*****************************************************************
02/09/06 ****     RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL)       **** VOL 14.34
*****************************************************************
   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 Guardian Unlimited: Libby: White House 'Superiors' OK'd Leaks
2 AL-AHRAM : Iran issue before Security Council not legal
3 [progchat_action] Fear of US Drove Iran's Nuclear Policy
4 IPS-English IRAN-NUKE PROGRAMME: Work out compromise formula
5 IPS-English POLITICS: U.N. Security Council Wades Into
6 IPS-English POLITICS-U.S.:In Public's Eyes, Iran Biggest
7 Guardian Unlimited: Saudi Ambassador Decries Iran Nuke Program
8 Guardian Unlimited: U.S. Official: No Quick Fix for Iran Mess
9 IRNA: Fleming: IAEA sends Iran's documents to UNSC 
10 IRNA: Ambassador: Iran's nuclear facilities open to inspections - 
11 IRNA: MP: Access to peaceful nuclear energy a national demand
12 IRNA: Iran not to give in to pressure on its nuclear program, 
13 IRNA: Diplomat warns against politicization of Iran's nuclear case -
14 Daily Yomiuri: Japan walks away empty-handed as talks close 
15 Xinhua: DPRK urges US to drop sanctions   
16 Korea Times: Nuclear Envoy Named Seoul's US Policy Chief 
17 UPI: Analysis: Seoul joins sanction on North
18 US: Las Vegas SUN: Editorial: The Energy Hog is grinning
19 US: Pahrump Valley Times: Response lukewarm to Bush renewable energy
20 Guardian Unlimited: France secretly upgrades capacity of nuclear ars
 
                         NUCLEAR REACTORS
 
21 Times of India: 'US wants to block India's indigenous nuclear-progra
22 US: newsobserver.com: NRC OKs merger of Duke, Cinergy 
23 US: TVA: Notice of meeting
24 RIA Novosti: The world will not do without nuclear power engineering
25 TheStar.com: Ontario extends power subsidy
26 US: NRC: Regulatory Guide: Issuance, Availability
27 US: NRC: Regulatory Guide: Issuance, Availability
28 US: Boston Globe: Calls for Pilgrim fees rise - 
29 US: Odessa American Online: Regents to vote on nuclear reactor
30 Deccan Herald: Top nuclear scientists support AEC chief's stand - 
31 US: Brattleboro Reformer: Area lawmakers seek a say on VY license ex
 
                          NUCLEAR SECURITY
 
 
                          NUCLEAR SAFETY
 
32 [du-list] soldiers face debilitating diseases
33 US: Deseret News: Panel OKs bill on bonds for those seeking N-stays 
34 US: CD: When You Should Use Potassium Iodide in a Radiation Emergenc
35 US: New West Network | Did Utah Kill John Wayne?
36 US: Hudson Valley News: Kelly pursuing independent safety review at 
37 US: New West Network: Did Utah Kill John Wayne? Part II: Atomic Bomb
38 US: Morris Daily Herald: Residents seek 'truth' behind tritium leak
39 US: Pahrump Valley Times: 'No worries' concludes low-level backgroun
 
                         NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE
 
40 US: Las Vegas SUN: BLM whistleblower's ex-boss opposed firing in Nev
41 US: Bradenton Herald: Lockheed surveying Tallevast residents today
42 Bellona: Duma demands an end to nuclear reprocessing at Mayak
43 reviewjournal.com: The nature of environmentalists        
44 reviewjournal.com: Porter sets Yucca hearing
45 US: reviewjournal.com: Document submitted at whistle-blower hearing 
46 US: UCS: DOE Research Contradicts Administration Claims of 
47 US: Monticello Times: Public airs views on waste storage
48 Pahrump Valley Times: Still another dump plan, still lacking full de
49 Ensign: ENSIGN, REID: NAS FINDINGS ON NUKE WASTE TRANSPORT WILL
50 US: Canon City Daily Record: CDPHE cites Cotter with latest violatio
51 UPI: Group: extracting plutonium dangerous
52 Business Gazette: RADIOACTIVITY REMOVED FROM SEA DISCHARGES 
53 Pahrump Valley Times: Yucca funding an issue - again 
54 US: Deseret News: BLM seeks input on N-waste shipments
 
                           PEACE
 
 
                        US DEPT. OF ENERGY
 
55 ContraCostaTimes.com: More funds for NIF
56 Hanford News: 2007 budget would revive funds for vit
57 Hanford News: 4 companies merge to form new nuclear firm in Utah
58 Hanford News: Vit plant costs may top $10 billion
59 Hanford News: Vacuuming resumes at K East Basin
60 kgw.com: Hanford plant cost may top $10 billion 
61 lamonitor.com: Brooks ponders budget constraints 
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
                         FULL NEWS STORIES
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
 1 Guardian Unlimited: Libby: White House 'Superiors' OK'd Leaks
 
From the Associated Press        

[UP] 

Friday February 10, 2006 1:31 AM

By TONI LOCY 

Associated Press Writer 

WASHINGTON (AP) - A former top aide to Vice President Dick
Cheney told a federal grand jury that his superiors authorized
him to give secret information to reporters as part of the Bush
administration's defense of intelligence used to justify
invading Iraq, according to court papers. 

Special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald said in documents filed
last month that he plans to introduce evidence that I. Lewis
``Scooter'' Libby, Cheney's former chief of staff, disclosed to
reporters the contents of a classified National Intelligence
Estimate in the summer of 2003. 

The NIE is a report prepared by the head of the nation's
intelligence operations for high-level government officials, up
to and including the president. Portions of NIEs are sometimes
declassified and made public. It is unclear whether that
happened in this instance. 

In a Jan. 23 letter to Libby's lawyers, Fitzgerald said Libby
also testified before the grand jury that he caused at least one
other government official to discuss an intelligence estimate
with reporters in July 2003. 

``We also note that it is our understanding that Mr. Libby
testified that he was authorized to disclose information about
the NIE to the press by his superiors,'' Fitzgerald wrote. 

White House spokesman Scott McClellan refused to comment. ``Our
policy is that we are not going to discuss this when it's an
ongoing legal proceeding,'' he said. 

William Jeffress, Libby's lawyer, said, ``There is no truth at
all'' to suggestions that Libby would try to shift blame to his
superiors as a defense against the charges. 

Libby, 55, was indicted late last year on charges that he lied
to FBI agents and the grand jury about how he learned CIA
operative Valerie Plame's identity and when he subsequently told
reporters. He is not charged with leaking classified information
from an intelligence estimate report. 

Plame's identity was published in July 2003 by columnist Robert
Novak after her husband, former U.S. Ambassador Joseph Wilson,
accused the administration of twisting intelligence about Iraq's
efforts to buy uranium in Niger. The year before, the CIA had
sent Wilson to Niger to determine the accuracy of the uranium
reports. 

Wilson's revelations cast doubt on President Bush's claim in his
2003 State of the Union address that Niger had sold uranium to
Iraq to develop a nuclear weapon as one of the administration's
key justifications for going to war in Iraq. 

On Thursday, Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., said Cheney should
take responsibility if he authorized Libby to share classified
information with reporters. 

``These charges, if true, represent a new low in the already
sordid case of partisan interests being placed above national
security,'' Kennedy said. ``The vice president's vindictiveness
in defending the misguided war in Iraq is obvious. If he used
classified information to defend it, he should be prepared to
take full responsibility.'' 

In the summer of 2003, White House officials - including Libby -
were frustrated that the media were incorrectly reporting that
Cheney had sent Wilson to Niger and had received a report of his
findings in Africa before the war in Iraq had begun. 

In an effort to counter those reports, Libby and other White
House officials sought information from the CIA regarding Wilson
and how his trip to Niger came about, according to court
records. 

Fitzgerald, in his letter to Libby's lawyers, said he plans to
use Libby's grand jury testimony to support evidence pertaining
to the White House aide's meeting with former New York Times
reporter Judith Miller. 

During the meeting with Miller on July 8, Libby also discussed
Plame, Fitzgerald said. ``Our anticipated basis for offering
such evidence is that such facts are inextricably intertwined
with the narrative of the events of spring 2003, as Libby's
testimony itself makes plain,'' the prosecutor wrote. 

Miller spent 85 days in jail for refusing to discuss her source. 
		 	 	   
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
 2 AL-AHRAM : Iran issue before Security Council not legal
 
Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2006 20:50:00 -0600 (CST)

The provision ... "renders null Iran's sovereignty over its military sites 
and opens them to the IAEA and its inspectors. To a large extent, this 
resembles demands imposed on Iraq following its occupation of Kuwait and 
its being accused of possessing weapons of mass destruction."

  Serbia was likewise faced with a demand to diminish its own sovereignty 
by allowing unbcontrolled access to its territory - an extra-legal demand 
whose refusal justified armed intervention in that country.
   So there's lots of precedent for breaking international law when/if
the U$ warlords seek excuses to send in the troops - with or without help 
from other countries.

MICHAEL

=========

  http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/2006/781/re301.htm

  AL-AHRAM Weekly  (Cairo)     Issue No. 781
 	9 - 15 February 2006

NOT ACCORDING TO LAW

While almost assured to be referred to the Security Council for punitive 
measures, Iran still has right on its side, writes Mustafa El-Labbad

______________________________________________________________

The International Atomic Energy Agency's (IAEA) Board of Governors 
resolution ordering the referral of the Iranian nuclear file to the UN 
Security Council opens the door wide to the placement of sanctions on 
Tehran for the first time in the history of the Islamic republic. The 
resolution passed by 27 votes of a total of 35. This result is an 
indicator of current regional and international balances as well as future 
majorities in the Security Council.

The acquiescence of Russia and China -- both traditional allies of Iran -- 
to the draft resolution's demands and their approval of it is a virtual 
lifting of the international cover that has shielded Tehran in its 
confrontations with Washington via the IAEA. Only three states objected to 
the resolution: Syria, which is tied to a regional alliance with Tehran, 
and Cuba and Venezuela, both of which are engaged in reciprocal relations 
of hostility with Washington. And only five states refrained from voting: 
South Africa, Belarus, Indonesia, Algeria and Libya. Even neighbouring 
states such as Egypt, Yemen and India voted in favour of referral. The 
resolution needed only a passing majority (18 out of 35 votes). The high 
percentage of votes in favour can be read like a thermometer measuring the 
degree of international pressure being placed on Iran.

While the text of the resolution did not make reference to possible 
sanctions against Iran, its spirit, which reveals an escalation in 
comparison to which other resolutions pale, opens the door wide to 
sanctions. The same text guarantees that the Iranian nuclear file will be 
subject to non-stop screening, thus barring Iran from tying the IAEA's 
demands to a limited time period and cutting away at the margins of 
manoeuvre in its hands. The resolution's text does not include an explicit 
"time limit" but rather automatically transfers the Iranian nuclear file 
to the Security Council at the next meeting of the IAEA Board of Governors 
at the beginning of March. Should Iran not comply with the demands of the 
resolution, the "limit" will be up. It can thus be said that Washington 
has succeeded, through diplomatic and media pressure and mobilisation, in 
reaching the furthest reach of its demands -- automatically transferring 
the file to the Security Council -- without need for a further vote by the 
IAEA.

The formulation of the IAEA's demands is evidence of Iran's diplomatic 
crisis. Its legal position is much stronger, however, and to get around 
this problem Washington and its allies have been intent on inverting any 
logic that the accused be regarded innocent until proven guilty and that 
accusations must be backed up with evidence. For Iran to prove its 
innocence, it must comply with debilitating demands, although the text 
doesn't indicate it, being formulated with a great deal of baseness and 
very little sensitivity. The Board of Governors set four basic demands on 
Tehran ahead of automatic transferral to the Security Council. The first 
of these is "full and sustained suspension of all enrichment-related and 
processing activities, including research and development, to be verified 
by the agency". This means that it is forbidden for Iran to possess any 
form of nuclear knowledge or technology. The demand retracts Iran's legal 
right to enrich uranium for peaceful purposes, a right of all nations that 
is provided for by the IAEA's charter. The second part of this demand 
infers the IAEA placing its hand on Iran and its nuclear installations in 
order to "verify" something that in actuality has no legal classification. 
Nor does its time frame or geographic limits.

The IAEA's second demand calls on Iran to "reconsider the construction of 
a research reactor moderated by heavy water," which means barring Iran 
from using any technology with dual use. The third demand is that Iran 
change its legal obligations and "ratify promptly and implement in full 
the Additional Protocol [of the IAEA's safeguards regime]," and "pending 
ratification, continue to act in accordance with the provisions of the 
Additional Protocol." It is well known that the United States itself has 
not signed the IAEA Additional Protocol that allows unannounced 
inspections of nuclear installations, something that in Iran's case will 
be intensive if Tehran bows down to this demand.

The final and most important demand is to "implement the transparency 
measures ... which extend beyond the former requirements of the Safeguards 
Agreement and Additional Protocol, and include such access to individuals, 
documentation relating to procurement, dual use equipment, certain 
military- owned workshops ... " This final clause renders null Iran's 
sovereignty over its military sites and opens them to the IAEA and its 
inspectors. To a large extent, this resembles demands imposed on Iraq 
following its occupation of Kuwait and its being accused of possessing 
weapons of mass destruction, which, three years after Iraq's occupation, 
we are still waiting for evidence of.

It appears that this resolution, in word and spirit, aims at only one 
possible outcome: forcing Iran's hand into rejecting it, followed by a 
swift transferral of the Iranian file to the Security Council. Iran is 
holding fast to its rights provided by international charters and to its 
regional ambitions as witnessed by its political and strategic presence 
stretching from its western borders to northern Israel, passing through 
the Iraqi government, the Syrian regime, Hizbullah in Lebanon and Islamic 
Jihad and Hamas in Palestine. It will thus not accept these conditions. 
Despite question marks raised over the nature of the Iranian regime, 
Iran's insistence on possessing nuclear technology is a national endeavour 
that enjoys consensus among all political currents, from conservatives to 
reformists and inclusive of wide sectors of the Iranian people. And as to 
regional ambitions, they would not appear but for the desolation of the 
Middle East in absence of an "Arab policy". This is not something Iran can 
be blamed for.

There is no law that justifies the issuance of this resolution. Iran has 
not violated international law, and has not occupied another country like 
Iraq did Kuwait. The spirit of the resolution deals with Iran as though it 
has been vanquished in a military conflict, its defeat being substantiated 
with unfair conditions. Iran's so-called crime is that it has not 
relinquished its nuclear ambitions, and that it has exploited a regional 
vacuum opened up, largely, by the misadventures of the current American 
administration. What is being demanded of Iran clearly goes beyond its 
nuclear file and reaches the point of changing its political system under 
the pretext of inspecting its nuclear installations. The Board of 
Governors' resolution is nothing other than a final episode before handing 
Tehran over to the Security Council and placing sanctions upon it. If its 
political system remains unshaken, then thought might be given to military 
strikes against a "state to be punished on the basis of international 
resolutions".

Washington succeeded in imposing its will on signatories to the 
resolution; those who learned one thing from the Iraq debacle -- riding 
the American bandwagon guarantees profit and influence. But Iran today is 
not Iraq 2003. Its regional cards qualify it to deflect international 
demands on it throughout the region, stretching from its western borders, 
passing through Iraq and Syria, and reaching southern Lebanon. In this 
sense, the region and its peoples, and not just Iran and its people, will 
pay the price of Bush's catalogue of errors in the Middle East. It is true 
that Iran has never in its history seen an international line-up set 
against it as it is seeing now. But it is also true that its regional 
influence is stronger now than it was in the era of Qurush the Great, more 
than 2,500 years ago. Supporting the oppressed is a humanitarian duty 
regardless of nationality, colour, race and creed. The administration of 
President Bush, which turns a blind eye to Israel's actions, cannot, 
despite military prowess, erase the protections of international law nor 
pose as anything but the oppressor.
*****************************************************************
 3 [progchat_action] Fear of US Drove Iran's Nuclear Policy
 
Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2006 00:48:03 -0600 (CST)

February 8, 2006

Analysts: Fear of US Drove Iran's Nuclear Policy

by Gareth Porter

The George W. Bush administration's adoption of a policy of threatening to
use military force against Iran disregarded a series of official
intelligence estimates going back many years that consistently judged Iran's
fear of a U.S. attack to be a major motivating factor in its pursuit of
nuclear weapons.

Two former Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) officials who were directly
involved in producing CIA estimates on Iran revealed in separate interviews
with IPS that the National Intelligence Estimates (NIEs) on Iran have
consistently portrayed its concerns about the military threat posed by the
United States as a central consideration in Tehran's pursuit of a nuclear
weapons capability.

Paul Pillar, who managed the writing of all NIEs on Iran from 2000 to 2005
as the national intelligence officer for the Near East and South Asia, told
IPS that all of the NIEs on Iran during that period addressed the Iranian
fears of U.S. attack explicitly and related their desire for nuclear weapons
to those fears.

"Iranian perceptions of threat, especially from the United States and
Israel, were not the only factor," Pillar said, "but were in our judgment
part of what drove whatever effort they were making to build nuclear
weapons."

Pillar said the dominant view of the intelligence community in the past
three years has been that Iran would seek a nuclear weapons capability, but
analysts have also considered that a willingness on the part of Washington
to reassure Iran on its security fears would have a significant effect on
Iranian policy.

Pillar said one of the things analysts have taken into account is Iran's May
2003 proposal to the Bush administration to negotiate on its nuclear option
and its relationship with Hezbollah and other anti-Israel groups as well as
its own security concerns.

"It was seen as an indicator of Iran's willingness to engage," he said.

A second theme in the NIEs, alongside the emphasis on Iranian fears of U.S.
military intentions, was Iran's aspiration to be the "dominant regional
superpower" in the Persian Gulf.

However, the estimates suggested that the Iranian regime would not pursue
that aspiration through means that would jeopardize the possibility of a
relationship with the United States.

Ellen Laipson, now president of the Henry L. Stimson Center in Washington,
managed three or four NIEs on Iran as national intelligence officer for the
Near East from 1990 to 1993, and closely followed others as vice chair of
the National Intelligence Council from 1997 to 2002.

In an interview with IPS, she said the Iranian fear of an attack by the
United States has long been "a standard element" in NIEs on Iran.

Laipson said she was "virtually certain the estimates linked Iran's threat
perceptions to its nuclear program." She added, however, that she was not
directly involved in preparation of NIEs that focused exclusively on Iran's
nuclear program, as distinct from overall assessments of Iranian intentions
and capabilities.

Laipson said the intelligence analysts had a "fairly consistent
understanding" of Iranian perceptions of threat. "We could tell they were
afraid of the U.S. both from their behavior and from their public
statements," Laipson recalled. The acuteness of those Iranian fears of U.S.
attack fluctuated over time, she said, in response to different
developments.

The 1991 Gulf War, in which U.S. forces destroyed most of the Iraqi army,
caused the Iranians to become much more concerned about U.S. military
intentions, according to some scholarly analyses of Iranian thinking,
because of the awareness that the same thing could happen to Iran.

The aggressive stance of the Bush administration toward Iran again increased
Iranian fears of a U.S. attack. In early 2002, a secret Pentagon report to
Congress on its "Nuclear Posture Review" named Iran as one of seven
countries against which nuclear weapons might be used "in the event of
surprising military developments." The report was obtained by defense
analyst William Arkin, who revealed its contents in the Los Angeles Times on
Jan. 26, 2002.

Five days later, Bush referred to Iran in his State of the Union address as
being part of an "axis of evil," along with Iraq and North Korea. "By
seeking weapons of mass destruction," he said, "these regimes pose a grave
and growing danger."

Although it did not refer directly to fears of the United States, a
declassified letter from the CIA to Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman
Bob Graham on April 8, 2002, alluded to the linkage between Iranian
perceptions of threats and its pursuit of nuclear weapons.

The letter stated, "There appears to be broad consensus among Iranians that
they live in a highly dangerous region and face serious external threats to
their government, prompting us to assess that Tehran will pursue missile and
WMD technologies indefinitely as critical means of national security."

The letter then suggested that the external threats were focused largely on
the United States, adding that "persistent suspicion of U.S. motives will
help preserve the broad consensus among Iran's political elite and public
for the pursuit of missile and WMD technologies as a matter of critical
national security."

After the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003, the spokesman for the Iranian
government stated that, in a "unipolar world," Iran had to have policy that
would avoid war with the United States.

That preoccupation with averting a U.S. attack cut both ways: it forced the
Iranian leaders to seek a political-diplomatic accommodation with the United
States, as illustrated by its cooperation with the United States in
Afghanistan after 9/11, and its offer of broad negotiations on all major
issues between the two countries in 2003. But when the United States failed
to respond to those efforts, it also strengthened the argument for pressing
ahead with a nuclear option.

Joseph Cirincione, a nonproliferation specialist at the Carnegie Endowment
for International Peace in Washington, told IPS that an analysis that links
Iran's security concerns about the United States to its quest for nuclear
weapons would be consistent with the history of other nations' policies
toward acquiring nuclear weapons.

"No nation has ever been coerced into giving up a nuclear program," he said,
"but many have been convinced to do so by the disappearance of the threat."

Cirincione cited three former Soviet republics, Argentina and Brazil, South
Africa and Libya as examples of countries that decided to give up nuclear
weapons only after fundamental international or internal changes eliminated
the primary security threat driving their nuclear programs.

http://www.antiwar.com/orig/porter.php?articleid=8516

This email was cleaned by emailStripper, available for free from
http://www.papercut.biz/emailStripper.htm

 
*****************************************************************
 4 IPS-English IRAN-NUKE PROGRAMME: Work out compromise formula
 
Date: Thu, 09 Feb 2006 18:34:06 -0800

<x-flowed>
  LA IP HD SL=20
IRAN-NUKE PROGRAMME: Work out compromise formula with IAEA and West, says
UAE paper
Att.Editors: The following item is from the Emirates News Agency (WAM)

ABU DHABI, Feb. 9 (WAM) - A major United Arab Emirates (UAE) English dail=
y=20
today commented on the issue of Iran being referred to the UN Security=20
Council over its nuclear programme.

    Commenting editorially on the issue under the topic =94Permanent inter=
ests=94,=20
the 'Khaleej Times' said: =94China has defended its decision to back the=20
West's moves to take Iran to the UN Security Council. In its first reacti=
on=20
after the surprise move last week, Beijing has insisted that its last min=
ute=20
decision to go with the 'international community' on Iran's nuclear=20
programme issue had been inspired by its commitment to non-proliferation =
of=20
nuclear weapons.

    =94Considering China -- along with Russia -- had all along resisted th=
e=20
moves to bring in punitive measures against Iran and championed diplomacy=
  to=20
resolve the issue, Beijing's move had come as a huge shock to Teheran. In=
=20
the run-up to the IAEA decision, Iran had lobbied both Russia and China.=20
Since the two are the permanent members of the UN Security Council, their=
=20
support to the IAEA decision had been crucial. Iran had hoped that if=20
nothing else, the two big players would at least abstain in the IAEA vote=
.=20
In the end, though, both China and Russia went along with the West's line=
=2E

    =94This is understandable considering the fact that in the world of=20
realpolitik it is not good relations but permanent political interests th=
at=20
determine a nation's decisions and policies. Both China and Russia have v=
ery=20
good ties with Iran. China, the ever-hungry, burgeoning economy that it i=
s,=20
in particular has major energy interests in Iran and the Middle East. It=20
wouldn't have liked to undermine those interests. At the same time, both=20
Moscow and Beijing couldn't have afforded a showdown with the West over=20
Iran. In the end, be it China or Russia or for that matter India, everyon=
e=20
kept its own permanent interests above those of its relations with Iran.

    =94What happens now? Will taking Iran to the Security Council resolve =
this=20
issue? As China has emphasised and this newspaper has repeatedly argued,=20
peaceful diplomacy is the way out of this crisis. Both sides need to avoi=
d=20
brinkmanship. In fact, before the Security Council takes up the Iran=20
question next month, both Iran and the West should explore a compromise=20
solution. The Russian proposal of alternate enrichment, to be re-examined=
  in=20
Iran-Russian talks on February 16, can still be a way out.

    =94In this regard, Russia and China can play a positive role. While th=
e=20
West may not afford to open a new front in the Middle East, Iran too must=
=20
demonstrate greater political maturity and wisdom in defusing this crisis=
.=20
It must think long and hard of the possible consequences of this totally=20
avoidable confrontation with the West. If Teheran is nurturing secret=20
ambitions to build itself into a nuclear weapons state, it needs to take=20
into account the possible consequences of pursuing such a course. It coul=
d=20
undermine not only its own security but further destabilise an already=20
volatile region. But if Iran's nuclear programme is for peaceful purposes=
,=20
as it insists it is, then it has all the more reasons to work out a=20
compromise formula with the IAEA and the West,=94 concluded the paper. (W=
AM)=20





=20

</x-flowed>
*****************************************************************
 5 IPS-English POLITICS: U.N. Security Council Wades Into
 
Date: Thu, 09 Feb 2006 18:34:07 -0800

<x-flowed>
ROMAIPS NA WD IP CU=20
POLITICS: U.N. Security Council Wades Into Corruption Fray
Thalif Deen

UNITED NATIONS, Feb 9 (IPS) - The 15-member United Nations Security Counc=
il, whose primary responsibility is the maintenance of international peac=
e and security as mandated by the U.N. charter, is scheduled to meet next=
  week to discuss something outside its traditional purview: charges of co=
rruption and malfeasance facing the world body's Secretariat.

The politically controversial U.S. Ambassador John Bolton, who is current=
ly presiding over the rotating monthly chair of the Security Council, is =
using his discretionary powers to summon an open meeting to review a 45-p=
age report by the U.N. Office of Internal Oversight Services (OIOS) that =
is loaded with accusations of fraud and mismanagement in U.N. procurement=
=2E

Bolton probably thinks the Security Council has the right to discuss the =
issue because most of the corruption is related to U.N. peacekeeping oper=
ations overseas.

But 132 developing nations, an overwhelming majority of the 191 member st=
ates in the world body, beg to differ.

A spokesman for the Group of 77 (G77), which represents both the developi=
ng nations and China, says the Security Council is encroaching on the fun=
ctions of the 191-member General Assembly, the highest policy-making body=
  at the United Nations.

The Group has already accused the U.N. Secretariat, presided over by its =
chief administrative officer Secretary-General Kofi Annan, of trying to u=
surp the powers of member states as represented by the General Assembly.

=94It is a peculiar coincidence,=94 says Ambassador Nirupam Sen of India,=
  an active member of the G77, =94that the (recent) attempted arrogation o=
f the functions of the General Assembly by the Secretariat comes at a tim=
e when we are witnessing a similar arrogation by the Security Council.=94

He said that later this month the Security Council will hold a meeting on=
  the management of the Department of Peacekeeping Operations (DPKO), spec=
ifically related to procurement and the OIOS audit.

=94But procurement and audit, as with other aspects of management, are th=
e prerogative of the General Assembly,=94 not the Security Council, Sen t=
old delegates early this week.

The proposal for a comprehensive management audit of DPKO, he pointed out=
, was introduced jointly by a few developing country delegations, includi=
ng India, and was subsequently adopted by the General Assembly.

In effect, he said, the Security Council has no business hijacking someth=
ing that was within the purview of the General Assembly.

On Tuesday, the G77 sent a letter to Annan complaining that Under-Secreta=
ry-General for Management Christopher Burnham had briefed the media on th=
e findings of the OIOS audit even before member states had access to the =
report.

=94Rather than briefing member states in the General Assembly on the outc=
ome of the audit, we have on the one hand the under-secretary-general for=
  management briefing the press, and on the other, we have the Security Co=
uncil organising a meeting on the subject,=94 Sen complained.

He also pointed out that an earlier attempt by the Security Council to ge=
t involved in the management of the oil-for-food programme in Iraq was cr=
iticised by a committee that probed corruption and mismanagement of the 6=
4-billion-dollar programme.

=94The searing criticisms of the role played by the Security Council are =
all too fresh,=94 Sen added.

The OIOS report that is to be discussed by the Council next week reviews =
27 contracts totaling about one billion dollars during 2000-2005.

The audit cites several instances where the U.N.'s peacekeeping budget wa=
s =94over-estimated or inflated, which in some cases led to the build-up =
of a reserve of supplies above the actual needs=94.

