***************************************************************** 03/03/06 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 14.53 ***************************************************************** 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: Iran, EU Inch Toward Possible Compromise 2 Guardian Unlimited: Iran, EU Nuclear Talks End Without Result 3 IRNA: EU3 envoys: No agreement reached in talks with Iran 4 IRNA: Left warns UPA government on Nuclear deal 5 IRNA: US must let sanity prevail on Iran's nuclear issue - Pak daily 6 IRNA: Member of European Parliament condemns US nuclear policy as hy 7 IRNA: Iran's top nuclear negotiator begins talks with Elbaradei 8 IRNA: ElBaradei favors returning to negotiation table 9 IRNA: NAM members reach consensus on Iran's nuclear program 10 [du-list] US signs $38 million deal for depleted uranium tank 11 IPS-English POLITICS-US: Nuclear Pact with India Seen as 12 Guardian Unlimited: Bush Ushers India Into Nuclear Club 13 Guardian Unlimited: Pakistan Proves an Awkward Ally to U.S. 14 Guardian Unlimited: Bush: U.S. Shouldn't See India As Threat 15 Financial assistance available for Kiev conference; NIRS is 16 ITAR-TASS: Ukraine, Russia sign contract to extend RS-20 service lif 17 Morning Sun: He's incompetent, but we're stuck with him 18 UPI: Analysis: Eyeing a common EU energy policy NUCLEAR REACTORS 19 US: [NukeNet] Net Loss of Energy by Nuclear Power Industry Over 20 US: NRC: NRC Issues Draft Environmental Report for Palisades License 21 US: Brattleboro Reformer: Yankee gets OK to increase power 22 US: Brattleboro Reformer: Theater of the absurd 23 US: NRC: NRC Issues Annual Assessments for Nation’s Nuclear Plants 24 US: Rutland Herald: Yankee gets OK to boost power 25 Xinhua: Hungary has no plans to build new nuclear plant 26 TheStar.com: Ontario cannot afford to give up coal 27 US: NRC: Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards Subcommittee Meeti 28 US: NRC: Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards, Subcommittee Meet 29 US: Arms Control Association: Bush Promotes New Nuclear Plan 30 Russia Newswire: Greenpeace Condemns Russia’s Environmental Review 31 US: PRN: Davis-Besse Prepares for Refueling 32 Business Day: Koeberg probe turns focus on contractors 33 US: Vermont Guardian: Vermont regulators signal VY go-ahead NUCLEAR SECURITY 34 World´s Regulators Meet On Nuclear Safety And Security At UN Confere NUCLEAR SAFETY 35 [du-list] We Want Justice Now/Republic of the Marshall Islands 36 US: "PLANNED DEATHS" By Nuclear Industry-Court Testimony By Dr John 37 US: [southnews] US places new order for DU shells 38 [du-list] FoI Case Reveals Misleading (UK) Minister 39 US: Herald News: County planning tritium tests 40 US: Summit Daily News: Study says 16,000 died from fallout 41 US: Salt Lake Tribune: Radiation-fallout compensation reaches $1 42 US: Pahrump Valley Times: Above-ground tests in 1950s-60s still caus 43 Aljazeera: The U.S. radiates civilians and soldiers with depleted ur NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE 44 US: [du-list] RADIOACTIVE PROFITS 45 US: Deseret News: Huntsman is urged to veto second waste bill 46 US: Deseret News: EnergySolutions completes acquisition of BNG Ameri 47 US: Bellona: Russia to invest $10 billion in uranium mining and proc 48 reviewjournal.com: Yucca Mountain repository costs may drop after 49 Planet Ark: US Government Plans Steps to Advance Nevada Nuclear Dump 50 US: AS: Toxic Rocket fuel in most Americans 51 US: Salt Lake Tribune: Huntsman hints at veto of bill on suits 52 US: Salt Lake Tribune: Envirocare finishes aquisition 53 PRN: Urenco Buys Westinghouse Interest in LES 54 Mos News: Nuclear Waste Plant Chief Dismissed Over Breach of Environ 55 Unian: President Wants to Store Used Nuclear Fuel in Ukraine 56 Pahrump Valley Times: DOE: Yucca money won't be diverted PEACE US DEPT. OF ENERGY 57 SF New Mexican: Geologist says LANL needs to upgrade wells 58 Hanford News: Witnesses decry program changes 59 Hanford News: Small firm gets Hanford contract 60 Pahrump Valley Times: DOE DOA due to TVA ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** FULL NEWS STORIES ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** 1 Guardian Unlimited: Iran, EU Inch Toward Possible Compromise From the Associated Press [UP] Saturday March 4, 2006 12:31 AM AP Photo VIE108 By GEORGE JAHN Associated Press Writer VIENNA, Austria (AP) - Iran and the European Union inched toward a possible compromise Friday that diplomats said would allow Tehran to run a scaled-down uranium enrichment program despite its potential for misuse in building atomic weapons. The meeting Friday ended without agreement, but the discussions were significant because the Europeans and the United States have for years opposed allowing Iran any kind of enrichment capability - a stance that Russia, China and other influential nations have also embraced. Top European officials publicly described the talks in Vienna as failed because of Tehran's refusal to reimpose a freeze on enrichment. The board of the International Atomic Energy Agency is to revisit the issue beginning Monday. ``Unfortunately we were not able to reach an agreement,'' French Foreign Minister Philippe Douste-Blazy told reporters, saying the EU continued to demand ``full and complete suspension'' of uranium enrichment and related activities that have fed fears Iran may be pursuing nuclear arms. German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier said the meeting ended ``without achieving a result.'' But diplomats familiar with the talks told The Associated Press that after months of deadlock, the two sides explored plans that essentially would allow Iran small-scale enrichment after reimposing its freeze for an undefined period to rebuild international trust. In Washington, State Department spokesman Adam Ereli discounted the notion of a compromise that allows Iran to enrich at home, and said the United States is confident European nations and Russia remain opposed to allowing Tehran that capability. Tehran has insisted on its right to conduct enrichment, saying it wants only to produce fuel for nuclear reactors that generate electricity. But enrichment also can create fissile material for warheads and a growing number of nations share U.S. fears that is Iran's true goal. Russia has recently sought to persuade Iran to move its enrichment program to Russian territory, which would allow closer international monitoring. A compromise could leave Washington facing near isolation diplomatically after months of building a consensus that on Feb. 4 led the IAEA's 35-nation board to put the U.N. Security Council on alert. But it could allow Iran, the EU and Russia to say they had achieved their main goals. Iran would be able to run a program it insists it has a right to under the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, even if it is only on a research basis instead of full-scale enrichment. The Europeans could tolerate small-scale enrichment if Iran first agrees to their key demand - a freeze to re-establish international confidence. Moscow could benefit diplomatically and economically if Iran accepted its proposal for a joint enrichment program to produce Iran's reactor fuel in Russia. One of the diplomats, who insisted on anonymity in exchange for divulging the substance of the confidential discussion, said Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov would discuss the compromise plan in Washington next week. On Friday evening, U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan called in the five permanent Security Council members - the United States, Russia, China, Britain and France - to exchange views on the latest developments. Afterwards, China's U.N. Ambassador Wang Guangya said a solution to the Iran dispute was still possible. ``We believe that before the IAEA meeting next week there are still some time for a solution out of it,'' Wang said. His comments were echoed by Russia's U.N. ambassador. The small-scale enrichment envisioned under the compromise would deprive Iranians of the chance to run the thousands of centrifuges needed to enrich enough uranium for multiple weapons. But it would allow them to perfect the methodology they would need if they later decided to start industrial scale enrichment. A report last week by IAEA head Mohamed ElBaradei said Iran was testing centrifuges, which spin uranium gas into enriched uranium, and had plans to begin installation of the first 3,000 centrifuges late this year. Iran restarted some enrichment last month, two years after voluntarily freezing the program during talks with Germany, Britain and France. Those talks unraveled late last year after Iran refused to give up enrichment in return for Western economic help. While Russia backed alerting the Security Council to Iran at the last IAEA board meeting, it remains reluctant to press for tough action against Tehran, an economic and strategic partner. Lavrov said Friday that the council's five veto-wielding members were not united. ``There is no collectively discussed and agreed strategy of what we all will be doing in the Security Council if the issue is there,'' Lavrov told reporters, hinting at his country's opposition to increasing pressure on Tehran. In Vienna, ElBaradei said he was ``hopeful'' of a negotiated solution after meeting with Iranian nuclear negotiator Ali Larijani, while the Iranian representative to the IAEA, Ali Asghar Soltanieh, described the talks with the Europeans as ``fruitful.'' --- Associated Press Writer Edith M. Lederer contributed to this report from the United Nations. --- On the Net: International Atomic Energy Agency: www.iaea.org Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006 ***************************************************************** 2 Guardian Unlimited: Iran, EU Nuclear Talks End Without Result From the Associated Press [UP] Friday March 3, 2006 11:31 AM AP Photo VIE101 By GEORGE JAHN Associated Press Writer VIENNA, Austria (AP) - Talks between European Union negotiators and Iran over its nuclear ambitions broke up Friday without any agreement, paving the way for potential U.N. Security Council action against Tehran as early as next week. French Foreign Minister Philippe Douste-Blazy said the EU had been demanding ``full and complete suspension'' of Iran's uranium enrichment and related activities. ``Unfortunately we were not able to reach an agreement,'' he told reporters after meeting with Iranian negotiators for just over two hours. The talks took place ahead of Monday's meeting of the International Atomic Energy Agency's 35-nation board. The board put the U.N. Security Council on alert Feb. 4 after Iran refused to heed requests to reimpose a suspension on enrichment, which can make both nuclear fuel or the fissile material for warheads. Douste-Blazy, his German counterpart Frank-Walter Steinmeier, EU foreign affairs chief Javier Solana and a senior British official met with Iranian chief negotiator Ali Larijani after his arrival from Moscow, where Russia tried to persuade Tehran to accept its offer to enrich uranium for Iran. Before leaving Moscow, Larijani warned that handing over the nuclear issue to the Security Council - as the United States has demanded - would kill Moscow's initiative. There had been little hope the Vienna meeting would achieve a breakthrough. A Russian nuclear agency official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak to media, confirmed the Moscow talks remained snagged over Iran's refusal to freeze enrichment at home. Still, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said a deal on Iran's nuclear enrichment program was still possible before next week's IAEA meeting. ``There always is an opportunity to reach an agreement,'' the Interfax news agency quoted Lavrov as saying Friday. The Russian plan - backed by most in the international community including the U.S. and the Europeans - is meant to deprive the Iranians of domestic control of all enrichment, easing fears that Iran might misuse the process for making nuclear weapons. Iran restarted some enrichment activities last month, two years after voluntarily freezing the program during talks with the Europeans that unraveled late last year. While the Security Council is waiting for the outcome of next week's board meeting to decide further action, its involvement reflects the level of concern surrounding Iran's nuclear ambitions. Tehran insists it wants enrichment only to generate electricity and that it does not seek nuclear arms, but a growing number of nations share U.S. fears that that is not the case. U.S. intelligence chief John Negroponte told lawmakers in Washington on Wednesday that the risk of Iran's acquiring nuclear arms and merging them with ballistic missile systems was ``a reason for immediate concern.'' Providing what he called secret details of those missile programs, Iranian opposition figure Alireza Jafarzadeh told the AP on Thursday that Iran had ``significantly increased the production line'' of its Shahab 3 missiles last year, and was now turning out 90 a year - more than four times its previous production rate. The most advanced Shahab has a range of nearly 1,200 miles, he said. That is enough to target arch-foe Israel. There was no independent confirmation of the information, which Jafarzadeh said he received from sources inside Iran. Steinmeier urged the Iranians to reconsider its stance before Monday's board meeting takes a decision ``so that we can return to the process of negotiations'' instead of confrontation. Solana said the nuclear impasse had reached ``a very critical moment.'' ``We have expressed that very clearly to our friends,'' he added. Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006 ***************************************************************** 3 IRNA: EU3 envoys: No agreement reached in talks with Iran Vienna, March 3, IRNA Iran-Nuclear-EU3 The EU3 announced here on Friday that no agreement had been reached with Iran in their talks on Tehran's peaceful nuclear program. "The atmosphere of the talks was positive in general but the requisite for any agreement is Iran's suspending all its enrichment activities in order for confidence-building," said representatives of three European heavyweights-- UK, France and Germany -- after talks with visiting Secretary General of Iran's Supreme National Security Council Ali Larijani. The envoys said that if Iran refuses to take necessary actions, no agreement and talks will be held. ***************************************************************** 4 IRNA: Left warns UPA government on Nuclear deal New Delhi, March 3, IRNA India-Bush-Left Left Parties Friday warned the Congress-led United Progressive Alliance (UPA) government that it would not hesitate to act against the Manmohan Singh dispensation if they succumbed to US pressure while clinching the nuclear deal. "We were telling the government again and again that the nuclear deal proposal was an American method of pressure tactics on countries like India. Nothing, but a method for continuous blackmailing", Communist Party of India (CPI) General Secretary A B Bardhan told reporters at an anti-Bush rally here. Bardhan said that Left parties "know what to do" if the government succumbs to US pressure on the nuclear deal. "It is obvious that they have to face consequences." Communist Party of India (Marxist) (CPI-M) General Secretary Prakash Karat reserved his comments on the issue saying that his party would demand "full details" about the deal. Earlier, during the rally, Karat said, "if the government is withdrawing from the independent foreign policy, they have to prepare themselves for consequences. The Left leaders' response came as India and US reached an understanding on the implementation of the civil nuclear cooperation agreed last year. CPI(M) polit bureau member Sitaram Yechury said the Left would not "in any case appreciate any erosion of Indian interest." "We are waiting till March 6 when India goes to International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) meeting on the vote on Iran", Yechury said adding, "We don't know how many reactors come under the deal or whether Fast Breed Reactors are included in this." Rashtriya Socialist Party (RSP) leader Abani Roy said they would oppose any deal which would harm the interest of the country. ***************************************************************** 5 IRNA: US must let sanity prevail on Iran's nuclear issue - Pak daily - Islamabad, March 3, IRNA Pakistan-Iran Presenting itself to be the sole super power, the United States of America is resorting to hegemonic policies, be it the attack on Iraq without any reason, or the destruction of Afghanistan, denying Palestinians their rights and now hurling threats to Syria and Iran. Mohammad Amjad Thanvi's article has been published in Pakistan's leading Urdu language newspaper on Friday with the title of Iran's nuclear program and America. The writer expressed these views in the article. He said that it appeared that the US planned to attack Syria and Iran in near future, as has been indicated by the statements by American leaders from time to time. The daily accused the US of following a policy of double standard vis-a-vis the nuclear-related issues concerning the Muslim countries and non-Muslim states. In this connection, the example of North Korea and India was quoted with reference to Iran's nuclear plan. "The path of dialogue has been adopted whenever an issue is related to a non-Muslim nation, but the US and its allies unleash terror when it comes to the Muslims," it noted. Even before, his visit, President Bush has announced to offer a number of concessions to India on its nuclear energy needs while on the contrary, he is bent upon misleading the world about Tehran's efforts to acquire nuclear energy for peaceful purposes. Iran has not only fully cooperated with the International Atomic Energy Agency, but also has engaged in talks with Russia for a joint plan of action with regards to its nuclear program, apparently this offer by Russia has tacit approval of the US and the West. This should now satisfy the world community on the issue, the daily said. The US, it pointed out, has totally ignored Israel, which has a stockpile of more than 100 nuclear weapons and is opening hurling threats to Iran and according to reports has alerted its airforce for a selective action against Iran's nuclear installations. Owing to these factors, Saudi Arabia, China, Syria and many other countries have expressed sympathy with Iran. Even, five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council also blamed the West for keeping a mum over Israel's nuclear arms and now raising a needless hue and cry over Tehran's program. The newspaper said that the US and Britain greatly helped Tel Aviv to make nuclear weapons. Keeping in view all these sectors, the proposal about joint Iran- Russia strategy on the issue is a welcome development. All the countries' unanimous demand is that the US and the West should stop following a hypocritical policy and let any country trying to make use of science and technology for peaceful purposes. "Hypocrisy is encouraging reactions," the daily added. Referring to US unilateral policies, the newspaper cited the instance of US-led propaganda of Iraq possessing weapons of mass destruction and in the end nothing coming out, despite its military actions killed more than 0.1 million innocent Iraqis and the situation is going from bad to worse. Tehran, as the Muslim countries view, has provided a window of opportunity for peaceful settlement of the issue and the best option is also the same that dialogue should be the only means to resolve the crisis. "Because, dropping nuclear bombs, subjecting innocent men, women, children and even elderly to aggression and desecration of holy shrines offer no solution to any issue". News sent: 19:26 Friday March 03, 2006 Print ***************************************************************** 6 IRNA: Member of European Parliament condemns US nuclear policy as hypocritical - Brussels, March 3, IRNA EP-US-Nuclear Angelika Beer, Member of the European Parliament's Foreign Affairs Committee and Chair of the Iran- Delegation in the EP has denounced the US-India nuclear deal and called on the EU to take an objective approach towards Iran's nuclear program. "The planned nuclear cooperation deal between the US and India could scupper the prospects for a peaceful solution to the current dispute with Iran. With the talks between Russia and Iran on outsourcing Iran's uranium enrichment programme hanging very much in the balance, the ill-timed visit by President Bush to India smacks of hypocrisy and double standard," said Beer a German MEP for the Greens, in