For example, the fuel contracts for the U.N. Mission in Sudan (for 2005-2=
006) and the U.N. Mission in Haiti (2004-2006) were in excess of the requ=
irements by at least 34 million dollars and 31 million dollars, respectiv=
ely.

The U.N. Mission in Sierra Leone, which closed up shop last December, was=
  not associated with DPKO's decision in New York to raise a 10.3-million-=
dollar requisition in the year 2000.

Additionally, the U.N. Mission in the Democratic Republic of Congo receiv=
ed seven aircraft hangers valued at 2.4 million dollars that are still no=
t being used in 2006.

The U.N. Mission in East Timor had no requirement for a Mi-26 helicopter =
which was leased at a cost of 10.4 million dollars.

The OIOS report says that in many cases, U.N. peacekeeping operations dep=
ended on a limited number of vendors, which made the missions vulnerable =
to overcharges.

The study blames =94lack of proper care and attention by officials=94 who=
  should really be responsible to design and implement internal controls. =
As a result, there were both resource mismanagement and fraudulent activi=
ties.

In the period 2002-2004, U.N. procurement, including for peacekeeping, am=
ounted to around three billion dollars. Of this total, 2.5 billion, or 82=
  percent, represented purchases by peacekeeping missions overseas.
*****
+U.N. Procurement Service (http://www.un.org/Depts/ptd/http://www.un.org/=
Depts/ptd/)
+U.N. Peacekeeping (http://www.un.org/Depts/dpko/dpko/index.asphttp://www=
.un.org/Depts/dpko/dpko/index.asp)
+POLITICS: Senior U.N. Officials Under Fire for Reckless Talk (http://ips=
news.net/news.asp?idnews=3D32083)

(END/IPS/WD/NA/IP/CU/TD/KS/06)



=20
=3D 02091925 ORP008
NNNN

</x-flowed>
*****************************************************************
 6 IPS-English POLITICS-U.S.:In Public's Eyes, Iran Biggest
 
Date: Thu, 09 Feb 2006 18:34:07 -0800

<x-flowed>
ROMAIPS MM NA IC IP BW IK ML=20
POLITICS-U.S.:In Public's Eyes, Iran Biggest Foreign Menace
Jim Lobe

WASHINGTON, Feb 9 (IPS) - The escalating crisis over Iran's nuclear progr=
amme appears to have persuaded the U.S. public that Tehran now poses a gr=
eater threat to the United States than any other country, or even al Qaed=
a, according to recent surveys.

And even though the public remains worried and unhappy about the U.S. inv=
asion and occupation of Iraq, a significant percentage has already begun =
thinking of eventual military action against Iran.

=94Americans are telling us that they would prefer we pack our bags and l=
eave Iraq now, and yet they appear ready to do some damage to Iran if it =
proceeds with its nuclear programme,=94 said John Zogby, president of the=
  polling firm, Zogby International, which released a survey last week in =
which nearly half of the respondents (47 percent) said they favoured mili=
tary action, preferably along with European allies, to halt Iran's nuclea=
r programme.=20

Still, despite the high level of concern, the polls do not show eagerness=
  to take military action now or unilaterally. The public appears to prefe=
r an effort to settle the crisis diplomatically, preferably through the U=
nited Nations.=20

If that fails, the poll respondents indicated they would prefer for any m=
ilitary action to be undertaken in conjunction with other countries and, =
in any event, strongly oppose an invasion designed to overthrow the regim=
e, as in Iraq.

=94Are people clamouring for military action at this point? Definitely no=
t,=94 said Steven Kull, director of the University of Maryland's Programm=
e on International Policy Attitudes (PIPA).=20

=94Between now and military action, the public would definitely be lookin=
g for more negotiations. And then they want to try to do something multil=
aterally,=94 he said. =94They'd have to cross a whole bunch of hurdles be=
fore you'd get military action.=94

Nonetheless, the latest poll, released Tuesday by the Pew Research Centre=
  for the People and the Press, found that some 27 percent of respondents =
cite Iran as Washington's greatest menace -- three times the percentage w=
ho ranked it at the top of foreign threats just four months ago.

The same survey, which polled 1,500 adults during the first week of Febru=
ary, also found that nearly three in four (72 percent) believed Tehran wa=
s =94likely=94 to launch attacks on Israel if it obtained nuclear weapons=
. An even higher percentage (82 percent) said they believed the Iranian g=
overnment would likely transfer nuclear weapons to terrorists.

The latest results strongly suggest that the combination of belligerent d=
eclarations by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad; Tehran's defiance o=
f European appeals not to resume its uranium enrichment activities; and e=
fforts by Israel and its allies here to mobilise international and U.S. o=
pinion has moved the Islamic Republic to the centre of the public's forei=
gn-policy consciousness.

This shift in some ways echoes how the hawks in the administration of Pre=
sident George W. Bush focused the public's post-9/11 fears on former Pres=
ident Saddam Hussein in the year-long run-up to the Iraq invasion in Marc=
h 2003.

=94How Dangerous is Iran=94 was the bold headline that ran along a photo =
of Ahmadinejad on the cover of this week's =94Newsweek=94 magazine. =94Th=
e Next Nuclear Threat=94 and =94Radical Islam in Power=94 topped the cove=
r.

Similarly, a familiar cast of Washington hawks -- many of whom greeted Ah=
madinejad's election and declaration that Israel should be =94wiped off t=
he map=94 as a godsend for their own efforts to rouse the public against =
Iran -- has also been talking up the threat.=20

=94An 'Intolerable' Threat=94 was the title of the neo-conservative Wall =
Street Journal's lead editorial, while the =94Weekly Standard=94 featured=
  an article entitled =94Iran or Bust: The Defining Test of Bush's War Pre=
sidency,=94 which argued that Iran had become =94the central crisis of th=
e Bush presidency.=94=20

In an interview on the public television network PBS's =94Newshour=94 thi=
s week, Vice President Dick Cheney, citing Ahmadinejad's =94pretty outrag=
eous statements,=94 described the nuclear standoff as =94dangerous=94 and=
  warned that =94no options are off the table,=94 even as he rejected repe=
ated questions by the host about =94striking parallels=94 between the esc=
alating crisis and the run-up to the Iraq war.=20

At the same time, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice blamed Iran for inc=
iting this week's violent protests in the Middle East against offensive c=
artoons about Mohammed published in European newspapers.

In that respect, the Pew poll results were perhaps the most striking. Ove=
r the last 15 years, an average of only about six percent of respondents =
rated Iran as the =94greatest danger=94 to the United States. In October,=
  the same month that Ahmadinejad threatened Israel for the first time, th=
at grew to nine percent, still far below Iraq (18 percent), China (16 per=
cent), and North Korea (13 percent).=20

But the latest survey found that the percentage had tripled to 27 percent=
  compared to China (20 percent), Iraq (17 percent), North Korea (11 perce=
nt), and al Qaeda/terrorists (four percent).=20

Moreover, two-thirds of respondents listed Iran's nuclear programme, whic=
h U.S. intelligence agencies believe is still a decade away from developi=
ng an actual weapon, as a =94major threat=94 -- compared to 60 percent wh=
o described North Korea's nuclear programme that way, despite the fact th=
at Pyongyang is believed to have built as many as a dozen bombs. Pew dire=
ctor Andrew Kohout, however, noted that 55 percent of respondents in the =
October poll said they believed that Iran already possessed nuclear weapo=
ns.

Nevertheless, the public is divided about what to do about Iran, accordin=
g to the survey's results. Nearly four in five respondents (78 percent) s=
aid they wanted the UN to deal with the situation, compared with only 17 =
percent who said the United States should.=20

Nearly 80 percent of respondents said they had heard about Iran's announc=
ement that it would resume its enrichment activities. Nearly half of thos=
e who said they had heard a lot about it ranked Iran as the greatest thre=
at to the United States, according to the poll.=20

=94There's been so much written and broadcast about the intransigence of =
the Iranians, it would've been remarkable otherwise,=94 Kohout told IPS.

A poll taken in late January by the Washington Post and ABC television ne=
twork found strong support for diplomatic efforts and economic sanctions =
to persuade Iran to curb its nuclear programme.

Asked in the same poll whether they would support U.S. bombing of suspect=
ed nuclear sites if those steps don't work, 42 percent were in favour, wh=
ile 54 percent opposed the idea.=20

In a similar poll taken at the same time by Fox News, nearly 60 percent o=
f respondents said the United States should be prepared to =94use whateve=
r military force is necessary=94 to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear w=
eapons if diplomacy failed, and 47 percent said they considered Iran more=
  of a threat than Iraq was when the U.S. invaded.

More than 90 percent of respondents said they were either =94very concern=
ed=94 (68 percent) or =94somewhat concerned=94 (23 percent) that Iran wou=
ld give nuclear weapons to terrorists; and more than 80 percent who said =
they were either =94very=94 (54 percent) or =94somewhat concerned=94 (27 =
percent) that it would attack a neighbouring country.

Kull attributed these more dramatic results in large part to the impressi=
on created by Ahmadinejad since his election. =94I think this is caused m=
ore by the personality of the president and his comments than specific de=
velopments in the negotiations over the nuclear programme. He certainly c=
omes across as a hothead, and that has definitely focused people's minds.=
=94

At the same time, less than 20 percent in the Fox News poll and a CNN/USA=
  Today/Gallup poll conducted a few days before described Iran as an =94im=
mediate=94 or =94imminent=94 threat.

*****

+POLITICS: Fear of U.S. Drove Iran's Nuclear Policy (http://ipsnews.net/i=
nterna.asp?idnews=3D32065)

+IRAN: Confrontation on the Cards (http://ipsnews.net/interna.asp?idnews=3D=
31979)

+POLITICS: US Tries to Pressure Iran with Attack Stories (http://ipsnews.=
net/news.asp?idnews=3D31903)

(END/IPS/NA MM AP/IP IK ML BW/JL/LD/06)

=20
=3D 02092335 ORP012
NNNN

</x-flowed>
*****************************************************************
 7 Guardian Unlimited: Saudi Ambassador Decries Iran Nuke Program
 
From the Associated Press        

[UP] 

Thursday February 9, 2006 5:31 AM

By AMANDA LEE MYERS 

Associated Press Writer 

PHOENIX (AP) - The Saudi Arabian ambassador to the United States
on Wednesday denounced Iran's uranium enrichment program and
what he called inconsistent U.S. policy toward countries that
are seeking or already have nuclear weapons. 

Although Iranian officials have said they want to make fuel
through enrichment, the activity can also generate the nuclear
core of warheads. 

Iran's persistence with the enrichment program is only
increasing tensions in the Middle East, ambassador Turki
Al-Faisal said during a speech here. 

``It escalates the tensions, and brings about competition which
is unneeded,'' Al-Faisal told an audience of about 250 political
and business leaders, and members of the Phoenix Committee on
Foreign Relations, which organized the event. 

Al-Faisal, 60, questioned the usefulness of possessing weapons
he said the Iranian people would never allow its leaders to use. 

``Where is Iran going to use these weapons?'' he asked. ``If
their intention is to bomb Israel, then they will kill
Palestinians, Syrians, Jordanians and Saudis, as well. 

``If they intend to bomb the United States, for example, they
will kill other people, as well. Where is the value of having a
weapon of destruction that people know you are not going to
use?'' 

The United States is not without blame, according to Al-Faisal. 

Iranians support their government in its uranium enrichment
program partly because of what they see as American
inconsistency, he said. 

``(Iranians) see a double standard,'' he said. ``They see the
U.S. government negotiating with North Korea ... and they see
the U.S. signing a nuclear peace agreement with India .... and
they see the U.S. turning a blind eye completely to Israel,
although Israel has the most nuclear weapons in our part of the
world.'' 

Al-Faisal called on U.S. officials to advocate a totally
nuclear-free Middle East instead of picking and choosing whose
nuclear programs to oppose. Last week, the U.S. and European
powers successfully moved to call Iran before the U.N. Security
County because of its enrichment program. 

Al-Faisal also voiced his country's opposition to terrorism and
condemned a Danish newspaper whose caricatures of the Prophet
Muhammad have sparked rage throughout the Islamic world. 

``As a Muslim, I found those cartoons offensive and absolutely
uncalled for,'' he said. ``And I can't for the life of me
imagine how such a depiction of a revered and respected prophet
... could have anything to do with freedom of speech.'' 

But whatever the cartoons depicted, those in the Muslim
community who have reacted with violence are unjustified,
Al-Faisal said. He asked them to follow in the footsteps of the
Muhammad and practice nonviolence. 

The newly appointed ambassador spoke in Dallas and Houston
earlier this week. He is scheduled to speak in Boston and New
York City next week. 
		 	 	   
      Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
 8 Guardian Unlimited: U.S. Official: No Quick Fix for Iran Mess

From the Associated Press        

[UP] 
 	 
Thursday February 9, 2006 9:01 PM

By LIZ SIDOTI 

Associated Press Writer 

WASHINGTON (AP) - The chief U.S. arms control official said
Thursday the international standoff over Iran's disputed nuclear
program will not be resolved quickly. 

``This is going to be a very difficult diplomatic effort
stretching over many months,'' Robert G. Joseph, the
undersecretary of state for arms control, told the Senate
Foreign Relations Committee. 

``We are working diplomacy as hard as we can,'' he said.
``Everyone wants diplomacy to provide the solution to this
threat.'' 

The International Atomic Energy Agency's board of governors has
reported Iran to the U.N. Security Council, but the United
States has been reluctant to discuss what actions it may seek
next to persuade Iran to halt its nuclear program. 

Joseph reiterated the Bush administration's position that it has
not ruled out any option, including military action, but he
declined to discuss exactly what options are being considered. 

However, he suggested that restrictions on oil were among them
when asked by Sen. Joseph Biden of Delaware, the panel's top
Democrat, whether the administration has analyzed the impact of
oil sanctions on Iran. 

``As we move forward, we are analyzing all aspects of next steps
we might be able to take,'' Joseph said, declining to be more
specific. ``But what you said is something that we know in terms
of certain vulnerabilities that are out there.'' 

Iran says its nuclear program is peaceful, intended only to
produce electricity. But the U.S. contends Tehran seeks to make
a nuclear bomb. 

``A nuclear-armed Iran is something that is unacceptable to
us,'' Joseph said. ``My sense is we can't wait 10 years and 17
resolutions before we address the full aspect of the threat.'' 

--- 

On the Net: 

State Department: http://www.state.gov 

Senate Foreign Relations Committee: http://foreign.senate.gov/ 

CIA Factbook on Iran:
http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/ir.html 
		 	 	   
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
 9 IRNA: Fleming: IAEA sends Iran's documents to UNSC 

Feb 8, IRNA                                                                                                            

International Atomic Energy Agency has sent all the documents on
Iran to the UN Security Council, said the IAEA spokeswoman
Melissa Fleming here on Wednesday.

 Fleming further told IRNA that the documents include all the
IAEA Board resolutions and all reports of the UN nuclear
watchdog Chief Mohammed ElBaradei regarding Iran.

 The documents are sent based on the clause two of recent IAEA
Board resolution, which mandates the Director General to report
to the UN Security Council whether the IAEA Board had asked Iran
to take the measures. The clause also asks the UN nuclear
watchdog chief to report to the UN Security Council all the IAEA
reports and resolutions regarding the issue.

 The Iran documents were emailed on Saturday but mailed on
Monday to the UN Security Council.




*****************************************************************
 10 IRNA: Ambassador: Iran's nuclear facilities open to inspections - 

Madrid, Feb 8, IRNA                                                                                                              

Iran-Cuba-Ambassador 

Iran's nuclear facilities have been the most open and
transparent facilities to the International Atomic Energy
Agency, said Iran's ambassador to Cuba Ahmad Edrissian in Havana
on Wednesday.

 "Over the past three years, about 1,500 man/day inspections
have een made to Iran's nuclear facilities and the facilities
have been constantly monitored by the cameras installed by the
International Atomic Energy Agency," said Edrissian in a press
conference.

 Edrissian said despite all the confidence-building measures, a
group of the European states and the US are opposing Iran's
using nuclear fuel to produce energy and they are accusing us of
producing mass destruction equipment.

 He said the worst is certain countries' opposition to Iran's
access to peaceful nuclear energy despite their enjoying nuclear
bombs themselves. The countries, he added, are constantly
threatening to use the weapons against the countries, that are
resisting their colonialist policies.

 The diplomat accused EU3 and the US of politicizing Iran's
nuclear dossier and said the states have turned into bases with
the mission to obstruct countries' progress.

 He said the Islamic Republic of Iran is not responsible for the
ongoing row on nuclear issue. "Tehran has been in talks with
European states for two years on the issue but failed to gain
any satisfactory agreement as a result."
 "Western states' time killing in the period marks an insult to
Iran," noted the diplomat.

 Edrissian said reference of Iran's case to the UN Security
Council at whatever way means an attempt to undermine
international institutions and their abuse by the west to force
the developing states.

 Ruling out western allegations, Edrissian said, "In Iran's
military doctrine, nuclear weapons have no position because
Islam and Supreme Leader of Islamic Revolution have announced
that any sort of application of such a weapon is religiously
forbidden." He said Iran is determined to continue with its
peaceful nuclear program despite opposition of the European
troika and the US. "That's our decision and western states
should know the Middle Ages is gone." Edrissian said Iran is an
IAEA member and a signatory to the nuclear Non-Proliferation
Treaty. Other proofs and documents also substantiate Tehran's
motivation to refuse application of nuclear energy for
biological purposes, he added.

 The diplomat also thanked Cuban government and leader Fidel
Castro for defending Iran's right for peaceful use of nuclear
energy.

 Referring to Tehran-Havana "very good and extensive" relations
and their common stances in the political and international
issues such as campaign against terrorism, south-south
cooperation and the need for promotion of the Non-Aligned
Movement, Edrissian said relations between Tehran and Havana are
in the excellent level.

 Elsewhere in the interview, Edrissian criticized west's false
human rights and democracy slogans and its double-standards in
that concern.

 He said publication of offensive caricatures, deemed insulting
to holy prophet of Islam, in European press signs West's
disrespect for human dignity and others' beliefs and values.

*****************************************************************
 11 IRNA: MP: Access to peaceful nuclear energy a national demand

, Feb 9, IRNA                                                                                                            

Access to peaceful nuclear energy is a call of the Iranian nation 
that will not give up its right, said an Iranian lawmaker here on 
Wednesday.

 A member of Majlis' National Security and Foreign Policy
Commission, Soleyman Jaafarzadeh, told IRNA that Iranian
President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's order for resumption of nuclear
activities was in obedience to the wishes of the Iranian nation,
the Islamic Republic system and all national political organs.

 "All the hue and cry and issues raised by the west will die
down and the Islamic Republic of Iran will emerge successful in
the strongest test it has ever taken in post-Islamic Revolution
history through its refusal to bow to the enemies and not
abandon its cause." He said western threats and confrontations
in countries are intended to fan psychological wars.

 "The west is addicted to creating psychological wars and thinks
it can terrify countries and achieve its objectives through this
kind of warfare," he added.

 The westerners, led by the US, have been deceived to think that
Iran, like other developing countries, can easily be intimidated
and succumb to psychological warfare, but their cries are doomed
to fail because the Iranian nation stands by their leaders, he
noted.

 He said that the Iranian nation, through unity and obedience to
the instructions of the Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution
and other officials, will thwart any adverse decision or move of
the west.

*****************************************************************
 12 IRNA: Iran not to give in to pressure on its nuclear program, 
says Iranian philosopher - 

, Feb 9, IRNA                                                                                                            

-- 
Iran will not give in to pressure on its nuclear program due to
its pride, said a Rome-based Iranian philosopher Ramin Jahan
Beiglu, in an interview with the Italian daily `La Stampa'.

 "Iranians will not abandon their (peaceful) nuclear program...

 Even reformist (former president Mohammad) Khatami did not do
so; no Iranian leader will ever think of surrendering," La
Stampa quoted Beiglu as saying.

 Beiglu added: "I, too, believe that Iran is entitled to make
use of civilian nuclear technology. When Iran joins the club of
nuclear states, Europeans and Americans will get to realize our
peaceful intentions and we will no longer feel discriminated."
Asked why Iranian officials were campaigning for support from
the international community, Beiglu said, "They know quite well
that the West does have limited options."
 He said imposing sanctions on Iran was not something easy
because with current oil prices hovering around dlrs 60 per
barrel, a ban on Iranian oil exports would only lead to higher
oil prices.

 He said that Washington and Tel Aviv can launch a pre-emptive
war against Iran for which they are well prepared, but the move
would entail grave consequences with the possibility that
American forces would lose the Iraqi Shiites' support which they
badly need.

 "The nuclear program is a national prestige for Iranians,"
added he philosopher.


*****************************************************************
 13 IRNA: Diplomat warns against politicization of Iran's nuclear case -

, Feb 9, IRNA                                                                                                            

-- 
Iranian Ambassador to Brazil Jafar Hashemi on Wednesday warned
against politicization of Iran's nuclear case by western states.

 "The political stance taken by western states towards Iran over
this issue can be a danger to other developing nations," said
Hashemi in a press conference in Brazilia.

 "The January 4th resolution passed by the Board of Governors of
the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and tabled by
western states against Iran's nuclear activities can serve as a
warning to other nations that have a similar desire to acquire
peaceful nuclear energy.

 "We believe the Agency's gesture is politically motivated and
that westerners, in fact, have turned a technical and legal
issue into a political one," the ambassador said.

 "This could be true for other countries in the future as well,"
he added.

 He called on all countries, particularly those with friendly
ties to Iran, to avoid falling into such a scheme.

 Brazil was among the countries that voted in favor of the IAEA
Board resolution that reported Iran's dossier to the UN Security
Council last week.

 Hashemi stressed that Iran does not desire anything "more or
less" than what others are entitled when it comes to nuclear
energy intended for peaceful purposes.

 He reiterated that access to peaceful nuclear energy is Iran's
right and that of all countries, including Brazil.

 The ambassador warned: "If our rights are not respected today,
other countries' rights could also be violated tomorrow."

*****************************************************************
 14 Daily Yomiuri: Japan walks away empty-handed as talks close 

Takaharu Yoshiyama Yomiuri Shimbun Staff Writer 

Bilateral talks with North Korea ended Wednesday in Beijing with
both sides leaving the table with little more than a promise to
continue the talks at a future date. 

The talks only highlighted differences in opinion and the
veritable ravine between Tokyo and Pyongyang. 

For the first time, the talks employed a three-track format.
Each panel dealt with one of three key issues: the abduction of
Japanese to North Korea, the normalization of diplomatic ties
and the nuclear and missile issues. 

A high-ranking Foreign Ministry official was less than pleased
with the results of talks on the abduction issue. "The outcome
was worse than a stalemate," the official said. "It was a
downright retreat." 

The government has been forced to review its strategies. 

Yet unlike in the past, the negative outcome has yielded only a
slight change in the Liberal Democratic Party's deliberations
over the bilateral talks, and there has been no marked increase
in the number of calls for sanctions against the country. 

=== 

Pyongyang skirts abductee issue 

While Japan continued to demand the return of citizens abducted
to North Korea, that country's delegation demanded that
nongovernmental workers assisting North Korean defectors be
handed over in turn. 

"That's totally unrelated to the issue at hand and makes us
skeptical about just how sincere they are to come to a
conclusion over their abduction of our people," argued Kunio
Umeda, deputy director general of the Foreign Ministry's Asian
and Oceanian Affairs Bureau and Tokyo's chief negotiator with
Pyongyang on the abduction issues, said. 

During the bilateral talks, Japan demanded that North Korea
return any abductees still in the country, conduct a thorough
investigation into the crime and hand over the agents
responsible for the abductions. 

However, in return, North Korea demanded that Tokyo surrender
Japanese citizens connected to NGOs that assist defectors from
North Korea. 

The abduction issues were discussed Sunday and Tuesday for a
total of 11 hours, ending without any movement from the North
Korean side. 

Instead, they threw in the NGO worker curve ball and attempted
in other ways to admonish Japan. 

Kim Chol Ho, head of the North Korean delegation to the
abduction talks, questioned a DNA analysis of the remains, which
Pyongyang claims belonged to Megumi Yokota, who was kidnapped
and taken to North Korea in 1977 at the age of 13. The analysis
found that the remains were those of two unknown people. 

Kim mentioned a Korean proverb--"doubt is an illness"--which
means that one can never be sure of anything once worry begins
to set in. 

A wide perception gap over the 2002 Japan-North Korea Pyongyang
Declaration became apparent during the normalization talks, the
first held in more than three years. 

Japan proposed to make up for its transgressions by having the
sides drop their claims against each other, thereby bringing to
a legal conclusion the issue of reparation for Japan's colonial
rule, including that for comfort women and slave labor. 

In return for North Korea dropping its claims, Tokyo said it
would provide a lump-sum payment in the form of economic aid to
the impoverished country. 

Tokyo stressed that the formula was the only realistic solution. 

It is based on the method employed by Japan and South Korea in
1965, when the two achieved normalization of diplomatic
relations. 

However, Pyongyang slammed the idea, saying it would not accept
it as the only solution, as the country made vague demands for
further compensation for issues such as comfort women and forced
labor. 

It is believed that North Korea wants to strike a better bargain
than South Korea. 

=== 

Lawmakers careful on sanctions 

"If we don't make any progress on solving the abduction issue,"
ambassador in charge of normalization talks Koichi Haraguchi
warned his North Korean counterpart, "the atmosphere in Japan
will become less favorable." 

Some lawmakers have begun to demand the central government put
more heat on North Korea because of the country's lackluster
response to the issue. 

Some LDP members are preparing to submit to the current Diet
session a bill stipulating specific conditions under which the
country could impose economic sanctions on North Korea, as well
as another bill to demand that North Korea improve its human
rights. 

Ichita Yamamoto, head of the LDP Foreign Affairs Division, and
other members of the party plan to draw up an outline of the
bills as early as Thursday, based on the outcome of the
bilateral talks. 

According to government sources, another form of pressure on the
reclusive country comes in the form of a Fukuoka High Court
ruling that it is illegal to reduce or exempt Korean halls in
Kumamoto affiliated with the pro-Pyongyang General Association
of Korean Residents in Japan (Chongryon) from paying property
tax and other local taxes. 

North Korean ambassador to the talks Song Il Ho indicated that
Pyongyang would match any pressure by Japan. He commented about
the pressure in a press conference Wednesday, saying, "Newton's
Third Law of Motion states that for every action, there is an
equal and opposite reaction." 

However, the deadlocked talks will not necessarily give momentum
to the move to impose sanctions. 

The bulk of the government takes a cautious stance on sanctions.
One government official said: "We should take this in stride. If
we close the door on talks with North Korea just because we're
angry, it'll make it difficult for us to ever reach a solution
to the abduction issue." 

There also persists a feeling within the government that if
Japan did impose sanctions on North Korea, it would not have
much of an effect. 

"We'll decide what sort of pressure to apply once we have
carefully discussed the issue," Chief Cabinet Secretary Shinzo
Abe told reporters Wednesday. 

Before becoming chief Cabinet secretary, Abe had been an active
proponent of invoking sanctions against North Korea, but now
that he is in the post, he is approaching the issue more
delicately. 

He also has been somewhat influenced by the loss of important
LDP figures, such as former Economy, Trade and Industry Minister
Takeo Hiranuma. (Feb. 10, 2006) 

 © The Yomiuri Shimbun.   
*****************************************************************
 15 Xinhua: DPRK urges US to drop sanctions   

  www.xinhuanet.com

  www.chinaview.cn 2006-02-09 21:31:38   

    PYONGYANG, Feb. 9 (Xinhuanet) -- The Democratic People's
Republic of Korea (DPRK) on Thursday urged the United States to
drop its sanctions against Pyongyang, reaffirming its stance in
which Washington's actions are linked with the settlement of the
Korean Peninusula's nuclear issue. 

    "The DPRK attaches so much importance to the lifting of the
financial sanctions because it is a touchstone which will show
whether Washington is willing to make a switchover in its policy
or not," a spokesman of the DPRK's Foreign Ministry said. 

    "For the US to respect the state sovereignty of the DPRK and
opt for peaceful co-existence is the key to the denuclearization
of the Korean Peninsula," the spokesman added. 

    The United States has frozen eight DPRK enterprises' assets,
accusing them of "proliferating mass destruction weapons" and
"illegal dealing," said the spokesman, who was lashing out at a
recent statement by the US State Department that the financial
sanctions are a separate issue from the six-party talks. 

    It is impossible for a peaceful negotiated settlement of the
nuclear issue if the United States will not back away from
sanctions against Pyongyang's finances, he warned. 

    Meanwhile, he denied the DPRK had engaged in any illegal
acts in the financial field. 

    "The results of the past several months' investigation
clearly proved that there is no evidence proving the DPRK's
issue of counterfeit notes or money laundering," he said. 

    It is the DPRK's invariable basic stand to attain the goal
of denuclearizing the Korean Peninsula, implement the joint
statement adopted at the six-party talks and seek a negotiated
peaceful settlement of the issue, he said. 

    "The point at issue is the US attitude," the spokesman
added. Enditem   

  Copyright ©2003 Xinhua News Agency. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 16 Korea Times: Nuclear Envoy Named Seoul's US Policy Chief 

    
  	   
    
      Hankooki.com > The Korea Times > Nation   
   
      

SEOUL (Yonhap) ¤Ñ Cho Tae-yong, deputy head of South Korea¡¯s
delegation to the six-way talks on North Korea¡¯s nuclear
weapons program, was appointed yesterday as head of the North
American affairs bureau of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and
Trade.

 He replaces Kim Sook, whose next position has not been decided
yet.

 Cho served as first secretary at the South Korean Embassy in
the United States from 1993 to 1997. 

02-09-2006 22:17         
  

*****************************************************************
 17 UPI: Analysis: Seoul joins sanction on North

United Press International - Intl. Intelligence - 

2/9/2006 4:13:00 PM -0500

By JONG-HEON LEE UPI Correspondent

SEOUL, Feb. 9 (UPI) -- South Korean banks have joined U.S.-led
efforts to impose financial sanctions on North Korea by cutting
business transactions with Banco Delta Asia, accused of helping
the communist country launder money. 

U.S. officials believe the financial sanctions have hurt the Kim
Jong Il regime and will eventually force it to give up its
nuclear weapons program. 

But South Korean officials are divided over the effect of the
sanctions. They are concerned the new round of tensions between
the U.S. and North Korea over sanctions may upset the hard-won
dialogue momentum to defuse North Korea's nuclear crisis. 

The National Federation of Fisheries Cooperation, a Seoul-based
bank specializing in business transactions with fishermen, said
Thursday it severed ties with BDA last week. "We have suspended
all of our transactions with BDA because it was suspected of
laundering money for North Korea," a bank spokesman said. 

According to the South Korean financial watchdog, the
fishermen's bank was involved in a correspondent banking deal
worth $3 million with the Macau-based bank last year, which the
U.S. Treasury Department said was a "primary money laundering
concern." 

The NFFC is the second South Korean bank to terminate
correspondent banking relations with BDA. Last week,
U.S.-controlled Korea Exchange Bank ceased transactions with the
Macau-based bank. 

"All transactions between KEB and BDA, including remittance and
foreign exchange dealings, have been halted since Feb. 1," a
bank spokesman said. The bank is controlled by U.S. equity fund
Lone Star, which has a 51 percent stake. 

Another South Korean bank, Shinhan Bank, said it terminated ties
with BDA in late 2004. "We were not involved in any deals with
BDA last year," said Yang Shin-keun, the bank's vice president. 

"Local banks' ties with BDA were not close. Their decision to
suspend transactions with BDA seemed intended to avoid any
possible problems that may arise from transactions with the bank
accused of money laundering for North Korea," said an official
at the Financial Supervisory Commission. 

Two Japanese banks, Bank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi UFJ and Mizuho
Corporate Bank suspended transactions with BDA late September
shortly after the U.S. Treasury forbade American banks from
doing business with the Macau bank, accusing it of laundering
money for North Korea and abetting other illicit activities such
as counterfeiting and smuggling. 

In December, the Japanese Bankers Association urged its members
to be cautious in dealing with BDA. 

Under the U.S. measure, BDA has cut off transactions with North
Korea, which is believed to have choked off Pyongyang's cash
flow. 

The U.S. administration, which has also frozen the U.S.-based
assets of eight North Korean companies, says Pyongyang's illicit
activities -- such as counterfeiting and drug trafficking --
have helped finance its nuclear weapons programs. 

U.S. officials believe concerted measures to financially isolate
North Korea will effectively force the country to abandon its
nuclear and missile programs. 

U.S. financial crimes investigators led by Deputy Assistant
Treasury Secretary Daniel Glaser used their recent visit to
Seoul to urge South Korea to join U.S.-led efforts to curb
counterfeiting and other unlawful activities by North Korea,
according to the U.S. Embassy in Seoul. 

Michael Green, who left the White House in December after
serving as senior director for Asian affairs on the National
Security Council, told a South Korean newspaper last week that
U.S.-led sanctions could lead to North Korea giving up its
nuclear aspirations. 

"North Korea will be left with no option but to seek reforms and
opening if its cash flow is choked off," he was quoted as saying
by the Chosun Ilbo, Seoul's largest daily. 

Kim Seung-hwan, a professor at Myongji University in Seoul, said
the U.S.-led sanctions would have a devastating effect on North
Korea's economy, which relies on illicit activities for 35 to 40
percent of its gross domestic product. 

South Korean officials agree that North Korea's furious response
to the U.S. sanctions reflects the blow the North has suffered. 

They are more concerned that tensions over sanctions would
further stall the six-nation talks on the North's nuclear
programs. The communist country has boycotted the six-nation
talks, accusing the U.S. of imposing financial sanctions. 

Foreign Minister Ban Ki-moon expressed regret that the
six-nation talks on North Korea's nuclear ambitions were stalled
by the financial issue. "I feel deep regret about the situation,
that an issue not related to the six-way talks is creating
trouble," Ban Ki-moon told a news briefing. 

He said South Korea was making diplomatic efforts to revive the
long-stalled nuclear negotiations, but admitted he could not say
for sure when the six-nation talks could continue. "I can't give
a definitive answer as to whether the talks will resume in
February," Ban said.

© Copyright 2006 United Press
International, Inc. All Rights Reserved
*****************************************************************
 18 Las Vegas SUN: Editorial: The Energy Hog is grinning

Today: February 09, 2006 at 7:49:27 PST 

Bush's proposed budget contains deep cuts in programs promoting
energy efficiency

 Creative minds in the Bush administration borrowed from Greek
mythology and came up with a variation of the Minotaur two years
ago to promote the president's publicly expressed views about
energy conservation. Their creation was called "Energy Hog" and
it featured the head of a pig instead of a bull on the body of a
fiendish man. 

Television, radio and Internet public service announcements were
drawn and written around the repulsive creature, which delights
in wasting energy without concern about the impact on the
country. The announcements were clever but insincere, though, as
federal funding for conservation programs have been dwindling
over the past four years. 

The president's 2007 budget, for example, handed to Congress on
Monday, recommends cutting the Environmental Protection Agency's
Energy Star program by 9 percent. The federal government's
weatherization program for low-income households is slated for a
cut of about 33 percent. 

Altogether, Bush's proposed budget cuts programs for energy
efficiency by 18 percent, or $100 million, according to the
American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy, a nonprofit
Washington-based group. And since 2002, the group says, such
programs have been cut by a total of 32 percent when inflation
is calculated. 

These are cuts only the Energy Hog could love. 

         All contents copyright 2005 Las Vegas SUN, Inc.
*****************************************************************
 19 Pahrump Valley Times: Response lukewarm to Bush renewable energy budget 

Februrary 8, 2006
By RAEM WONG PVT WASHINGTON BUREAU 

WASHINGTON - Supporters of Nevada's fledgling renewable energy
industry were lukewarm Monday to President Bush's budget
proposal to boost funding for wind and solar energy, while
eliminating the geothermal research program.

 The president's budget increases spending on research and
development for solar power to $149 million, about an 80 percent
increase over this year. Wind power would receive a $5 million
hike to $44 million.

 "You throw $5 million into a program like that and it barely
pays for the secretaries," said Tim Carlson, managing partner of
Nevada Wind, which is developing the state's first wind farm
near Ely.

 Carlson said the White House's new Advanced Energy Initiative
fell far short of Bush's goal articulated in his State of the
Union speech of ending the nation's "addiction" to foreign oil.

 But Carlson and other renewable energy advocates agreed that
the infusion of federal research dollars could make the sun and
the wind more competitive with oil and gas as energy sources. 

"That's a step in the right direction," said Steve Rypka of
Solar, NV. - the local chapter of the American Solar Energy
Society.

 The budget calls for closing the $23 million Geothermal
Technology program, which industry officials said threatened the
development of new technology for a promising clean-energy
source. 

"It's very shortsighted," said Dan Schochet, vice president of
Ormat, a Nevada-based geothermal company

 Industry officials say the research dollars are critical to
making geothermal exploration and drilling more efficient and
cost effective.

 "If we've got all this energy beneath our feet, why can't we
use it?" said Karl Gawell of the Geothermal Energy Association.
"The answer is technology." 

Experts describe Nevada as a hotbed of geothermal activity. With
modest technological advancements, the state's subterranean
reserves could generate 1,500 megawatts of energy, or enough
electricity to power 1.5 million homes, Schochet said.

 Rebecca Wagner, Gov. Kenny Guinn's energy adviser, added, "I'm
very disappointed to see geothermal research completely
eliminated."

 The Natural Resources Defense Council criticized the budget
proposal, calling the increase in renewable energy spending "an
elaborate shell game" while the White House supports policies
benefiting the oil and gas industries that damage the
environment.

 Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman said that taxpayer money could
be better spent in developing other renewable energy, as well as
new "clean" coal and nuclear power plants.

 "We believe that we can more effectively put money to work in
developing the ethanol program, for example, or solar energy
than on working on geothermal," Bodman said.

 Bodman added, "It doesn't mean that it's not a valuable source
of energy."

 Industry officials say the clean-energy effort would also be
helped if Congress made permanent tax credits for new
alternative energy plants, which are set to expire next year,
making it difficult for companies to make long-term plans.

webmaster@pahrumpvalleytimes.com
Copyright © Pahrump Valley Times, 1997 - 2006 
*****************************************************************
 20 Guardian Unlimited: France secretly upgrades capacity of nuclear arsenal 

Kim Willsher in Paris

Friday February 10, 2006
 		
France has secretly modified its nuclear arsenal to increase the 
strike range and accuracy of its weapons. The move comes weeks 
after President Jacques Chirac warned that states which 
threatened the country could face the "ultimate warning" of a 
nuclear retaliation.

A military source quoted yesterday by the Libération newspaper 
claimed France had tinkered with its nuclear weapons to improve 
their strike capability and make this threat more credible.

The source said there had been two major changes: the bombs can
now be fired at high altitude to create an "electromagnetic
impulsion" to destroy the enemy's computer and communications
systems; and the number of nuclear warheads has been reduced to
increase the missiles' range and precision.

During his surprise speech, which was made in January, President 
Chirac said: "The number of nuclear warheads has been reduced in 
certain of the missiles in our submarines".

Military experts said this was not a step towards disarmament,
but a move to improve the performance of the weapons. Until now
each submarine carried 16 French-made M45 missiles, each fitted
with six nuclear warheads. After being fired, each warhead would
separate to hit a different target, in effect giving each
submarine 96 nuclear bombs.

In reducing the number of warheads, down to one per missile in
some cases, the weapon is lighter and has a longer range. It can
also be targeted more accurately.

Libération speculates that while potential targets are "secret",
it is clear they include the Middle East or Asia, and that its
military contacts suggest the changes are aimed at adding
"flexibility" to France's nuclear deterrent.

"These evolutions are aimed at better taking into account the
psychology of the enemy," defence minister Michèle Alliot-Marie
said after President Chirac's warning in January.

In a speech to MPs, she added: "A potential enemy may think that
France, given its principles, might hesitate to use the entire
force of its nuclear arsenal against civilian populations.

"Our country has modified its capacity for action and from now
on has the possibility to target the control centres of an
eventual enemy."

French government sources said the president's speech, given at
a nuclear submarine base in Brittany, was not targeted
specifically at Iran - despite Tehran's decision to continue its
nuclear programme - or at individual terrorist organisations,
but at countries that posed a direct threat to France itself.

It is also seen as an attempt to justify the more than 3.5bn
(£2.4bn) a year France spends to maintain its estimated 300-350
nuclear weapons more than a decade after the end of the cold war.

"The ultimate warning restores the principle of dissuasion," the
military source told Libération. The president is not talking
about a choice between an apocalypse or nothing at all."

The paper says according to its information "ultimate warning"
could take two new forms.

The most demonstrative would be to fire a relatively weak
warhead into a deserted zone far from centres of power and
habitation. The more radical option would be to explode a bomb
at an extremely high altitude with the aim of creating a brief
but enormously strong electromagnetic field which would disable
or destroy all non-protected electronic systems in the area.

During the cold war France's "ultimate threat" involved firing
nuclear bombs into Soviet military divisions and large cities.
 	
[UP] 

Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
 21 Times of India: 'US wants to block India's indigenous nuclear-programme'- 

[ Thursday, February 09, 2006 06:57:51 pmPTI ]


MUMBAI: Top nuclear scientists and experts have come out in full
support of Atomic Energy Commission(AEC) chief Anil Kakodkar's
stand that putting the fast breeder reactor programme under IAEA
safeguards will jeopardise the country's strategic interests. 

Backing Kakodkar, P K Iyengar, former AEC Chairman, asked "why
this government is backing on its words? We are a nuclear weapon
country and it is for us to decide (on which reactors to put
under IAEA safeguards). 

"Clearly we should be able to tell the Americans that both BARC
and Kalpakkam will be completely out of safeguards in addition
to few others decided by the government," Iyengar said. 

 "Why is this government supporting on issues where they (US) 
show double standards? he asked. The much-hyped CTBT and FMCT 
also fizzled out as they did not suit them," he quipped.

He said, even in US, the separation of civilian/military 
programme is not very distinct as for example Los Alamos and 
other strategic labs do research both on civilian and military 
strategies.

As a weapon state, and a non-signatory to NPT, "we should be able 
to decide as to what we want to emphasise as our priorities and a 
collective wisdom will help the government also," former Director 
of Bhabha Atomic Research Centre A N Prasad said.

Nuclear strategic expert Rajesh Basru contended that India's role 
as an emerging power will not be affected even if the Indo-US 
agreement does not come through. 

 "India, as a weapon country, has every right to reject the 
agreement, Basru said.

"Certainly, our role as an emerging power in the world would not 
be affected even if the agreement does not come through," he 
said.

"As a weapon state, we should also have the freedom to choose our 
plan of separation just as US or any other weapon country does," 
he stressed.

Several nuclear scientists pressed for a national debate on the 
Indo-US July 18 nuclear deal so that all aspects could be 
considered in the correct perspective.

The scientists, who spoke on condition of anonymity, asked why 
the US has "done an almost 180-degree turn" from the July 18 
agreement.

 They wondered why the US turned a 'blind-eye' to China 
"violating" all non-proliferation regimes and Beijing's continued 
assistance to Pakistan.

They felt that the US shifting its goalpost was aimed at blocking 
India's indigenous programme and making it nuclear-energy 
dependent on the US. They also pointed out that the US Congress 
can at any time stop transfer of technology to India.


Copyright Â© 2006Times Internet Limited. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 22 newsobserver.com: NRC OKs merger of Duke, Cinergy 

Thursday, February 9, 2006

The Associated Press The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
approved Duke Energy's planned $9 billion acquisition of
Cincinnati-based Cinergy.

Last May, Charlotte-based Duke Energy agreed to buy Cinergy in a
deal that will create a company with about 5.4 million customers
and $70 billion in assets. The acquisition still needs the
approval of state regulators in North Carolina and Indiana.

The deal, which will go before shareholders from both companies
March 10, is expected to close in April. All rights reserved.
This copyrighted material may not be published, broadcast or
redistributed in any manner.
   
 © Copyright 2006, The News & Observer Publishing Company
A subsidiary of The McClatchy Company <img




*****************************************************************
 23 TVA: Notice of meeting


                         FR Doc 06-1228 
[Federal Register: February 9, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 27)] 
[Notices] [Page 6818-6820] From the Federal Register Online via 
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr09fe06-101]                         

TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY
 
Meetings; Sunshine Act
Agency Holding the Meeting: Tennessee Valley Authority (Meeting 
No. 1562). Time and Date: 1 p.m. (EST), February 13, 2006. TVA 
West Tower Auditorium, 400 West Summit Hill Drive, Knoxville, 
Tennessee. [[Page 6819]] Status: Open. Agenda: Approval of 
minutes of meeting held on September 28, 2005.

New Business
A--Budget and Financing A1. Proposed Rate Adjustment and Rate 
Addendum. C--Energy C1. Gibson County Coal LLC--Delegation of 
authority to the Executive Vice President, Fossil Power Group, to 
enter into a contract for coal supply to Colbert Fossil Plant 
Units 1-4. C2. Cumberland Coal Resources LP--Delegation of 
authority to the Executive Vice President, Fossil Power Group, to 
enter into a contract for coal supply to various TVA fossil 
plants. E--Real Property Transactions E1. Knoxville Office 
Complex East Tower--Approval of the public auction sale of 
leasehold interests or term easements and reaffirmation of the 
declaration of surplus and sale at public auction of the fee 
interest (Tract No. XKOC-4) and conveyance of associated 
easements (Tract Nos. XKOC-5E and XKOC-6E), affecting 
approximately 1 acre of land in Knoxville Tennessee.

Information Items

1. Westinghouse Electric Company--Approval of contract for 
replacement steam generators, with associated equipment, for 
Sequoyah Nuclear Plant Unit 2.

2. Town of Spring City, Tennessee--Approval of utility agreement 
with TVA for sanitary sewer disposal and for the grant of a 
permanent easement and temporary construction easement for a 
sewer line to extend to the Watts Bar Nuclear Plant.

3. Bartlett Holdings, Inc. (formerly known as Numanco 
LLC)--Approval of contract supplement for specialty staffing 
services (health physics technicians and instrument mechanics) 
for nuclear operations at all TVA nuclear plants and general 
staffing support at Browns Ferry Unit 1 Restart.

4. ABB, Inc.--Approval of indefinite quantity term contract for 
the supply of medium voltage power transformers. 5. CSX 
Transportation--Delegation of authority to the Executive Vice 
President, Fossil Power Group, to enter into a contract for rail 
transportation of high-sulfur coal to Paradise Fossil Plant.

6. Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway Company--Delegation of 
authority to the Executive Vice President, Fossil Power Group, to 
extend Contract No. C-12306 for rail transportation of Wyoming 
coal to various TVA fossil plants through the year 2010.

7. Coalsales LLC and Resource Sales Inc.--Delegation of authority 
to the Executive Vice President, Fossil Power Group, to enter 
into contracts for coal supply to TVA's scrubbed plants.

8. CSX Transportation--Delegation of authority to the Executive 
Vice President, Fossil Power Group, to extend the contract for 
rail transportation of coal to Bull Run Fossil Plant through the 
year 2015.

9. Variable Price Interruptible Power (VPI) Exit Fee `` Approval 
of option for customers that would like to switch from VPI to 
firm power.

10. Two-Part Real Time Pricing Pilot Program--Approval of program 
modifications.

11. Pilot Seasonal Rates for Large Manufacturing 
Customers--Approval of program.

12. Seasonal Time of Use Pricing Overlay--Approval of pilot
program.

13. Two-Part Real Time Pricing (2-Part RTP) Pilot 
Program--Approval of arrangements with a directly served customer 
and other proposed actions relating to the program.

14. Competitive Index Rate (CIR)--Approval of arrangements with a 
directly served customer.

15. Long-Term Power Supply--Approval of arrangements with a 
directly served customer.

16. Market Days Option for Flat Price Interruptible Power 
Program-- Approval to add market days option.

17. Alcoa Switching Station--Approval of abandonment of the 
161-kV transmission line easement, affecting approximately 1.2 
acres in Blount County, Tennessee, Tract No. JSAS-394, S.1X.

18. Regional Resource Stewardship Council--Approval of charter 
extension for 1 year, continuation of service of members and 
chair, and authorization of the Executive Vice President, River 
System Operations & Environment, to complete the charter renewal 
process in accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act.

19. Columbia to Murfreesboro Transmission Line--Approval of 
abandonment of easement affecting approximately 40 acres of land 
in Rutherford County, Tennessee, Tract Nos. CMB-129 through 
CMB-144.

20. Kevin and Karen Millikan--Approval of the sale of a 
nonexclusive permanent easement for private water-use facilities, 
affecting approximately .12 acre of land on Tellico Reservoir in 
Monroe County, Tennessee, Tract No. XTELR-254RE.

21. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service--Approval of 
sale of an approximately .06 acre portion of former TVA land on 
Blue Ridge Reservoir, in Fannin County, Georgia, XTBRR-1.

22. City of Norris--Approval of transfer of real property 
affecting approximately 420 acres of land on Norris Reservoir in 
Anderson County, Tennessee, Tract No. XTNR-117.

23. Assistant Secretaries of TVA--Approval of appointments of 
Nicholas P. Goschy, Jr., and Ralph E. Rodgers.

24. Condemnation Cases--Approval of filing to acquire easements 
and rights-of-way for transmission line projects, affecting Aspen 
Grove- Westhaven in Williamson County, Tennessee; Basin-Toccoa in 
Polk County, Tennessee; Northeast Benton--Etowah District in Polk 
and McMinn Counties, Tennessee; Cumberland FP-Montgomery in 
Montgomery County, Tennessee; and East Franklin-Truine Tap to 
Clovercroft in Williamson County, Tennessee.

25. Condemnation Cases--Approval of filing to acquire easements 
and rights-of-way for transmission projects, affecting East 
Franklin-Truine Tap to Clovercroft in Williamson County, 
Tennessee.

26. Delegations of Authority--Approval of extension of interim 
delegations relating to procurement contracts, financing, and 
personnel and compensation.

27. Tax-equivalent Payments--Approval of payments for Fiscal Year 
2005 and estimate of payments for Fiscal Year 2006. 28. Winning 
Performance Team Incentive Plan--Approval of FY 2006 Scorecard.

29. TVA Retirement System Board--Approval of appointment of 
Phillip L. Reynolds to the Board of Directors.

30. TVA Retirement System (TVARS)--Amendments to the Rules and 
Regulations and to the Provisions of the TVA Savings and Deferral 
Retirement Plan.

31. The Office and Professional Employees International Union-- 
[[Page 6820]] Approval of implementation of Fiscal Year 2006 pay 
adjustments.

32. International Brotherhood of Teamsters--Approval of 
implementation of Calendar Year 2006 pay adjustments.

33. Trades and Labor Annual Employees--Approval of implementation 
of Calendar Year 2006 pay adjustments.

34. Bellefonte Nuclear Plant--Approval of cancellation of 
construction of the deferred Units 1 and 2.

35. Alliance Coal Corporation--Approval of delegation of 
authority to the Executive Vice President, Fossil Power Group, to 
enter into a contract for coal supply to Bull Run Fossil Plant.

36. Norris Reservoir--Deed modification affecting approximately 
6.5 acres of former TVA land in Campbell County, Tennessee, Tract 
No. XNR- 165, S.2X.

37. Retention of Net Power Proceeds and Nonpower Proceeds and 
Payments to the U.S. Treasury--Approval.

38. Summer Place Tower--Authorization of the public auction sale 
of leasehold interests located at 500 West Summit Hill Drive, 
Knoxville, Knox County, Tennessee.

    For more information: Please call TVA Media Relations at 
(865) 632- 6000, Knoxville, Tennessee. Information is also 
available at TVA's Washington Office (202) 898-2999. People who 
plan to attend the meeting and have special needs should call 
(865) 632-6000. Anyone who wishes to comment on any of the agenda 
in writing may send their comments to: TVA Board of Directors, 
Board Agenda Comments, 400 West Summit Hill Drive, Knoxville, 
Tennessee 37902. Dated: February 6, 2006. Maureen H. Dunn, 
General Counsel and Secretary. [FR Doc. 06-1228 Filed 2-7-06; 
9:47 am] BILLING CODE 8120-08-P
 
*****************************************************************
 24 RIA Novosti: The world will not do without nuclear power engineering

Opinion &analysis - 

09/ 02/ 2006                                  


MOSCOW. (Academician Yevgeny Velikhov, for RIA Novosti) -- I am
an optimist, and I don't think that natural energy resources
will be depleted anytime soon. 

At any rate, oil and gas rather than , which will be sufficient
to ensure the world's steady development until the middle of
this century. 

In addition, we still have coal. As for , its role during this
period will be to stabilize the world's energy situation, which
appears to be extremely complicated. 

Certain countries possess a prevailing amount of natural
resources due to their uneven distribution in the world. For
this reason, , and sometimes becomes a trump card in a political
game. Nuclear power engineering is capable of reassuring all
those who are not certain about having sufficient energy today
and tomorrow. There is no doubt, that it is the only source of
energy which can ensure the world's steady development in the
foreseeable future. Today, this fact is understood not only by
physicists, but also by politicians, who have to accept it as an
axiom. 

In the modern world people are actively striving to improve the
quality of life, but better amenities require a great deal of
energy. Several billion people, whom the nations of the golden
billion only recently considered poor and an object of charity,
are today consuming as much energy as they need. This allows
them to achieve fast economic progress. Many of them (China,
Korea, India, Malaysia, and others) are reaching the level of
the world's leaders. New powerful consumers are emerging on the
energy market. 

Experience shows that all known sources of energy are at the
service of people, and have a role to play in their lives.
Although nuclear power will be moving to the fore, I do not rule
out that mankind as well. The energy of the sun, wind, tides,
and biomass will find a niche. The use of these energy carriers
is justified and they harmoniously supplement each other. 

However, nuclear power engineering has indisputable advantages
over alternative sources of energy. For instance, it takes many
echelons to transport coal, but it can be easily replaced with
several kilos of uranium. 

Nuclear power engineering will not only relieve transport of a
titanic burden, but will also give an addition reserve of fuel.
keep growing, and it is clear that they are not going to fall.
This situation may cause a collapse of the economy or of
individual industries. In the United States, for one, the price
of gas is so high that its chemical industry is losing its
ability to compete on the world market. Other countries are
faced with similar problems as well. Nuclear power engineering
will be the only energy alternative in this situation. 

Although this industry is very complicated, and requires huge
investment and proper security, it is still the best option in
the final count. In the European part of Russia it makes more
sense than gas ones. Gas may be used more rationally in the
chemical industry, or sold abroad at a good price, which will
contribute to the national budget. Replacement of gas with
nuclear energy is a strategic cause for Russia. 

Today, Russia is at the world's average level in the use of
nuclear energy. Its contribution to the common energy pot
averages 17%-18% (up to 30% in the European part of the
country). If we look three or four decades ahead in order to
evaluate Russia's nuclear energy requirements, we will see that
its share should be increased by at least 25%, if not more. 

Russia is not the only country to recognize the value of nuclear
power engineering. The French nuclear power plants account today
for up to 80% of national energy consumption. In his recent
State of the Union Address President Bush spoke about the need
to replace non-renewable energy sources with nuclear energy. put
a certain restraint on the development of nuclear power
engineering. Germany was even considering giving it up
altogether. But now everything is changing. Rational Europeans
have realized that nuclear power engineering is indispensable.
As for India and China, it is difficult even to imagine these
giants making progress without such a powerful source of energy. 

True, they are rich in coal (for the time being!). But the
burning of coal generates large amounts of carbon dioxide, which
is fraught with unpredictable climatic changes, for instance,
accelerated global warming. There is another problem: coal is
linked to the appearance of aerosols, which are the main source
of lung cancer. I do not mean to say that coal mining has no
future. People will learn to burn coal without these side
effects, just as they have coped with a number of problems in
nuclear power engineering. I think that today the latter
industry has left others far behind in terms of security and
ecology. As for the negative impact on the climate and
environment, it can well compete with any other power
generation, including solar and wind energy. 