a statement Friday. "The US plan to unilaterally end the nuclear embargo on India and end its status as a nuclear pariah deals a blow to the Non- Proliferation Treaty and flies in the face of attempts to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons programme." "With this deal and the promise of nuclear cooperation, the US is effectively rewarding India for secretly developing nuclear weapons and contravening international treaties. It also opens the door to an intensification of the nuclear arms race in the region," noted Beer. "Against this background, the current apathetic European diplomatic approach is inexcusable. Europe should take a proactive approach to ensuring the implementation of the EU's Non-Proliferation Strategy, rather than just sitting back and waiting for Iran to be referred to the UN Security Council." "The relevance of the Non Proliferation Treaty should be restored and the US obliged to act within this framework, rather than plying its own belligerent approach. It is time to inject some objectivity into the dispute over Iran's nuclear program," added the statement. ***************************************************************** 7 IRNA: Iran's top nuclear negotiator begins talks with Elbaradei Vienna, March 3, IRNA Larijani-Elbaradei-Talks Secretary of Iran's Supreme National Security Council (SNSC) Ali Larijani here on Friday evening began a round of talks with IAEA Chief Muhamed ElBaradei. Also present at the negotiation was the Deputy IAEA Chief Olli Heinonen. The meeting is held a few hours after Larijani's Friday morning negotiation with representatives of Germany, France, and Britain. The Friday morning negotiation was held "amid a constructive atmosphere" according to Larijani, but the two sides reached no agreement during it. The European countries' demand during their Friday talks was that Iran would immediately suspend all its enrichment activities, including those related to its research and development (R) activities. ElBaradei had earlier on Thursday issued a communique in which he had expressed delight over resumption of a new round of talks between Iran and the EU. He had in that communique asked Iran for increasing its trust-building measures, and encouraged the two sides to keep on their negotiations. ***************************************************************** 8 IRNA: ElBaradei favors returning to negotiation table Vienna, March 3, IRNA Iran-Nuclear-ElBaradei Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency Mohamed ElBaradei said here on Friday the Agency will try to return to the negotiation table with Iran. ElBaradei told IRNA the final goal of the efforts is settlement of Iran's nuclear case through talks. He said that he thought highlights have been clarified but no agreement has yet been reached. ElBaradei held a meeting with Iran's top nuclear negotiator Ali Larijani after the Iranian official's talks with the EU troika envoys in Vienna on Friday. In a statement, issued on Thursday, ElBaradei had welcomed the meeting. ***************************************************************** 9 IRNA: NAM members reach consensus on Iran's nuclear program Vienna, March 3, IRNA Iran-NAM-Nuclear Member countries of the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) announced here on Friday that they have reached a consensus on adopting a shared stand regarding Iran's nuclear program in IAEA's Monday Board of Governors session. The concession was reached following NAM members' past few days' several rounds of talks that ended issuing a joint communique on the issue. The NAM sessions on Iran's peaceful nuclear program began right after IAEA Chief Muhamed Elbaradei presented his last report on Iran. In NAM communique on the issue the IAEA Director General's efforts aimed at solving the crisis through peaceful and diplomatic channels are appreciated and hope is expressed that the remaining "few ambiguities" would be solved soon. The IAEA Board of Directors would meet on Monday, March 6, and the most important issue on its agenda on that date would be surveying ElBaradei's report on Iran's nuclear program and adopting a decision on the issue. ***************************************************************** 10 [du-list] US signs $38 million deal for depleted uranium tank Date: Fri, 03 Mar 2006 15:09:29 -0800 US signs $38 million deal for depleted uranium tank shells http://rawstory.com/news/2006/U.S._signs_38_million_deal_for_0302.html Raw Story - 14 hours ago The US Army quietly placed an order for $38 million in depleted uranium rounds last week, bringing the total order from a West-Virginia based company to $77 million for fiscal year 2006, RAW STORY has learned. The munition is highly controversial. ... ---------- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 268.1.1/273 - Release Date: 3/2/06 [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. ***************************************************************** 11 IPS-English POLITICS-US: Nuclear Pact with India Seen as Date: Fri, 03 Mar 2006 15:52:10 -0800 ROMAIPS AP NA HD IF IP NU=20 POLITICS-US: Nuclear Pact with India Seen as Surrender Jim Lobe WASHINGTON, Mar 3 (IPS) - While U.S. President George W. Bush hailed Thur= sday's nuclear accord with India as a major breakthrough in forging a =94= strategic partnership=94 with the South Asian giant, the pact has been br= oadly denounced by non-proliferation experts here as a devil's bargain. The agreement, which must still be approved by the U.S. Congress, marks a= significant blow to the prevailing international non-proliferation regim= e, according to the critics, who have argued that it effectively rewards = India for behaviour that differs little from what Iran is trying to do to= day. =94It's going to be tough to argue that Iran and North Korea should be de= nied nuclear technology while India -- which has failed to even join the = Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) -- is given the same technology on a silve= r platter,=94 said Worldwatch President Christopher Flavin. =94The deal is a disaster for the nuclear non-proliferation regime on the= planet,=94 agreed Democratic Rep. Edward Markey, a leading proliferation= specialist in the U.S. Congress, who is expected to spearhead efforts to= defeat the accord as signed. =94It blows a hole through any attempts in the future that we could make = to convince the Pakistanis, or the Iranians, or the North Koreans, or for= that matter any other country in world that might interested in obtainin= g nuclear weapons, that there is a level playing field, that there is a r= eal set of safeguards,=94 he added in an interview with public television= =2E While most observers believe that a majority in Congress will eventually = go along with the deal, they also expect a spirited fight, and not only f= rom Democrats like Markey. A number of high-ranking Republican lawmakers have also indicated strong = doubts about the deal, precisely because of the likelihood that it will e= ncourage proliferation and thus undermine national security. Among the do= ubters, for example, are the chairmen of the two houses' foreign affairs = committees, Rep. Henry Hyde and Sen. Richard Lugar. Even the head of the increasingly powerful Congressional Caucus on India,= Rep. Gary Ackerman, has warned that Bush will have to become personally = involved in the effort to gain legislative approval. =94The president has, thus far, done a horrendous job of convincing Congr= ess that the agreement is a good idea,=94 he said Thursday. =94Now that t= here is an agreement with India, he must get to work and make the case to= Congress, or else the nuclear deal will blow up in his face.=94 The agreement, which was concluded only at the eleventh hour of Bush's fi= rst trip to India this week, ends a U.S. moratorium on sales of nuclear f= uel and equipment to India since it first exploded a nuclear device 32 ye= ars ago. In exchange, India agreed to separate its nuclear programme into separate= military and civilian components and to open the latter to inspections b= y the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) for the first time. India= also agreed to abide by international non-proliferation agreements, such= as those of the 45-nation Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG). But non-proliferation specialists like Joseph Cirincione of the Carnegie = Endowment for International Peace charged that agreement's specifics -- n= otably the exemption of =94military=94 reactors from international inspec= tions and safeguards -- deal a mortal blow to the international non-proli= feration regime. Under the plan, about one third of India's existing 22 nuclear reactors a= re designated as military, including a prototype fast-breeder reactor, wh= ich produces plutonium needed for the production of nuclear weapons. More= over, the accord gives India the authority to assign future nuclear react= ors, including fast-breeders, to the military side of its nuclear program= me, thus making them, too, exempt from international safeguards. =94The deal appears to give India complete freedom not just to continue b= ut to expand its production of fissile material for nuclear weapons,=94 a= ccording to Robert Einhorn, a top non-proliferation specialist in the Bil= l Clinton administration (1993-2001) now with the Centre for Strategic an= d International Studies (CSIS) here. =94In the future, any reactor it designates as 'military' can be used for= the weapons programme,=94 he said, questioning what Bush received in ret= urn. Carnegie's Cirincione was more blunt: =94Pres. Bush has now given away th= e store. He did everything but actually sell nuclear weapons to India.=94 Indeed, India, which, 32 years after its first nuclear test, is believed = to have accumulated about 50 nuclear weapons, could almost double that ar= senal each year with the plutonium produced by breeder reactors. The Bush administration and its backers defend the accord as a major adva= nce on a variety of fronts. They point out that the agreement will bring = a significant part of India's nuclear programme under international safeg= uards for the first time and also enable New Delhi to make improvements t= hat will contribution to its overall safety and security. They also stress that the construction of new nuclear power plants in Ind= ia will reduce its fast-growing economy's reliance on fossil fuels. Not o= nly will that mean cheaper oil and gas for other energy-hungry countries,= but, according to the administration -- with no hint of irony -- it will= also reduce greenhouse gas emissions that contribute to global warming. To most critics, these justifications ring remarkably hollow, and not onl= y because the administration has opposed efforts to mandate limits to U.S= . greenhouse emissions. =94Nuclear power plants, even at the officially projected level of 20,000= megawatts for the year 2020, are not going to significantly contribute t= o solving India's energy problems,=94 according to Arjun Makhijani of the= Institute for Energy and Environmental Research (IEER) here. The percent= age of India's electricity generated by nuclear power would rise from thr= ee percent to five percent, if projections are realised. Rather, the main motivations for the deal appear to be both strategic and= economic. According to a recent Wall Street Journal analysis, many of the largest U= .S. companies regard India as the =94next big frontier=94 and have come t= o believe that a nuclear accord =94will open the way for a spate of deals= , not just in potential nuclear sales, but in everything from turbines an= d jets to road construction=94. These companies, which include General El= ectric and Ford, among others, stand poised to lobby hard for Congression= al approval of the pact. The strategic rationale -- namely, the hope that India, along with Japan,= will become a strategic counterweight to China in Asia -- may be even mo= re decisive, according to analysts here who note the fervent interest sho= wn by the Pentagon, and U.S. arms manufacturers, over the last several ye= ars in cultivating New Delhi. Indeed, this interest was underlined, as noted by the New York Times Frid= ay, by the Pentagon's release of =94an unusually explicit statement=94 pr= aising the deal as a way to enhance bilateral military cooperation, inclu= ding arms sales. =94Where only a few years ago, no one would have talked about the prospec= ts for a major U.S.-India defence deal,=94 it said, =94today the prospect= s are promising, whether in the realm of combat aircraft, helicopters, ma= ritime patrol aircraft or naval vessels.=94 Not only will the deal enable India to accelerate its development of nucl= ear weapons, but it may also contribute to an increase in tensions betwee= n India and China, which, according to Circincione, is already reported t= o be considering a similar accord with Pakistan -- another nuclear power = that has defied the NPT. ***** +POLITICS: Nuclear Glitches Apart, Bush Set to Alter Indo-US Ties (http:/= /ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=3D32333) +PAKISTAN: Anxiety Ahead of Bush Visit (http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnew= s=3D32346) +POLITICS: Bush Seeks to Draw India, Pakistan Closer to U.S. (http://ipsn= ews.net/news.asp?idnews=3D32312) (END/IPS/NA/AP/IP/NU/HD/IF/JL/KS/06) =20 =3D 03040105 ORP001 NNNN ***************************************************************** 12 Guardian Unlimited: Bush Ushers India Into Nuclear Club From the Associated Press [UP] Friday March 3, 2006 2:31 AM AP Photo INDD129 By TERENCE HUNT AP White House Correspondent NEW DELHI (AP) - Reversing decades of U.S. policy, President Bush ushered India into the world's exclusive nuclear club Thursday with a landmark agreement to share nuclear reactors, fuel and expertise with this energy-starved nation in return for its acceptance of international safeguards. Eight months in the making, the accord would end India's long isolation as a nuclear maverick that defied world appeals and developed nuclear weapons. India agreed to separate its tightly entwined nuclear industry - declaring 14 reactors as commercial facilities and eight as military - and to open the civilian side to international inspections for the first time. The agreement must be approved by Congress, and Bush acknowledged that might be difficult because India still refuses to sign the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty. ``I'm trying to think differently, not stay stuck in the past,'' said Bush, who has made improving relations with India a goal of his administration. Celebrating their agreement, Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh said, ``We have made history today, and I thank you.'' The deal was sealed a day before Bush begins an overnight visit to Pakistan, a close ally struggling with its own terrorism problems. An American diplomat and three other people were killed when a suicide attacker rammed a car packed with explosives into theirs. The bombing was in Karachi, about 1,000 miles south of Islamabad, the Pakistani capital, where Bush will meet with Pervez Musharraf, the military leader who took power in a 1999 coup. U.S. officials said there was evidence the U.S. diplomat, foreign service officer David Foy, was targeted. ``Terrorists and killers are not going to prevent me from going to Pakistan,'' Bush said at a news conference with Singh in New Delhi. Bush aides said there were security concerns about the president going to Pakistan but that officials were satisfied adequate precautions were in place. ``But this is not a risk-free undertaking,'' said national security adviser Stephen Hadley. The U.S.-India nuclear deal was seen as the centerpiece of better relations between the world's oldest and most powerful democracy and the world's largest and fastest-growing one. The United Nations' nuclear watchdog agency, the International Atomic Energy Agency, gave its endorsement Thursday, calling the deal ``an important step towards satisfying India's growing need for energy, including nuclear technology and fuel, as an engine for development.'' ``It would also bring India closer as an important partner in the nonproliferation game,'' IAEA Director-General Mohamed ElBaradei said in a statement. India has more than 1 billion people, and its booming economy has created millions of jobs along with consumer demands that have attracted American businesses. India's middle class has swelled to 300 million - more than the population of the United States. Still, 80 percent of Indians live on less than $2 a day. Bush acknowledged that Washington and New Delhi were estranged during the Cold War, when India declared itself a nonaligned nation but tilted toward Moscow. ``Now the relationship is changing dramatically,'' he said. Bush began the day by paying respects at a memorial to Mohandas K. Gandhi, India's independence leader and apostle of nonviolence. Following tradition, the president and his wife, Laura, left their shoes behind. Bush also conferred with the CEOs of Indian and American businesses, religious leaders and the head of India's political opposition. Bush and Singh announced new bilateral cooperation on issues from investment, trade and health to agriculture, the environment and even mangoes. Bush agreed to resume imports of the juicy, large-pitted fruit after a 17-year ban. The president ended the day at a state dinner with Indian President A.P.J. Abdul Kalam under a crescent moon in a lush courtyard of the presidential palace. Waiters in red tunics and red-and-white turbans scurried to serve broccoli-almond soup, seafood and peach ice cream after toasts of mango juice by the two heads of state. The nuclear agreement drew fire from congressional critics. ``With one simple move the president has blown a hole in the nuclear rules that the entire world has been playing by and broken his own word to assure that we will not ship nuclear technology to India without the proper safeguards,'' said Rep. Edward Markey of Massachusetts, senior Democrat on the House Energy and Commerce Committee. Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., said he looks forward to receiving ``detailed briefings'' from the administration. ``While I believe that the Congress will support this agreement, it is important to take into consideration the nonproliferation concerns raised by some of my colleagues,'' he said. In New York, John Bolton, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, defended the deal. ``India and Pakistan had never signed the Non-Proliferation Treaty and therefore they weren't in violation of it by having nuclear programs,'' he said. Bush said helping India with nuclear power would reduce the global demand for energy which has sent gasoline prices soaring. ``To the extent that we can reduce demand for fossil fuels, it will help the American consumer,'' Bush said. It also could be a boon for American companies that have been barred from selling reactors and material to India. Critics have complained the deal rewards bad behavior and undermines efforts to prevent states like Iran and North Korea from acquiring nuclear weapons. The White House said India was unique because it had protected its nuclear technology and not been a proliferator. The administration also argued it was a good deal because it would provide international oversight for a program that has been secret since India entered the nuclear age in 1974. ``In its largest sense, in the geopolitical sense, the agreement today removes a basic irritant in the relations between India and the United States over the last 30 years,'' said Nick Burns, undersecretary of state for political affairs.'' The agreement has no impact on India's nuclear weapons program. ``It's not a perfect deal in the sense that we haven't captured 100 percent of India's nuclear program,'' Burns acknowledged. The agreement grew out of an accord Bush and Singh signed last July to establish a new relationship in civil nuclear energy. The United States and other countries slapped sanctions on India and Pakistan after they conducted nuclear weapons tests in 1998. But those penalties were lifted after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, when the United States sought allies against al-Qaida. Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006 ***************************************************************** 13 Guardian Unlimited: Pakistan Proves an Awkward Ally to U.S. From the Associated Press [UP] Friday March 3, 2006 10:46 AM AP Photo LHR105 By WILLIAM FOREMAN Associated Press Writer ISLAMABAD, Pakistan (AP) - When President Clinton visited Pakistan six years ago, he said much was wrong in the impoverished Islamic nation: It wasn't democratic enough. Terrorism was a problem. And money was squandered building a nuclear bomb. No doubt friendlier words will be spoken on Saturday during President Bush's first visit to Islamabad. Pakistan has become a key ally in the war on terror, and Washington has offered to sell the country F-16 fighter jets. But all is not well with Pakistan and its relations with the United States. Anti-U.S. sentiments run deep among its 150 million people, and the threat of terrorist attacks hasn't faded. An apparent suicide bombing Thursday near the U.S. Consulate in Karachi killed four people, including an American diplomat. Pakistan is also in the throes of anti-Western protests against Prophet Muhammad cartoons that have left at least five people dead. On Friday, police swung batons to disperse about 1,000 demonstrators chanting ``killer go back'' and ``death to America'' and trampling on the American flag. The protest was in Rawalpindi, a city about four miles from where Bush's plane was expected to land. Security will probably be as tight as it gets. When Clinton visited in 2000, he made a last-minute plane switch before he took off for Pakistan from neighboring India. He arrived in an unmarked Gulfstream jet, which landed five minutes after a USA-marked decoy plane touched down. Extraordinary security measures are still warranted here because the shadow of al-Qaida and the Taliban continues to hang heavy over Pakistan. Although Pakistan has arrested more than 700 al-Qaida suspects in the past four years, including the masterminds of the Sept. 11 attacks, key terror leaders are still thought to be at large within its borders. Bush's visit might bring him closer than he's ever been to Osama bin Laden, believed to be in hiding along the rugged border with Afghanistan. Less than two months ago, the United States thought al-Qaida's No. 2 leader, Ayman al-Zawahri, was attending a dinner party in a northwestern region near the Afghan border. A U.S. missile strike on the village missed al-Zawahri, who apparently wasn't there, and killed 13 residents, including women and children. The attack enraged Pakistanis and set off protests by Islamic moderates as well as radicals - a rare show of unity between groups that have played a tug of war over the country's identity since its birth during partition from India after independence from Britain. Pakistan's military leader, President Gen. Pervez Musharraf, insists most Pakistanis are moderates. He often complains his nation is viewed to be a hotbed of extremism and says his goal is to puncture the misconception. But his crackdown on radicals has drawn criticism from moderates and human rights groups, as has his tough military action against suspected terrorists. This week, the army said an airstrike on a border village killed 45 militants at a suspected al-Qaida hideout. Musharraf seized power in a bloodless coup in 1999, and this was a major point of contention with Clinton, the first American president to visit Pakistan since 1969. Clinton urged Musharraf to make a plan to return to civilian rule. The Pakistani leader later pledged to relinquish his military post by the end of 2004, but he has reneged on that promise. He says the nation still needs the military's firm hand. Bush recently acknowledged that Pakistan still has ``distance to travel on the road of democracy.'' But he has also lavished praise on Musharraf, calling him a brave warrior in the war on terror. That praise could be tempered by concerns over militant infiltration from Pakistan into Afghanistan, where U.S. forces have come under increasing attack in the past year. Before the Sept. 11 attacks, Pakistan was one of only three countries that recognized Afghanistan's former Taliban regime, but it switched allegiance before the U.S.-led war across the border. The war on terror was a blessing for Pakistan in many ways. It helped pull the country out of the international isolation it suffered after Musharraf's coup and its nuclear tests in 1998. Clinton criticized Pakistan's push to join the nuclear club and urged the country to end its arms race with rival India. The neighbors have fought three wars since independence. But after Bush announced a landmark deal in New Delhi Thursday to share American civilian nuclear know-how and fuel with India - which like Pakistan had faced U.S. sanctions for conducting nuclear tests in 1998 - Pakistan will be vying for similar cooperation. That's unlikely, considering that just two years ago Pakistan's leading nuclear scientist, A.Q. Khan, was exposed as the chief of a lucrative black market in weapons technology that had supplied Iran, Libya and North Korea. The government denied any knowledge of his proliferation activities. Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006 ***************************************************************** 14 Guardian Unlimited: Bush: U.S. Shouldn't See India As Threat From the Associated Press [UP] Friday March 3, 2006 12:16 PM AP Photo INDD121 By DEB RIECHMANN Associated Press Writer HYDERABAD, India (AP) - With U.S.-India relations at their highest mark in six decades, President Bush said Friday Americans should see the rapidly growing nation as a land of opportunity instead of a threat. ``The U.S. will reject protectionism,'' Bush said here in one of India's high-tech hubs that's driving economic expansion. ``We won't fear competition. We welcome competition.'' Bush wrapped up his three-day stay in India with a landmark nuclear deal that is the centerpiece of America's new romance with this 1 billion-strong democracy, the world's largest. Later Friday, he was heading to Pakistan for an overnight visit under extraordinary security to a close anti-terror partner struggling with terrorism problems. Osama bin Laden is believed to be hiding along the porous and mountainous border with Afghanistan. And just a day before Bush arrived, a suicide car bomber killed an American diplomat and three others in a strike near the U.S. consulate in the southern port city of Karachi, a hotbed of Islamic militancy, hundreds of miles from Islamabad where the president was staying. Bush has promised to raise with President Gen. Pervez Musharraf the need to do more to hunt down al-Qaida members. He also will talk about the need for additional democratic reforms. But a public show of solidarity for the Pakistani leader, who has survived repeated assassination attempts in part because of his support for the U.S. war on terror, was likely to take center stage. Bush aides said officials were satisfied adequate security precautions were in place, though, as national security adviser Stephen Hadley acknowledged: ``this is not a risk-free undertaking.'' In Hyderabad, Bush met with young entrepreneurs at a business school, and visited an agricultural college that is researching biotechnology and ways to increase yields and output. Roughly 65 percent of India's population of 1 billion makes its living off agriculture, but the nation's farm sector is lagging behind its expanding information technology and service industries. Bush mingled in a hot, sunny field at Acharya N.G. Ranga Agricultural University with Indians using sticks and tools to hand-till soil around young peanut, tomato and soybean plants. In another part of the city that Bush didn't see, black flags flew above buildings in the predominantly Muslim Charminar quarter, where shops were closed in protest. Several hundred communist and Muslim demonstrators, chanting ``Bush hands off India'' and ``Bush go home,'' carried posters of Osama bin Laden and burned an effigy of the president. ``We are protesting against George Bush because he is a warmonger,'' said B.V. Raghavulu, a leader of the Communist Party of India (Marxist). The Hyderabad Bush saw was a virtual ghost town, locked down along his motorcade routes for security. Bush saw new homes and buildings under construction - evidence of expanding development in Hyderabad. If he had peeked over a concrete wall along his motorcade route, he also would have gotten a look at impoverished Indians living in corrugated metal shacks topped with tarps. An estimated 80 percent of Indians live on less than $2 a day. Yet India's middle class has swelled to more than 300 million, a number larger than the entire U.S. population, and India's exploding economy has created millions of jobs. The country's outsourcing industry alone is expected to bring in $22 billion in revenue this fiscal year, much of that generated by U.S. companies. Bush urged India to untangle bureaucratic snarls that are impeding U.S. investment. But he said America's best response to globalization is not to erect economic barriers to protect workers, but educate them to make sure they can compete on any stage. ``Globalization provides great opportunities,'' he said. On Thursday, Bush and Prime Minister Manmohan Singh inked a deal for the United States to provide nuclear fuel, reactors and know-how to help India meet its growing demand for power. In exchange, India declared 14 reactors as commercial facilities that would be open to international inspections for the first time. Its remaining eight reactors would remain designated as military, an endorsement of India's continued development of nuclear weapons even though it won't sign the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. Critics complain the deal undermines the treaty, as well as efforts to prevent states like Iran and North Korea from acquiring nuclear weapons. The administration argued it was a good deal because it would provide international oversight for part of a program that has been secret since India entered the nuclear age in 1974. ``Yesterday was a way to put the Cold War behind us,'' Bush said. Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006 ***************************************************************** 15 Financial assistance available for Kiev conference; NIRS is Date: Fri, 03 Mar 2006 15:10:03 -0800 image001.jpgFinancial Assistance Available for U.S. Activists to Attend Chernobyl+20 Conference in Kiev. Apply Now! NIRS IS MOVING. Details Below. NIRS has received a grant to provide financial assistance for U.S. grassroots activists who want to attend the Chernobyl+20: Remembrance for the Future conference in Kiev, Ukraine, April 23-25, 2006. The conference is a true international effort, bringing together experts and activists from across the globe. Besides the formal conference sessions, there also will be a networking session for grassroots groups from across the globe on the afternoon of April 25. The conference is being organized by NIRS, WISE, Heinrich Boell Foundation, Greens/EFA in the European Parliament, Bundnis 90/Die Grunen (German Greens), International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War (IPPNW), Earth Day Network and Ecoclub (Ukraine). For more information about the conference and a regularly updated program and speakers list, visit www.ch20.org. U.S. activists wishing to apply for financial aid should contact Michael Mariotte at nirsnet@nirs.org with an indication of how much assistance is requested. However, please recognize that funds are limited. Current round-trip airfares to Kiev are in the $750-900 range; hotel (shared room) ranges from about $30 to $120 per night, depending on choice of accommodations (for more information on conference hotels, go to www.ch20.org/kyiv.htm). Conference fee is $60. Lunches will be provided at the conference; dinners in Kiev can range from dirt-cheap to wildly extravagant. In addition to the conference, on Saturday, April 22, there will be Earth Day and anti-nuclear activities in Kievs famed Independence Square, as well as an optional trip to the Chernobyl reactor site organized by conference sponsors (cost is about $25). There are also likely to be activities in downtown Kiev on the anniversary of the accident, April 26. We hope to have a good showing of U.S. activists in Kiev; if you want to go, please contact us! NIRS IS MOVING: WRITE THIS DOWN! Our building was sold, so NIRS is moving our offices on March 11, 2006. Our new address will be 6930 Carroll Avenue, Suite 340, Takoma Park, MD 20912. Our new phone number will be 301-270-NIRS (301-270-6477). Our new fax number will be 301-270-4291. Website (www.nirs.org) and e-mail addresses will remain the same. NIRS will be closed from March 6-March 14, so we can pack and set up the new office. Please call us only for emergencies during that time. Thanks! This is the NIRS E-Mail Alert list. You are on this list because you signed up on our website, at a NIRS table at a concert, on a petition, or directly to NIRS. Your name and address are never sold, rented, or traded with anyone for any reason. For address changes or to unsubscribe, just send an e-mail to nirsnet@nirs.org. If you have friends or colleagues who would like to be on this list, have them send a note to nirsnet@nirs.org Attachment Converted: image0015.jpg: 00000001,3e67c135,00000000,00000000 ***************************************************************** 16 ITAR-TASS: Ukraine, Russia sign contract to extend RS-20 service life 03.03.2006, 21.40 KIEV, March 3 (Itar-Tass) -- Ukraine and Russia have signed an agreement extending the service life of the RS-20 Voyevoda missile system (SS-18 by the NATO classification), Ukrainian National Space Agency General Director Yuri Alexeyev said on Friday. The Russian Strategic Missile Forces adopted RS-20 in the end of the 1980s. The missiles were designed and produced in Ukraine. Their service life was initially set at 15 years, and extended for another five years later. START-1 treaty provides for the disposal of such missiles, but some of them will remain in the forces for several years. “There are newer and older RS-20 missiles. The older ones will be used until 2007-2010, while the newer ones will be used until 2014-2016,” Strategic Missile Forces Commander Col. Gen. Nikolai Solovtsov said. The Bulava advanced intercontinental ballistic missile will soon become a key component of the Russian nuclear triad. It was designed at the Moscow Thermal Machinery Institute. © ITAR-TASS. All rights reserved. You undertake not to copy, ***************************************************************** 17 Morning Sun: He's incompetent, but we're stuck with him Opinion: PUBLISHED: Friday, March 3, 2006 Well, William Buckley and George Will last week made it unanimous - Iraq, since we invaded, has become a total mess. Buckley's latest National Review column lamented that three years later, we've failed to achieve anything of importance. Will, on one of those Sunday morning shout fests, said the nation is in the middle of a civil war. Michael Moore couldn't be more shrill. Well, Buckley was wrong. We originally set out to stop Saddam from building a nuclear bomb. We did stop him from doing that. In fact, we stopped him very prematurely, since his program consisted of a few doodles, and junk buried in some guy's yard. Since then, our real purpose was revealed - our presence in Iraq would cause stable democracies to sprout and take hold like dandelions under a warm summer sun. That hasn't gone too well. In fact, it's gone terribly. Just this week, with the country teetering, came word of sectarian cleansing in Iraq. I'm no expert, but violent segregation doesn't seem like a positive step toward stability and peace. The best case scenario, according to lots of experts, is an Iraq fragmented into three separate countries. Worst case scenario is civil war. Neither is worth the price in blood and treasure we've already paid. In response, there's already been the seed planted of who to blame. It should hit critical mass Ö oh, right around November. The ones to blame, the argument goes, are the now-majority of Americans who oppose the war and especially those who were opposed it from the get-go. So it goes with the party of personal responsibility - those who have no access to decision making apparatus, those who were summarily dismissed and told to shut up before and during the invasion, those who were accused of appeasement Ö these are the folks who've lost the war. Those who picked the fight and threw all the punches; and ignored, mocked and shouted down dissenting advice Ö they bear no culpability. Well, we all know who the real guilty party is. George Bush. We saw him earlier this week, in a videotaped conference call, being told that Hurricane Katrina could very easily breach the levees of New Orleans and cause catastrophic death. His response was that the federal government was ready. Then, he cut out for California where he played guitar and sliced birthday cake while the city filled with water. A couple days later, when he finally got back to work, he told us that no one could have envisioned the city's levees breaking. A couple years earlier, he stood in front of a banner that read Mission Accomplished and told the insurgents of Iraq to bring it on. They did, and today the nation is in danger of dissolving into a cycle of violence that could destabilize the entire Middle East. In other lines of work, these kinds of things are grounds for dismissal. Heck, people get fired for reasons that are downright trivial compared to getting people needlessly killed. Unfortunately, short of his throwing up his hands and resigning - can you imagine a guy who thinks he has the authority to break whatever law he wants resigning? - we're stuck with him. The Constitution says we can fire him for breaking the law, but not crushing incompetence - in this case, incompetence of action and incompetence of management. It's a process that first requires a Congress willing to stake its political capital to get the job done, the acquiescence of two legislative houses, and probably at some point a Supreme Court that is currently stacked in ways to prevent this kind of president from rightfully being thrown out on his ear. This Supreme Court is designed to enhance the powers of the executive, not challenge them. There is something else. The same Constitution that lays out a fairly complicated process to fire the president for breaking the law, also creates the line of succession. First in line is the vice president, who is half as popular as his unpopular boss and even more guilty of incompetence - insiders say Sept. 11 has left him dangerously paranoid. In fact, all the way down the line you have men and women who helped guide us into this unnecessary, now probably unwinnable, war and then helped to incompetently prosecute it (except for the Speaker of the House, Dennis Hastert, who's carried the administration's water the last six years). In other countries, there are mechanisms built into the system that call for new elections once the government has lost the confidence of the people - as the Bush administration has. Unfortunately, as we were reminded so often a few years ago, when we decided to go it alone in Iraq, we're not other countries. Make no mistake, this is the worst presidential administration in history, run by history's worst president. He turns everything he touches - including an otherwise routine port operations business deal - into ash. But, unfortunately, it's our presidential administration, and we're stuck with them for another two stinking years. Eric Baerren is the Sun news editor. His columns appear Fridays. | | © 2006 Morning Sun all rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 18 UPI: Analysis: Eyeing a common EU energy policy United Press International - Energy - 3/3/2006 10:03:00 AM -0500 By HANNAH K. STRANGE UPI U.K. Correspondent LONDON, March 2 (UPI) -- The European Union's plans for a common energy policy to ensure future security following the suspension of Russian gas supplies to Ukraine in early January is under threat by increasing state protectionism of domestic energy markets. Concerns over rising energy demands and security of supply have been fueled by conflict and political instability in supplier nations. The EU's vulnerability was thrown into sharp relief by the decision of Russian gas giant Gazprom to cut off supplies to Ukraine in January during a battle - later resolved -- over prices. Within hours of the cut, several other European countries, including Austria, France, Germany, Hungary, Italy, Poland and Slovakia, began reporting pressure drops of as much as 30 percent in their pipelines. Speaking at London think-tank Chatham House in February, former Ukrainian Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko said Russia was using gas as a "post-Soviet neo-imperialist weapon." Moscow's unilateral decision to increase the price of gas to Ukraine was "nothing less than energy terrorism," she said. The crisis prompted Europe to consider how to reduce its dependence on gas from one source. Around 20 percent of the EU's gas comes from Russia, with around 