The advantage of nuclear power engineering is that it is not
accompanied by hothouse emissions or pollution of the
atmosphere. The 1986 technogenic Chernobyl disaster slowed down
the advance of nuclear power engineering, and the public lost
interest and trust in it. But the progressing market
difficulties with hydrocarbons have compelled the world to turn
to nuclear power engineering once again. Today, many countries,
Russia among them, have placed their bets on this industry. 

By the middle of the century we physicists are hoping to see
rapid development of another, more progressive type of nuclear
power engineering - thermonuclear synthesis. Let me remind you
that all life on Earth is a stream of solar energy of
thermonuclear origin. Will thermonuclear energy meet mankind's
requirements? Of course, there is no magic wand, which would
make energy sources last forever. But thermonuclear energy is
very promising. It is not for nothing that it is called the Sun
of the Earth (150 million degrees inside the reactor). For the
time being this type of energy is very expensive, and
commercially unviable. Experts will have to solve a whole
package of scientific problems, and upgrade a number of
technologies in order to make the thermonuclear power plant
competitive with other energy sources. 

Seven participants in the unique project - Europe, Japan,
Russia, the U.S., China, Korea, and India have agreed to invest
five billion dollars into the construction of a thermonuclear
experimental reactor (ITER - Russian acronym), and use for this
purpose their intellectual resources, industrial capacities, and
technologies. The site for it has already been chosen --
Cadarache in Provence, France. When will this project be
implemented? If we start building it by a well-orchestrated
effort this year, its construction will be completed in ten
years. Another five years will be spent on designing an electric
power station, and another 20 years on extensive research. The
fast track suggested by Tony Blair's advisor Sir David King, is
aimed at building the first thermonuclear electric station by
2030. If this experience succeeds, the world will receive very
powerful sources of energy -- thermonuclear electric stations.
This will be an effective cure for the headache caused by the
energy problem for a long time to come. 

ITER's history is an amusing illustration of how politicians
have advanced the cause of nuclear power engineering. A perfect
balance of mutual interests has taken shape: politicians have no
choice but to vote for atomic power engineering, whereas its
destiny largely depends on the political will of governments. It
is no secret that on the one hand, politicians express national
interests, whereas on the other hand, they are speaking for
themselves with an eye to elections, populist motives, personal
prestige and ambitions. Decision on the ITER project was a
strictly political one, and credit for it goes to the political
leaders. In 1985, Russian physicists convinced the then
President Mikhail Gorbachev of the advantages of thermonuclear
energy. In turn, he had a fruitful discussion with Francois
Mitterand, who appeared to be well versed in the subject and
took it further by convincing U.S. President Ronald Reagan of
its benefits. As a result, an agreement on ITER was signed the
same year in Geneva. 

This is not the end of the story. Credit for the choice of the
site in France goes to another French President, Jacques Chirac,
who put huge pressure on other participants. Moreover, Chirac
managed to persuade Japanese Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi,
who was very enthusiastic about Japan hosting ITER. He finally
gave in, but not for nothing. The Japanese were happy about a
brilliant idea suggested by Russia - to start designing a
commercial thermonuclear power station in Japan on a par with
the experimental ITER project in France. This idea received
universal support. 

Under heavy pressure from his domestic opponents, President Bill
Clinton was forced to withdraw from the ITER project. But the
new President, George W. Bush, made a rational decision on the
return to the project. He even urged the nation to view ITER as
a priority of American energy policy of the future. Russian
President Vladimir Putin called on the world to give credit to
nuclear power engineering at the Millennium Summit in New York
in 2000. Thank God, today's world compels politicians to think
about the future. 

Academician Yevgeny Velikhov, prominent Russian scientist,
President of the Kurchatov Institute Russian Scientific Center.
 
© 2005 "RIA Novosti"   
*****************************************************************
 25 TheStar.com: Ontario extends power subsidy
 
Thu. Feb. 9, 2006. | Updated at 11:38 PM 

 PMCANADIAN PRESS

Industries and manufacturers are applauding an Ontario government 
move today to extend a program that helps them predict their 
energy costs, but critics say it’s not enough to stop firms from 
cutting back staff to save money because of rising electricity 
bills. 

The government partly answered the business community’s call for
more stable prices with a three-year extension of a cap on the
amount of revenue Ontario Power Generation can collect from some
of its energy producing assets. 

“We know that Ontario’s businesses, whether they be located in
Thunder Bay, in Sarnia or downtown Toronto . . . rely on
electricity prices that are stable and predictable,” said Energy
Minister Donna Cansfield. 

Starting May 1, the revenue limit on OPG’s unregulated
facilities — small hydroelectric stations and coal-fired power
plants — will drop to 4.6 cents per kilowatt-hour from the
present limit of 4.7 cents. The previous program was set to
expire April 30. 

Any additional revenues will be refunded through quarterly
rebates. At the end of last year, the program had returned some
$740 million back to businesses, and officials say the latest
reduction would mean another $35 million in rebates. 

The Communications, Energy and Paperworkers Union slammed the
move as just preserving “the status quo” of a program that
didn’t help stem more than 3,000 forestry sector job losses in
Ontario over the past year. 

But industry groups like Canadian Manufacturers and Exporters
and the Association of Major Power Consumers of Ontario hailed
the decision as an important step that would help businesses
forecast energy costs and ensure they don’t get out of control. 

Mining giant Inco Ltd. (TSE:N), which is set to become Ontario’s
biggest energy consumer once it finalizes its friendly takeover
of Falconbridge (TSE:FAL.NV), said more predictable costs makes
it easier to budget for potential expansions and new jobs. 

However, even with the cap, the combined company will likely
spend some $300 million annually on electricity alone, Inco CEO
Scott Hand estimated. 

“Anyone who has spent time in our Sudbury operations knows it
takes a lot of electricity to run our mines, our mills, our
smelters and our refineries,” Hand said. 

Without more competition for OPG, which produces 70 per cent of
Ontario’s electricity, businesses can’t easily shop around for
better rates, forcing the government to impose revenue limits
until more competitors arrive. 

Electricity rates are still subject to rise May 1 on OPG’s
regulated assets, such as its nuclear plants, which generate
most of Ontario’s energy. Analysts have predicted homeowners and
businesses alike could face rate increases of as much as 25 per
cent. 

A former senior advisor to the ministry of energy in the
previous Conservative government argues subsidizing the rates
paid by industrial users helped build billions of dollars in
debt at the former Ontario Hydro, which ratepayers are still
paying off through a debt-retirement charge on their bills. 

Mike Richmond, who advised former Conservative energy minister
Jim Wilson, said that for decades, provincial governments have
been cutting deals with private companies to get them to locate
in Ontario. 

“It worked, but they ended up selling them power at far below
cost as part of these special deals,” Richmond said. 

New Democrat critic Peter Kormos said the move is a
``lacklustre” response to massive job cuts announced in
Ontario’s manufacturing sector in recent months. 

“Thousands of workers in this province have been losing good
jobs across Ontario — jobs that are not going to be restored by
(Thursday’s) announcement, jobs that will probably never come
back,” Kormos said. 

Economic Development and Trade Minister Joe Cordiano disagreed,
saying price stability will allow companies to better predict
expenses. 

He also noted that the rising dollar and higher offshore
competition are big factors impacting manufacturers that are out
of the provincial government’s control. 

Legal Notice: Copyright Toronto Star Newspapers Limited. All
rights reserved. Distribution, transmission or republication of
*****************************************************************
 26 NRC: Regulatory Guide: Issuance, Availability
 
                         FR Doc E6-1774 
[Federal Register: February 9, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 27)] 
[Notices] [Page 6794-6795] From the Federal Register Online via 
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr09fe06-82]                         
 
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has issued a new 
guide in the agency's Regulatory Guide Series. This series has 
been developed to describe and make available to the public such 
information as methods that are acceptable to the NRC staff for 
implementing specific parts of the NRC's regulations, techniques 
that the staff uses in evaluating specific problems or postulated 
accidents, and data that the staff needs in its review of 
applications for permits and licenses.
 
Regulatory Guide 1.203, ``Transient and Accident Analysis 
Methods,'' provides guidance for NRC licensees and applicants to 
use in developing and assessing evaluation models that may be 
used to analyze transient and accident behavior that is within 
the design basis of a nuclear power plant. Evaluation models that 
the NRC has previously approved will remain acceptable and need 
not be revised to conform with the guidance given in this 
regulatory guide.
 
Chapter 15 of the NRC's ``Standard Review Plan (SRP) for the 
Review of Safety Analysis Reports for Nuclear Power Plants'' 
(NUREG-0800) and the ``Standard Format and Content of Safety 
Analysis Reports for Nuclear Power Plants'' (Regulatory Guide 
1.70) describe a subset of the transient and accident events that 
must be considered in the safety analyses required by Title 10, 
part 50, of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR part 50), 
``Domestic Licensing of Production and Utilization Facilities,'' 
section 50.34, ``Contents of Applications; Technical 
Information'' (10 CFR 50.34). In particular, 10 CFR 50.34 
specifies the following requirements regarding applications for 
construction permits and/or licenses to operate a facility: (1) 
Safety analysis reports must analyze the design and performance 
of structures, systems, and components, and their adequacy for 
the prevention of accidents and mitigation of the consequences of 
accidents.
 
(2) Analysis and evaluation of emergency core cooling system 
(ECCS) cooling performance following postulated loss-of-coolant 
accidents (LOCAs) must be performed in accordance with the 
requirements of 10 CFR 50.46. (3) The technical specifications 
for the facility must be based on the safety analysis and 
prepared in accordance with the requirements of 10 CFR 50.36. An 
additional benefit is that evaluation models that are developed 
using the guidelines provided in Regulatory Guide 1.203 will 
provide a more reliable framework for risk-informed regulation 
and a basis for estimating the uncertainty in understanding 
transient and accident behavior.
 
In addition, the NRC is issuing section 15.0.2 of the SRP, which 
covers the same subject material as Regulatory Guide 1.203, and 
is intended to complement the guide. Specifically, section 15.0.2 
provides guidance to NRC reviewers of transient and accident
 
[[Page 6795]] analysis methods, while Regulatory Guide 1.203 
provides practices and principles for the benefit of method 
developers. Chapter 15 of the SRP recommends using approved 
evaluation models or codes for the analysis of most identified 
events. The SRP also suggests that evaluation model reviews 
should be initiated whenever an approved model does not exist for 
a specified plant event. If the applicant or licensee proposes to 
use an unapproved model, an evaluation model review should be 
initiated.
 
The NRC previously solicited public comment on this guide by 
publishing a Federal Register notice (65 FR 77934) concerning 
Draft Regulatory Guide DG-1096 on December 13, 2000, followed by 
a Federal Register notice (68 FR 4524) concerning Draft 
Regulatory Guide DG-1120 on January 29, 2003. Following the 
closure of the latest public comment period on March 24, 2003, 
the staff considered all stakeholder comments in the course of 
preparing the new Regulatory Guide 1.203. The NRC staff 
encourages and welcomes comments and suggestions in connection 
with improvements to published regulatory guides, as well as 
items for inclusion in regulatory guides that are currently being 
developed. You may submit comments by any of the following 
methods.
 
Mail comments to: Rules and Directives Branch, Office of 
Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, 
DC 20555-0001.
 
Hand-deliver comments to: Rules and Directives Branch, Office of 
Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 11555 
Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852, between 7:30 a.m. and 
4:15 p.m. on Federal workdays.
 
Fax comments to: Rules and Directives Branch, Office of 
Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, at (301) 
415-5144.
 
Requests for technical information about Regulatory Guide 1.203 
may be directed to Shawn O. Marshall at (301) 415-5861 or via 
e-mail to .
 
Regulatory guides are available for inspection or downloading 
through the NRC's public Web site in the Regulatory Guides 
document collection of the NRC's Electronic Reading Room at 
-rm/doc-collections. Electronic copies of Regulatory Guide 1.203 
and SRP section 15.0.2 are also available in the NRC's Agencywide 
Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) at , under 
Accession Nos. ML053500170 and ML053550265, respectively.
 
In addition, regulatory guides are available for inspection at 
the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR), which is located at 11555 
Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland; the PDR's mailing address is 
USNRC PDR, Washington, DC 20555-0001. The PDR can also be reached 
by telephone at (301) 415-4737 or (800) 397-4205, by fax at (301) 
415-3548, and by email to . Requests for single copies of draft 
or final guides (which may be reproduced) or for placement on an 
automatic distribution list for single copies of future draft 
guides in specific divisions should be made in writing to the 
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, 
Attention: Reproduction and Distribution Services Section; by 
e-mail to ; or by fax to (301) 415-2289. Telephone requests 
cannot be accommodated. Regulatory guides are not copyrighted, 
and Commission approval is not required to reproduce them.
 
(5 U.S.C. 552(a)) Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 29th day of 
December, 2005.
 
For the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. James T. Wiggins, 
Deputy Director, Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research.
 
[FR Doc. E6-1774 Filed 2-8-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P

 
*****************************************************************
 27 NRC: Regulatory Guide: Issuance, Availability
 
                         FR Doc E6-1775 
[Federal Register: February 9, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 27)] 
[Notices] [Page 6795-6796] From the Federal Register Online via 
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr09fe06-83]                         
 
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has issued a new 
guide in the agency's Regulatory Guide Series. This series has 
been developed to describe and make available to the public such 
information as methods that are acceptable to the NRC staff for 
implementing specific parts of the NRC's regulations, techniques 
that the staff uses in evaluating specific problems or postulated 
accidents, and data that the staff needs in its review of 
applications for permits and licenses.
 
Regulatory Guide 1.201, ``Guidelines for Categorizing Structures, 
Systems, and Components in Nuclear Power Plants According to 
Their Safety Significance,'' which is being issued for trial use, 
provides guidance for use in developing and assessing evaluation 
models for accident and transient analyses. An additional benefit 
is that evaluation models that are developed using these 
guidelines will provide a more reliable framework for 
risk-informed regulation and a basis for estimating the 
uncertainty in understanding transient and accident behavior.
 
The NRC has promulgated regulations to permit power reactor 
licensees and license applicants to implement an alternative 
regulatory framework with respect to ``special treatment,'' where 
special treatment refers to those requirements that provide 
increased assurance beyond normal industrial practices that 
structures, systems, and components (SSCs) perform their 
design-basis functions. Under this framework, licensees using a 
risk-informed process for categorizing SSCs according to their 
safety significance can remove SSCs of low safety significance 
from the scope of certain identified special treatment 
requirements.
 
The genesis of this framework stems from Option 2 of SECY-98-300, 
``Options for Risk-Informed Revisions to 10 CFR part 50, 
`Domestic Licensing of Production and Utilization Facilities','' 
dated December 23, 1998.\1\ In that Commission paper, the NRC 
staff recommended developing risk-informed approaches to the 
application of special treatment requirements to reduce 
unnecessary regulatory burden related to SSCs of low safety 
significance by removing such SSCs from the scope of special 
treatment requirements. The Commission subsequently approved the 
NRC staff's rulemaking plan and issuance of an Advanced Notice of 
Proposed Rulemaking (ANPR) as outlined in SECY-99-256, 
``Rulemaking Plan for Risk-Informing Special Treatment 
Requirements,'' dated October 29, 1999.
 
----------------------------------------------------------------- 
---------- \1\ Commission papers cited in this notice are 
available through the NRC's public Web site at 
collections/commission/secys/, and the related Federal Register 
notices are available through the Federal Register Web site 
sponsored by the Government Printing Office (GPO) at .
 
gov/fr/index.html. 
----------------------------------------------------------------- 
---------- The Commission published the ANPR in the Federal 
Register (65 FR 11488) on March 3, 2000, and subsequently 
published a proposed rule for public comment (68 FR 26511) on May 
16, 2003. Then, on November 22, 2004, the Commission adopted a 
new section, referred to as Sec. 50.69, within Title 10, part 50, 
of the Code of Federal Regulations, on risk- informed 
categorization and treatment of SSCs for nuclear power plants (69 
FR 68008).
 
This trial regulatory guide describes a method that the NRC staff 
considers acceptable for use in complying with the Commission's 
requirements in Sec.  50.69 with respect to the
 
[[Page 6796]] categorization of SSCs that are considered in 
risk-informing special treatment requirements. This 
categorization method uses the process that the Nuclear Energy 
Institute (NEI) described in Revision 0 of its guidance document 
NEI 00-04, ``10 CFR 50.69 SSC Categorization Guideline,'' dated 
July 2005.\2\ Specifically, this process determines the safety 
significance of SSCs and categorizes them into one of four 
risk-informed safety class (RISC) categories.
 
----------------------------------------------------------------- 
---------- \2\ NEI 00-04, ``10 CFR 50.69 SSC Categorization 
Guideline,'' is available through the NRC's public Web site at 
/idmws/doccontent.dll?ID=052910091:= 
2b2cbc48fd7897510347535dd7c30495, and through the NRC's 
Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS),  / 
reading-rm /adams/web-based.html, under Accession ML052910035.
 
----------------------------------------------------------------- 
---------- The NRC issued a draft of this guide, Draft Regulatory 
Guide DG- 1121, as part of the Sec.  50.69 rulemaking package in 
May 2003, and solicited public comments specifically concerning 
the draft guide by publishing related Federal Register notices 
(68 FR 34012 and 68 FR 41408) on June 6 and July 11, 2003. 
Following the closure of the public comment period on August 1, 
2003, the staff considered all stakeholder comments in the course 
of preparing the new Regulatory Guide 1.201. However, a few 
issues of technical interpretation and implementation still 
remain, with respect to specific aspects of the guidance.
 
Because the staff believes these issues will be best resolved by 
testing the guide against actual applications, the NRC decided to 
issue this guide for trial use. This trial regulatory guide does 
not establish any final staff positions, and may be revised in 
response to experience with its use. As such, this trial guide 
does not establish a staff position for purposes of the Backfit 
Rule, 10 CFR 50.109, and any changes to this trial guide prior to 
staff adoption in final form will not be considered to be 
backfits as defined in 10 CFR 50.109(a)(1). This will ensure that 
the lessons learned from regulatory review of pilot and follow-on 
applications are adequately addressed in the final regulatory 
guide, and that the guidance is sufficient to enhance regulatory 
stability in the review, approval, and implementation of 
probabilistic risk assessments (PRAs) and their results in the 
risk-informed categorization process required by Sec.  50.69. The 
NRC staff encourages and welcomes comments and suggestions in 
connection with improvements to published regulatory guides, as 
well as items for inclusion in regulatory guides that are 
currently being developed. You may submit comments by any of the 
following methods.
 
Mail comments to: Rules and Directives Branch, Office of 
Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, 
DC 20555-0001.
 
Hand-deliver comments to: Rules and Directives Branch, Office of 
Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 11555 
Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852, between 7:30 a.m. and 
4:15 p.m. on Federal workdays.
 
Fax comments to: Rules and Directives Branch, Office of 
Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, at (301) 
415-5144.
 
Requests for technical information about Regulatory Guide 1.201 
may be directed to Donald G. Harrison at (301) 415-3587 or via 
e-mail to .
 
Regulatory guides are available for inspection or downloading 
through the NRC's public Web site in the Regulatory Guides 
document collection of the NRC's Electronic Reading Room at .
 
Electronic copies of Regulatory Guide 1.201 are also available in 
the NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System 
(ADAMS) at , under Accession No. ML060260164. In addition, 
regulatory guides are available for inspection at the NRC's 
Public Document Room (PDR), which is located at 11555 Rockville 
Pike, Rockville, Maryland; the PDR's mailing address is USNRC 
PDR, Washington, DC 20555-0001. The PDR can also be reached by 
telephone at (301) 415-4737 or (800) 397-4205, by fax at (301) 
415-3548, and by e- mail to . Requests for single copies of draft 
or final guides (which may be reproduced) or for placement on an 
automatic distribution list for single copies of future draft 
guides in specific divisions should be made in writing to the 
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, 
Attention: Reproduction and Distribution Services Section; by 
e-mail to ; or by fax to (301) 415-2289. Telephone requests 
cannot be accommodated. Regulatory guides are not copyrighted, 
and Commission approval is not required to reproduce them.
 
(5 U.S.C. 552(a)) Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 27th day of 
January, 2006.
 
For the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Carl J. Paperiello, 
Director, Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research.
 
[FR Doc. E6-1775 Filed 2-8-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P

 
*****************************************************************
 28 Boston Globe: Calls for Pilgrim fees rise - 

Towns: We share risk from waste
 
By Robert Knox, Globe Correspondent  |  February 9, 2006 

Now that Plymouth lawmakers have filed legislation seeking fees
from the Pilgrim power plant for its on-site nuclear waste
storage, neighboring towns are vying for part of the money on
grounds that they share the risk, too.

''We're asked to share the pain, we should get a share of the
gain," said Mary Lampert, chairwoman of the Duxbury Nuclear
Advisory Committee.

Duxbury's Town Meeting will be asked this spring to vote on a
resolution directing town officials to seek compensation for the
storage of nuclear waste at Pilgrim. The measure states that the
town should negotiate with the plant's owner, Entergy Corp.,
examine legislative remedies, and take any other means necessary
to assure proper compensation.

The prospect that nuclear waste will accumulate on the site over
the next three decades -- Entergy Corp. just applied for a
20-year license extension to 2032 -- prompted the legislation
assessing Entergy $2 million or more a year to offset what
lawmakers say are the increasing security costs and risks for
Plymouth.

But four other towns -- Kingston, Duxbury, Carver, and
Marshfield -- also lie within the federally mandated 10-mile
emergency planning zone, and officials in those towns are eyeing
a share of the money. All five towns are required to draw up
detailed emergency evacuation plans and update them yearly.

The plant does cause additional expenses for Duxbury, said John
Tuffy, chairman of Duxbury's Board of Selectmen, ''and in my
view we ought to be compensated for it."

Those who favor payments to area towns also said the amount
required of Entergy should be increased from the $2 million
figure in the legislation to something more -- perhaps $5
million. Otherwise, they say, there will not be enough money to
go around. Entergy has opposed any payment on grounds that it
already covers security costs.

The view that neighboring towns should be compensated goes
beyond Duxbury. Representative Frank Hynes, a Democrat who
represents Marshfield, backed the idea that any fee imposed by
the Legislature on Entergy should be shared.

''It makes sense to me that all the communities within that
10-mile zone should share in it in some fashion, since all are
at risk," he said last week.

Hynes said the federal government recognizes the increased risk
posed to towns like Marshfield by requiring the existence of an
alarm system to warn residents within the 10-mile zone of a
nuclear accident and requiring the towns to stage emergency
preparedness drills. ''Any fee attached to the Pilgrim plant
because of storing waste there ought to be shared," he said.

Senator Marc Pacheco, a Taunton Democrat whose district includes
Carver, said he supports a bill to compensate Plymouth in ''view
of the profits coming out of Pilgrim," but said the measure
''needs to be expanded to all the host communities." 

Emergency plans call for other communities to serve as hosts to
residents forced to evacuate the 10-mile zone in the event of an
emergency.

Pacheco also said the state's current emergency management plans
are underfunded and understaffed and said the Legislature needs
to look more closely at emergency planning.

Kingston officials are beginning to address the relicensing
question, said Kevin Donovan, Kingston's town administrator.
Donovan met with town department heads this month to learn what
their requirements were to meet the town's responsibilities
under federal and state nuclear regulations and make a report to
the Board of Selectmen.

Donovan said selectmen plan to comment to the NRC on Entergy's
relicensing application and that compensation for the expense
and risks of having a nuclear waste dump in the neighborhood may
be an issue for them.

Entergy has reacted negatively to the proposal that it pay a fee
for storing nuclear waste in Plymouth, contending that it
already pays for emergency preparation costs.

Spokesman David Tarantino said the presence of nuclear waste at
Pilgrim does not cause towns to hire additional police because
the plant meets or exceeds federal security regulations.

It's the federal government's responsibility to remove spent
nuclear fuel rods from Pilgrim (and all the country's nuclear
reactors) to a safe storage site, not Entergy's, said Tarantino.

Lambert, however, said Duxbury's emergency planning efforts have
presented costs not covered by Entergy. Because the loud speaker
warning system to alert residents to a nuclear emergency does
not reach enough people, her town wants to install a
computerized rapid dialing telephone calling system that can be
used by all town departments to notify the public. Town Meeting
will be asked to pay for the system this year.

Duxbury has paid for protective gear for emergency workers,
Lambert said. She also said a drill to test the town's emergency
plans would be a considerable expense the communities have not
wanted to bear.

Expenses for equipment and training tied directly to emergency
planning are part of the rationale for imposing a fee on
Entergy, Plymouth Selectman Anthony Schena said. But the
legislation filed by Plymouth's representatives also addressed
the town's right to tax a company making a profit in Plymouth,
Schena said. ''I believe Plymouth has the right to tax it."

But, Schena added, neighboring towns have rights, too.

''I think this is a regional issue. The lion's share should go
to Plymouth, but I have no problem with percentages going to
other towns."

 Robert Knox can be reached at . 

What do you think?


Should the owner of the Pilgrim nuclear plant have to pay a
special fee of $2 million or more to compensate area towns for
storing nuclear waste at its Plymouth site? Please e-mail your
comments to , with your name, hometown, and a daytime phone
number (for verification only).[ /]  © Copyright 2006 Globe
Newspaper Company. More: 

*****************************************************************
 29 Odessa American Online: Regents to vote on nuclear reactor

November 9th 2006

UT officials to weigh teaming agreement

BY DAVID J. LEE
Odessa American

The University of Texas System's board of regents will decide 
today whether to throw its support behind a proposed test nuclear 
reactor in Andrews.

When the finance and planning committee met Wednesday morning, 
chairman Robert Rowling briefly mentioned the item at the 
beginning of the meeting.

"I just want to point your attention to a teaming agreement, 
docket No. 95," Rowling told the committee. "That'll come up 
tomorrow before the entire board of regents."

The item did not come up for discussion again Wednesday.

"All that is good news," UTPB President David Watts said. "All 
that means is that the regents have reviewed the agreement and 
find it acceptable. They don't feel the need to discuss it, and 
it's prepared for tomorrow for approval when it goes onto the 
docket."

The regents met all day Wednesday and are to meet until noon 
today.

The nuclear reactor proposal will hit today's docket as an item 
on a consent agenda - which means that regents will not discuss 
it today.

"By Regent Rowling bringing it up this morning, he made sure that 
every regent had the opportunity to make a comment before it goes 
forward on the consent agenda," Watts said.

The regents are to consider approving a teaming agreement between 
the UT System, UT Permian Basin, UT Austin, UT Arlington, UT 
Dallas, UT El Paso, the City of Andrews, the City of Odessa, the 
City of Midland, Sandia National Laboratories, Thorium Power Inc. 
and General Atomics.

The teaming agreement would last for one year. The agreement is 
for all the organizations to lend their support to creating a 
pre-conceptual design for the proposed state-of-the-art facility 
in Andrews County.

The proposed High Temperature Test Teaching Reactor - dubbed HT3R 
(pronounced heater) - facility is a joint project between UTPB 
and General Atomics of San Diego, Calif.

The HT3R will also be discussed when the Odessa Development Corp. 
board meets at 2 p.m. today.

Attorney Joel V. Roberts said a teaming agreement is being 
drafted for approval by the ODC board.

The agreement, Roberts said, is actually formalizing a pledge the 
ODC board made at its last meeting to commit $500,000 toward 
construction of the HT3R facility to be built by UTPB and General 
Atomics of California.

Each of the three communities backing the project - Andrews, 
Odessa and Midland - has committed to spending $500,000 toward a 
pre-conceptual design for the test nuclear reactor facility.

"It's what all of our communities have worked toward - to put the 
proposal in a position that it would garner their support," 
Andrews City Manager Glen Hackler said. "The financial support 
the communities have put forward is a strong show of commitment. 
So, we're hopeful (the board will approve it.)"

That design would also determine what the reactor would look 
like, where it would be located, how large it would be and what 
it would end up costing.

The University of Texas of the Permian Basin has garnered $1.73 
million of the $3 million it needs for a pre-conceptual design 
for the proposed state-of-the-art test nuclear reactor in 
Andrews.
 

  American Online: c /o Odessa American 222 E. 4th Street P.O. 
Box 2952 Odessa, TX 79760 Copyright © 1999-2006 Odessa American. 
All rights reserved. Refer comments to Webmaster.   
*****************************************************************
 30 Deccan Herald: Top nuclear scientists support AEC chief's stand - 
               
Thursday, February 9, 2006       
    
  Mumbai, PTI: 
  
Top nuclear scientists and experts have come out in full support
of Atomic Energy Commission(AEC) chief Anil Kakodkar's stand
that putting the fast breeder reactor programme under IAEA
safeguards will jeopardise the country's strategic interests. 