80 percent of that coming through pipelines crossing Ukraine. The European Commission, which is the EU executive, forecasts that as Europe's own fuel resources run out, that dependence will increase, with general energy consumption from foreign sources rising from 50 to 70 percent by 2030. Austrian Chancellor Wolfgang Schuessel, speaking as his country assumed the presidency of the European Union in January, said the EU needed to promote investment in energy and "look for a long-term solution." "It's a question of reducing our dependence on one supplier and another question of diversification of supplies," he told the European Parliament in Strasbourg, France. The issue is likely to be high on the agenda at the EU summit in June. British Prime Minister Tony Blair has urged closer cooperation among EU member states and greater liberalization of the bloc's energy market. Speaking alongside German Chancellor Angela Merkel in Berlin in February, Blair said member states should also discuss interconnection between different parts of the energy grid within Europe, and research and development into different types of energy, such as renewables. "Europe and energy is a major factor in how we are going to be able to make ourselves competitive in the time to come," he said. "And I think it makes perfect sense for Europe to try and develop a common energy policy together and then, of course, you have got the liberalization of the energy market." Former Polish Prime Minister Jerzy Buzek, a member of the European Parliamentary Committee on Industry, Research and Energy, said last week Europe could be energy-sufficient in 10 to 15 years if it embarked on a coordinated program of investment in alternative fuels to oil and gas. In a lecture at the London School of Economics, he argued Europe could power itself on a mix of nuclear power, renewables and fuel from clean-coal technologies. The EU also had to do everything in its power to prevent Gazprom from gaining control of all pipelines into Europe, he said. There was only one gateway free from Gazprom control into Europe today, he said: Ukraine, which had its own gas and oil pipelines. Because of January's deal between Ukraine and Russia, it was possible these pipelines would in the future be under Gazprom ownership. "It's a monopoly, and we don't like monopolies in a free and open market," he said. "We are not against Gazprom for political reasons but it's a monopoly, and if they close one tank somewhere near the Kremlin then Austria, Hungary, parts of Germany, the Czech Republic will have shortages of gas immediately." Buzek argued that Europe should bypass Russia and open the gateway through the Caspian Sea and the Black Sea to Ukraine and the European Union. He added, however, that importance must be given to energy efficiency. "We have to change our policy completely. We need a common energy policy for the European Union, and to decide at the level of the European Union about our security, environmental protection and cost," he said. The EC is to publish a green paper on the future of EU energy policy next Wednesday outlining the need for a common vision. It is also expected to warn that recent attempts by European states to protect their own energy industries threaten that goal, and by extension, the bloc's energy security. Heavyweight energy companies are locked in an intense battle to acquire firms, which has mergers in a bid to fend off interest. Some member states have been criticized for apparently interfering on a political level in such deals, particularly the planned merger between France's state-owned Gaz de France and Suez. A spokesman for Britain's Department of Trade and Industry told United Press International the government was "frustrated" by the failure of other member states to liberalize their energy markets, which had, in part, been to blame for problems with gas supply and soaring prices in Britain this winter. "It also means that consumers across the EU aren't benefiting from competitive prices," he added. Earlier, European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso cautioned against a move toward economic nationalism, telling reporters Wednesday: "We cannot deal with globalization if we have 25 mini-markets." "We are not going to be able to meet ... the challenges that we currently face if we take a nationalist approach," he said. "... It is being united that gives us strength, not divided." -- (Comments to energy@upi.com) © Copyright 2006 United Press International, Inc. All Rights Reserved ***************************************************************** 19 [NukeNet] Net Loss of Energy by Nuclear Power Industry Over Date: Fri, 03 Mar 2006 15:22:34 -0800 NukeNet Anti-Nuclear Network (nukenet@energyjustice.net) ------------- Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2002 2:46 AM Subject: [NucNews] NET LOSS OF ENERGY BY NUCLEAR POWER INDUSTRY OVER FIRST 40 YEARS IN USA Energy audit of nuclear fuel cycles By R. Ashok Kumar, B.E,M.E(Power),Negentropist,Flat 1/13, Telec Officers' CHS.,Ltd.,Plot 30, Sector 17, Vashi, Navi Mumbai-400705. Tel:7896209. Although the gross nuclear capacity of the USA reached 104820 MW (greater than 150 MW capacity only considered), less than 20000 MW energy capacity was in fact delivered to society in 1991(Spread Sheet No.12A: See attachment). This is derived as follows:Gross cumulative energy delivered to society (1991)= Megawatt-years/years = 798370/40=19959 MW or 20000 MW approximately. The rest was all consumed by the nuclear industry itself. The actual energy- capacity delivered at the consumption point was much less. Using a figure of 0.597 for the plant factor, and 20% transmission,distribution and conversion loss, the amount of energy delivered by the programme amounts to only 9.09% of the energy generated. For the annual energy invested in the nuclear programme, the energy generated per year per unit was divided by a factor of 1.5(R. Ashok Kumar.1989.The Indian Nuclear Energy Programme:A Net Energy Analysis. PPST Bull. No.18.March.pp17: Energy Invested in Waste Storage. See also Appendix 1,this article.). Thus as the US programme of commissioning of the nuclear power plants progressed from 1952 to 1991 (end of my study period for the US programme), the average nuclear capacity added per year was 2621 MW while the average nuclear industry demand was 12229 MW! The cost overrun was 4.25. It is estimated(based on assumptions given in the appendix) that the programme started delivering net energy to society only thirty years after the commencement of the programme. And while it generated 1283911 MW-yrs in 30 years,it delivered to society only 30% or less in a brief period from 1981 only. At the end of forty years of the US nuclear power programme by 1991, this energy- 381302 MW-yrs -delivered to society is still less than the gross cumulative energy invested in nuclear plant construction and maintenance of 489174 MW-yrs! This analysis assumes only a portion of the energy used for waste storage and maintenance.This American civilian nuclear programme cost a total of Rs 45 trillion. This means Rs 45 Crores per Megawatt! But as we saw above, this programme delivered to society an energy capacity of 9532 MW per year over 40 years , with an installed capacity of 104820 MW achieved over 38 years. As shown above the US programme needed an additional gargantuan amount of thermal power to construct the nuclear facilities.The data for the nuclear capacity additions were taken from Nuclear Engineering International, April 1991. Appendix 1 Nuclear Wastes Unmanageable: An audit of the Energy Required As of year 2000, 7925 reactor years of operation have been completed in sixteen countries which have operating nuclear power plants (Data till 1990 have been taken from Nuclear Engineering International April 1991). Thus the 16 countries of the world generated by end 1990 in their nuclear power plants 15714.1 TWh or 1793847 MW-yr. The corresponding capacity was 290898 MW(337 reactors). Average nuclear capacity was 290898/337= 863.2 MW. All over the world the number of reactors retired to date is 90 with a total capacity of 77688 MW. Net capacity on line= 209898-77688=213210 MW. Energy generated by these reactors from 1991 to 2000 amounts to 213210 MWxlifetime plant load factor of 0.64 x 10y= 1364545 MW-yr. Therefore the total energy generated till 2000 from begin of nuclear programmes= 1793847+1364545= 3158392 MW-yr. The number of reactor years of operation till end 1990 was 4500. Taking the number of reactor years of opeartion to be proportional to the energy generated yields a total of 7925 reactor years of opeartion. For this the power required for waste storage and maintenance is 4.75 MW(thermal). See Lovins. Technical Bases for Ethical Concern. In AH Lovins and JH Price. 1975. Non-Nuclear Futures. Harper-Colophon. p 97. This is at the rate of 1.505 watts per megawatt-year (of gross energy generated) for waste storage and maintenance. Now the energy invested in the nuclear power programmes of the 16 countries till end 1990 was 1793847 x 0.5= 896923.5 MW-yr(See below for derivation). From 1991 to 2000 units were retired rather than added. Let us assume that the energy invested remained at this value (1990 end value). Then, net energy available after accounting for the energy invested which included energy for waste storage and its maintenance for 31500 years(see below) was 3158932-896924= 2261478(The energy invested 896924, if considered at the bus bars would be higher). Thus the number of additional years of waste storage and its maintenance which is obtained by dividing the net energy available 2261478 MW-yr by the power needed for waste storage and its maintenance 4.75 MW(thermal) is a maximum of 476101 years because there is a conversion efficiency for electrical to heat production of 50% to 80%. This is far from enough for storing wastes for a million years or more. Thus the nuclear energy programmes are net energy consumers. The latest evaluation of waste storage research proclaims this loudly(Institute for Energy and Environmental Research. May 2000. Science for Democratic Action. See also R. Ashok Kumar, op cit. ). The gross energy output per year at 100 percent plant load factor(PLF) divided by 1.5 is taken as the energy invested per year. For a 1000 MW nuclear power plant at 100 % PLF net of process inputs and zero losses, the energy invested per year is thus 1000 MW-yr/yr/1.5= 667 MW-yr/yr. Now if excluding waste storage ,at 62% PLF and 20% transmission, distribution and conversion losses, the net energy delivered is 1000x0.62x0.8=496 Mw-yr/yr,the energy invested in the nuclear power programme is , at 1.8 ratio of output per year to input per year, 496/1.8=276 MW-yr/yr. Thus the energy investment debited to waste storage is 667-276=391 MW-yr/yr. The gross energy generated by the 1000 MW nuclear power plant is 12400 MW-yr(electrical) during the 25 year lifetime of the plant(the lifetime on the average for the plant has been found to be just 17y). The power required for its waste storage and its maintenance is computed as follows: Let us assume 10000 reactor-years of operation. At this level,following Lovins op cit) we have a power requirement of 1 watt(thermal) per MW-yr of operation. Thus for 12400 Mw-yr of generation ,the power required is 12400 watts or 0.0124 MW(thermal). Thus the 391 MW-yr/yr of generation will power the waste storage for 391/0.0124 or 31532 years. An estimate of the fraction of energy generated debited to investment in the nuclear power programmes can be done as follows: Let us take four countries namely,the USA,France, Japan and Canada. The energy generated back of the 20% losses is given by the (sum of the total nuclear industry demand and the net energy delivered to society )/0.8. This for these four countries for which the energy audit has been worked out by the author becomes 2354460 MW-yr. Details in a separate article. The nuclear industry demand works out to 1175742 MW-yr which is 50% of the gross energy generated. A number of surprises as the nuclear power programmes progressed over the world. It must be noted that a number of surprises have caused retrofits and replacements like the steam generator premature replacements and the replaced radioactive steam generators enclosed in costly sarcophages worldwide. These have enormously increased the energy invested in these white elephants. ------------- * NucNews Archives (by date) at http://prop1.org/nucnews/ * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. _______________________________________________________________________ Subscribe/Unsubscribe Here: http://www.energyjustice.net/nukenet/ Change your settings or access the archives at: http://energyjustice.net/mailman/listinfo/nukenet_energyjustice.net ***************************************************************** 20 NRC: NRC Issues Draft Environmental Report for Palisades License Renewal, Announces April 5 Public Meeting News Release - Region III - 2006-00 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs, Region III No. III-06-007 March 3, 2006 CONTACT: Jan Strasma (630) 829-9663 Viktoria Mitlyng (630) 829-9662 E-mail: opa3@nrc.gov preliminary conclusion that there are no environmental impacts which would preclude renewal of the operating license for the Palisades Nuclear Power Plant located at Covert, Mich. The plant is operated by Nuclear Management Co. The NRC is seeking public comment on the draft environmental impact statement (EIS) for the proposed license renewal which includes the agencys preliminary assessment of the environmental impacts of renewal of the Palisades license for an additional 20 years. The draft EIS is open for public comment until May 18 and will also be the subject of public meetings on April 5 in South Haven, Mich. The comments and views of the public help assure that we have identified and addressed the appropriate issues in our environmental review of the Palisades license renewal application, said James Caldwell, NRC Regional Administrator. The April 5 meeting also gives us a chance to discuss any issues and questions firsthand with the public. The NRC has been reviewing the proposed extension of the Palisades license since Nuclear Management Co. submitted its application in March 2005. Under NRC regulations, the original operating license for a nuclear power plant is issued for up to 40 years. The license may be renewed for up to an additional 20 years if NRC requirements are met. The current NRC license at Palisades will expire on March 24, 2011. The possible environmental effects of an additional 20 years of nuclear plant operation are described in the NRCs Generic Environmental Impact Statement or GEIS (NUREG-1437). The NRC issues a site-specific supplement to the GEIS on each plant requesting license renewal to address the potential environmental impacts. The NRC staffs preliminary recommendation is that the adverse environmental impacts of license renewal for the Palisades reactor are not so great that preserving the option of license renewal for energy-planning decision makers would be unreasonable. On Wednesday, April 5, the NRC staff will hold two similar meetings in South Haven to obtain comments on the draft supplement to the GEIS. The meetings will be held at the Lake Michigan College, 125 Veterans Boulevard. The sessions will begin at 1:30 p.m. and 7 p.m. In addition, the NRC staff will host informal discussions one hour prior to each meeting. NRC staff members will be available to answer questions and provide additional information about the license renewal process during those informal sessions. No formal comments on environmental issues will be accepted during these pre-meeting discussions. The two sessions will begin with identical overviews, including presentations by NRC staff on the draft supplement to the GEIS. There will then be an opportunity for public comments. Written comments on the draft Palisades supplement to the GEIS will also be considered by NRC staff. Comments should be submitted either by mail to the Chief, Rules and Directives Branch, Division of Administrative Services, Office of Administration, Mailstop T-6D59, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, or by e-mail to PalisadesEIS@nrc.gov. The draft EIS and other documents related to the license renewal application are available for public review at the South Haven Memorial Library, 314 Broadway St. Documents are also available on the NRCs web site at http://www.nrc.gov/reactors/operating/licensing/renewal/applicati ons/palisades.html. At the conclusion of the public comment period on May 18, the NRC staff will consider and address the comments as it prepares the final Palisades supplement to the GEIS. The supplement is scheduled to be issued in October. Last revised Friday, March 03, 2006 ***************************************************************** 21 Brattleboro Reformer: Yankee gets OK to increase power March 03, 2006 Brattleboro, VT By KRISTI CECCAROSSI Reformer Staff BRATTLEBORO -- Federal regulators have OK'd a plan to boost power at Vermont Yankee by 20 percent. The approval punctuates two years of review by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. It marks a victory for Entergy, Mississippi-based owners of Vermont Yankee, and a loss for the many local people and nuclear watchdog groups who have fought hard against the so-called "uprate." Power levels at the Vernon reactor will be increased immediately, plant spokesman Rob Williams said Thursday. After urging by the NRC, Entergy officials agreed to incrementally raise the output as a safety precaution. But within "several weeks," Williams said, the plant will be producing 640 megawatts instead of its current 540 megawatts. The additional output will be sold on the open market. Vermont utilities declined to use any of the power. Williams said he could not speculate how much that could mean for Entergy, in terms of profit. Right now, power is selling in the New England market at roughly $75 per megawatt. Dozens of local people, the state's Department of Public Service, the New England Coalition and other nuclear watchdog groups have raised serious questions about Vermont Yankee's ability to withstand an uprate. The plant is 33 years old and one of the oldest operating reactors in the country. In anticipation of the NRC's approval, groups have testified before local, state and federal boards in opposition. Hundreds of people have protested, sent letters to local newspapers. Legislators and members of the state's Congressional delegation have also criticized the plan. "Today is a sad day for our government," said Ray Shadis, technical adviser for the New England Coalition. "If they have an accident as a result of this, with this antiquated plant, it is not just going to affect Windham County. It has the potential to affect all of New England." In March 2004, the state's Public Service Board also OK'd the uprate. The quasi-judicial panel, which weighs all matters related to state utilities, approved it with one condition: the board said it would decide later if a safety assessment of the plant, done by the NRC, was sufficient, or if an independent safety assessment was necessary. A clerk answering the phone at the Public Service Board's Montpelier office, Thursday, said the board was working on an order right now concerning that issue. The NRC's final approval Thursday ends the NRC's longest review of an uprate application. Thirteen other plants have been cleared for uprates; those reviews took, on average, half the time. The delay has been partly credited to the work the New England Coalition and other groups have done, in opposition of the plan. Despite Thursday's announcement, that work isn't completed yet. Nor is the uprate a done deal. The New England Coalition and the state's Department of Public Service have also brought concerns to the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board, a quasi-judicial arm of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. A formal set of hearings before that board may not happen for months, but it's there that opponents of the uprate see a glimmer of hope. The Atomic Safety and Licensing Board could reverse the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's endorsement of the uprate. Short of that, the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board could put more restrictions on terms of the uprate. But no one really knows what will happen with the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board challenge; this case is uncharted territory. This is the first that's ever been brought to the board for review. Right now, 55 percent of Vermont Yankee's 540 megawatts goes to Vermont utilities. The rest goes to other New England states. Ten