Backing Kakodkar, P K Iyengar, former AEC Chairman, asked "why
this government is backing on its words? We are a nuclear weapon
country and it is for us to decide (on which reactors to put
under IAEA safeguards). 

"Clearly we should be able to tell the Americans that both BARC
and Kalpakkam will be completely out of safeguards in addition
to few others decided by the government," Iyengar said. 


"Why is this government supporting on issues where they (US)
show double standards? he asked. The much-hyped CTBT and FMCT
also fizzled out as they did not suit them," he quipped. 

He said, even in US, the separation of civilian/military
programme is not very distinct as for example Los Alamos and
other strategic labs do research both on civilian and military
strategies. 

As a weapon state, and a non-signatory to NPT, "we should be
able to decide as to what we want to emphasise as our priorities
and a collective wisdom will help the government also," former
Director of Bhabha Atomic Research Centre A N Prasad said from
Bangalore.   


  Copyright 2005, The Printers (Mysore) Private Ltd., 75, M.G.
Road, Post Box No 5331, Bangalore - 560001
 Tel: +91 (80) 25880000 Fax No. +91 (80) 25880523   
*****************************************************************
 31 Brattleboro Reformer: Area lawmakers seek a say on VY license extension

February 09, 2006 Brattleboro, VT                                                                                 
 			 								 					
By KRISTI CECCAROSSI 
Reformer Staff

BRATTLEBORO -- A group of lawmakers is determined to weigh in on
Vermont Yankee's bid to extend its operating license another 20
years.

 But before they can, they have to push a bill through the
Statehouse that would legally allow them to have a say.

 Entergy Nuclear, the Mississippi-based owners of Vermont
Yankee, filed a federal application last week to extend the
nuclear power plant's license past its 2012 expiration date.

 As far as Entergy is concerned, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission is the only body that has to OK a license renewal.
Whether or not Entergy likes it, though, legislators are moving
ahead with a bill that would require the company to submit
license renewal plans to Montpelier.

 In testimony before the state Senate this week, company
officials said they were opposed to the legislation. 

The bill is expected to move slowly through the Statehouse, but
Entergy's early resistance could be a sign of a looming clash,
not unlike last year's intense legislative debate over a
proposal to put "dry" nuclear waste storage on the plant's
grounds.

 The so-called "dry cask" storage bill passed in the Legislature
last year, but only after several weeks of heated negotiations
between Entergy officials and lawmakers.

 The bill, as approved, was highly criticized by Windham County
residents. And now dry cask storage is under review by the
state's Public Service Board, which marks the final regulatory
roadblock for the plan.

 If a similar dispute arises over the relicensing bill, Entergy
officials could have federal law on their side.

 The Atomic Energy Act gives the Nuclear Regulatory Commission
oversight of nuclear power plant issues, including license
renewal.

 Neil Sheehan, a spokesman for the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, said if state lawmakers vote on license renewal in a
way that somehow counters what the commission has to say about
it, the commission's decision would trump any state decision and
legal precedent supports that.

 "The courts have ruled unambiguously in favor of the NRC having
control over these issues," Sheehan said.

 Sen. Jeanette White, D-Windham, says that's "debatable."

 She and other legislators have found a few examples of courts
that ruled in favor of a state's economic interests, overriding
the Atomic Energy Act.

 White, along with Sen. Rod Gander, D-Windham, is sponsoring the
relicensing bill.

 "The Legislature gave initial approval for the plant to operate
until 2012, and no one had any reason to think it would go
beyond that. Relicensing is a whole new ball game," White said.

 Testimony was collected on the bill last week in the Senate
Finance Committee. A lobbyist for Entergy told senators that the
company is against the legislation.

 Sen. Ann Cummings, D-Washington, who heads the finance
committee, said the bill is still in its "fact-finding" stage
and that she doesn't expect it to move quickly through the
Legislature.

 If the bill does make it to a vote this session, and gets
passed, no one can predict how lawmakers are likely to weigh in
on the matter.

 "I'm not going to even guess how we'd vote on it," White said.

 But as it moves through the legislative process, Entergy's
position is firm.

 Rob Williams, spokesman for Entergy, said the company will wait
for its 803-page license renewal application to be reviewed by
the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

 The company will also bring license renewal to the Public
Service Board, a quasi-judicial board that reviews state utility
issues. But it will not seek approval from the Legislature.

Kristi Ceccarossi can be reached at kceccarossi@reformer.comor
(802) 254-2311, ext. 160. 		   	 	
			

Copyright ©1999-2005 New England Newspapers, Inc., 
*****************************************************************
 32 [du-list] soldiers face debilitating diseases
 
Date: Thu, 09 Feb 2006 18:56:17 -0800

<x-flowed>
http://www.nbc30.com/news/6837518/detail.html
Soldiers Face Debilitating Diseases
POSTED: 10:40 am EST February 8, 2006

They served their time in the military in places like Saudi Arabia and
Kuwait, and more recently, Iraq and Afghanistan.
Most returned in good health.
But an NBC 30 investigation has found that for some soldiers, their
service has meant a long and debilitating death sentence with
mysterious diseases.

"I have good days, I have bad days," said M. Sterry, of New Haven.
"There were eight of us that served together. Six of my friends are
dead."
She looks healthy, but Sterry is a very sick woman who has no idea how
much longer she will live.

"I've had three heart attacks, two heart surgeries. I have chronic
headaches, chronic upper respiratory infections. I get pneumonia two or
three times a year," she said. "I have chronic fatigue, joint aches,
muscle aches. I have a rash that migrates all over my body."

Sterry figures the initial symptoms began in Saudi Arabia in September
of 1991 while she was serving with the National Guard. Three years
later, after completing her tour of duty and coming back home, the
symptoms were still there, but much more severe.

State Sen. Gayle Slossberg said one of the sources of the diseases may
be depleted uranium. She was one of those who helped pass legislation
last year setting up a health registry in Connecticut, strictly to keep
records on our military personnel.

"We'll know where they've served, what they've done, what the scope of
the job was," she said. "We'll be able to identify to some extent what
they've been exposed to and what their symptoms are."
But it will come too late for David Leighton, of Naugatuck, a Marine
who served in Saudi Arabia in Desert Storm. When he came home, the
symptoms he had had for quite some time would not go away.
His mother, Gail Leighton, said that for the next 15 years, she saw her
once vital and vibrant son slowly dying before her eyes.

"You would have had to have been there during the journey and see him
in bed and sweating and in agony," she said.
She said her son was a patriot, that his dad had been a Marine. She
said the federal government did not believe that those coming back
became sick because of the conditions in which they served.
"That was the hardest part, I think, more than anything, to have the
DOD, the Department of Defense, and the VA spending so much time and
energy trying to deny and discount and discredit some of the people who
were doing research."

State Veterans Commissioner Linda Schwartz told NBC 30 that making the
connection between battlefield exposures and diseases has been a long,
ongoing process.

She said the use of depleted uranium has to be studied because, as she
put it, we're sending our best people into battle and their well-being
must be the top priority.
==============
***NOTICE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this
material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a
prior interest in receiving the included information for research and
educational purposes.***

		
---------------------------------
To help you stay safe and secure online, we've developed the all new Yahoo! 
Security Centre.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





To unsubscribe from this groups send a message to 
du-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com.  In the body of the message type 
unsubscribe and send.
*****************************************************************
 33 Deseret News: Panel OKs bill on bonds for those seeking N-stays 

[deseretnews.com] 

Thursday, February 9, 2006 

By Joe Bauman 

Deseret Morning News 

A bill to require bonding before seeking a stay on an action 
before the Radiation Control Board passed a House committee 
Wednesday after a heated hearing in which the bill's sponsor 
accused opponents of being misleading and calling him a racist. 
HB335 would require posting a bond to cover costs and damages 
"suffered by the order recipient" when a stay is requested. The 
measure would apply to anyone seeking a stay of an order by the 
executive secretary of the state's Radiation Control Board. 

The House Public Utilities and Technology Committee voted 
6-3 in favor of the bill that now goes to the House for debate. 

"These permits could take an enormous amount of time to 
go through and process," said the sponsor, Rep. Aaron Tilton, 
R-Springville, and there is already ample opportunity for the 
public to comment. 

Jason Groenewold, director of the Healthy Environmental 
Alliance of Utah (HEAL-Utah), said steps are in place to prevent 
frivolous requests for stays. They include the requirement that 
a petitioner must prove the action would cause irreparable harm 
that outweighs damage to the other party, that the position is 
not adverse to the public interest, and that the case is likely 
to prevail on the merits. 

He discussed situations he believed were similar to those 
in which access to redress would be hindered by the bill. "The 
standard that the board already has in place" is adequate and 
sets a "very high bar," he said. 

Dianne R. Nielson, director of the Utah Department of 
Environmental Quality, also testified on HB335. "Were this to 
become law, there probably is a chilling effect and a 
significant financial effect to request a stay," she said. 

Claire Geddes, who said she was representing herself "but 
I work with HEAL-Utah also," said citizens need redress when the 
nuclear industry has a great deal more money and easier access 
to decisionmakers. 

"We're not talking about roads here," she said. "We're 
talking about radioactive waste and nuclear waste. This is a 
serious issue for the state." 

A committee member said, "I think we need to stay germane 
to the bill itself." 

Tilton said, "I would also question why we're hearing 
from HEAL-Utah again." 

"I said I'm here representing myself and I'm a citizen," 
Geddes said. "And I took a lot of time to come up here. I have a 
sick husband. And I think I have a right to have five minutes." 

Tilton responded, "But you work for HEAL-Utah." 

"No, I do not work for HEAL-Utah," Geddes replied. She 
added that she said she works with HEAL-Utah, and Tilton said he 
apologized. 

Small organizations like HEAL-Utah don't have much money, 
while big nuclear businesses have large revenues. The 
requirement to post a bond in an appeal on a radiation matter 
would make it "virtually impossible" for a citizen group to 
question the system, she said. 

Anne Sward Hansen, a resident of Highland, Utah County, 
said she is a member of the board of the Environmental Justice 
Foundation, which is supporting Goshute Indians who do not want 
nuclear waste on their reservation. (That referred to the 
attempt by Private Fuel Storage to build a high-level nuclear 
fuel repository on tribal property in Skull Valley, Tooele 
County. Some tribal members support the repository and others 
don't.) 

Hansen said a question was raised about whether the 
present system is broken. "I am very much ashamed to say this, 
and please forgive me: the system is not broken for white 
people. It's hemorrhaging for black people and Indian people," 
she said. 

Citing exposure to radiation she said happened to 
minority people elsewhere, she said there are no administrative 
procedures for these people to seek justice. 

The bill in question, she added, represents "a lack of 
respect for constitutional rights." She accused federal agencies 
of conspiring in such matters with the nuclear industry, and 
said there was complicity between the state and the nuclear 
industry. 

"I don't want to see any more stumbling blocks," Hansen 
said. "Democracy is not for sale. And now you have all of these 
hoops, and now you have to pay bonds. 

"It's hard enough to get Indian people up to the state 
Legislature just to speak because they can't afford a car," 
Hansen said. "And now in order to go against the DOE and some of 
these other regulatory agencies, you're expecting them to put on 
millions and millions of dollars of bonding." 

Tilton said, "I think in the course of an hour I've been 
called a racist and many members on the committee were called 
racists. . . . 

"And they go through all this hyperbole and conjecture 
and that's exactly their point, is to not to speak to the bill . 
. . but to inflame and to arouse a suspicion of the process." 

Naming Groenewold, Tilton said, "Either he doesn't 
understand the bill or he was misleading." Nielson had to 
correct his points "over and over and over," Tilton said. 

"And I think you can see a pattern developed of 
inflammatory testimony, actions and misleading information that 
would lead people to think that, you know, cats and dogs are 
living together and mass hysteria is going to take place if we 
pass this bill out favorably." 

After the meeting, Hansen said he did not accuse his 
opponents of calling him a racist. "I was talking about a 
system." 

© 2006 Deseret News Publishing Company 	 		 		 [ /] 
*****************************************************************
 34 CD: When You Should Use Potassium Iodide in a Radiation Emergency ?
 
  CommunityDispatch.com   
   
  CDC Health Advisory Notices & Announcements 

    Last Updated: Feb 9th, 2006 - 06:49:30   

 By Center for Disease Control , Emergency Preparedness
&Response 

What is Potassium Iodide ? 

Potassium iodide is a salt of stable (not radioactive) iodine.
Stable iodine is an important chemical needed by the body to
make thyroid hormones. Most of the stable iodine in our bodies
comes from the food we eat. potassium iodide is stable iodine in
a medicine form. This fact sheet from the Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention (CDC) gives you some basic information
about potassium iodide . It explains what you should think about
before you or a family member takes potassium iodide . 

What does Potassium Iodide do? 

Radioactive iodine may be released into the air—and then
breathed into the lungs—as part of a radiological or nuclear
event. In most cases, once radioactive iodine has entered the
body, the thyroid gland quickly absorbs it. After it has been
absorbed into the thyroid gland, radioactive iodine can then
cause thyroid gland injury. Because potassium iodide acts to
block radioactive iodine from being taken into the thyroid
gland, it can help protect this gland from injury. 

It is also important to know what potassium iodide cannot do.
potassium iodide cannot protect parts of the body other than the
thyroid from radioactive iodine. potassium iodide cannot protect
the body from any radioactive elements other than iodine. If
radioactive iodine is not present, then tapotassium iodide ng
potassium iodide is not protective. 

How does potassium iodide work? 

The thyroid gland cannot tell the difference between stable and
radioactive iodine and will absorb both. potassium iodide works
by blocpotassium iodide ng radioactive iodine from entering the
thyroid. When a person takes potassium iodide , the stable
iodine in the medicine gets absorbed by the thyroid. There is so
much stable iodine in the potassium iodide that the thyroid
gland becomes "full" and cannot absorb any more iodine—either
stable or radioactive—for the next 24 hours. 

Iodized table salt also contains iodine; there is enough iodine
in iodized table salt to keep most people healthy under normal
conditions. However, there is not enough iodine in table salt to
block radioactive iodine from getting into your thyroid gland.
You should not use table salt as a substitute for potassium
iodide . 

How well does potassium iodide work? 

It is important to know that potassium iodide may not give a
person 100% protection against radioactive iodine. How well
potassium iodide blocks radioactive iodine depends on 

how much time passes between contamination with radioactive
iodine and tapotassium iodide ng potassium iodide (the sooner a
person takes potassium iodide , the better), 

how fast potassium iodide is absorbed into the blood, and 

the total amount of radioactive iodine to which a person is
exposed. 

Who should take potassium iodide ? 

The thyroid glands of a fetus and of an infant are most at risk
of injury from radioactive iodine exposure. Young children and
people with low stores of iodine in their thyroid are also at
risk of thyroid injury. 

Infants (including breast-fed infants): Infants need to be given
the recommended dosage of potassium iodide for babies (see How
much potassium iodide should I take?). Even though some
potassium iodide gets into breast milk, it is not enough to
protect breast-fed infants from radioactive iodine exposure. The
proper dose of potassium iodide given to a nursing infant will
help to protect them from radioactive iodine that they breathe
in or drink in breast milk. 

Children: The United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA)
recommends that all children exposed to radioactive iodine take
potassium iodide , unless they have a known allergy to iodine.
Children from newborn to 18 years of age are the most sensitive
to the potentially harmful effects of radioactive iodine. 

Young Adults : The FDA recommends that young adults (those
between the ages of 18 and 40 years) who are exposed to
radioactive iodine take the recommended dose of potassium iodide
. Young adults are less sensitive to the effects of radioactive
iodine than are children. 

Pregnant Women: Because all forms of iodine cross the placenta,
pregnant women should take potassium iodide to protect the
growing fetus. However, pregnant women should take only one dose
of potassium iodide following exposure to radioactive iodine. 

Breastfeeding Mothers: Women who are breastfeeding should take
only one dose of potassium iodide if they have been exposed to
radioactive iodine. Because radioactive iodine quickly gets into
breast milk, CDC recommends that women exposed to radioactive
iodine stop breastfeeding and feed their child baby formula or
other food if it is available. If breast milk is the only food
available for an infant, nursing should continue. 

Adults: A dults older than 40 years should not take potassium
iodide unless public health or emergency management officials
say that contamination with a very large dose of radioactive
iodine is expected. Adults older than 40 years have the lowest
chance of developing thyroid cancer or thyroid injury after
contamination with radioactive iodine. They also have a greater
chance of having an allergic reaction to potassium iodide . 

When should I take Potassium Iodide ? 

After a radiological or nuclear event, local public health or
emergency management officials will tell the public if there is
a need to take potassium iodide or other protective actions. You
may be told to shelter-in-place or evacuate. Follow the
instructions given to you by these authorities. 

How much Potassium Iodide should I take? 

The FDA has approved two different forms of potassium iodide
—tablets and liquid—that people can take by mouth after a
nuclear radiation emergency. Tablets come in two strengths, 130
milligram (mg) and 65 mg. The tablets are scored so they may be
cut into smaller pieces to give lower doses. Each milliliter
(mL) of the oral liquid solution contains 65 mg of potassium
iodide . 

According to the FDA, you should take (or give) the following
doses after exposure to radioactive iodine: 

Adults should take 130 mg (one 130 mg tablet OR two 65 mg
tablets OR two mL of solution). 

Women who are breastfeeding should take the adult dose of 130
mg. 

Children between 3 and 18 years of age should take 65 mg (one 65
mg tablet OR 1 mL of solution). Children who are adult size
(greater than or equal to 150 pounds) should take the full adult
dose, regardless of their age. 

Infants and children between 1 month and 3 years of age should
take 32 mg (½ of a 65 mg tablet OR ½ mL of solution). This dose
is for both nursing and non-nursing infants and children. 

Newborns from birth to 1 month of age should be given 16 mg (¼
of a 65 mg tablet or ¼ mL of solution). This dose is for both
nursing and non-nursing newborn infants. 

How often should I take Potassium Iodide ? 

A single dose of potassium iodide protects the thyroid gland for
24 hours. A one-time dose at the levels recommended in this fact
sheet is usually all that is needed to give full protection to
the thyroid gland. In some cases, radioactive iodine might be in
the environment for more than 24 hours. If that happens, local
emergency management or public health officials may tell you to
take one dose of potassium iodide every 24 hours for a few days.
You should do this only on the advice of emergency management
officials, public health officials, or your doctor. Avoid repeat
dosing with potassium iodide of pregnant and breastfeeding women
and newborn infants. Those individuals may need to be evacuated
until levels of radioactive iodine in the environment fall. 

Tapotassium iodide ng a higher dose of potassium iodide , or
tapotassium iodide ng potassium iodide more often than
recommended, does not offer more protection and can cause severe
illness or death. 

Medical conditions that may make it harmful to take Potassium
Iodide 

It may be harmful for some people to take potassium iodide
because of the high levels of iodine in this medicine. You
should not take potassium iodide if 

you know you are allergic to iodine (If you are unsure about
this, consult your doctor. A seafood or shellfish allergy does
not necessarily mean that you are allergic to iodine.) or 

you have certain spotassium iodide n disorders (such as
dermatitis herpetiformis or urticaria vasculitis). 

People with thyroid disease (for example, multinodular goiter,
Graves’ disease, or autoimmune thyroiditis) may be treated with
potassium iodide . This should happen under careful supervision
of their doctor, especially if dosing lasts for more than a few
days. 

In all cases, talk to your doctor if you are not sure whether or
not to take potassium iodide . 

What are the possible risks and side effects of Potassium Iodide
? 

When public health or emergency management officials tell the
public to take potassium iodide following a radiological or
nuclear event, the benefits of tapotassium iodide ng this drug
outweigh the risks. This is true for all age groups. Some
general side effects caused by potassium iodide may include
intestinal upset, allergic reactions (possibly severe), rashes,
and inflammation of the salivary glands. 

When taken as recommended, potassium iodide causes only rare
adverse health effects that specifically involve the thyroid
gland. In general, you are more likely to have an adverse health
effect involving the thyroid gland if you 

take a higher than recommended dose of potassium iodide , 

take the drug for several days, or 

have pre-existing thyroid disease. 

Newborn infants (less than 1 month old) who receive more than
one dose of potassium iodide are at particular risk for
developing a condition known as hypothyroidism (thyroid hormone
levels that are too low). If not treated, hypothyroidism can
cause brain damage. Infants who receive potassium iodide should
have their thyroid hormone levels checked and monitored by a
doctor. Avoid repeat dosing of potassium iodide to newborns. 

Where can I get Potassium Iodide ? 

Potassium iodide is available without a prescription. You should
talk to your pharmacist to get potassium iodide and to get the
directions about how to take it correctly. Your pharmacist can
sell you potassium iodide brands that have been approved by the
FDA. 

Other Sources of Information 

The FDA recommendations on potassium iodide can be reviewed on
the Internet at . 

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Emergency
Response Site is available at (). 

*****************************************************************
 35 New West Network | Did Utah Kill John Wayne?

www.newwest.net

UTAH GOTHIC
 
By Contributing Writer, 2-06-06

By Clint Wardlow, 

is one of those legendary cursed Hollywood movies. The
brainchild of eccentric billionaire and aviator Howard Hughes,
the historical epic cast John Wayne as Temujin (a.k.a. Genghis
Khan). It was a bad idea from the start; destined for failure in
the form of bad box office and critical derision.
 
This aside, The Conqueror has a more troubling legacy. Six of
its main players kicked the bucket, possibly as a direct result
of working on this film. Veteran character actors Pedro
Armendariz (suicide) and Lee Van Cleef (natural causes) were
causalities. However it was the deaths of the three leads and
its actor-turned-director that raised eyebrows. Susan Hayward,
Dick Powell, Agnes Moorehead and the duke himself, John Wayne,
all died from cancer. 

Was this a macabre coincidence or was there some other factor?
Something that not only affected the cast and crew of the movie,
but involved everyone in the Southern Utah area it was filmed 

In 1954 St. George buzzed. Hughes had decided to film the epic
story of Genghis Khan under the aegis of his recently acquired
RKO studios and the dusty clime of Southern Utah would make a
nice Mongolia. 

Two hundred cast and crew members had arrived to begin work on
the big budget Hollywood feature. The rural Utah townsfolk
weren't used to having such tinsel-town luminaries invade their
drab agricultural lives. Susan Hayward, Pedro Armendariz, Dick
Powell (the director) and John Wayne would be hanging with the
commoners. Hollywood dollars would be flowing into the small
community. It took the town's mind off of other problems that
had sprung up recently. Problems that would eventually rust
their silver screen dream. 

Thursday, Part II: â€œAtomic Bombs and Dead Sheepâ€ 

Technorati Tags: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 

By , 2-06-06 | comments (3) | | --> | | --> 

  © 2006 NewWest, All Rights Reserved 
*****************************************************************
 36 Hudson Valley News: Kelly pursuing independent safety review at IP   

Thursday, February 9, 2006 

Congresswoman Sue Kelly is calling on the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission to conduct an Independent Safety Assessment at the
Indian Point Energy Center in Buchanan. 

Kelly visited Indian Point on Jan. 30 to press her longstanding
concerns about the NRC's handling of an ongoing leak
investigation at one of the spent fuel pools as well as issues
that she has raised about potential problems in the separation
of cables at the plant. Kelly brought Dave Lochbaum, a nuclear
safety engineer with the Union of Concerned Scientists, with her
on the tour of the plants last week. 

While Kelly said there have been efforts made to improve and
upgrade the safety and security of plant operations, she is
pushing for an Independent Safety Assessment as the most
guaranteed way to ensure the utmost safety at Indian Point and
for surrounding communities. She said a similar independent
review in 1996 of Maine Yankee nuclear power plant detected some
major safety and maintenance problems that would have otherwise
remained unknown. 

Kelly made the case for an ISA at Indian Point in a letter to
NRC Chairman Nils Diaz Wednesday. "I believe an independent and
thorough safety assessment of Indian Point is a necessary step
to ensuring the plants' safe operations," Kelly wrote. "As you
recall, the NRC established an Independent Safety Assessment
team in 1996 to conduct a comprehensive horizontal and vertical
review of the Maine Yankee plant. The formation of such an ISA
team for Indian Point would help us make certain that problems
are identified proactively in order to prevent any emergency or
potentially disastrous event from occurring at Indian Point." 

Kelly is requesting that the ISA for Indian Point be monitored
by outside experts and local officials. She said that an
independent safety review "may help restore the public's
confidence in the NRC's oversight, and will certainly better
assure the safety of the plant's operations."   

"The tour demonstrated that Entergy has made considerable
progress resolving a longstanding problem - cable separation -
as well as a more recent issue - leakage from the Unit 2 spent
fuel pool," Lochbaum said. "The ISA would either confirm that
Entergy has replicated this progress across the board or focus
attention on remaining gaps."   
  
                                
  HEAR today's news on MidHudsonRadio.com, the Hudson Valley's
                only Internet radio news report. 
  
*****************************************************************
 37 New West Network: Did Utah Kill John Wayne? Part II: Atomic Bombs 
and Dead Sheep

www.newwest.net

UTAH GOTHIC
 
Part two of a four-part series.

 By Contributing Writer, 2-09-06

By Clint Wardlow, UtahGothic.com

Atomic Bombs and Dead Sheep
 
Local prospectors had been reporting finds on their Geiger
counters that indicated large caches of uranium. The problem was
that once they began digging, the uranium never turned up. Also,
local ranchers had been suffering a spate of mysterious
livestock deaths.
 
Many suspected it may be due to the atomic bomb tests a short
distance away at Yucca Flats in Nevada. However, the feds
assured locals the tests were perfectly safe. Any fallout would
be minimal and dissipate quickly. And everyone knows the
government would never lie to its own citizens. That would be
unethical.
 
On May 19, 1953 the Atomic Energy Commission set off "Dirty
Harry," a 32 kiloton nuclear device about 100 miles away from
St. George. The bomb was one of 126 test fired on the Nevada
range from 1951 to 1963. Unfortunately for Cedar City and St.
George residents, the winds were particularly bad for this test.
What no officials admitted was that St. George had been pummeled
by 1230 times the permissible fallout level and had stayed that
way for an alarming 16 days! Sheep begin to die. Cattleman were
alarmed. The AEC gave Utah Congressman Douglas Stringfellow a
tour of the 1350 square mile test site. Good lackey that he was,
Stringfellow told residents the tests posed no danger to the
citizens of southern Utah. We had to keep the world safe from
Communism.
 
When producers considered shooting The Conqueror in southern
Utah they were concerned about nuclear fallout. Government
experts assured Powell and the producers that radiation levels
were safe. The script called for several giant battle scenes.
Electric fans were set up to insure the fight scenes had a
certain dusty, wind-blown realism. The film-makers certainly did
not want blast their cast and extras with irradiated dirt.
 
Hayward brought her nine-year-old twins. Wayne arrived with his
two sons, Michael and Patrick. The shooting schedule called for
almost daily battles. Cast and extras rolled in the dirt, and
were hit by dust clouds from the giant wind machines. It was
such a constant that the food provided by craft services (a kind
of traveling cafe for the crew) was coated with dust. That
damned dirt got everywhere.
 
Because the government had given the area its seal of approval,
no one worried about what the soil, that seemed to work its way
into the hair, clothing and bodies of everyone working on the
film, contained. Strontium 90, cesium 137, radio iodine, and
plutonium were just not things one considered while making a
Hollywood blockbuster.
 
There were still some shots needed to complete the movie after
shooting in St. George finished. To match the location shots,
Hughes shipped over 60 tons of Utah dirt to Hollywood,
contaminating some Los Angeles studio.
 
The premiere of The Conqueror unfolded before the unbelieving
eyes of the nation. The critics hooted at the laughable
spectacle of John Wayne posturing as the tartar warlord.
Filmgoers stayed away in droves. Hughes, indignant at the
philistinesâ€™ reaction to his epic, pulled the movie from
theaters. The film remained unseen except by the crazed aviator.
Hughes, in his madness and hidden from the world, sat in his
secluded Las Vegas sanctuary screening the movie on an almost
daily basis.
 