megawatts of the plant's additional output, under the uprate, will go to the Vermont Electric Co-op. The rest will be sold on the open market. Based on an agreement made with the Legislature last year, Entergy is required to pay half of the revenue on 20 percent of the "uprated" power into a newly formed Clean Energy Fund. The state has projected Entergy will send about $20 million to that fund by 2012, when Vermont Yankee's license is set to expire. "Yes, the uprate signals the beginning of the Clean Energy Fund," state Rep. Sarah Edwards, P-Brattleboro, said Thursday. "But in this case I would gladly close an account rather than open an account." Copyright ©1999-2005 New England Newspapers, Inc., ***************************************************************** 22 Brattleboro Reformer: Theater of the absurd Editorials March 03, 2006 Brattleboro, VT It was appropriate that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission held Wednesday night's public hearing at the Latchis Theatre. That's because the whole process involving Vermont Yankee's request for a 20 percent power uprate at the Vernon reactor, as well as its request for a 20-year license extension, has been more or less a done deal. All the public hearings and protests of the past three years have amounted to mere theater, and not much more. Despite the vocal and persistent opposition of area residents and citizens groups such as the New England Coalition, the NRC signed off on Vermont Yankee's uprate request Thursday. The legitimate concerns over whether the 33-year-old reactor can withstand the additional pressure and stress of a 20 percent uprate, the maximum increase allowed by the NRC, were brushed aside. Entergy Nuclear has been preparing to run Vermont Yankee at increased power for the past couple of years, knowing that the NRC has never rejected an uprate request. It has made roughly $60 million in uprate-related modifications and has passed NRC inspection, which found there were "no significant hazards" connected with a power increase. Vermont Yankee can now increase its power output immediately, and there is nothing that anyone can do to stop it. As for the other part of the equation, the license renewal, that also appears to be a certain to happen -- especially since nuclear waste storage, emergency planning and existing problems at Vermont Yankee will be excluded from the NRC's license review. Also, the NRC says any design flaws with the reactor will be grandfathered in. It may take 30 months to complete the relicensing of Vermont Yankee. There will be ample opportunity for public comment. There will be more hearings such as Wednesday's event at the Latchis. But none of this matters if the NRC doesn't listen. That is why there is total mistrust of the NRC and the whole regulatory process. The NRC has consistently shown that it operates in the interest of the nuclear power corporations and has no regard for the concerns of anyone else. Until the NRC demonstrates that it is willing to truly listen and carefully weigh the objections toward giving Vermont Yankee an additional 20 years of operation, area residents have every right to not trust the NRC and to view the whole regulatory process as rigged in favor of the nuclear industry. Copyright ©1999-2005 New England Newspapers, Inc., ***************************************************************** 23 NRC: NRC Issues Annual Assessments for Nation’s Nuclear Plants News Release - 2006-03 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs Telephone: 301/415-8200 Washington, DC 20555-0001 E-mail: No. 06-033 March 3, 2006 plants. All the plants continue to operate safely. These annual assessments give the public an overview of how each plant has performed over the past year, said Michael Case, Director of the Division of Inspection and Regional Support in the NRCs Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. Later this spring, the NRC will meet with the operators of every plant in nearby locations to publicly discuss plant performance. A separate announcement will be issued for each plant meeting. In addition to the annual assessment letters, plants also receive an NRC inspection plan for the coming year. Updated information on plant performance is posted to the NRC web site every quarter. The plants also receive a mid-cycle assessment letter during the year; the next mid-cycle letters will be issued in September. The assessment letters sent to each licensee are available on the NRC Web site at: http://www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/index.html and through ADAMS, the Agencywide Documents Access and Management System. Help in using ADAMS is available from the NRC Public Document Room by calling (301) 415-4737 or (800) 397-4209. Last revised Friday, March 03, 2006 ***************************************************************** 24 Rutland Herald: Yankee gets OK to boost power Rutland Vermont News & Information March 3, 2006 By Susan SmallheerHerald Staff Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant, after a wait of more than two years, received federal approval Thursday to boost its power production by 20 percent. Entergy Nuclear, owner of the plant, said it would start the weeks-long process of increasing production and testing in the next couple days. The approval was expected after the plant passed an important regulatory hurdle in December. The Vernon reactor will eventually produce 640 megawatts, an increase of 110 megawatts. Currently, Vermont Yankee provides one-third of the state's electricity. It sells half of its production out of state. Only a small portion of the new power will be used by Vermont ratepayers: The Vermont Electric Cooperative will buy 10 megawatts of the new power for four years, according to state regulators. Both Central Vermont Public Service and Green Mountain Power reiterated earlier statements saying their power portfolios were filled for the foreseeable future and didn't need the additional power. The power, which will be sold into the regional power grid, is expected to ease some regional demand, according to Central Vermont's spokesman Stephen Costello. There might be an indirect benefit by the extra power reducing market prices, he said. The NRC decision was hailed by Entergy. Company spokesman Robert Williams said the decision means less pollution for New England. "It will serve consumers throughout the region and will further reduce the need for burning fossil fuels to generate electricity," he said Thursday. Williams said the company will start the process gradually, with testing along the way to ensure safety. The NRC also did a little back-patting Thursday for its two years of work. "We've taken great care to identify and address technical concerns involved with safely operating the plant at increased power," said Jim Dyer, director of the NRC's Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, in a prepared statement. The NRC said the proposal had received 11,000 staff hours of review, with a special state-requested inspection adding another 900 hours of scrutiny. The decision drew qualified support from the state's two U.S. senators, who noted that the decision was made before all the safety issues had been resolved. "We expect the NRC to closely monitor this uprate to ensure the increased power generation does not result in safety or reliability problems," said Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., and Sen. James Jeffords, I-Vt, in a joint statement. "As a delegation, we intend to continue to use our oversight authority to ensure the NRC follows through in these areas," the senators said. Both Jeffords and Leahy noted that the state's safety concerns filed with the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board remain unresolved. "We remain concerned that the ASLB has not set a hearing schedule yet, and urge the NRC to do so immediately," they said. Jeffords is the ranking member of the Senate committee overseeing the NRC. The NRC's decision Thursday was denounced by nuclear critics as putting too much new radiation into the atmosphere and putting the public at risk with what they claimed was an experimental technology in many ways. And Vermont regulators, who had largely supported the power increase, announced they had a new agreement with Entergy — worked out last month — that they say gives ratepayers more protection since it believes the power boost could create some reliability problems down the road. David O'Brien, commissioner of the Department of Public Service, said Yankee's steam dryer, a key component that has proved problematic in every similar nuclear reactor undergoing a similar power boost, could make Vermont Yankee unreliable. O'Brien said an earlier memorandum didn't provide adequate protection for ratepayers, and he said the new agreement would. If Vermont Yankee becomes unreliable and finds it has to shut down for costly repairs, the financial burden could fall on Vermont ratepayers because of the higher costs of replacing that power, he said. O'Brien said $20 million in revenue-sharing funds, negotiated between Entergy and the state more than two years ago, would go into the state's Clean Energy Fund, which can be used to fund alternative energy projects. The NRC's final approval Thursday still leaves two regulatory loose ends: the Public Service Board, which granted Entergy a certificate of public good on March 15, 2004, still hasn't given its final approval to the project. Judith Whitney, a spokeswoman for the board, said a final order was being prepared and would be released Friday. And the federal Atomic Safety Licensing Board hasn't ruled on safety concerns. Two anti-nuclear groups cried foul and said the state was changing its permit without due process and a public hearing. The PSB had ordered a special engineering inspection of the plant to reassure critics that the 33-year-old reactor could withstand the additional pressures of the power boost. "It's bizarre, it's symptomatic that they allow this increase before the final safety rulings have been made," said Ed Anthes of Nuclear Free Vermont. Anthes said it was "astounding" that the Public Service Board finally said Thursday it would issue its final order on the case, only after Entergy announced it would start the uprate process Saturday. Raymond Shadis of the New England Coalition, said the NRC's 11,000 hours of review represented "11,000 hours of pencil-sharpening" and of appeasing the nuclear industry. Shadis pointed out that the uprate will mean the plant will release up to 20 percent more radiation into the atmosphere in Vernon. State and federal have acknowledged the increase, but said it was still within safety standards. "This is poison power left over from the Eisenhower era," Shadis said. Contact Susan Smallheer at susan.smallheer@rutlandherald.com © 2006 Rutland Herald ***************************************************************** 25 Xinhua: Hungary has no plans to build new nuclear plant www.xinhuanet.com www.chinaview.cn 2006-03-03 09:29:07 BUDAPEST, March 2 (Xinhuanet) -- Hungary has no plans to expand its only nuclear plant, the Paksi Atomeromu plant, or build a new one, Hungarian Prime Minister Ferenc Gyurcsany said Thursday. "We know that nuclear energy experts have been working for several years on the issue of whether it will be necessary or possible in Hungary in the long term to build a new block. If anybody tables a proposal regarding the issue, a decision should be made by a referendum. But we are nowhere near that," Gyurcsany said. Gyurcsany's remarks came in response to reports by Russian newspapers which suggested that Russian investors were ready to invest in nuclear energy development in Hungary. Russian media referred to a memorandum, signed by Hungary's national electricity company MVM owning the Paks facility and Russia's energy holding company KES and nuclear plant developer Atomstroiek sport in Budapest this week during Russian President Vladimir Putin's there. After signing the memorandum, KES declared it was willing to co-finance the extension of the lifespan of the Paks nuclear plantand to increase its output by 15-20 percent, the Russian papers reported. "The document was signed to provide a framework for actual agreements in the future," MVM said, adding that extending the life of the plant at Paks, which provides 40 percent of the country's power supply, was a key responsibility. Two incidents have occurred at the Paks nuclear plant, which islocated 110 km south of Budapest. Enditem. Copyright ©2003 Xinhua News Agency. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 26 TheStar.com: Ontario cannot afford to give up coal Fri. Mar. 3, 2006. | Updated at 07:47 AM Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty long ago admitted his promise to shut down all of Ontario's smog-producing coal-generated electricity by 2007 was impossible. Ontario was already staring at a future supply shortage when he became premier and prices for that tenuous supply continue to be artificially suppressed by provincial subsidies. Where on earth would McGuinty find a new energy supply cheaply and quickly? The answer, which was not at all evident during his campaign, has become crystal clear over the past few months and it promises to be neither cheap nor quick. Ontario is going nuclear. In the process, McGuinty has had to rethink the merits of coal. Ontario has four remaining coal-fired generating stations  Lambton near Sarnia, Nanticoke on Lake Erie and Thunder Bay and Atikokan in the northwest  that account for 17 per cent of the electricity generated in the province. While Nanticoke and Atikokan are to be closed outright by 2009, the government plans to convert Thunder Bay and Lambton to natural gas. As an SES Research/Osprey Media poll this week showed, however, that public opinion is fractured on the government's plans to phase out coal and replace it with more expensive nuclear power. Just 26 per cent of voters surveyed strongly support government plans to mothball its coal stations, while 14 per cent strongly oppose the decision to stop using coal and 15 per cent somewhat oppose it. Two years ago, Falconbridge and Noranda officials told an Ontario legislative committee that every $1 increase per unit causes the companies' Ontario costs to rise $2 million. Together, they spend about $100 million a year on electricity. That's worrisome because their competition in Manitoba, for example, enjoys electricity rates 57 per cent lower than Ontario's. The cost of energy, Ontarians recognize, is a key factor in making investment decisions. Reducing generating capacity, then, and making Ontario more reliant on importing energy or costly nuclear, all but erases the impetus to invest here. So, what are the alternatives? An Energy Probe report last fall shows two of Ontario's coal-fired power generation units are among the cleanest in North America while a third, Unit 4 at the Lambton generating station, ranks as fourth cleanest among 403 coal generation units in Canada, the United States and Mexico. All are unfairly slated for closure. Energy Probe's research is compelling. Phasing out all of Ontario's coal plants by 2009 means we'll have to import coal-generated power from Michigan and Ohio, thereby worsening our air quality problems. And, in the longer term, Ontario taxpayers will be exposed to the potential for massive cost overruns on nuclear plants. This is one promise neither McGuinty nor Ontarians may be able to afford. Legal Notice: Copyright Toronto Star Newspapers Limited. All rights reserved. Distribution, transmission or republication of any material from www.thestar.comis strictly prohibited without ***************************************************************** 27 NRC: Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards Subcommittee Meeting on FR Doc E6-3039 [Federal Register: March 3, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 42)] [Notices] [Page 10998] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr03mr06-97] [[Page 10998]] Power Uprates; Notice of Meeting The ACRS Subcommittee on Power Uprates will hold a meeting on March 15-16, 2006, at the Hyatt Regency Bethesda, One Bethesda Metro Center, Bethesda, Maryland 20814 in the Cabinet/Judiciary Room. The agenda for the subject meeting shall be as follows: Wednesday, March 15, 2006--8:30 a.m. until the conclusion of business. Thursday, March 16, 2006--8:30 a.m. until the conclusion of business. The Subcommittee will review the application for a 17% power uprate for the R. E. Ginna Nuclear Power Plant. The Subcommittee will hear presentations by and hold discussions with representatives of the NRC staff, their contractors, Constellation Energy and other interested persons regarding this matter. The Subcommittee will gather information, analyze relevant issues and facts, and formulate proposed positions and actions, as appropriate, for deliberation by the full Committee. Members of the public desiring to provide oral statements and/or written comments should notify the Designated Federal Official, Mr. Ralph Caruso (Telephone: 301-415-8065) five days prior to the meeting, if possible, so that appropriate arrangements can be made. Electronic recordings will be permitted. Signs will not be permitted in the meeting room. Further information regarding this meeting can be obtained by contacting the Designated Federal Official between 7:30 a.m. and 4:15 p.m. (e.t). Persons planning to attend this meeting are urged to contact the above named individual at least two working days prior to the meeting to be advised of any potential changes to the agenda. Dated: February 24, 2006. Cayetano Santos, Acting Branch Chief, ACRS/ACNW. [FR Doc. E6-3039 Filed 3-2-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P ***************************************************************** 28 NRC: Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards, Subcommittee Meeting FR Doc E6-3040 [Federal Register: March 3, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 42)] [Notices] [Page 10998] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr03mr06-98] on Thermal-Hydraulic Phenomena; Notice of Meeting The ACRS Subcommittee on Thermal-Hydraulic Phenomena will hold a meeting on March 14, 2006 at the Hyatt Regency Bethesda, One Bethesda Metro Center, Bethesda, Maryland 20814 in the Waterford Room. The entire meeting will be open to public attendance, with the exception of portions that may be closed to discuss General Electric (GE) proprietary information pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552b (c) (4). The agenda for the subject meeting shall be as follows: Tuesday, March 14, 2006-8:30 a.m. Until the Conclusion of Business The Subcommittee will review the staff Safety Evaluation Report related to the use of TRACG to evaluate stability in the ESBWR. The Subcommittee will hear presentations by and hold discussions with representatives of the NRC staff, their contractors, GE and other interested persons regarding this matter. The Subcommittee will gather information, analyze relevant issues and facts, and formulate proposed positions and actions, as appropriate, for deliberation by the full Committee. Members of the public desiring to provide oral statements and/or written comments should notify the Designated Federal Official, Mr. Ralph Caruso (Telephone: 301-415-8065) five days prior to the meeting, if possible, so that appropriate arrangements can be made. Electronic recordings will be permitted only during those portions of the meeting that are open to the public. Further information regarding this meeting can be obtained by contacting the Designated Federal Official between 7:30 a.m. and 4:15 p.m. (ET). Persons planning to attend this meeting are urged to contact the above named individual at least two working days prior to the meeting to be advised of any potential changes to the agenda. Dated: February 24, 2006. Cayetano Santos, Acting Branch Chief, ACRS/ACNW. [FR Doc. E6-3040 Filed 3-2-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P ***************************************************************** 29 Arms Control Association: Bush Promotes New Nuclear Plan The Bush administration hopes emerging nuclear fuel-cycle tech nologies will help meet U.S. and global energy needs and reduce dangers that civilian nuclear programs might be corrupted for nuclear weapons. But even administration officials indicate that the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership (GNEP), an initiative to promote such technologies, is by no means assured of success. In his Jan. 31 State of the Union address, President George W. Bush argued the United States had to break its addiction to oil by investing in alternative energy sources. GNEP is the nuclear component of a multi-pronged approach that also includes boosting solar and wind power. The administration is seeking $250 million in seed money for GNEP in its fiscal year 2007 budget request. Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman unveiled GNEP Feb. 6. The initiatives aims, Bodman explained, were to extract more energy from nuclear fuel, reduce the amount of waste that requires permanent disposal, and greatly reduce the risk of nuclear proliferation. Speaking at the same event, Deputy Energy Secretary Clay Sell framed the initiative as part of a nuclear renaissance, which we greatly need. GNEP rests on devising new ways of treating spent nuclear fuel so it can be used again and again, a process referred to as recycling, before being discarded as waste. Currently, the United States only runs nuclear fuel through a reactor once before disposing of it. The United States abandoned commercial fuel recycling in the 1970s because of high costs and concerns about the dangers associ ated with chemical reprocessing, the current method for separating uranium and plutonium from spent nuclear fuel for reuse. Because plutonium can be used to build nuclear bombs, Washingtondeclined to embrace an approach that created large quantities of bomb-ready material susceptible to misuse or theft. Despite U.S.apprehensions, France adopted a civilian spent-fuel reprocessing program, and Japan is on the verge of implementing one. Administration officials envision GNEP as mooting past U.S. concerns by employing new reprocessing approaches, called UREX+ and pyroprocessing, that they say will not yield pure separated plutonium but a mixture, including plutonium, that is less applicable to making bombs. GNEP further calls for construction of new ad vanced burner reactors to make use of the reprocessed fuel. But the new reprocessing technologies have yet to be proven on an industrial scale, and the new reactors must still be designed. En ergy Department officials seemed to acknowledge the many chal lenges facing GNEP by repeatedly couching it in qualified terms. Bodman noted, If we can make GNEP a reality, while Sell said, Ultimately, we hope to be in a position to make a judg ment about the commercial viability of this approach in the coming years. Sell also added that the scale of what we are proposing is substantial and the level of [research and develop ment] and demonstration funding that would be required of this country is significant. Still, a Feb. 6 Energy Department press release quoted Bodman as declaring, GNEP brings the promise of virtually limitless energy to emerging economies around the globe in an environmentally friendly manner while reducing the threat of nuclear proliferation. The International Aspect The United States is aiming to get other advanced nuclear powers, such as France, Japan, Russia, and the United Kingdom, involved in GNEP. Participating countries would seek to develop new small-scale reactors that would operate their entire lifetime on one load of nuclear fuel, minimizing the risk that the fuel could be used for bomb purposes. GNEP countries would also work to devise new safeguard mechanisms to make it more difficult for nuclear materials and technologies in the civil sector to be di verted to building arms. If the novel reprocessing approach pans out, Washington sees it as enabling GNEP participants to offer other countries a reliable supply of nuclear fuel and fuel services at an attractive price while limiting proliferation dangers. We hope to develop an interna tional regimeso that fuel can be leased to a country interested in building a reactor and taking fuel, but then the fuel can be taken back to the fuel cycle country, Sell explained. Eligibility for this offer would depend on potential recipients forswearing acquisition of their own reprocessing or uranium-en richment capabilities. Uranium enrichment can be used to produce low-enriched uranium for nuclear fuel or highly enriched uranium for nuclear weapons. In February 2004, Bush called for a halt to the spread of reprocessing and enrichment capabilities. (.) Washington , Moscow, and several European capitals are trying to persuade Tehran to give up its fledgling enrichment program. The United States says Irans stubborn refusal is evidence of its nuclear weapons ambitions. Russia and International Atomic Energy Agency Director-General Mohamed ElBaradei have advanced concepts similar to GNEP intended to stymie the diffusion of enrichment and reprocessing technologies. Currently, 15 countries, including Iran, have such capabilities. At a July 2005 Moscow conference, Kremlin officials floated the possibility of organizing a network of global nuclear-fuel supply centers based in Russia and other advanced nuclear powers, and Russian President Vladimir Putin reiterated the proposal in January. ElBaradei has advocated establishing a guaranteed nuclear-fuel supply regime that would eventually evolve into multilateral management of all nuclear fuel facilities. ElBaradei and Putin have said their proposals would be open to any government. Putin said Russia would provide access without discrimination for all who desire it, while ElBaradei has recommended a supply regime based on apolitical, objective criteria. The United States has not made similar statements, raising questions as to whether GNEP services would be available to governments not in Washingtons favor. Sell indicated that reactions to GNEP by other capitals have been mixed. Although saying it had been enthusiastically received by some, he also admitted, [T]here are different perspectives and different angles, and there are many details to be worked out. The reaction of U.S. lawmakers has fallen along party lines. Sen. Pete Domenici (R-N.M.), chairman of the Energy and Natural Resources Committee, said Feb. 9 that the recycling technologies that are discussed under GNEP are exciting. Similarly, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) called the initiative Feb. 16 visionary. Alternatively, Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.) said the same day that GNEP has serious problems. She cited potential costs of up to hundreds of billions of dollars, proliferation dangers, and doubts that recy cling would reduce nuclear waste. The handling of nuclear waste is politically divisive in the United States, and the GNEP proposal to bring back spent nuclear fuel from foreign countries could prompt more objections to the initiative. Indeed, public opposition has stalled the U.S. governments plan to open a long-term spent nuclear-fuel and waste repository at Yucca Mountain. The Arms Control Association is a non-profit, membership-based organization. If you find our resources useful, please consider joining or making a contribution. Arms Control Today encourages reprint of its articles with permission of the Editor. © 1997-2006 Arms Control Association, 1150 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 620 Washington, DC 20036 Tel: (202) 463-8270 | Fax: (202) 463-8273 ***************************************************************** 30 Russia Newswire: Greenpeace Condemns Russia’s Environmental Review Process March 03, 2006 MOSCOW (RNWire) - Greenpeace Russia said today critical flaws in the environmental review process surrounding plans for an oil pipeline route through the Lake Baikal protected area raise serious doubts about the validity of the eventual ruling. The final session of the State Environmental Impact Assessment of the feasibility study for the Eastern Siberia-Pacific Ocean (ESPO) pipeline approved the proposed routing within 800 meters of the Lake Baikal shoreline. A decision by Rostechnadzor, the Russian envonmental regulator, is due Sunday and is widely expected to endorse the route, which is favoured by Transneft, Russia’s state-owned oil pipeline monopoly. “Unfortunately, this decision once again demonstrates that private interests of a group of oil industry officials in our country have more weight than the law, opinions of scientists and Russian citizens, and than the future of the world’s most unique freshwater lake,†said Roman Vazhenkov, Greenpeace Russia Baikal campaign coordinator, who attended the meeting. Greenpeace believes Rostechnadzor was under severe political and commercial pressure to approve Transneft's proposed route. In recent weeks, Semyon Vainshtok, Transneft's president, in an interview with Rossiyskaya Gazeta, a state-owned official newspaper, had even threatened to take Rostechnadzor to court if it ruled against the route. On Jan. 24, 46 members of a 52-member expert panel convened by Rostechnadzor voted against the proposed route. One of the principal problems cited was that the pipeline was to be constructed 800 meters from Lake Baikal, a UNESCO-protected World Heritage site. However, the resolution of the experts was not endorsed by the head of Rostechnadzor, Konstantin Kulikovsky, who then extended the deadline for the assessment for 30 days and added 34 new experts in the panel. Most of the new experts were specialists in disciplines far removed from oil pipe line transport. In particular, I.I. Lingue, the head of the panel for assessment of the Baikal section of the pipeline, is deputy director of the Institute for Safe Development of Nuclear Energy Industry, and a specialist in dose metering and irradiation protection. The panel was divided into three working groups, each tasked with evaluating a section of the pipeline selected for them. So, two-thirds of the experts were deliberately excluded from evaluating the most contentious section of the pipeline – the one near Baikal. Moreover, there were a number of violations noted in the organization of meetings. Some experts – especially those against the construction 800 meters from Baikal – were not notified about working group meetings. Only 60 experts out of 86 were present at Wednesday’s meetings. Some representatives of the public were not allowed to enter, while many of those who were present were not allowed to speak, including a representative of the Irkutsk Scientific Center of the Siberian Division of the Russian Academy of Sciences who was to read an open letter signed by Siberian scientists to the expert panel. The majority of experts voted for the pipeline construction along the Baikal shore. However, 23 experts voted against the proposed route in the morning of March 1. There were others who refused to sign the resolution because they hadn’t had access to full documentation on the project. At the moment the order is being prepared to endorse the findings of the panel. As support of two-thirds of the experts is needed to endorse the resolution, Greenpeace believes that those in doubt are being put under severe pressure now. Background for Editors: (1) The complete text of the open letter of the Presidium of the Siberian Division of the Russian Academy of Sciences is available at: http://www.greenpeace.org/russia/ru/press/reports/343249 (2) On February 27 14 000 Russian citizens addressed President Putin with the request to protect Baikal. The text of the public appeal is available at our site: http://www.greenpeace.org/russia/ru/news/339511 (3) Also popular stars: V. Rasputin, L.Gurchenko, S.bezrukov and many others – sent a letter to President asking to take all measures to prevent oil pipeline construction in the drainage area of the Baikal lake: http://www.greenpeace.org/russia/ru/news/227622 About Greenpeace Russia Greenpeace Russia is a division of the International Non-Governmental Non-Profit Organization “Stichting Greenpeace Council†and has worked on environmental issues in Russia for over 15 years. Greenpeace Russia established its Baikal Campaign as a separate section in 1996. Copyright © 2004-2005 Russia Newswire ***************************************************************** 31 PRN: Davis-Besse Prepares for Refueling PR Newswire TITLE="http://www.firstenergycorp.com"> March 3 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company (FENOC) announced today that the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, located near Oak Harbor, Ohio, will begin a scheduled outage to refuel the reactor and increase generating capacity on Monday, March 6. The unit is expected to return to service in April. Major work at the 935-megawatt plant will include replacing several components in the plant's turbine to increase power output by 11 megawatts or enough electricity to power approximately 11,000 additional homes. Seventy- six of the 177 fuel assemblies in the reactor also will be exchanged and two of the four Reactor Coolant Pumps will be rebuilt. Davis-Besse operated safely and reliably in 2005, completing the year with the best record for U.S. plants in its class for controlling radiation exposure to employees. The plant also ranked in the industry top quartile for industrial safety. After returning to service from a spring maintenance outage, Davis-Besse finished the second half of the year with a Capacity Factor of 98.45 percent. The plant's reliability complemented FENOC's overall performance for the last six months of 2005, contributing to a fleet Capacity Factor of 100.2 percent and placing the company's performance in the industry top decile for June through December. Similarly, FENOC's Beaver Valley site finished the second half of 2005 with a top decile Capacity Factor of 100.74 percent and Perry achieved a top quartile Capacity Factor of 100.19 percent. FENOC is a subsidiary of FirstEnergy Corp. (NYSE: FE), a diversified energy company headquartered in Akron, Ohio. FENOC operates Davis-Besse, as well as the Perry Nuclear Power Plant in Perry, Ohio, and the Beaver Valley Power Plant in Shippingport, Pennsylvania. Forward-Looking Statement: This news release includes forward-looking statements based on information currently available to management. Such statements are subject to certain risks and uncertainties. These statements typically contain, but are not limited to, the terms "anticipate," "potential," "expect," "believe," "estimate" and similar words. Actual results may differ materially due to the speed and nature of increased competition and deregulation in the electric utility industry, economic or weather conditions affecting future sales and margins, changes in markets for energy services, changing energy and commodity market prices, replacement power costs being higher than anticipated or inadequately hedged, the continued ability of our regulated utilities to collect transition and other charges or to recover increased transmission costs, maintenance costs being higher than anticipated, legislative and regulatory changes (including revised environmental requirements), the repeal of the Public Utility Holding Company Act of 1935 and the legal and regulatory changes resulting from the implementation of the Energy Policy Act of 2005, the uncertainty of the timing and amounts of the capital expenditures (including that such amounts could be higher than anticipated) or levels of emission reductions related to the settlement agreement resolving the New Source Review litigation, adverse regulatory or legal decisions and outcomes (including, but not limited to, the revocation of necessary licenses or operating permits, fines or other enforcement actions and remedies) of governmental investigations and oversight, including by the Securities and Exchange Commission, the United States Attorney's Office, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the various state public utility commissions as disclosed in our Securities and Exchange Commission filings, generally, and with respect to the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station outage and heightened scrutiny at the Perry Nuclear Power Plant in particular, the continuing availability and operation of generating units, the ability of our generating units to continue to operate at, or near full capacity, our inability to accomplish or realize anticipated benefits from strategic goals (including employee workforce factors), the anticipated benefits from our voluntary pension plan contributions, our ability to improve electric commodity margins and to experience growth in the distribution business, our ability to access the public securities and other capital markets and the cost of such capital, the outcome, cost and other effects of present and potential legal and administrative proceedings and claims related to the August 14, 2003 regional power outage, circumstances which may lead management to seek, or the Board of Directors to grant, in each case in its sole discretion, authority for the implementation of a share repurchase program in the future, the risks and other factors discussed from time to time in our Securities and Exchange Commission filings, and other similar factors. Dividends declared from time to time during any annual period may in aggregate vary from the indicated amounts due to circumstances considered by the Board at the time of the actual declarations. Also, a security rating should not be viewed as a recommendation to buy, sell or hold securities and it may be subject to revision or withdrawal at any time. We expressly disclaim any current intention to update any forward-looking statements contained herein as a result of new information, future events, or otherwise. SOURCE FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company Web Site: http://www.firstenergycorp.com Copyright © 1996- PR Newswire Association LLC. All Rights Reserved. A United Business Mediacompany. ***************************************************************** 32 Business Day: Koeberg probe turns focus on contractors Posted to the web on: 03 March 2006 Robyn Chalmersand Chris van Gass A TOP-level investigation into claims of sabotage at Western Capes Koeberg is believed to be focusing on outside contractors brought in to do maintenance work at the nuclear power plant. This comes as Eskom will today unveil a detailed plan to deal with rolling blackouts in Western Cape, including how it will manage outages at Koeberg in coming months. Political parties and experts poured scorn on governments claims, made on the eve of the local elections, that rolling blackouts in Western Cape were caused in part by sabotage at Koeberg. However, it is reliably understood that investigators have probed whether the alleged sabotage took place while Koeberg was on a controlled shutdown in December, amid concerns a disgruntled former employee may have been involved. Public Enterprises Minister Alec Erwin said this week that the bolt that damaged one of Koebergs generators did not get there by accident. He said intelligence officials had identified suspects. A source familiar with Koeberg said it was perfectly feasible that a previous employee of Eskom, who might have worked in the Koeberg maintenance unit, had left and joined a contractor. National Intelligence Agency spokesman Lorna Daniels declined to divulge any details about the investigation. Eskom CEO Thulani Gcabashe said yesterday that the electricity utility had conducted its own investigation. Our investigation focused on procedures, records and the people who were working there. We & have not come to any conclusion as to how this could have happened, (but) those investigations are not quite final. Gcabashe said national security forces had been doing their own investigation, and had indicated they were interviewing certain people. Gcabashe confirmed that contractors had been brought in to work on various sections of the plant when one of Koebergs units had to be refuelled. We have very stringent controls for contractors. They have to be security checked before they come in (and they are monitored). So we do have our security but its not impossible that somebody would be part of (sabotage). We would not exclude it, he said. Eskom would implement a plan to limit the number of blackouts in Western Cape. With one of Koebergs units out of action due to damage done by the bolt, Eskom was currently supplying 2700MW to the province each day while it needed about 4800MW at peak periods. It had sourced a spare generator from France and was also repairing the damaged one, so whichever arrived first would be installed. The second unit at Koeberg needed refuelling, which required a 59-day shutdown, but this would only be done once the first unit was back in operation. The transmission line that fed power into the province was being upgraded. The two plants, in Atlantis north of Cape Town and Mossel Bay, would be built by next year and would add 1050MW to the system. Copyright © 2005 BDFM Publishers (Pty) Ltd. All Rights Reserved ***************************************************************** 33 Vermont Guardian: Vermont regulators signal VY go-ahead By Kathryn Casa | Vermont Guardian