So that's how it would have remained; a forgotten, ill-conceived
movie vaguely remembered by the unlucky few who had forced
themselves to sit through it during its initial release. A
single blemish in the fifties during the golden age of John
Wayne. However, twenty-five years after its making, certain
information would come before the public that would bring The
Conqueror back into the limelight. Facts that showed the fallout
(literally) from The Conqueror went tragically far beyond the
simple consequences of a truly bad movie.
 
Tuesday, Part III: â€œFolks Start Dyingâ€ By Contributing
Writer, 2-09-06 | add comment| email this story | read more like

  © 2006 NewWest, All Rights Reserved 
*****************************************************************
 38 Morris Daily Herald: Residents seek 'truth' behind tritium leak

news@morrisdailyherald.com     		 		
     	

Hundreds turn out for informational forum in Godley
 
By Jo Ann Hustis Herald Writer

 A grassroots group wants to learn what it says is the truth
behind tritium in the groundwater around Braidwood Generating
Station.

“To try to learn the truth about what Exelon Nuclear has put in
the water, what are the health risks, and what can we do about
it,” noted Kurt Leinweber, a Joliet criminal attorney who is
heading the new Ad Hoc Project Committee.

“We’re very concerned about what regulators have done or have
failed to do, and we want to have accountability — to have a
criminal investigation of Exelon.”

Leinweber presented the AHP’s concerns Tuesday evening, during
the public forum by the Godley Park District for residents of
Reed Township and the villages of Godley and Braidwood.

The public forum was in response to a 1998 incident in which
about three million gallons of water containing tritium leaked
from an underground pipe inside Braidwood Station’s northern
boundary.

The incident was discovered during an environmental monitoring
program at the station in late November last year, and made
public on Dec. 3, 2005. 

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has said the tritium leak does
not pose a danger to the public, although the situation needs to
be addressed by the NRC and Illinois Environmental Protection
Agency.

Tritium is a naturally occurring isotope of hydrogen that emits
a very low level of radiation, and is a natural part of water.
It is found in more-concentrated levels in water used in nuclear
reactors.

A crowd estimated at up to 300 people attended the public forum
at the Godley Park District headquarters. District Director Joe
Cosgrove moderated the forum.

“Joe, as moderator, tried to keep things civil. The crowd was
outraged. Technical people were answering questions,” Leinweber,
of Custer Park, said today.

“The ultimate solution to the tritium thing is Exelon will put
the water in evaporating tanks. They won’t put it in the well
water — they’ll put it in the air. This is not a chocolate
factory here. This is dangerous stuff.

“The National Academy of Science said there’s no safe level (of
tritium in water),” he added. “I guess we can switch from
bottled water to bottled air now.”

NRC spokesman Viktoria Mitling of Region 3, Lisle, said the
public forum was very difficult.

“We were there to present information on our response to the
situation in Braidwood, and to answer questions from the public. 

“The people in Godley were very, very upset and angry about what
happened, so we did our best to present the information,” she
said.

“One of the things we did was take independent samples of water
from private wells in the area, and looked at the presence of
tritium and other isotopes. We didn’t find anything but tritium
levels below the level for most of the wells. The tritium level
in one well was elevated.

“The point is, this is information we had to repeat five to six
times,” she added. 

“People were just angry and upset about what happened, and
people didn’t want to hear things weren’t as bad as they think.”

Leinweber said that, not surprisingly, the crowd was very
hostile toward the IEPA and NRC, whom he said wanted to be on
the panel with himself, Dr. Joseph and Cynthia Sauer, and Paul
Gunter of the Nuclear Information &Resource Service, a private
organization in Washington, D.C.

“I was kind of surprised the regulators wanted to be there. The
conduct of Exelon is pretty outrageous in this whole area. They
were recipients of a lot of the crowd’s anger,” he said.

Mitling said she could understand the emotion behind the anger.

“However, it is very difficult to present information unless
people’s minds are open,” she added.

“My hope is we were able to offer information the people didn’t
have before. Some members of the audience were able to absorb
it, I hope. A couple people came up to our team after the
meeting and thanked us for providing information they didn’t
have before.”

Mitling did not know if people were satisfied with the answers. 

Leinweber discussed the Hazardous Waste Disposal Act, saying
this is a very powerful criminal statute that reads almost like
the Controlled Substances Act.

“And includes regulatory fines and penalties. They pass that
right along to the consumer. White collar crime. Standing in the
food line at Pontiac State Prison might make a little difference
in their thinking,” he said.

Mitling said all the speakers who followed the NRC and Exelon
presentations questioned the utility representatives,
understandably, but also accused federal and state agencies of
not protecting the public health as far as they were concerned.

“There was screaming in the audience. A woman came up to the
panel table with a jar of water, and challenged the NRC and IEPA
speakers to drink it,” said Mitling.

“We said we didn’t know anything about the water. One said,
‘Ma’m, I don’t know where the water came from.’ She didn’t tell,
and she didn’t ask for an independent sampling of her well water.

“It was hostility. I spoke with the NRC’s resident inspector at
Braidwood, and he said people were just fed up with Exelon. 

“It’s tritium on top of Exelon’s response to the oil spill
several years ago. This town is just not happy with what’s going
on.”

Leinweber said he thought the public saw a grassroots
organization is necessary to make government serve the people.

“And make this thing (Braidwood Station) work like they are
supposed to. The tail’s been wagging the dog far too long,” he
said.

Leinweber said that, in his view, the NRC has not shown any
propensity to look out for the neighbors of Exelon.

“They are just parroting the same line as Exelon,” he said.

 “Nothing developed last night to enhance their agency. If
anything, they dug the hole a little deeper.”

   Morris Daily Herald • 1804 N. Division St. • Morris, Illinois 
60450 (815) 942-3221 • (800) 215-9778 Software © 1998-2006 1up! 
*****************************************************************
 39 Pahrump Valley Times: 'No worries' concludes low-level background radiation study 

Februrary 8, 2006

By HEATHER EMMONS SPECIAL TO THE PVT 

LAS VEGAS - The Desert Research Institute completed the results
of a study assessing potential exposure to the public from truck
transport of low-level radioactive waste to the Nevada Test
Site. The NTS, located 25 miles north of Pahrump, is
administered by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) National
Nuclear Security Administration's Nevada Operations Office
(NNSA/NSO), which funded the study. DRI researchers set up a
solar-powered array of four Pressurized Ion Chambers, or PICs,
to collect data from February through December 2003, at a
pullout area that lies outside the Mercury gate at the NTS. 

The Nevada Site Office was interested in addressing ongoing
public concern over the safety of low-level waste, or LLW,
shipments to the NTS. The study addressed whether residents
along transportation routes receive cumulative exposure from
individual LLW shipments that pose a long-term health risk.
While DOE and U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT)
regulations ensure that radiation exposure from truck shipments
is negligible, stakeholders in rural communities along
transportation routes in Utah and Nevada perceive risk about
cumulative exposure, particularly when "Main Street" and the
routes being used by LLW trucks are one in the same. 

"Most studies of radiation exposure from truck transportation
are based on calculations of potential exposure," said David
Shafer, DRI's executive director of the Frank H. Rogers Center
for Environmental Remediation and Monitoring. "The study was
designed to help answer the question, 'What do the trucks really
measure?'"

 How the study worked: 

The PIC arrays took gamma readings from 1,012, or nearly 47
percent of the 2,260 trucks that delivered LLW to the NTS during
the test period. The Nevada Site Office could not contractually
require waste generators to participate in the study, so the
database is biased to voluntary participants. Drivers parked
their truck in a marked "footprint" within the array and
recorded shipment information, including date, time and Waste
Shipment Identification Number into a logbook located at the PIC
array. The PICs were positioned three and one-third feet from
the truck trailer at a height of five feet to simulate
conditions of a citizen standing on a sidewalk next to a LLW
truck on a standard two-lane highway in the U.S., and to be
representative of the exposure of chest organs. The use of four
PICs, two on each side of the truck, was to investigate and
account for variations in gamma radiation levels at different
locations around the trucks because of differences in the
radioactivity between waste packages, as well as how the waste
containers were packed in the truck. In addition to the PICs,
photoacoustic sensors, positioned between the PICs on each side
of the array, were used to detect when a truck entered and
departed the array, as LLW trucks can arrive at the NTS around
the clock. Data from the PICs and photoacoustic sensors were
recorded on dataloggers.

 Results:

 Of 1,012 trucks measured, about 70 percent could not be
distinguished from background radiation levels or were less than
1/100,000 of the DOT shipping standard. In reality though, their
percent of the DOT standard was even less. The DOT standard (10
millirems per hour) is actually established at 2 meters distance
from the truck, while the truck measurements were made at 1
meter. Although the DOT standard is set at 2 meters, the PICs
were placed one meter from the trucks so that measurements of
the trucks could be made faster, making it easier for truck
drivers to participate in the study. At 2 meters distance, the
potential exposure to a person would be less because of the
increased distance from the radiation source. Only 54 trucks, or
5.3 percent of the trucks in the study, had exposures greater
than or equal to 10 percent of the DOT standard as measured at
one meter. When cumulative exposures were considered, the few
number of trucks with comparatively higher measurements could
strongly influence the results. For example, in the unlikely
event that a person had been standing by the road for the 42 LLW
trucks that traveled through Amargosa Valley on their way to the
NTS, 35 percent of the person's total exposure would have come
from just one truck. No trucks measured during the study
exceeded the DOT shipping standard. 

Background:

 Since 1980, more than 27 million square feet of LLW has been
disposed of at the NTS by shallow land burial. Since 1988, the
majority of this waste has been generated at other DOE and
Department of Defense sites and facilities in the U.S. LLW is
shipped in different types of containers or forms: drums, boxes,
or large, bulk-type containers like concrete monoliths. The NTS
has Waste Acceptance Criteria, and generators must measure the
external radiation from LLW trucks before they leave their site
to ensure that it is below DOE and DOT regulations for
transportation.

 What is low-level waste?

 Low-level radioactive waste can best be described by what it is
not. It is not spent nuclear fuel or high-level waste from
reprocessing spent fuel, such as the type proposed to be
disposed at Yucca Mountain, Nev. It is not transuranic wastes
that have radionuclides heavier than uranium at concentrations
greater than 100 nanocuries per gram. Most low-level waste is
dominated by radionuclides with short half lives and includes
items like construction debris, trash, soil and equipment.
Shielding provided by LLW packaging ensures that workers can
handle most of this waste without any special equipment or
clothing. For truck transportation, any potential risk from LLW
would be from gamma radiation as the containers and the walls of
the trucks would shield alpha and most beta emissions.

 Sources of radiation:

 The average individual receives approximately 360 millirem of
radiation per year from natural and man-made sources. Natural
sources of radiation include: terrestrial sources, like rocks,
soil and building materials derived from the earth's crust (like
granite) and cosmic rays from outer space. In addition, about 40
millirem of the average person's total exposure emanates from
within the body itself. Man-made radiation sources include
x-rays and nuclear medicine procedures, as well as consumer
products like smoke detectors, building materials, lawn
fertilizer and even television sets.

 Accounting for 

background radiation:

 In determining the amount of "net exposure" from the LLW
trucks, the PICs ran continuously, whether a truck was in the
PIC array or not. When trucks were not present, the gamma
radiation levels measured by the PICs were used to obtain
background readings at the array site. The background was
subtracted from the total reading to obtain the net exposure
above background that was a result of the LLW.

 Study available to public:

 The study is available to the public in public reading rooms
and libraries, including the Nevada State Library, UNLV and UNR
libraries and the Desert Research Institute's Dina Titus Public
Reading Room located at 755 E. Flamingo Road, Las Vegas, Nev.
89119. The study also will be available in the near future at
the U.S. DOE's Office of Scientific and Technical Information at
www.osti.gov.

 About DRI:

 A nonprofit, statewide division of the Nevada System of Higher
Education, DRI pursues a full-time program of basic and applied
environmental research on a local, national, and international
scale. Nearly 600 full- and part-time scientists, technicians,
and support staff conduct more than 300 research projects at DRI
annually. DRI generates $45 million in total revenue consisting
predominately of competitively won research contracts and
grants. The State of Nevada provides critical funding in support
of DRI's administration, operations and maintenance, through the
Nevada System of Higher Education's budget. While DRI's portion
of the NSHE budget is less than 1 percent, the institute
leverages these funds to enhance its competitiveness.

 		 		     
For comment or questions, please e-mail
webmaster@pahrumpvalleytimes.com
Copyright © Pahrump Valley Times, 1997 - 2006 
*****************************************************************
 40 Las Vegas SUN: BLM whistleblower's ex-boss opposed firing in Nevada mine dispute 

Today: February 09, 2006 at 15:40:48 PST 

By SCOTT SONNER ASSOCIATED PRESS 

RENO, Nev. (AP) - The immediate supervisor of a former federal
site manager for a contaminated Nevada mine said Thursday that
he gave Earle Dixon a satisfactory job appraisal a month before
Dixon was fired in an ongoing dispute with Atlantic Richfield
Co. and state regulators. 

Two other higher ranking supervisors also testified at an
administrative hearing that they opposed Dixon's firing in
October 2004 by Bob Abbey, then state director of the U.S.
Bureau of Land Management for Nevada. 

"Nobody consulted me as to whether it was a good idea or not,"
said Charles Pope, BLM's assistant field manager in Carson City.
Pope testified he completed an appraisal in September 2004 that
concluded Dixon had successfully completed his one-year
probationary status and should be retained. 

"I believe technically, Earle was doing a good job," Pope told
an administrative law judge for the U.S. Labor Department. 

Dixon accuses BLM in a federal whistleblower complaint of firing
him in retaliation for speaking out about the dangers at the
former Anaconda copper mine near Yerington, including health and
safety threats posed by uranium, arsenic and heavy metals. 

Abbey, who retired last year, said he fired Dixon because he was
undermining BLM's efforts to work cooperatively with Atlantic
Richfield, which was responsible for the cleanup, as well as the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the Nevada Division of
Environmental Protection. 

Among other things, Abbey said he learned Dixon had been
accusing state regulators of withholding data and engaging in a
"cover-up" at the mine. He said Dixon had been telling others
that Abbey was being unduly "influenced by Arco." 

"I really took it as a personal criticism that I would allow
actions to take place on that mine site that would have adverse
impacts on people's health and safety," Abbey testified
Wednesday. 

Elayn Briggs, who at the time was BLM's associate field manager
in Carson City, said Thursday that if Abbey had consulted her
she would have recommended retaining Dixon. 

Don Hicks, field manager of BLM's Carson City office, said Abbey
had asked him to sign Dixon's termination letter but he
declined. He said he had persuaded Abbey to back off plans to
fire Dixon in June 2004 so that Hicks could improve Dixon's
communication skills and cooperation with others. 

"I had thought Mr. Dixon was coachable and workable. ... I
didn't think I'd been given enough time to effect change," Hicks
said. 

Robert Hamlett, BLM's employee relations specialist, said he
drafted Dixon's termination letter, which Abbey signed. He said
he was not aware then that Pope had approved Dixon's completion
of probationary status, but such approval would not preclude
dismissal. 

Hamlett acknowledged, however, that in his 24 years of federal
personnel work he'd witnessed only one or two times in which a
manager overruled an immediate supervisor on such a matter. He
said he'd seen a manager reach as far down the chain of command
as Abbey did to fire Dixon "probably 10 or fewer times." 

Dixon said he clashed with state regulators and Arco because
they were withholding data and dragging their feet on cleanup
plans at the six-square-mile mine site, 65 miles southeast of
Reno. But he said he worked in concert with EPA, which also
complained about the slow pace of work by Arco and the Nevada
Division of Environmental Protection. 

Most witnesses in the three-day hearing agreed. 

"I think he had a good relationship with EPA," Pope said. 

All contents copyright 2005 Las Vegas SUN, Inc.
*****************************************************************
 41 Bradenton Herald: Lockheed surveying Tallevast residents today

| 02/09/2006 | 

 Donna Wright Herald Staff Writer 

TALLEVAST -- Lockheed Martin Corp. will survey Tallevast
residents today to ask about past use of their properties and
whether they accepted fill dirt from the formal Loral American
Beryllium Co. 

The door-to-door survey will be conducted by Blasland, Bouck and
Lee, Inc., a Tampa engineering firm assessing the size of the
Tallevast pollution plume for Lockheed. 

Information from the survey will be used to determine what
additional soil sampling needs to be done in the community,
according to Gail Rymer, Lockheed spokeswoman. 

Lockheed will also re-sample Tallevast yards previously tested,
Rymer said. 

She expects the soil sampling to begin next week. 

Lockheed has also decided to voluntarily sample the soil of any
Tallevast resident who requests tests. 

While the voluntary testing is above the requirements set by
state, the Florida Department of Environment protection will
oversee all the testing. 

The survey is being conducted at DEP's request, Rymer said.

*****************************************************************
 42 Bellona: Duma demands an end to nuclear reprocessing at Mayak
 
Russian ecologists still weighing pros and cons of Rosatom plan 

ST. PETERSBURG—A resolution is being prepared by the State
Duma’s Ecology Committee, calling for a halt on the reprocessing
of spent nuclear fuel (SNF) at the Mayak Chemical Combine. 

  The liquid radioactive waste canal at Mayak   
  Thomas Nilsen/Bellona   

Vera Ponomareva, 2006-02-09 12:56
Translated by Charles Digges

The Duma’s ecological committee was, as of Wednesday, was still
discussing problems surrounding the Mayak Chemical Combine—the
most radioactively contaminated spot in Russia—located in the
Chelyabinsk region in the southern Urals. 

The resolution, which will be discussed at a Duma wide hearing,
calls for a cessation of SNF reprocessing at the combine, and
demands that Mayak’s license to do so be revoked. 

“In the past years, the radiological conditions at Mayak has
been appraised as a worsening,” reads the resolution. 

“Of special danger is the TSV [Techa Reservoir System] because
of the possibility of the reservoir’s overflow and because of
damage to hydro-technical equipment and pumps for radioactive
substances in the open hydro-geographical network of the Techa,
Iset, Tobol and Ob rivers. However, potential dangers will
remain so long as reprocessing of SNF is not stopped,” the
resolution continued. 

The text of the resolution suggesting the halt of reprocessing
has been greeted with support by ecologists, who have been
fighting for this for many years. 

“Halting reprocessing of SNF at Mayak is a revolutionary step
that we have demanded from the authorities for almost 15 years,”
said Ecodefence! co-chairman Vladimir Slivyak to Bellona Web.
“But the question remains as to whether the Duma’s deputies will
have the courage to tell the truth and stop the radioactive
pollution of Russia.” 

Nadezhda Kutepova, chairperson for the ecological organization
Planet of Hope—located in Ozersk, the home city of Mayak—also
approved of the resolutions contents. 

“I greet warmly this point [on halting reprocessing] because it
could solve many problems at Mayak. The situation would at least
stop getting worse,” Kutepova told Bellona Web. 

Alexei Yablokov, one of Russia’s leading ecologists, told
Bellona Web: “The resolution is unexpectedly good. I am ready to
sign under each point.”

  Bush and Russia wish to join forces in making nuclear fuel   
  
  The Bush administration proposed Monday in the budget it
handed down today the creation of an atomic energy partnership
with Russia, offering countries around the world a supply of
fuel for their reactors under restrictions intended to prevent
them from developing nuclear weapons, according to
administration officials in Washington, D.C.

The resolution comes at an awkward time in US-Russian nuclear
relations. According to a $250m White House federal budget
request for 2007, the two countries would unite in producing and
reprocessing civilian nuclear fuel for those counties in the
world that do not have nuclear weapons programmes. It is unclear
how the possible halt of reprocessing at Mayak would affect this
agreement, though it is an agreement that the Bellona Foundation
has spoken out against. 

Responsible parties at Rosatom and the US Department of Energy
could not be reached for comment, just as neither party would
comment on the White House budget request. Analysts have said
that US president George Bush has intentionally been playing
down nuclear involvement outlined in his budget for 2007 in
anticipation of losing face in the event of shifting nuclear
winds in Russia. 

Are the deputies bilking money for Rosatom? 
In the resolution, deputies outlines a number of recommendations
for improving the situation are Mayak. As such, they suggest
that social, medical and legal measures that are provided for by
government target plans finally be taken. Such measures include
“overcoming the consequences of radioactive accidents in a
period before 2010,” and “the nuclear and radiation safety of
Russia. 

Aside from these measures, deputies have forwarded for approval
a new government target plan called “The integrated plan of
action for 2006 to 2008 on the provision of solutions to
ecological problems arising from the activities of the Federal
State Unitary Enterprise Mayak.” 

Deputies plan to undertake the following measures within the
framework of this programme: to halt reprocessing with dumping
of liquid radioactive waste (LRW) into reservoirs; to
reconstruct the ridge of dam No. 11 on the Techa Cascade; and
primarily to build a combined sewage system with an outlet for
waste water on the left bank canal of the Techa Cascade system. 

Why the deputies consider it necessary to re-construct only the
ridge of the dam and not the whole thing, to give priority to
building a combined sewage system over other pressing projects
is not explained in the resolution. Meanwhile, Yablokov
considers that theese projets should be presented on a
competitive basis with the preparation of public environmental
impact reports. 

“If state structures would suggest programmes of action, then
NGOs could undertake public environmental impact assessments,”
Yablokov said. 

Yablokov was also suspicious that Rosatom was just coming to the
government, hat in hand to make a play for money. 

“There is the impression that the committee simply supported the
requests of Rosatom to earmark funding for the undertaking of
these activities,” said Yablokov. “When Rosatom needs money, it
always confesses that everything in its purview is bad.” 

Slivyak, however, doubted that the resolution was created with
the aim of earmarking money for Rosatom. 

“I might believe that if the Ecological Committee didn’t have
among its representatives people from Minsredmash [Rosatom’s
former name] who constantly defend the nuclear industry. They
would hardly refuse their political situations for the sake of
momentary gains,” he said.

  Tender to Solve the Mayak Problem   

  A working group set up by order of new Rosatom head Sergei
Kirienko to solve environmental problems at the Mayak Chemical
Combine has started work in Chelyabinsk Region where the complex
is located and the group held its first meeting on January 18th.
The next one is slated for February 10th. 

The working group includes representatives of Rosatom and NGOs
Planet of Hopes, the Movement for Nuclear Safety, Green Cross,
and Protection and Security. 

Environmentalists and rights activists, who have long been
critical of inaction by officials and the Mayak leadership, are
now to be involved in solving the Mayak problem for the first
time. 

Cooperation with the general public 

A working group was created with the aim of solving Mayak’s
problems in January 2006 on the initiative of new Rosatom chief
Sergei Kirienko. Ecologists and human rights advocates were
invited to work with nuclear scientists, who have all long
criticised the foot dragging of bureaucrats and management at
Mayak. 

The working group is charged with conducting a tender among NGOs
for the best sociological and ecological projects. Rosatom has
put 12 million rubles up as grant money. 

Ecologists are embracing with hope Kirienko’s initiatives. 

“An open competition for NGO—that is an unprecedented initiative
from Rosatom. We hope that this will produce the possibility for
real developments of suggestions,” said Natalya Mironova, a
participant in the working group and head of the environmental
organisation Movement for Nuclear Safety, in an interview with
Bellona Web. 

At the same time, participants of the working group say that the
group’s remit is limited and nebulous. As Kutepova told Bellona
Web, the activities of ecologists, by Rosatom’s design, will
only concern the consequences of Mayak’s emissions—that is to
say, social, medical and legal problems. From another point of
view, the task of NGOs will push them to the limit. 

“We are happy with any proposal,” said Rosatom management
advisor Igor Konyshev in an interview with Bellona Web. Given
this divide in opinion, there is the impression that the
organizers themselves don’t have a clear picture of the goals of
the working group and the possible role of NGOs in solving
ecological problems. 

Konushev said that Kirienko already gained experience
cooperating with NGOs when he headed the committee to destroy
chemical weapons—which by all accounts was a dismal failure. 

Lev Fyodorov, leader of For Chemical Safety took up that point. 

“That is a pack of lies—there is no cooperation with NGOs,” he
told Bellona Web. 

According to Fyodorov, Kirienko applied a “class system” toward
NGOs when forming the working group. 

“He loves some of them tenderly, some of them he doesn’t and
other’s he selected specially,” he said. Of those that were
specially chosen, said Fyodorov, were Clean House from the
Saratov region, Fyodorov said they were not given big money, and
the group simply imitates stormy action. 

Many ecologists fear that the working group created by Rosatom
is just a PR tool, and that NGOs will not get the chance to
influence the biggest decisions. 

“We need to do everything so that this initiative does not turn
into a PR-campaign that whitewashes Mayak with the hands of
NGOs,” said Mironova. 

Yablokov says that in such an event, there is no sense for NGOs
to take part and that the working group was created so that NGOs
“don’t belly-ache” 

The public advisory board at Rosatom 
With Kirienko taking the helm, the idea of a public ecological
advisory board was reborn. Such a board, in which social
activists would be represented along with management and experts
at Rosatom, was an idea that first saw the light of day some
years ago during the tenure of former Minatom—which was
succeeded by Rosatom—chief Alexander Rumyantsev. 

However, more than two years ago Minatom, on its own initiative,
discontinues the work of the previous public board and none of
the questions tabled by the board were ever addressed. 

The task of the new board is the “recruitment of civil society
institutes for the formation of policy in the field of the use
of atomic energy,” as well as “the collective development of
recommendations to take decisions in the area of atomic energy
use, environmental safety, nuclear and radiation safety,” reads
the project on the decree on Rosatom’s public board. 

The composition of the new public board is significantly
different from that of the last. Only three of representatives
30 representatives of the old public ecological organisation are
expected to remain. These include Green Cross President Sergei
Baranovsky, Anatoly Nazarov, chairman of the Chernobyl Union,
and Vladimir Kuznetsov, Green Cross’s nuclear and radiation
safety leader. The overwhelming majority of others will come
from Rosatom and affiliated structures. 

Finally, “among the members of the board are people who have not
been involved in any activities concerning the nuclear
industry,” a statement from the ecologists reads. 

“With such an approach to cooperation with civil society, it
will fall to Rosatom not only to solve noble tasks put before
them by the public board,” said the ecologists.   

  Publisher: Bellona Foundation, President: Frederic Hauge
Information: info@bellona.no, Technical contact:
webmaster@bellona.no
Telephone: +47 23 23 46 00 Telefax: +47 22 38 38 62  * P.O.Box
2141 Grunerlokka, 0505 Oslo, Norway
*****************************************************************
 43 reviewjournal.com: The nature of environmentalists        

Opinion - EDITORIAL

Feb. 09, 2006
 										Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal 
Last month, Miss Nevada Crystal Wosik found herself in newspaper 
headlines statewide, and not just because she was participating 
in the Miss America pageant in her hometown of Las Vegas. 

During the interview portion of the pageant, Ms. Wosik was asked 
about the federal government's plans to entomb high-level nuclear 
waste inside Yucca Mountain, about 100 miles northwest of Las 
Vegas. Ms. Wosik, 23, expressed support for the project -- a view 
not uncommon among Southern Nevadans. 

Predictably, environmentalists and anti-nuclear activists went
batty. They ripped Ms. Wosik as though she were an elected
official with genuine influence on public policy. 

Apparently, things got worse from there. According to Ms.
Wosik's mother, Lena, their family has been subjected to
anonymous taunts and threats that condemn Miss Nevada's support
for the Yucca Mountain Project. 

Lena Wosik said messages have been left on her answering machine
and on her doorstep calling her daughter, a student at
California's Orange Coast College, a "baby killer" who wants to
"dump toxic waste on our families." 

Now Peggy Maze Johnson, director of the environmentalist group
Citizen Alert, says those threats must be coming from Yucca
Mountain supporters intent on smearing groups like hers. She
says such deplorable behavior goes against the nature of people
intent on protecting the environment. 

Really? Perhaps Ms. Johnson has never heard of green extremists
like the Earth Liberation Front, which was deemed a terrorist
organization by the federal government after it torched tens of
millions of dollars worth of property? And what about the
sabotage artists of Earth First!? Or the taxpayer extortionists
and scientific frauds at the Center for Biological Diversity and
the Sierra Club? 

Yes, Ms. Johnson, radical environmentalists are certainly
capable of disrupting the lives and destroying the property of
those who don't agree with them. 

Nevada's environmentalist extremists should leave Ms. Wosik and
her family alone and attempt to direct their frustrations toward
more productive purposes. 	   

Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal, 1997 - 2006
 Stephens Media GroupPrivacy Statement
*****************************************************************
 44 reviewjournal.com: Porter sets Yucca hearing
 
Feb. 09, 2006

Congressman aims to break stalemate over access to documents     

BY STEVE TETREAULT <br/>STEPHENS WASHINGTON BUREAU

WASHINGTON -- A House chairman plans to summon Energy Department
officials to a hearing in a new bid to break a stalemate between
DOE and Congress over access to Yucca Mountain documents. 

Rep. Jon Porter, R-Nev., will schedule a hearing in about three
weeks after DOE once again this week resisted a demand to turn
over a 5,800-page draft license application for the proposed
nuclear waste repository, a spokesman said Wednesday. 

Porter, chairman of the federal workforce and agency
organization subcommittee, said he wants to examine the document
as part of an investigation of scientist e-mails that suggested
quality assurance documents might have been fabricated. 

Department officials have challenged whether the document is
relevant to the probe. 

Also, DOE general counsel David Hill said in a letter to
Congress on Tuesday that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission ruled
last week that the document was not required to be made public. 

Porter has uncovered further information that justifies access
to the repository documents, spokesman T.J. Crawford said. He
would not say what was discovered. 

"We will have a hearing and will present additional information
and ask DOE for a full explanation of why they feel that we
should not see the draft license," Porter said. 

In the letter sent to Government Reform Committee Chairman Tom
Davis, R-Va., Hill said DOE plans to supply other documents the
panel has requested, including new e-mails uncovered in the
fall. 

The repository would be built about 100 miles northwest of Las
Vegas. 	   

Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal, 1997 - 2006
 Stephens Media GroupPrivacy Statement
*****************************************************************
 45 reviewjournal.com: Document submitted at whistle-blower hearing 
shows Gibbons urged change in mine oversight
 
  Feb. 09, 2006

RENO -- Rep. Jim Gibbons urged the Bureau of Land Management to
shift oversight of a contaminated mine the month before the
agency fired its site manager, according to documents submitted
Wednesday at a whistle-blower hearing. 

Bob Abbey, ex-BLM director for Nevada, testified at the
administrative hearing that Gibbons' request to transfer
responsibility for the former Anaconda copper mine from its
Carson City field office to BLM state headquarters in Reno had
nothing to do with Abbey's decision to fire Earle Dixon in
October 2004. 

Dixon, who had been BLM's site manager in charge of leading its
cleanup efforts, accuses the agency of retaliating against him
for speaking out about the dangers of uranium, arsenic and other
toxic materials at the mine near Yerington. 

Gibbons' chief of staff, Amy Maier, said from Washington on
Wednesday that the Republican congressman's request to Abbey in
September 2004 had nothing to do with Dixon. She said it was
intended to speed cleanup at the mine. 

However, Gibbons' request is listed in an Oct. 4, 2004, memo --
the day before Dixon was fired -- to BLM human resources
officials entitled "Rationale/Reasoning for Removal of Earle
Dixon as project manager." 

Mick Harrison, Dixon's lawyer, said pressure from Gibbons and
county commissioners to change the site management was part of a
strategy to help ensure the abandoned site was not declared a
Superfund site -- something Gibbons opposed. 

"That would not be an appropriate interpretation of the letter,"
Maier said. 

Abbey said Dixon was fired because he was alienating BLM's
regulatory partners in the cleanup effort. 	   

Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal, 1997 - 2006
*****************************************************************
 46 UCS: DOE Research Contradicts Administration Claims of 
Proliferation-Resistant Reprocessing
 	 
February 9, 2006

New Initiative Would Make Nuclear Terrorism Easier

UCS Butterfly Links in nuclear terrorism DOE proliferation 
resistance fact sheet

In testimony today, Secretary of Energy Samuel Bodman reiterated 
administration claims that its new initiative to extract 
plutoniumwhich can be used to make nuclear weaponsfrom spent 
nuclear reactor fuel will use a "proliferation-resistant" 
technology that would make the plutonium inaccessible and 
undesirable to terrorists and states pursuing nuclear weapons. 
However, this claim is contradicted by prior research conducted 
by two Department of Energy (DOE) scientists: Dr. E. D. Collins 
from DOE's Advanced Fuel Cycle Initiative, and Dr. Bruce Goodwin 
of Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. 

"Perhaps Dr. Bodman is unaware of this technical work," noted Dr. 
Edwin Lyman, Senior Scientist at the Union of Concerned 
Scientists, "It clearly demonstrates that the administration's 
new reprocessing program will pose a serious risk that terrorists 
could acquire the material needed to make a nuclear weapon from a 
U.S. facility." 

Plutonium, which is used in most of the world's nuclear weapons,
is not very radioactive and not inherently difficult to steal. 
In an attempt to address this problem, the reprocessing
technology in DOE's proposal would leave the plutonium mixed
with other elements. However, according to Dr. Collins'
research, this mixture would also not be very radioactive and
would be essentially as vulnerable to theft as plutonium itself.
 And Dr. Goodwin's research concludes that the other isotopes in
the plutonium mixture can also be used to make nuclear weapons. 

A commercial reprocessing plant would handle about 10 tons of
this plutonium mixture annuallyenough for more than 1,000 crude
nuclear weapons. Because it would be converted to liquid and
powder forms, it is difficult to precisely measure and keep
track of this material. There are several instances in which
foreign reprocessing plants have been unable to account for
enough plutonium to make ten or more nuclear weapons for over a
period of months or years.  The modified reprocessing
technologies in DOE's proposal would make this problem even
worse, because the mixture of plutonium and other elements would
be even harder to precisely measure.     

"The safest thing to do with plutonium is to leave it in spent
fuelsince it is kept in large, heavy casks and is fatally
radioactive," said Dr. Lyman. "Experts agree that no
reprocessing technology developed or proposed to date is
proliferation-proof."    


ED LYMAN
SENIOR SCIENTIST
202 223 5445 ERIC YOUNG
Press Secretary
Nuclear power safety, Scientific Integrity, Clean Energy, and
Invasive Species
202-331-5439
<FONT face=Arial size=1>eyoung@ucsusa.org</FONT> 

RICH HAYES
Media Director Food & Environment and Clean Vehicles
202-331-5437
<FONT face=Arial size=1>rhayes@ucsusa.org</FONT> 

LUKE WARREN
Press Secretary
Global Warming and Global Security
202-331-5458
<FONT face=Arial size=1>lwarren@ucsusa.org</FONT> 

© Union of Concerned Scientists 
Page Last Revised: 02/09/06  
*****************************************************************
 47 Monticello Times: Public airs views on waste storage

www.monticellotimes.com

Thursday, February 09, 2006             
  
Most support nuclear power plant’s proposal for dry-cask storage 
facility

By Eric O’Link News Editor
    
  Two whitetail deer paused underneath the transmission lines 
leading from Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Tuesday morning. 
Several hearings are scheduled in Feburary regarding Xcel 
Energy’s proposal to store dry casks of nuclear waste on the 
plant grounds. (Photo by Eric O'Link)   

  Ways to comment  

  Want to voice your thoughts on waste storage at Monticello
Nuclear Generating Plant?

• Attend the second day of public hearings. The hearings are
scheduled at 1 and 7 p.m. Thursday, Feb. 16, at the Minnesota
Public Utilities Commission offices, 121 Seventh Pl. E., Suite
350, in St. Paul.

• Write Administrative Law Judge Steve Mihalchick, Office of
Administrative Hearings, 100 Washington Ave. S., Suite 1700,
Minneapolis, MN, 55401-2138.

The long, many-stepped review process that will decide whether 
nuclear waste will be stored in Monticello has entered a very 
public phase.

An administrative law judge oversaw public hearings in
Monticello last week, taking comments from a variety of people
about whether Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant should be able
to construct a drycask storage facility on the plant grounds.

Another public hearing is scheduled next week in the Twin Cities.

Most, but not all, who commented at the two hearings in
Monticello spoke in support of granting a certificate of need
for Xcel Energy to build waste storage at the power plant.

Xcel, which owns the plant, needs the certificate of need as an
official “OK” from the state to build the storage facility,
which is necessary to remove the spent fuel rods in the plant’s
refueling pool if the plant is to continue operating beyond
2010. Its current 40-year operating license expires that year,
meaning that unless the plant is granted a license extension, it
will have to shut down and be decommissioned.

In separate but related actions, Xcel has asked the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission (NRC) for a license extension to 2030, and
has filed a request with the Minnesota Public Utilities
Commission for permission to build a temporary waste storage
facility. Draft environmental impact statements on both
decisions have been published. Decisions on the operating
license and the waste storage facility are expected in 2007.

The state’s process to review the waste storage proposal
includes a series of hearings. The public comment portion of
those hearings began in Monticello Thursday. About 50 people
came to the afternoon hearing, with an evening session more
sparsely attended.

Before the public comment portion of the hearing,
representatives from each of the formal parties involved stated
their positions (see related story).

For the majority of each of Thursday’s hearings, a number of
local government officials, businesspeople and community members
gave testimony before Administrative Law Judge Steve Mihalchick.
Mihalchick, who has been assigned to the case, is independent of
the state’s utilities commission, which ultimately makes the
decision on allowing waste storage.

Almost all public comments were in favor of allowing waste
storage at the plant to keep it operating.

Monticello Mayor Clint Herbst said that, as mayor and a 34-year
resident of the community, he gets phone calls about just about
everything - but not the power plant. That is a credit to the
plant’s employees, he said.

“Not once have I ever heard any complaint or concern about the
plant,” he said. “As far as concern from the public, if there is
any out there, I haven’t heard it–and I’ve heard everything.”

Monticello School District Superintendent Jim Johnson and a
representative of Monticello-Big Lake Community Hospital also
voiced their support of waste storage to keep the plant
operating.

Wright County Commissioner Pat Sawatzke, a Monticello resident,
spoke on behalf of the county commissioners.

“We do support Xcel Energy’s request to store spent fuel and dry
casks at the Monticello facility,” he said.

He said the commissioners recognized the importance of the plant
to the community and the county and to the Midwest.

Sawatzke serves on the Wright County nuclear response team. He
said he is familiar with safety training and the biannual drills
conducted at the plant and gave the agencies involved a vote of
confidence.

“I’ve come to realize that the state, federal government and
county are prepared in the unlikely event that there is some
sort of incident at the facility,” he said.

State Rep. Bruce Anderson said that a study by the Chicago-based
Heartland Institute showed that nuclear energy is coming back
into the spotlight as technology improves. With operating costs
of nuclear plants decreasing from the 3.3 cents per hour they
once were to 1.2 cents now, countries in Europe are moving ahead
with plans to build new nuclear reactors. Anderson also touted
the zero emissions factor of nuclear reactors.

“When you look at that, compared to coal or natural gas...the
environment comes up as a big plus,” he said.

Susan Struckness, vice president of Premier Banks Monticello and
past chair of the Monticello Chamber of Commerce, also spoke in
favor of waste storage.

“We strongly feel the nuclear plant should be granted their life
extension,” she said.

She added that losing the plant would have an economic effect on
the community - Xcel Energy pays between 30 and 40 percent of
the city’s taxes. 

“The taxes Xcel pays are extremely important as we continue to
reside in one of the fastest growing corridors– I-94–in the
Midwest,” Struckness said.

She also said that the city would lose its wintering population
of trumpeter swans, should the plant be decommissioned. More
than 1,000 swans flock to Monticello each winter because the
Mississippi River does not freeze, with the plant’s warm water
discharge upstream. Struckness said the swans are responsible
for bringing 10,000 tourists to Monticello annually.

Larry Newell, general manager for Liberty Paper Mill in Becker,
said his business relies on the low-cost energy provided by
Xcel. He, too, voiced support of the storage facility.

“We rely on safe, low-cost energy to stay viable and
competitive,” he said.

Former Monticello City Council member and lifelong Monticello
resident Roger Carlson said Xcel Energy and the plant had been
good for Monticello, and Monticello had been good for Xcel.

“Xcel is a very important member of the Monticello business
community,” he said. “Monticello would not be the same without
Xcel Energy.”

Dan Lemm, a Monticello Township resident who lives about
three-quarters of a mile from the plant, said he had many
questions about the storage facility, but that he was for it.

“I think it’s good for our community, the state and the nation,”
Lemm said. “I think of Xcel as a good neighbor. They’ve done a
lot for our community.”

One of the people who spoke at Thursday’s hearings, however, was
vocal in her opposition to the waste storage.

Diane Rother, a resident of Eden Prairie, made a lengthy case as
to why the waste storage was a bad idea. Among the points she
touched on, she noted that the federal government had not yet
fulfilled its responsibility to take the waste; that the
transportation of the waste posed an undue risk; that waste
storage might increase cancer rates, as some studies had shown a
correlation; and that though the storage casks were supposed to
have an integrity of 200 years, the waste would be dangerous for
thousands of years.

“Are we going to continue producing nuclear waste for the sake
of turning on a light bulb?” Rother asked. “My question is, what
if the light goes out because of a nuclear accident?”

The opportunity for public comment is not over yet. The public
hearing will reconvene at 1 and 7 p.m. Thursday, Feb. 16, at the
Public Utilities Commission’s offices, 121 Seventh Pl. E., Suite
350, in St. Paul.

Judge Mihalchick is also accepting written comments through
Friday, March 3. Comments may be mailed to the judge at the
Office of Administrative Hearings, 100 Washington Ave. S., Suite
1700, Minneapolis, Minn., 55362.

The next step in the Public Utilities Commission’s process is an
evidentiary hearing, which is scheduled to be Feb. 21-24 in St.
Paul, where the groups who have formally intervened in the
review process will be able to cross-examine witnesses.

Jim Alders, Xcel’s manager of regulatory projects, welcomed
people’s comments at public hearings.

“We’re happy to have you here,” he said, “and encourage you to
speak.”

Xcel, intervenors make arguments

Many people spoke at Thursday’s public hearings regarding Xcel
Energy’s proposal to keep radioactive waste at a storage
facility at Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant.

Most comments were made by members of the public–local
government officials, businesspeople and homeowners.

But those parties formally involved in the review process–Xcel
Energy and the three groups challenging the utility’s request to
the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission for a waste storage
facility–also stated their cases.

Jim Alders, Xcel Energy’s manager of regulatory projects,
offered a brief summary of the plant’s current situation. He
explained the plant’s application for license renewal and its
need for waste storage:

Because the federal government’s Yucca Mountain waste storage
site in Nevada has yet to be completed, further operation of the
plant would require a temporary waste storage site. Xcel plans
to put the radioactive spent fuel rods into 20-ton dry, sealed
steel canisters, and place those canisters within a large
concrete vault that would be built near the plant’s reactor
building. Such a storage facility is likely in Monticello’s
future, as Alders says one would be needed whether the plant
continued operating or had to shut down in 2010.

“In the foreseeable future, we see the need for dry spent fuel
storage, regardless,” he said.

Alders said storage technology similar to what was proposed in
Monticello is in use at 28 other sites across the nation,
totaling 300 casks.

“It’s a proven technology that’s been used for well over a
decade,” he said.

If the plant shuts down, he continued, it would have to be
replaced, as its 600 megawatts of continuous base load
electricity provide about 10 percent of the energy for Xcel’s
customers in the five-state area. Xcel looked at replacing some
of Monticello’s electricity with energy from renewable sources,
he said, but the energy was too expensive. A Minnesota
Department of Commerce analysis of various electricity
generation sources has estimated that keeping the Monticello
plant running would save about $750 million over decommissioning
the plant and turning to new electricity sources.

Also, Alders said, renewable energy sources were not reliable
enough.

“Renewables can’t play the same role that a base load power
plant like Monticello can,” he said. “That’s not to say we don’t
support renewables.”

He noted that Xcel is one of the largest purchasers of wind
energy in the United States.

Three Minnesota organizations have formally intervened in the
waste storage application process. The North American Water
Office, the Minnesota Center for Environmental Advocacy (MCEA)
and Minnesotans for an Energy-Efficient Economy (ME3) have
provided testimony and will be participating in the evidentiary
hearings later this month. They will cross-examine witnesses, in
an attempt to convince the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission
not to grant Xcel a certificate of need.

Representatives from the organizations also spoke during
Thursday’s meeting.

Tom Harlan, an attorney representing MCEA and ME3, said his
groups’ concern was to balance “the true costs” of waste storage
in Monticello.

“Nuclear energy...is not just clean, safe energy,” he said.
“Like everything else, it has a byproduct.”

Harlan noted that although the federal government has accepted
responsibility for nuclear waste, no federal storage option for
waste yet exists. Neither are reprocessing the waste, or an
initiative for a privately-funded storage area in Utah, yet
viable options.

“The federal government has just issued another unfunded
mandate,” he said. “The question is, what are the citizens of
Monticello and of Minnesota...going to do about it?”

George Crocker, the executive director of the North American
Water Office, said his organization’s goal was to focus on the
relationship between energy development, economic development,
the environment and social justice issues.

“Our role...is to help the decision-makers and the public
understand that, in our perspective, (waste storage at
Monticello) is a terrible mistake,” he said.

Crocker acknowledged “the tremendous economic benefits” that the
power plant brings to Monticello and electricity generation. But
he argued that the costs of possible releases of radiation that
accompany waste storage and the operation of nuclear plants
would not be worth the money saved by continuing to operate
Monticello.

“We are very disturbed at how...dramatically understated the
costs and the risks of dry storage are,” he said.

He added that managing the waste, which remains dangerous for
tens of thousands of years, was geological in scope.

“Humans don’t know how to manage this stuff,” he said.

Harlan also offered a response to the often-heard comment in
Monticello that the power plant is “a good neighbor.”

“If they really, truly want to be a great neighbor,” Harlan
said, “they’re going to think long-term about what is going to
be done with these rods.”

Copyright 2006, Monticello Times
*****************************************************************
 48 Pahrump Valley Times: Still another dump plan, still lacking full debate on the topic 

February 8, 2006

Last week I was cruising the net when I came across a story in
the Bridgewater Courier News in New Jersey. The headline read:
"Mercury leaving Hillsboro GSA Depot," but it was the subhead
that was the grabber: "Officials say mercury being moved to Army
site in Nevada."

 The story was undated, but a search on Google's news page
suggested it had run on Feb. 2.

 Mercury coming to a Nevada military dump wasn't something I had
encountered in Nevada's news outlets, so I wondered what the
heck was going on. Normally we hear a lot about these kinds of
things - particularly when, as in this case, more than four
thousand tons of toxins are involved.

 Nevada's governor's office was on top of it, though. Before I
could do much digging, a story appeared on the web page of the
Long Island newspaper Newsday (the mercury is located in four
different states) that quoted a statement from Governor Guinn's
office and a Nevada environmental official saying, thanks, but
no thanks for the mercury.

 After Guinn's stance reached New Jersey, the Courier News,
which had not bothered in its first story to scrutinize whether
the proposed transport of mercury out of their community was a
good idea, took another look. 

The director of a local Jersey environmental group told the
newspaper he had concerns about moving the stuff based on a 2003
site inspection where leakage was seen: "We were able to locate
beads of mercury that were outside of the containers. Some of
these containers were quite old ... I have inquired about its
structural stability." 

The story was still too narrowly focused. The headline was "Is
mercury move safe for Hillsboro?" The safety of other locales -
such as communities along the transport route, to say nothing of
Nevadans - was never examined, nor was the suitability of
storage near Hawthorne in Nevada, where the mercury is supposed
to be dumped.

 Nevadans have experienced this kind of thing repeatedly -
shipment of sludge from California to Nevada landfills, leaky
shipments of low level nuclear waste to the Beatty dump in the
1980s, plans for storage of high level waste in the Yucca
Mountain dump. 

We tend to blame outsiders for this attitude that Nevada is a
big sandbox where toxins and unattractive projects like the MX
missile system can be dumped. But whenever there's one of these
disputes, I'm always reminded of how new is the protective
attitude of our leaders toward this state. 

While it's not the only reason, one of the reasons other states
think of us as a dump is because our leaders encouraged that
view for so long.

 "We had long ago written off that terrain as wasteland, and
today it's blooming with atoms," said Nevada Governor Charles
Russell in the 1950s of the federal decision to test atomic
weapons in the state. Compare that to the statement this week
from Gov. Guinn's office in response to the mercury news:
"Nevada is not the nation's dumpsite."

 In the 1960s Gov. Paul Laxalt encouraged all things nuclear as
economic development and in the 1970s Gov. Mike O'Callaghan
attacked Ralph Nader for defending the state from the Atomic
Energy Commission's dishonesty. The state's congressional
delegation took similar stances. Only Gov. Grant Sawyer
(1959-67) was suspicious.

 In 1975 the Nevada Legislature passed a resolution asking the
feds to put a dump for high-level nuclear wastes in the state.

 Little wonder the nation thinks of the state as a place to dump
unpleasant things - a "great nuclear sponge," as one Air Force
officer put it.

 In the 1950s, '60s, and '70s, Nevada leaders told us that the
Nevada public supported their efforts to bring all things
nuclear to the state for economic development. 

It was a difficult proposition to disprove (there were few to no
polls and public hearings were not the fixture they are today)
and so their claim took on the aura of assumed truth, which
discouraged the expression of dissenting views. The needed full
debate never took place.

 As archival records came out from under seal, we began to learn
that there was not the unanimity of opinion they claimed.
Nevadans were writing to their elected officials expressing
concern, and often for their trouble they were abused and
accused. 

Martha Bardoli Laird, a Lincoln County resident, wrote to U.S.
Senator George Malone of Nevada about her worry over the testing
and the fallout, and she got back a letter in which Malone
questioned her patriotism. (She lost her seven year-old son to
leukemia).

 So it's not just the outsiders who targeted Nevada for dumping.
Now Nevadans live with the reputation shortsighted Nevada
leaders gave it. It's a compelling argument in favor of
encouraging the expression of unpopular viewpoints. 

Today the assumed truth is in opposition to dumping in the
state, and the unpopular view gets little ink or airtime. That's
just as foolish as our earlier one-sided debate.

 Myers is a veteran capital reporter. His column, "Against the
Grain," appears here on Wednesdays.

Copyright © Pahrump Valley Times, 1997 - 2006 
*****************************************************************
 49 Ensign: ENSIGN, REID: NAS FINDINGS ON NUKE WASTE TRANSPORT WILL
BENEFIT NEVADA

02/09/2006

United States Senator John Ensign
 
Ensign and Harry Reid said today that a newly released study by
the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) is a positive development
in Nevadaâ€™s fight against a nuclear waste repository at Yucca
Mountain. The NAS report, according to the senators, calls for
studies and reports on the transportation of nuclear waste that
have previously not been undertaken. 

â€œAs weâ€™ve said many times before, the more we delay Yucca
Mountain the closer we are to defeating it once and for all,â€
Ensign said. â€œThe tone on Capitol Hill is shifting
dramatically when it comes to Yucca Mountain, from a feeling of
inevitability to a realization that we must consider
alternatives. NASâ€™s recommendation that a full-scale security
study be conducted verifies our long-standing concerns about the
risk of a terrorist attack or other possible catastrophe.â€ 

"I agree we should have a full-scale security study before we
consider transporting nuclear waste, but my concerns run much
deeper," said Reid. "The standards set by a security study would
be meaningless unless they're strictly enforced. The Department
of Energy has repeatedly failed to meet the scientific,
technical and legal standards set for Yucca Mountain. I do not
trust them to uphold any guidelines for transportation. I
appreciate the efforts of all the talented people at NAS, but
all they have really concluded is that nuclear waste can be
transported safely under very strict conditions if no mistakes
are made. That is not enough." 

Among other recommendations, the NAS study calls for an in-depth
examination of transportation security issues, expert evaluation
of the effect of transportation on local communities and a
review of extreme accident or fire scenarios. 

The NAS study was mandated by Congress in 2003. 

*****************************************************************
 50 Canon City Daily Record: CDPHE cites Cotter with latest violation
 
Cañon City and the Greater Royal Gorge Region
   
  Publish Date: 2/9/2006 			 


Blakely Thomas-Aguilar
 The Daily Record 					 					The Colorado Department for Public

Health and Environment issued a Notice of Violation Wednesday
for license condition violations during a December inspection at
Cotter Corp. 

The Cañon City-based uranium and vanadium processing plant also
responded to an air quality violation issued in January by
canceling the permit for “certain decomposition and fusion
furnace emissions.” 

Mill manager John Hamrick said this morning that previous plans
to lower the opacity on the vanadium-production side of the
plant were unsuccessful, so the mill will shut down vanadium
production and begin repairs. 

“We’re focusing on uranium production for cash-flow issues,”
Hamrick said. “This will allow us to do some engineering and
perhaps new construction to address the issue.” 

The CDPHE inspector cited Cotter with three Severity Level I
violations during the Dec. 26 inspection that found three
emergency showers out of operation and a worker that was found
to be unqualified, according to the NOV. 

The notice states that the worker in question was injured and
was unable to use the showers located throughout the grind and
leach building, as well as the CCD wagon wheel building. It also
states that the worker’s “documentation of training was
inadequate.” 

The three shower violations carry a fine of $5,000 each and the
Severity Level III worker violation is $1,250, for a total of
$16,250. 

Hamrick said the plant received the NOV Wednesday and is still
in the process of determining the next step. He did say,
however, that negotiations with the CDPHE likely will ensue,
partly because the inspector did not leave a written result of
the inspection at the site. 

“We are looking forward to sitting down with CDPHE and working
this out,” Hamrick said. 				   

All contents Copyright © 2005 The Cañon City Daily Record. All
*****************************************************************
 51 UPI: Group: extracting plutonium dangerous
     
    United Press International - Security &Terrorism - 

2/9/2006 7:17:00 PM -0500

WASHINGTON, Feb. 9 (UPI) -- A plan to extract plutonium from
spent reactor fuel is not "proliferation resistant" despite what
Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman told Congress Thursday, a nuclear
safety group said. 

The Bush administration says extracting the plutonium but mixing
it with other elements would discourage terrorists from stealing
it. Also, the plutonium could be used again to fuel a nuclear
reactor. 

However, the Union of Concerned Scientists, Washington, D.C.
advocacy group, says the plutonium and additional elements are
not radioactive enough to deter terrorists who want it to make a
nuclear bomb, or a "dirty" radioactive conventional bomb. 

UCS says research conducted by two Energy Department scientists
shows the plutonium mixture would be as vulnerable to theft as
plutonium itself, because of its low level of radiation. A
second study concludes that the other isotopes in the mixture
could also be used to make nuclear weapons, thus increasing the
motive to steal it. 

"Perhaps Dr. Bodman is unaware of this technical work," noted
Dr. Edwin Lyman, Senior Scientist at the Union of Concerned
Scientists. "It clearly demonstrates that the administration's
new reprocessing program will pose a serious risk that
terrorists could acquire the material needed to make a nuclear
weapon from a U.S. facility." 

Under the administration plan, a commercial reprocessing plant
would process about 10 tons of the plutonium mixture into liquid
or powder form, enough for more than 1,000 nuclear weapons. 

"There are several instances in which foreign reprocessing
plants have been 

unable to account for enough plutonium to make 10 or more
nuclear weapons for over a period of months or years. The
modified reprocessing technologies in DOE's proposal would make
this problem even worse because the mixture of plutonium and
other elements would be even harder to precisely measure," UCS
said. 

UCS advocates leaving the plutonium in the heavy casks of highly
radioactive spent fuel to discourage theft.

© Copyright 2006 United Press
International, Inc. All Rights Reserved
*****************************************************************
 52 Business Gazette: RADIOACTIVITY REMOVED FROM SEA DISCHARGES 

Published in Whitehaven News on Thursday, February 9th 2006 

RADIOACTIVITY that was getting into lobsters and sparking
protests from the Norwegian fishing industry has been removed
from sea discharges by British Nuclear Group at Sellafield.

The company has completed the clean-up of historic liquid waste
from one of the oldest plants at Sellafield, while preventing
more than 44 years of radioactive discharges to sea and saving
taxpayers up to £300million in potential new building costs.