Posted March 3, 2006 MONTPELIER Acknowledging that a federal inspection of Vermont Yankee did not strictly comply with state specifics, the Vermont Public Service Board nevertheless ruled today that the inspection was sufficiently rigorous to meet its requirements. Todays ruling represents the penultimate hurdle in Entergys quest to run the Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant at 120 percent of its design capacity. Operators plan to begin the graduated power increase on Saturday, according to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, ratcheting up a full 20 percent, or 110 megawatts, within the next several weeks. This inspection was not a vertical slice review of four systems as we had requested. Nonetheless, the inspection report makes clear that the review was both detailed and extensive, covering both safety and engineering issues. In particular, the [Nuclear Regulatory Commission] makes clear that it gave special consideration to components that would be affected by the power uprate, the board stated in todays ruling. In a March 2004 order approving the uprate, the board held out jurisdiction on the uprate, reserving the right to revisit it pending the outcome of an NRC inspection of the plant. At the time, the board included a letter to the NRC that laid out its criteria for a VY engineering assessment: It would be independent in the same sense as the independent safety assessment of Maine Yankee, i.e., it should be performed by experts independent of any recent or significant regulatory oversight responsibility related to Vermont Yankee. The assessment would be a vertical slice review of two safety-related systems and two Maintenance Rule, non-safety systems affected by the uprate, the board wrote at the time. Such an inspection would provide a valuable check of the reliability of the systems that are reviewed and allow for correction of any problems, the 2004 document states. In todays ruling, the board said its earlier decision did not mean the assessment was to have been identical to the one at Maine Yankee, which ultimately led to a shutdown of the plant. NEC faults the NRC's assessment because it was not an independent safety inspection as at Maine Yankee approximately 10 years ago. Our order, however, does not require an exact duplication of the Maine Yankee inspection and NEC has not shown any basis for seeking such an inspection at the present time, the board wrote. The board also appeared to overlook comments filed by the public in opposition to the uprate. According to board clerk Judy Whitney, the board received hundreds of public comments on the case, most of which opposed, or raised concerns about, the uprate. The final challenge to the VY uprate is represented in a series of safety-related contentions, filed by the state and NEC before the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board, a quasi-judicial arm of the NRC that reviews all safety considerations. That hearing will take place in the summer or fall. Under NRC rules, operators are allowed to uprate a nuclear power plant even while safety questions remain outstanding. According to Ray Shadis, technical advisor to the NEC, the uprate at the 33-year-old reactor will put area residents at inordinate risk. Send us your news tips, a letter to the editor or general comments. * All fields required - This information is used for verification purposes only - Thanks! information| privacy policyNorthern Vermont: PO Box 335, Winooski, VT 05404 Southern Vermont: 139 Main Street, Suite 702, Brattleboro, VT 05301 Contact: 802.861.4880 (ph) | 802.861.6388 (fax) | 877.231.5382 (toll-free) ©2005 Vermont Guardian | Visit us: www.vermontguardian.com This document can be located online: www.vermontguardian.com/local/032006/VYApproval(PSB).shtml ***************************************************************** 34 World´s Regulators Meet On Nuclear Safety And Security At UN Conference Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2006 11:00:04 -0500 WORLD´S REGULATORS MEET ON NUCLEAR SAFETY AND SECURITY AT UN CONFERENCE New York, Mar 3 2006 11:00AM Faced with the threat of nuclear terrorism and the risk of accidents at atomic power stations, senior regulators from some 60 countries wrapped up a week-long United Nations-sponsored meeting in Moscow today aimed at reinforcing nuclear safety and security around the world. The International Conference On Effective Nuclear Regulatory Systems, organized by the UN International Nuclear Energy Agency (IAEA), was the first of its kind for senior regulators and nuclear technologists to come together and examine global challenges and solutions in the wider context of nuclear and radiation safety and security. “For safety to be worthy of its goals it has to be global,” IAEA said in a statement of the development of its improved safety regime stemming from the aftermath of the 1986 Chernobyl power plant accident when worldwide consensus emerged on the need for effective international cooperation. Likewise, the development of a global nuclear security regime was triggered by the 11 September 2001 attacks in the United States and successive terrorist events in Europe and Asia. The key challenges regulators face are renewed global interest in the use of nuclear energy, increased threats to the security of nuclear installations and the need to closely link safety and security issues as well. Issues discussed included the effectiveness of national regulatory systems, further development of regulatory approaches for the use of advanced technologies and innovative designs to enhance nuclear and radiation safety and security; and additional mechanisms for co-operation among regulators. 2006-03-03 00:00:00.000 ________________ For more details go to UN News Centre at http://www.un.org/news To change your profile or unsubscribe go to: http://www.un.org/apps/news/email/ ***************************************************************** 35 [du-list] We Want Justice Now/Republic of the Marshall Islands Date: Fri, 03 Mar 2006 15:17:01 -0800 PRESS RELEASE: March 1, 2006, Majuro, Republic of the Marshall Islands "We Want Justice Now!" Although there were less international guests than at the two previous March 1st events, ERUB (Enewetak, Rongelap, Utrik, Bikini) again held their own survivor's rally in front of the Rongelap Atoll Local Government office. The RMI (Republic of the Marshall Islands) committee again refused to allow a survivor to speak on the morning agenda. At ERUB's rally there were sixteen international guests: twelve from Japan, one from Puerto Rico, and three from Hawaii. Ten from Japan represented Gensuikyo, the Japan Council against A & H Bombs, led by the Assistant General Secretary Ms. Yayoi Tsuchida, who read a letter from a fisherman from the Lucky Dragon V who was contaminated by the Bravo test in 1954. Ms. Brunilda Zayas Rodriguez represented Mayaguezanos con Vieques in Puerto Rico. Among those from Hawaii was Ms. Chiyoko Tamayose representing ERUB II, the survivors based in Hawaii. The participants at the rally signed a petition to U.S. Ambassador Greta Morris that read,"We want justice now!" The three demands listed were: 1) Continue funding 177 HCP at the level of the need!, 2) Extend DOE Medical monitoring and treatment for children and grandchildren of survivors!, and 3) Pass the Changed Circumstances Petition!. This petition will be taken to the U.S. Embassy either tomorrow or on Friday. A motorcade began the day from the Amata Kabua International Airport to the Rongelap Atoll office. All four atolls from which the survivors hail were represented and shared their stories with the audience in the afternoon. For more information, contact Ms. Elma Coleman, at lmacoleman@hotmail.com or telephone the Rongelap Atoll Local Government office at 011-692-625-7271. Available is the letter from the Lucky Dragon V fisherman read at the event. Also available is a copy of Mayor James Matayoshi's speech at the RMI government event. [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. ***************************************************************** 36 "PLANNED DEATHS" By Nuclear Industry-Court Testimony By Dr John Gofman Date: Sat, 4 Mar 2006 01:43:52 -0500 From: "Bill Smirnow" Date: Wed Apr 11, 2001 4:22 am Subject: "PLANNED DEATHS" By Nuclear Industry-Court Testimony By Dr John Gofman smirnowb@... Send Email http://www.mothersalert.org/chernobyl.html ALARA stands for "As Low As Reasonably Achievable". It's definition is in part 20 of the U.S. code of Federal Regulation of the U. S. NRC for exposure to radiation. All ALARA means is that, depending on the amount of money that any nuclear industry wishes to spend on protection of the environment and people, and depending on available technology, that is what they can use! So if you say, as a nuclear producer, "I only intend to spend $10 on keeping emissions as low as reasonably achievable, and that's all the technology that is available" its OKAY! Dr. John W. Gofman[http://www.ratical.org] has stated in front of federal judges in U.S. Federal courts that this constitutes "planned deaths": Question by the court: "What does ALARA..." Answer: "It permits deaths." Question: "Permits human deaths?" Answer: "Yes, because ALARA does not say -- see, the only way you could avoid deaths from the nuclear fuel cycle is to have zero releases. ALARA says keep the releases as low as you can reasonably achieve with the economics that you want to spend on it, and the equipment that you have available and so forth. So it is a planned emission of radioactivity, and that in effect means planned deaths." -- Dr. John Gofman, in conversation with the court, October 2nd, 1978, Jeannine Honicker versus the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission in Federal Court, Nashville, Tennessee, seeking an injunction to shut down the nuclear fuel cycle. The judge found out that he had no jurisdiction and that it had to go instead in front of the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission/NRC judges. The petition was denied. (It can be found in "Shut Down: Nuclear Power on Trial: Experts Testify in Federal Court" ISBN 0-913990-21-3, published in 1979 in the U. S. by The Book Publishing Company, 156 Drakes Lane, Summertown, Tennessee, 38483.) From: "Frieda A. Berryhill" Date: Thu Apr 12, 2001 1:41 am Subject: Re: "PLANNED DEATHS" By Nuclear Industry-Court Testimony By Dr John Gofman frieda302@... Send Email Planned deaths indeed.!!!!!A momorandum of September 21,1977 from Dr.Walter H.Jordan of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Pannel to Dr. James R.Yore Chairman of the ASLB states as follows: "In summary, the values given in Table S-3 for the ammount of RN 222 omitted per annual fuel requirement is grossly in error.So also is the dose to offsite population from milling due to one annual fuel requirement"It was not not until March 1978 that the NRC released the news to the public that the healtheffects to future generations was in error by a factor of 100,000 (no typo onehundredthousand)(part of my testimony before the IRG in Boston August 5th 1978)This was the trigger for me to form the Committy for the Application of the Nuremberg Prinicpal which clearly condems this kind of random murder by any nation..The distinquished panel ( see enclosure) was headed by an attorny who as an assistant Gen Attorny for the state Tennessee and a firce opponent of Oakridge...Much has been done by this committee and as many stories have it it sort of scared the H....out of the NRC. The porblem was that Bill Garner died of a heart attack just as we got going and i could not find another laywer to replace him.However to those who often questioned my sanity i can now say with satisfaction that i was not the only one thinking along those lines as i began searching the eclosed sites I found that everal leaders in other countries have began to realize that the principals so clearly defined in Nurenberg indeed apply here. .http://www.prop1.org/prop1/azantink.htm see attachent "nurenberg Pnncipal ***************************************************************** 37 [southnews] US places new order for DU shells Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2006 02:24:20 -0600 (CST) The U.S. Army quietly placed an order for $38 million in depleted uranium rounds last week, bringing the total order from a West-Virginia based company to $77 million for fiscal year 2006 U.S. signs $38 million deal for depleted uranium tank shells John Byrne Raw Story March 2, 2006 The U.S. Army quietly placed an order for $38 million in depleted uranium rounds last week, bringing the total order from a West-Virginia based company to $77 million for fiscal year 2006, RAW STORY has learned. The munition is highly controversial. While the Pentagon has been ambiguous about its health toll, leftover rounds from the first Gulf War are believed to have caused a significant increase in cancer and birth defects in Iraq. According to a detailed article by the Seattle Post-Intelligencer in 2002, "Many researchers outside Iraq, and several U.S. veterans organizations, agree; they also suspect depleted uranium of playing a role in Gulf War Syndrome, the still-unexplained malady that has plagued hundreds of thousands of Gulf War veterans." The new $38 million order was placed with Alliant Techsystems for 120-mm ammunition. Once the new pact is completed the firm will have produced 35,000 rounds for the U.S. military. Advertisement The Pentagon uses depleted uranium in its rounds because they say it is extremely effective in penetrating heavy armor. Depleted uranium remains radioactive for 4.5 billion years. The byproduct of manufacturing nuclear weapons or reactors, the rounds contaminate water and soil. Along some highways in Iraq where the weapon was used during in the first Gulf War, radiation levels register 1,000 times normal background radiation levels. Cancer levels in Iraq are attributed to the shells. A destroyed Iraqi tank in Basra destroyed by the U.S. weapon registered 2,500 times normal background radiation. Read more on depleted uranium in the Guardian here, and from the Post Intelligencer here. In a release, the firm making the weapon said, "Its state-of-the-art composite sabot, propellant, and penetrator technologies give it outstanding accuracy and lethality." UPI first reported on the deal Feb. 20. http://rawstory.com/news/2006/U.S._signs_38_million_deal_for_0302.html ______________________________ ATK bags $38 million tank ammo order MINNEAPOLIS, Feb. 20 (UPI) -- The Army has placed a $38 million order with Alliant Techsystems (ATK) for 120-mm ammunition for its main battle tank. The follow-on contract announced by ATK Monday extends the original contract for M829A3 tank rounds and brings the total value of the rounds ordered in fiscal year 2006 up to $77 million. Once the new pact is completed, ATK will have delivered 35,000 M829A3 rounds to the military. ATK says the price is worth it because it gives the U.S. M1A1 and A2 Abrams tanks unmatched punch "designed to ensure that U.S. armored forces maintain battlefield supremacy." Based on a depleted-uranium penetrator, the West Virginia-produced round is billed as the most advanced armor-piercing kinetic-energy ordnance available. "Its state-of-the-art composite sabot, propellant, and penetrator technologies give it outstanding accuracy and lethality," ATK said. The M829A3 specs show that the 22.3-kilogram round uses 8 kilograms of solid propellent to attain a muzzle velocity of 1,555 meters per second. While the velocity isn't as fast as other U.S. 120-mm rounds, the 10-kg projectile is heavier than the others. The projectile's use of depleted uranium shows continued confidence in the slightly radioactive but increasingly controversial depleted uranium. Critics see the radiation of depleted uranium as a potential health hazard to tank crews and to people exposed to the material after it has been fired. Armor experts, however, maintain that the extremely heavy composition of depleted uranium makes it not only a top-notch armor-piercer but a vital hardener of the Abrams' own armor. links DEPLETED URANIUM: DEAD CHILDREN, SICK SOLDIERS http://southmovement.alphalink.com.au/antiwar/depleted.htm The archives of South News can be found at http://southmovement.alphalink.com.au/southnews/ ***************************************************************** 38 [du-list] FoI Case Reveals Misleading (UK) Minister Date: Fri, 03 Mar 2006 15:18:38 -0800 FOI CASE REVEALS MISLEADING MINISTER MOD letter reveals John Reid issued misleading figures on British casualties in Iraq http://craigmurrayfriends.blogspot.com/2006/02/mod-letter-reveals-john-reid- issued.html Craig Murray Source: Mario Profaca / Spy News OSIF/OSINT Newsletter / http://mprofaca.cro.net/ Feb 26 2006 > Feb 25. A new letter from the Ministry of Defence, written in reply to a FOIA enquiry, has revealed that statements on British casualties in Iraq have been seriously misleading. These statements have been attributed to John Reid, the Minister for Defence. On the 20th January the BBC reported:- "About 230 British troops have been injured in enemy action since the invasion of Iraq, Defence Secretary John Reid has revealed." The response just received from the MOD confirms that this was only a partial count and that the true figure may be significantly greater. The letter contains a footnote relating to the 230 figure:- "Before Oct 2004, we only have centrally held records for the Shaibah UK Field Hospital. The figure does not include, for example, UK casualties of hostile action who were treated either by other UK Field Hospitals (early stages of operation only - for which unit records are not held centrally) or by coalition partners, or those with more minor injuries who did not receive Field Hospital treatment. " The letter also states that the 230 figure only includes casualties treated in theatre and that:- "Separate records show that between February 2003 and December 2005 some 4,000 military and civilian personnel (including a few Iraqis) have been medically evacuated from theatre." In a subsequent letter on the 23rd of February they effectively confirm that the information released by Reid in January was inaccurate by stating that:- "Premature release [of information on casualties] could result in inaccurate information being put in the public domain." In the BBC report on the 20th Reid attempts to play down the importance of knowing the true extent of casualties:- "The important thing, actually, is not the 40 or the 230, the important thing is that every single one of them gets to be given the care they need," Mr Reid said. No one could argue with his second sentiment but regarding the numbers, these are undoubtedly impor-tant, and need be respected rather than spun. By his obfuscation the Minister appears to have attempted to mislead the British public on a critical issue of foreign and defence policy conduct. My own attempts to get at the facts by using the FOIA have been thwarted by the MOD's use of the Public Interest Exemption. They state that the requested information is about to be published on their www site but as yet no date has been set for this disclosure. The MOD letters (minus email) can be read here: 17.02.06 The first reply to my enquiry http://homepage.ntlworld.com/refuge_art/CM_downloads/modreply2.doc 21.02.06 An explanation of the Public Interest Test they intend to employ http://homepage.ntlworld.com/refuge_art/CM_downloads/modreply3.doc 23.02.06 Confirmation that they will use this exemption to delay release of information http://homepage.ntlworld.com/refuge_art/CM_downloads/modreply4.doc ---------------------------------------------------------------------- stichting Laka Laka foundation documentatie en onderzoeks- documentation and research centrum kernenergie centre on nuclear energy Ketelhuisplein 43 Ketelhuisplein 43 1054 RD Amsterdam NL-1054 RD Amsterdam tel: 020-6168294 Netherlands fax: 020-6892179 tel: +31-20-6168294 fax: +31-20-6892179 www.laka.org laka@antenna.nl ---------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from this groups send a message to du-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com. In the body of the message type unsubscribe and send. ***************************************************************** 39 Herald News: County planning tritium tests [SuburbanChicagoNews.com] Nuclear plant: Local leaders want results independent of Exelon's influence By Cindy Wojdyla CainStaff Writer JOLIET The county health department will have a plan in place by Thursday to test wells around Exelon's Braidwood nuclear power plant for radioactive tritium contamination. The testing plan and a recommendation to hire Theodore Hogan, a public health consultant, to