The liquid waste known as medium active concentrate (MAC), which
is a by-product of spent Magnox fuel reprocessing, has been
stored at a facility called the Medium Active Tank Farm (MATF)
at Sellafield since the early 1980s.

With the increasing age of the MATF facility, a need developed
to transfer and process its MAC inventory before new storage
facilities were required. However, due to limits on sea
discharges of the radioactive isotope Technetium (Tc-99), which
was present in MAC and originally could not be removed, the
speed of processing was restricted.

However, this all changed thanks to a unique process developed
at Sellafield, which used a chemical known as TPP to separate
Tc-99 from the historic MAC so it could be encapsulated in
cement and stored safely on site. 

In addition, all current and future arisings of MAC were
diverted to an alternative plant at Sellafield where waste could
be melted into glass for safe storage, a process called
vitrification.

These breakthroughs allowed a massive acceleration in the MAC
processing programme and led to an 87 per cent reduction in the
radioactive inventory at the MATF and the prevention of more
than 44 years-worth of Tc-99 discharges at proposed new
discharge limits. 

The transfer of all historic MAC was completed 18 months ahead
of schedule, and together with the diversion of current liquid
waste arising from Magnox reprocessing, negated the potential
need for a new storage facility to be built and saving the UK
taxpayer about £300million.

John Storer, British Nuclear Groups director of production
operations, said: Cleaning up the historic MAC inventory at
Sellafield indicates a significant reduction in the radioactive
hazard on site and the way in which British Nuclear Group has
achieved it demonstrates a commitment to providing value through
innovation, and also its dedication to minimising environmental
impact.

The creation of the separation process using the chemical TPP
came in response to concerns raised by the Irish, Icelandic and
Norwegian governments about the impact of trace quantities of
Tc-99 being found in their coastal waters. 

After the commencement of the Tc-99 removal process, one of the
most vocal critics of the sea discharges, the Liberal Party from
Norways coastal Rogaland region, awarded the UK environment
minister its annual environmental award.

*****************************************************************
 53 Pahrump Valley Times: Yucca funding an issue - again 

Februrary 8, 2006

By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS 

WASHINGTON - President Bush's $2.77 trillion budget proposal for
2007 seeks $544 million to continue work licensing a proposed
nuclear waste dump at Yucca Mountain. 

Congress approved $450 million for the project in 2006 - less
than Bush's $650 million request. 

The budget for Yucca Mountain was $577 million in 2004 and 2005. 

Bush's budget request for the fiscal year that begins Oct. 1
also proposes $250 million as down payment on a multiyear
program to resume commercial nuclear fuel reprocessing, which
was abandoned in the 1970s over proliferation fears. 

The aim is to reduce volumes of waste from commercial power
reactors and develop an international program to control
civilian nuclear material. 

A series of setbacks - including a required rewrite of radiation
safety standards for the repository - has slowed spending on
Yucca Mountain. It's not clear when the Energy Department will
submit its license application to the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission and the projected opening date has slipped to 2012,
at the earliest. 

For comment or questions, please e-mail
webmaster@pahrumpvalleytimes.com
Copyright © Pahrump Valley Times, 1997 - 2006 
*****************************************************************
 54 Deseret News: BLM seeks input on N-waste shipments
 
[deseretnews.com] 

Wednesday, February 8, 2006                              

By Suzanne Struglinski

Deseret Morning News  

WASHINGTON — The Bureau of Land Management wants to hear from the 
public on whether it should grant Private Fuel Storage access to 
federal land in order to ship nuclear waste to the Skull Valley 
Goshute Indian reservation.

       The bureau posted a four-page notice announcing the
90-day public comment period in the Federal Register on Tuesday,
following up on a letter sent to Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, in
December.
       "Utahns have repeatedly expressed concerns about the
dangers of transporting and storing high-level nuclear waste in
Skull Valley," Gov. Jon Huntsman Jr. said in a statement.
"Off-loading high-level nuclear waste on a rail siding adjacent
to Interstate 80, the principal east-west transportation
corridor in the West for commerce and the public, makes
absolutely no sense. The citizens and businesses that depend on
this highway must speak out in opposition to the PFS proposals."
       Late last year, Hatch asked Interior Secretary Gale
Norton for "fresh consideration" on the right of way Private
Fuel Storage must get to build a rail line or a transfer
facility for trucks. He highlighted that several companies
making up the consortium supporting PFS had pulled or frozen
their financial backing late last year and that the Energy
Department has made clear PFS is not part of its nuclear waste
plan.
       The Bureau of Indian Affairs cannot sign off on PFS's
lease of the Goshute land without the BLM's right-of-way
approval. PFS filed the right-of-way applications in 1998 and
the environmental impact statement was finished in 2001,
according to BLM Deputy Director Jim Hughes.
       In the Federal Register notice, Hughes also acknowledged
President Bush signed a law that declared 100,000 acres of land
in Utah as federally protected wilderness. That protects the
Utah Test and Training Range, but also effectively prevents
hauling nuclear waste onto Goshute land via the PFS-preferred
rail route. Waste could still be moved via truck, but PFS would
need to build a transfer facility that would also require public
land use, Hughes said.
       Hatch continued his plea with state residents that they
should all write the BLM to make the case that moving waste
through Utah is not in the public's best interest.
       "Every viable transportation option for PFS requires the
(Bush) administration's approval, and the BLM is making it very
clear that its decision will be based on whether these options
are in the public's interest," Hatch said.
       "The BLM has put this decision in the hands of Utahns and
other concerned citizens, and it's crucial that we make our
voices heard."
       PFS spokeswoman Sue Martin said she could not comment on
BLM electing to re-open the public comment period since the
agency has the right to do so. She said she hopes the BLM will
consider the responses it receives based on the criteria
included in the notice.

The public can send letters to: 

      Pam Shuller
       Bureau of Land Management
       Salt Lake Field Office
       2370 S. 2300 West
       Salt Lake City, UT 84119
       The comment period closes May 8.

 
© 2006 Deseret News Publishing Company                                                                                                                           [
*****************************************************************
 55 ContraCostaTimes.com: More funds for NIF

| 02/09/2006 | 

LAST YEAR, THE U.S. Senate considered cutting funding for the
Nuclear Ignition Facility at Lawrence Livermore Laboratory by
$146 million. Fortunately, that mistake has been corrected in
the Energy Department's budget plans for 2007. 

The NIF would get $353 million, an increase of $17 million,
instead of a huge decrease that could have jeopardized the
facility. 

The NIF's superlaser project is one of the most important
technological and scientific developments in the nation. The
192-beam laser is scheduled to be finished in 2009. One goal is
to achieve nuclear fusion ignition and to produce significantly
more energy than is used to ignite it. 

The primary function of NIF is to allow the United States to
assure the reliability of its nuclear weapons stockpile without
actually exploding the weapons, which has been necessary in the
past. 

But the NIF also has even more immediate importance and future
possibilities. 

The laser project, coupled with the world's most powerful
computers, is a magnet for the best scientific minds in the
nation and much of the rest of the world. 

Even more promising for the long-term is the NIF's role in
developing nuclear fusion. If fusion reactors ever become
practical, which is possible if the nation is committed to
research, the United States could free itself from dependence on
petroleum imports. 

Fusion energy is virtually pollution free. It does not produce
huge amounts of radioactive material and the source of fuel is
limitless. 

The United States should be far more aggressive in pursuing
nuclear fusion, not pulling funding away from it, as the Senate
considered doing last year. 

We hope that the Energy Department's budget for the lab and the
NIF remains intact after the budget has been approved by
Congress. 

Congress has killed other projects such as the Superconducting
Supercollider, a 54-mile particle accelerator in Texas. But that
project was way over budget before much of it was built. 

As a result, America lost many of its top scientists to Europe,
which has the world's largest accelerator. 

The NIF is also over budget, but not nearly as much as the
supercollider. Besides, the NIF has an immediate use in making
testing of nuclear weapons obsolete and could give the United
States a major boost toward developing nuclear fusion energy. 

If anything, the budget for NIF should be even larger to
accelerate completion of the project. 

y
*****************************************************************
 56 Hanford News: 2007 budget would revive funds for vit
 
This story was published Tuesday, February 7th, 2006 

By Annette Cary, Herald staff writer 

Hanford's vitrification plant would receive full funding for
fiscal year 2007 under the budget proposal the White House gave
to Congress on Monday. 

Hanford was one of the few Department of Energy nuclear cleanup
sites nationwide to see an increase in its proposed budget. But
with the restoration of the budget for the vitrification plant
construction, funding for other work to protect the Columbia
River was cut. 

The proposed budget would spend $1.88 billion on cleanup and
security at the Hanford nuclear reservation in fiscal year 2007.
That's up from $1.75 billion this year, but less than the $2.09
billion spent in fiscal year 2005, the peak funding year to date
for Hanford. 

"Overall this budget is far better than last year's plan," said
U.S. Rep. Doc Hastings, R-Wash., in a statement. "It's a bit of
a relief." 

But he and others still had questions about proposed cuts to
individual programs at Hanford, including less money for
contractor CH2M Hill Hanford Group's work at the tank farms. The
Plutonium Finishing Plant also would receive a substantial
reduction in funding. 

Among programs that fared well was cleanup along the Columbia
River, which would receive 25 percent more money. 

Before the proposed budget was released Monday, Gov. Chris
Gregoire and Hastings had pushed for funding to be restored at
the vitrification plant to $690 million. Because of a reduced
budget this year and other problems at the Waste Treatment
Plant, construction has slowed, and about 1,700 workers have
lost their jobs. 

The plant is needed to turn the most radioactive waste held in
Hanford's underground tanks into stable glass logs for permanent
disposal. The waste is left from the past production of
plutonium at Hanford for the nation's nuclear weapons program. 

"An increase in funding for the Waste Treatment Plant back to
$690 million is a positive step," said Jay Manning, director of
the Washington State Department of Ecology, in a statement. 

"But we have grave concerns about the president's proposal for a
substantial reduction in funding for other aspects of the
Hanford cleanup, including the important work that is currently
under way to remove radioactive waste from the underground
tanks," he said. 

That part of the proposed budget was about $100 million less
than was spent in fiscal year 2005 and $52 million less than the
fiscal year 2006 budget. Reductions would come from slowing work
to empty tanks and also from not beginning construction on the
bulk vitrification pilot plant in fiscal year 2007. 

Construction on the pilot plant already has been temporarily
halted to allow the design to be completed and costs verified
after estimates jumped from $46 million to $159 million. 

Even before the proposed budget was announced, DOE had warned
the state that it might not empty the 16 tanks in C Tank Farm by
a legal deadline. Budget documents said C Tank Farm work would
continue at a "reduced pace." 

Hastings said he was skeptical about the limits DOE said exist
for work on tank retrieval, bulk vitrification and the Plutonium
Finishing Plant. 

"It may be possible that more work might be needed on each of
these next year," he said. "More information from DOE will help
answer these questions." 

The overall DOE budget request for environmental management, or
cleanup of nuclear sites across the nation, dropped 12 percent
for fiscal year 2007 to $5.8 billion. Cleanup has been completed
at the Rocky Flats, Colo., site and the Fernald, Ohio, site and
a few smaller sites should soon be completed, DOE explained. 

Hanford was singled out for increased funding as DOE focused on
projects with the greatest need and highest risk, said DOE
spokesman Mike Waldron. 

"The Hanford site, because of its unique history and
environmental challenges, is not only a cleanup priority for
Washington state, but the nation," he said. 

A return to a $690 million budget for the vitrification plant
demonstrates DOE's confidence that technical issues will be
resolved and the plant will be finished, Waldron said. 

Heart of America Northwest criticized DOE for not keeping
funding level with fiscal year 2005. That would have required
$367 million more, according to Heart of America Northwest. 

DOE began delaying cleanup at Hanford and other major sites in
1999 to accelerate and finish cleanup at smaller sites, said
Gerald Pollet, executive director of the Hanford watchdog group.
It promised to restore funding beginning in 2006 but has not
kept that promise, he said. 

DOE officials say 2005 always was to be the peak funding year. 

"We're feeling good about what we can get done next year," said
Colleen French, a DOE spokeswoman at Hanford. "At a time when
overall budget has gone down, we've got an increase." 

The budget sent to Congress on Monday is only a proposal by the
White House and DOE, and Congress can increase or decrease it. 

Here's how much the budget proposes spending on various Hanford
programs: 

n Vitrification plant - The return to $690 million in fiscal
year 2007 would allow construction to resume on the two largest
buildings at the plant, the High Level Waste Facility and the
Pretreatment Facility. Design work is being done on those
buildings and construction is being done on buildings that would
not handle large amounts of the most radioactive waste. 

n Tank farms - The proposed budget did not break out how the $52
million reduction would be divided between tank retrieval work
and the bulk vitrification pilot plant. 

n Columbia River corridor cleanup - Spending would increase 25
percent, from $177 million in fiscal year 2006 to $221 million
in fiscal year 2007. The work is being done by new contractor
Washington Closure Hanford. 

n Plutonium Finishing Plant - The budget would drop to $82
million for fiscal year 2007 as work to decontaminate and
decommission the plant slows. DOE has been unable to ship
weapons-grade plutonium from the plant so security would be
decreased and allow more efficient cleanup. In addition, money
has been needed for the K Basins as technical and other problems
have increased costs there. 

The fiscal year 2006 budget for the Plutonium Finishing Plant is
$197 million, although that's being adjusted to $127 million to
allow more work to continue at the K Basins. 

n K Basins - About $81 million would be spent on cleaning up the
basins. That compares with $113 million to be spent on the K
Basins this fiscal year. Additional money would be used for
sludge treatment. 

n Fast Flux Test Facility - The budget would be reduced from $46
million to $35 million under a plan to get decommissioning work
done to reduce maintenance on the reactor but not tear it down. 

n Ground water - Funding would increase from $74 million to $76
million to monitor and clean up contaminated ground water. 

n Central Hanford cleanup - The budget would increase from $70
million in fiscal year 2006 to $94 million in fiscal year 2007.
However, that's still less than the $126 million spent in fiscal
year 2005, for the early work and planning to clean up the
highly contaminated central area of the nuclear reservation. 

n Solid waste stabilization - The budget includes $40 million
for retrieving buried waste contaminated with plutonium and $190
million for other solid waste projects, including repackaging
retrieved waste for disposal. 

© 2006 Tri-City Herald. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 57 Hanford News: 4 companies merge to form new nuclear firm in Utah
 
This story was published Wednesday, February 8th, 2006 

By the Herald staff 

Four companies with experience in nuclear waste plan to become
part of a new company based in Salt Lake City, EnergySolutions. 

Duratek announced Tuesday that it plans to merge with
EnergySolutions. 

Friday, BNG America, formerly known as BNFL, announced it was
being sold to the new company that will focus on providing a
full range of services to the nuclear industry. 

Envirocare of Utah and Scientech D also are joining
EnergySolutions. Without Duratek, EnergySolutions will have
about 1,000 employees, including employees based in Richland. 

The Duratek merger will require stockholder and regulatory
approval.

         
© 2006 Tri-City Herald. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 58 Hanford News: Vit plant costs may top $10 billion
 
This story was published Wednesday, February 8th, 2006 

By Annette Cary, Herald staff writer 

Hanford's vitrification plant could cost more than $10 billion
before it's ready to begin treating radioactive waste in the
spring of 2017, according to a new report. 

The legal deadline to begin turning radioactive waste into a
stable glass form for permanent disposal is 2011. 

The cost and schedule estimate, contained in a 44,000-page
report prepared by contractor Bechtel National, was given to
Washington congressional and state leaders Tuesday. 

It is the latest attempt to calculate the cost of the project
since it became apparent last year that the official estimate of
$5.8 billion was too low, and that the plant would not be
treating waste by a legal deadline. 

About 53 million gallons of radioactive waste from the past
production of plutonium for the nation's nuclear weapons program
are stored in aging underground tanks. 

The new estimate puts the cost at almost $8.8 billion. But it
does not include an undetermined fee for Bechtel or an allowance
for uncertainties in the project that likely would be the
responsibility of the Department of Energy. 

Bechtel estimated those risks at nearly $1.8 billion, which
would bring the cost without the contractor fee to $10.5
billion. 

"This is Bechtel's revised estimate based on new seismic
criteria and other technical challenges," said Mike Waldron,
spokesman for DOE in Washington, D.C. 

However, DOE will not endorse the estimate until the Army Corps
of Engineers has validated Bechtel's numbers. Energy Secretary
Samuel Bodman has said he will base a plan for completing the
vitrification plant on verifiable facts and Bechtel's numbers
haven't been verified, Waldron said. 

Bechtel spent six months preparing the document - called an
"estimate at completion," - after the Corps said last year that
an earlier estimate at completion did not contain complete
enough information to be verified. 

But the Corps document said the cost of the plant could increase
to as much as $9.6 billion. 

Bechtel National already is at work on a revision of its latest
estimate at completion that is expected to adjust the cost
upward because of changes since it began work on the estimate.
That updated estimate should be ready in May. 

Among the biggest changes has been a reduction in the expected
vitrification plant budget for the current fiscal year from the
$626 million Bechtel had expected to $526 million as it was
finishing the report. That reduction led to the temporary halt
to construction on key parts of the plant. 

In addition, Congress has separated funding for the five major
facilities at the plant, which will increase overhead costs and
limit flexibility, Bechtel believes. Technical reviews of the
project also could lead to changes. 

The estimate released Tuesday adds 26 months to the building
schedule and $700 million to $900 million to the cost because of
new earthquake design standards. An earthquake study in late
2004 indicated the earlier standards might be inadequate for a
severe earthquake. 

Other factors driving the cost increase include solving science
problems for the first-of-a-kind plant, increased costs for
labor and materials, design changes that have required more
construction material and more contingency money. 

The Bechtel contingency built into the budget was increased from
$550 million to $1 billion to cover uncertainties such as the
total amount of building material needed and employee wages. 

That does not include risks in the $1.76 billion estimate that
fall outside Bechtel's responsibilities. Those risks include
possible upgrades to the plant, reductions in funding from
Congress and potential changes to air emission requirements by
regulators. 

DOE was criticized last year for not releasing enough
information about the changing cost and schedule of the
vitrification plant. This year, Rep. Doc Hastings, R-Wash., has
praised DOE for being more open about releasing information as
work continues to develop a plan for completing the project. 

© 2006 Tri-City Herald. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 59 Hanford News: Vacuuming resumes at K East Basin
 
This story was published Thursday, February 9th, 2006 

By Annette Cary, Herald staff writer 

Hanford workers have been able to clear up the murky waters of
Hanford's K East Basin to do some heavy-duty housekeeping. 

Radioactive sludge again is being vacuumed from the floor of the
basin after a temporary stop to make the work more efficient. 

Changes appear to be working. 

"We're covering a large area in a fraction of the time we did
before," said Pete Knollmeyer, a vice president for Department
of Energy contractor Fluor Hanford. 

About 85 percent of the sludge has been vacuumed into underwater
containers and Fluor expects to have all the sludge in
containers this fall. 

The K East Basin was once used to hold fuel irradiated in the K
East Reactor until it could be processed to remove plutonium for
the nation's nuclear weapons program. 

But when the last processing plant shut down, fuel was left
stranded in the basin in open containers for more than a decade.
It corroded and formed a radioactive sludge with cement that
sloughed off the basin walls and dirt to form a radioactive
sludge. 

Removing the sludge from the 1 million gallons of water in the
indoor, leak-prone basin to underwater containers has been a
challenge. 

The project was initially planned to take four months, but now
will take a year and nine months, Knollmeyer said. 

Workers stand on grates above the water and maneuver tools with
27-foot handles through the grating holes to do work at the
bottom of the pool. The water in the pool shields workers from
radiation, although they still must wear double layers of
protective clothing and masks that supply air. 

Videos recorded by cameras to guide work at the bottom of the
murky pools show the vacuum nozzle poking among racks once used
to hold the fuel and piles of debris. 

"Everything that ever fell in the water stayed in the water
because it was so contaminated," Knollmeyer said. 

Workers have found tools, hoses, welding blankets, spacers used
between fuel pieces in the reactor, and, mysteriously, a
computer monitor hidden in the sludge on the bottom of the pool. 

When the vacuum nozzle bumped against a piece of debris, a cloud
of sludge would mushroom up, making visibility too poor to
continue vacuuming. 

But that's changed in recent months. 

Vacuuming temporarily stop-ped while workers pulled 198 racks
out of the water, many weighing 500 pounds. They've also removed
much of the debris. 

That and engineering changes have made vacuuming more efficient. 

Fine sludge that used to float out of the tops of the open,
underwater containers during vacuuming now is being captured and
suctioned away. 

The water is clear enough that vacuuming can be done in one part
of the basin while work to remove debris goes on elsewhere. 

Work also is moving forward on the next step of the project -
transferring sludge from underwater containers at the K East
Basin to containers in the less contaminated and more sound K
West Basin. From there it will be moved again to be treated for
disposal. 

The transfer system between the basins nearly is completed. It
will pump sludge in a hose, contained within a larger hose to
detect any leaks and prevent any sludge from contaminating the
environment. 

Once all the sludge is removed from K East in early 2007, work
can move on to demolish the basin and the K East Reactor.

© 2006 Tri-City Herald. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 60 kgw.com: Hanford plant cost may top $10 billion 

News for Oregon and SW Washington | AP Wire
 
02/09/2006 

Associated Press 

The cost to build a waste treatment plant at the Hanford nuclear
reservation in south-central Washington could top $10 billion,
according to a new report. 

In addition, the plant wouldn't be ready to begin treating toxic
and radioactive waste until 2017, six years after the legal
deadline. 

The cost and schedule estimate were contained in a 44,000-page
report prepared by Bechtel National, the contractor hired to
build the plant. The U.S. Department of Energy, which manages
cleanup at the highly contaminated site, presented the report to
Washington congressional and state leaders Tuesday. 

The so-called vitrification plant has long been considered the
cornerstone of Hanford cleanup. The plant is being designed to
convert millions of gallons of radioactive waste into a stable
glass form for permanent disposal in a nuclear waste repository. 

The waste is being stored in underground tanks, some of which
have leaked into the aquifer, threatening the Columbia River
less than 10 miles away and making cleanup a priority. 

But the plant is billions of dollars over budget and years
behind schedule. Bechtel spent months completing the latest cost
estimate and schedule after it became apparent last year that
the official estimate of $5.8 billion was too low. 

The new estimate puts the cost at almost $8.8 billion. However,
the estimate does not include an undetermined fee for Bechtel or
an allowance for uncertainties in the project that likely would
be the responsibility of the Energy Department. 

Bechtel estimated those risks at nearly $1.8 billion, which
would bring the cost without the contractor fee to $10.5
billion. 

The Army Corps of Engineers is in the process of reviewing the
estimate. The corps review will not be ready before summer, and
the Energy Department cannot confirm any other estimates until
that review is completed, department spokesman Mike Waldron
said. 

In addition, Bechtel already is working to revise the estimate
due to recent changes. They include a reduction in the budget
for the plant in 2006, from $626 million when Bechtel began the
review last year to $526 million. 

A 2004 report showed that the Energy Department had
underestimated the impact a severe earthquake might have on the
plant. That report  coupled with the rising costs for labor and
materials and technological problems for the one-of-a-kind plant
 prompted the federal government to halt construction on major
portions of the plant last fall. 

The latest estimate adds $700 million to $900 million to the
overall cost to meet new earthquake design standards. 

Under the Tri-Party Agreement, the cleanup pact signed by the
state, Energy Department and Environmental Protection Agency,
the plant is to be operating by 2011. Under the latest estimate,
the plant would be operating in March 2007. 

Jay Manning, director of the state Department of Ecology, said
federal officials focused on the latest cost estimate  rather
than the schedule  when briefing the state on the situation
Tuesday. 

"The numbers we're seeing are alarming and the impact to the
schedule is my primary concern at the moment," Manning said. 

In its 2007 budget request Monday, the Bush administration
restored funding for the plant to 2005 levels at $690 million. 

The federal government created Hanford in the 1940s as part of
the top-secret Manhattan Project to build the atomic bomb.
Today, it is the nation's most contaminated nuclear site, with
cleanup costs expected to total $50 billion to $60 billion. 

This text is invisible on the page, but this text is affected by
the invisible item's flow. This text is invisible on the page,
but this text is affected by the invisible item's flow.     

&copy; 2006, KGW-TV  
*****************************************************************
 61 lamonitor.com: Brooks ponders budget constraints 

The Online News Source for Los Alamos
 
ROGER SNODGRASS, roger@lamonitor.com, Monitor Assistant Editor

Ambassador Linton Brooks said budget considerations would
influence future activities of the National Nuclear Security
Administration, including consolidation of the complex and
redesigning existing weapons. 

"There are a lot of things that are very good things to do," he
said, adding that the point of making a budget was "to pick
which ones are most important within a constrained resource."

Brooks visited the laboratory on the day after the federal
budget was announced in Washington. He bestowed awards for
excellence in scientific research and leadership, checked on
transition activities in his local office and met with Los
Alamos National Laboratory Director Robert Kuckuck and incoming
director Michael Anastasio. 

Brooks said he saw his own budget fall from $9.3 billion this
year to $9.1 billion in the proposal for next year and was not
optimistic that the Department of Energy budget would go up any
time soon.

"I'm not even keeping up with inflation," he said, adding that
his projections called for no growth beyond inflation, and that
if he could be guaranteed even that right now, he would probably
take it. 
Congress has refused to fund the Modern Pit Facility, a major
investment in producing nuclear triggers, known as "pits." LANL
and Carlsbad in New Mexico, have been among five sites under
consideration for the new plant.

The Plutonium Facility at LANL has, meanwhile, become the center
of activity to provide replacement pits for aging nuclear
weapons since the Rocky Flats production facility closed nearly

30 years ago under massive environmental violations. 
Brooks noted that the United States has been the only nuclear
power that could not produce the triggers for its weapons.

The laboratory is scheduled to produce its first certifiable pit
next year, and then begin ramping up to 10 pits a year.

Brooks quelled alarms that Los Alamos was on a path to become
"the next Rocky Flats," as critics have warned, despite the
laboratory's statements of disinterest. Brooks did not rule out
the possibility that the MPF would eventually be built at Los
Alamos, but suggested that if it were it might be separated from
the scientific laboratory.

Brooks said there was a difference in culture between a
scientific and a production facility that should be respected.

Before committing to a site and construction, Congress asked
NNSA to reexamine the whole complex and what needed to be done
in the long term.

Brooks said one set of inputs came from a task force known as
the Overskei report, but that the agency has been doing a good
deal of its own internal thinking on the question of creating "a
response infrastructure."

While the Overskei report proposes a radical consolidation of
the complex, the initial investment would be hard to obtain in
the current budget climate.

At the same time, the Reliable Replacement Warhead, which has
been central to ideas about transforming the complex, has been
seeded. Congress appropriated $25 million for competition
between Los Alamos National Laboratory and Lawrence Livermore
National Laboratory, to design a warhead that will simplify and
modernize the nuclear stockpile.

The budget request increases slightly to $27 million next year.
The first design data packages are due from the two laboratories
at the end of March.

One criteria imposed by Congress is that the weapon would have
to work without testing.

Antinuclear activists, encouraged by their victory last year in
defeating the "bunker buster," a study to enable existing
nuclear weapons to penetrate underground targets, have now set
their sights on stopping the RRW.

"Watch for the RRW Program to dramatically grow over the next
five years, with a steady progression toward new nuclear weapons
designs," warned the Alliance for Nuclear Accountability in a
budget-day alert.

Brooks' visit to LANL coincided with an awards ceremony honoring
outstanding science research and leadership.

Fellows prizes for research this year went to Neil Harrison of
Los Alamos High Magnetic Field Laboratory and Robert
Roussel-Dupr/ of Atmospheric, Climate and Environmental Dynamics.

Rick Luce of the Research Library and Bob Little of Material
Science received the prize for leadership.

Along with awards, recipients also received checks for $3,000
each.

"A number of years ago we made a decision as a country that we
could not have a great weapons lab unless there was great
science," said Brooks, during his remarks.

Editor's note: More on Brooks perspective on the Reliable
Replacement Warhead is coming Sunday, with part two of "Crunch
time for NNSA."   

  © 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: 
<http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml> 
    
*****************************************************************