oversee the plan, will be on the Will County Board's health committee agenda, said Jim Zelko, executive director of the health department. The health committee meets at 9 a.m. Thursday in the county office building, 302 N. Chicago St. Hogan told the county board's executive committee on Thursday that he has worked in this field for many years as a teacher and as a consultant. He is president of Hogan and Associates of Lemont. He also worked for ComEd at one point as the company's head of safety and industrial hygiene. Hogan said the county should look for people who are at the highest risk from the tritium first. Exelon, which owns and operates the nuclear power station, has recently admitted that tritium-laced water leaked from its facility several years ago onto adjacent land, including some forest preserve land. The company has been cited for violations by the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency. Tritium is a radioactive isotope. Hogan said there are tests that can look for other contaminants that could have come from the plant. Hogan said it's possible, too, to test tree rings in the area to better gauge when contamination may have occurred. County board Chairman Jim Moustis, R-Frankfort, said the county would pay for the testing so that it's independent of Exelon. Zelko said his staff would test the wells, but the samples would have to be sent to an independent lab for analysis. Moustis said he hopes Hogan's expertise and the tests can help clarify the risk to residents who live in and around the nuclear power station. Hogan said the county should set up a Web site to keep the public fully informed of its plan and test results. Zelko said his staff would work as quickly as possible to give residents the information they need. "We don't intend to prolong this," he said. - Reporter Cindy Wojdyla Cain may be reached at (815) 729-6044 or at ccain@scn1.com. 03/03/06 SuburbanChicagoNews.com — © Digital Chicago & Sun-Times ***************************************************************** 40 Summit Daily News: Study says 16,000 died from fallout for Breckenridge, Keystone, Copper and Frisco Colorado - News A study finds that nuclear fallout exposure during the 1950s caused no more than 16,000 cancer deaths to date. By BRETT WILKISON high country news March 3, 2006 Almost all of the 140 million Americans alive during the nuclear bomb tests of the 1950s were exposed, in some degree, to radioactive fallout. Thirty million have died or are expected to die of cancer. Yet only a tiny fraction of those cases — no more than 16,000 — can be attributed to nuclear fallout, say three researchers from the National Cancer Institute in a study published in January. That estimate is low, say some fallout victims’ advocates. They worry that the study lends support to a recommendation that would significantly decrease the number of downwinders covered by a federal compensation program. The study follows a 2005 National Academy of Sciences report that recommended scrapping the geography-based standards of the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act (RECA). That 1990 law provides payments to downwinders suffering from certain cancers who lived in parts of Nevada, Arizona and Utah during the tests. The Academy report said radioactive fallout was likely not a “substantial contributing cause of cancer,” and it recommended compensation be based on medical evidence instead of location. Yet it’s difficult to prove that fallout exposure caused a given case of cancer, downwinders say, and developing new compensation standards could take years. “The government might as well say there is not going to be any more compensation,” says Tona Henderson, an activist in Emmett, Idaho, who has lost 10 family members to cancers she believes were induced by fallout. While Congress debates how to change RECA, Sen. Mike Crapo., R-Idaho, Sen. Larry Craig, R-Idaho, and Sen. Conrad Burns, R-Mont., introduced legislation in December to extend compensation to their states, which have counties that were among the hardest hit by fallout. Downwinders suffering from cancer are running out of time, says Henderson: “They should include us in RECA now and study us later.” Colorado Nuclear Testing sites Grand Valley The testing was an experiment in aiding natural gas extraction. The program was part of Project Plowshare. 1966-1967: 73 1968: 49 1969: 36 1970: 35 Rifle The testing was also part of Project Plowshare in aiding natural gas extraction 1971: 16 1972: 24 1973-4: 29 1975: 20 Source: http://www.atomicarchive.com All contents © Copyright 2006 summitdaily.com Summit Daily - 40 West Main Street - Frisco, CO 80443 P.O. Box 329 · Frisco, CO 80443-0329 E-mail: news@summitdaily.com ***************************************************************** 41 Salt Lake Tribune: Radiation-fallout compensation reaches $1 billion Article Last Updated: 03/03/2006 2:09 AM MST By Thomas Burr The Salt Lake Tribune WASHINGTON - The U.S. government has paid out more than $1 billion to people affected by atomic tests at the Nevada Test Site, including some $213 million to Utahns. The program to compensate downwinders passed the $1 billion mark this week, a “huge milestone” to Utah Sen. Orrin Hatch, who wrote the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act in 1990. More than 3,700 Utahns have received payments under the program, which covers 10 counties in the states where winds carried radioactive clouds from the nuclear tests in the 1950s and 1960s. Each payment, Hatch said in a statement, “shows the nation's commitment to helping victims of radiation exposure,” Hatch said. “Thousands of Utahns were harmed by nuclear testing, and we can never do enough to right this.” In fact, more people were affected than previously thought, according to a study released recently by the National Academies of Science and the National Research Council. The report says an estimated 11,000 extra cancer deaths may occur in America “as a result of external exposure to fallout” from the tests. A 1997 study said that as many as 212,000 cases of thyroid cancer may be related to the atomic tests in Nevada. Idaho and Montana are fighting to get included in the compensation fund, which doles out one-time payments of $50,000 for civilians affected by the fallout, $75,000 for ore transporters and up to $100,000 for mill workers. Overall, some 15,000 people have received payments, according to Hatch's office. But there are more who need help, says Vanessa Pierce, program director of the Healthy Environment Alliance of Utah. “It's an important milestone,” Pierce said, “but it sadly represents just a tiny fraction of the whole cost” of America's nuclear weapons program. While applauding Hatch's work to ensure downwinders are compensated, Pierce says Hatch should help get the rest of Utah, Idaho and Montana added to the list of covered areas. tburr@sltrib.com © Copyright 2006, The Salt Lake Tribune. ***************************************************************** 42 Pahrump Valley Times: Above-ground tests in 1950s-60s still cause major health issue fallout March 3, 2006 By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS SALT LAKE CITY - The Centers for Disease Control has posted its final report on the feasibility of studying health problems caused by nuclear-testing fallout, concluding that a detailed study was technically possible. However, it said this would require significant resources and that "careful considerations should be given to public health priorities before this path is taken." Congress requested the feasibility report in 1998. The final report was posted on the Internet Friday, a spokeswoman said. At issue has been the long-term effect of radioactive fallout from the aboveground tests conducted in Nevada in the 1950s and early 1960s. Studies have produced conflicting conclusions as to whether the fallout caused increased incidences of particular types of cancer in the residents living downwind in parts of Nevada, Utah and Arizona. The Radiation Exposure Compensation Act of 1990 provides for compassionate payments to downwinders who contracted certain cancers and other serious diseases. The report referred approvingly to a study that Dr. Joseph Lyon of the University of Utah was conducting related to the connection between thyroid abnormalities and fallout. However, Lyon's study was killed by the CDC last year. Lyon estimated his study was about two-thirds completed. "We should be doing that study," he said Tuesday. "The CDC shut us down and told us it was a waste of their money and time." The final feasibility report described the harm from fallout as small. It said that about 11,000 "extra cancer deaths from all cancers, including leukemia, would be predicted to occur among the population of the United States alive at any time during the years 1951-2000 as a result of external exposure to fallout." When nonfatal cancers are included, the number of cases double to 22,000, it said. That is a relatively small number compared with the millions of cases that harm Americans. The most heavily impacted by fallout are the 3.8 million Americans born in 1951, because that group had higher doses at younger ages than others. Fallout was expected to cause "fewer than 1,000 extra fatal cancers" among them. By comparison, for people born in 1951, about 760,000 fatal cancers could be expected if there were no fallout. "Any person living in the contiguous United States since 1951 has been exposed to radioactive fallout, and all organs and tissues of the body have received some radiation exposure," the report said. About 100 nuclear bombs were detonated above ground at the Nevada Test Site in the 1950s and 1960s. The new report said fallout deposition maps are available, and a detailed study of health impacts is technically possible. "In spite of the large uncertainties, it is likely that there is an increased risk of cancer from fallout, but it is also highly likely that this increase is very small relative to the usual risk of cancer in the absence of fallout exposure," it said. The report also said the Institute of Medicine, part of the National Academy of Sciences, "could help to clarify the extent to which the Nevada tests increased the incidence of thyroid cancer. The report said regarding Lyon's study that "The University of Utah is currently extending the follow-up for a previous epidemiological study of children who lived in the vicinity of the Nevada Test Site in the 1950s; the results are expected to be available in a few years." However, that study was canceled by CDC before the final report was completed. "Obviously, the Institute of Medicine must disagree with the leadership of the CDC" about the value of his study, Lyon said. Preston Truman, a former southern Utah resident now living in Malad, Idaho, and director of the activist group Downwinders, said he was amazed by the lack of attention paid to Lyon's study. After it was canceled, "the politicians never really applied the pressure they could have," he said. He said a fallout study should be made to get answers to questions that persist. For comment or questions, please e-mail webmaster@pahrumpvalleytimes.com Copyright © Pahrump Valley Times, 1997 - 2006 ***************************************************************** 43 Aljazeera: The U.S. radiates civilians and soldiers with depleted uranium - Aljazeera.com 3/3/2006 5:00:00 PM GMT Depleted uranium remains radioactive for 4.5 billion years. Last week, the U.S. military placed an order for $38 million in depleted uranium rounds, bringing the total amount of the order from a West-Virginia Based company to $77 million for fiscal year 2006. The new order was placed with Alliant Techsystems for 120-mm ammunition. Once the new deal is completed, the company will have produced 35,000 rounds for the U.S. army. In a statement, the company making the deadly weapon said: "Its state-of-the-art composite sabot, propellant, and penetrator technologies give it outstanding accuracy and lethality." The Pentagon uses depleted uranium in its rounds because it says that it is extremely effective in penetrating heavy armor. But critics of these controversial munitions believe that inhaling the radioactive dust left by the highly combustible weapon causes cancer and birth defects. Depleted uranium remains radioactive for 4.5 billion years. The byproduct of manufacturing nuclear weapons or reactors contaminate water and soil. It also poses a more serious threat when it is inhaled and absorbed into the human body. Studies show that DU can remain in human organs for years. + Gulf War According to an editorial on The Guardian, the depleted uranium (DU) used in the first Gulf War led to a significant increase in the levels of childhood leukaemia and birth defects in Iraq. In 1991, the U.S. and its allies blasted a number of tanks, armored personnel carriers and other military vehicles with armor-piercing shells made of depleted uranium -- the first time such deadly weapons had been used in warfare -- as the Iraqi soldiers retreated from Kuwait. Now, almost 15 years after the end of the Gulf War, the highway where the tanks were blasted remains a radioactive toxic wasteland, some experts even call it the "Highway of Death.” An article on The Seattle Post-Intelligencer states that “many researchers outside Iraq, and several U.S. veterans organizations, agree; they also suspect depleted uranium of playing a role in Gulf War Syndrome, the still-unexplained malady that has plagued hundreds of thousands of Gulf War veterans." In the “Highway of Death” in Iraq, radiation levels register 1,000 times normal background radiation levels. Tedd Weymann, deputy head of the Uranium Medical Research Centre (UMRC), said: “At one point the readings were so high that an alarm on one of my instruments went off telling me to get back. Yet despite these alarmingly high levels of radiation children play on the tanks or close by.' + Iraq War The exact amount of DU used during the 2003 Iraq war hasn’t been revealed, but some experts estimate it was more than a thousand tons used in more than 51 sites across the country. An Iraqi tank destroyed by the U.S. weapon in Basra, where UK forces are stationed, registered 2,500 times normal background radiation. In the surrounding area, researchers recorded radioactivity levels 20 times higher than normal. In 2003, Human Rights Watch said that hundreds of “preventable” civilian deaths in Iraq have been caused by the use of cluster bombs by U.S. and UK occupation forces. Experts also called for the water and milk being used by Iraqi civilians in Basra, where more than 1 million people live, to be monitored after analysis of biological and soil samples from area found 'the highest number, highest levels and highest concentrations of radioactive source points' in the Basra suburb of Abu Khasib, the centre of the fiercest battles between British troops and Saddam loyalists. British Professor Brian Spratt, who head a Royal Society working group on the hazards of DU, said: “British and U.S. forces need to acknowledge that DU is a potential hazard and make inroads into tackling it by being open about where and how much has been deployed. Fragments of DU penetrators are potentially hazardous, and should be removed, and areas of contamination around impact sites identified. Impact sites in residential areas should be a particular priority. Long-term monitoring of water and milk to detect any increase in uranium levels should also be introduced in Iraq.” The U.S. and its allies committed another war crime in Fallujah, which witnessed a bloody offensive in 2004. Residents, mainly civilians, were subject to bombardment by napalm, depleted uranium shells, phosphorus bombs (a weapon that is illegal if used against civilians). The use of such banned weapons makes the U.S. responsible for the same crimes that the toppled Iraqi President Saddam Hussein is accused of. + “Crime against humanity” The U.S. military acknowledges the deadly impacts of depleted uranium in a training manual, which requires anyone who come within 25 meters of any DU-contaminated equipment to wear respiratory and skin protection, warning that “contamination will make food and water unsafe for consumption”. Dr. Doug Rokke, a Vietnam and Gulf War combat veteran, is an outspoken opponent of the use of DU munitions. "DU is the stuff of nightmares," he said. “Verified adverse health effects from personal experience, physicians and from personal reports from individuals with known DU exposures include reactive airway disease, neurological abnormalities, kidney stones and chronic kidney pain, rashes, vision degradation and night vision losses, lymphoma, various forms of skin and organ cancer, neuropsychological disorders, uranium in semen, sexual dysfunction and birth defects in offspring… This whole thing is a crime against God and humanity." In addition to Iraq, DU munitions were used in Bosnia, Kosovo and Serbia in 1999. In the same year, a UN sub-commission considered DU hazardous enough to call for an initiative banning its use worldwide. The initiative has remained in committee, primarily blocked by the U.S., according to Karen Parker, a lawyer with the International Educational Development/Humanitarian Law Project, which has consultative status at the United Nations. “Since 1991, numerous U.S. Department of Defense reports have said that the consequences of DU were unknown," Rokke said. "That is a lie. We warned them in 1991 after the Gulf War, but because of liability issues, they continue to ignore the problem." "Their arrogance is beyond comprehension," he said. "We have spread radioactive waste all over the place and refused medical treatment to people“. Copyright 2005 Al Jazeera Publishing Limited ***************************************************************** 44 [du-list] RADIOACTIVE PROFITS Date: Fri, 03 Mar 2006 15:16:02 -0800 The Daily Reckoning PRESENTS: Most people are in the dark when it comes to nuclear energy, and all this talk of uranium enrichment programs leaves people scratching their heads. Well, never fear, Kevin Kerr will do his best to explain the uranium markets... RADIOACTIVE PROFITS by Kevin Kerr The Uranium market is one that is like a wild roller coaster, and many of the equities associated with it can make investors queasy from the ride. These equities are no different from many mining stocks; they have to be looked at very closely. Uranium trading was starting to become more stable, or so it seemed. Then, just as fast as it calmed down - bam! - it went right back up. In two the uranium price surged $5 to $29 in just two weeks last year. After the market woke up and new buying came in, the ultra-precious metal's price climbed another $4, which set the highest uranium price since the early 1980s. The new speculation was triggered by growing expectations that China, India and Russia were planning to build new reactors and more reactors would cause a run on the limited supply of uranium. This speculation may well be right, if the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) stats are even close to true. According to a report by the IAEA, 130 new nuclear power plants may be built in the next 15 years. Who are the big players? The usual suspects, of course: China, India, Europe, Russia, etc. Nuclear power provides about 16% of the planet's total annual electricity generation and 34% of the European Union's needs. Trust me, they need it - a lot. When my wife Katrin and I were in Estonia recently, it was frigid cold. Likewise, people are freezing to death in Moscow, right now. Nuclear power is a key component to economic survival in both Eastern Europe and the European Union. I couldn't believe some of the stats for other countries that I found in a great nuclear energy report called Uraniumletter International: "China: Announced that it plans to build up to 40 nuclear reactors within the next 15 years. Some experts feel this will increase the amount of electricity generated by nuclear power from 2.4% to 4%. "India: Also getting aggressive and wants to increase mining of uranium ore at four mines, including the existing Jaduguda mine in Jharkhand. The country recently signed a nuclear energy agreement with the United States and could generate 40,000 megawatts of nuclear power in the next 10 years, compared with current production of 3,120 megawatts. "France: Receives 78% of its electricity from nuclear power. "Belgium: Gets almost 56% of its power from nuclear plants. "Sweden: Close to 50% of Sweden's power is nuclear. "Switzerland, Japan and the United States: Nuclear power provides 40%, 25% and 20%, respectively. "Korea: Currently uses about 40%, operating on 19 nuclear reactors, and is expected to increase its dependence on nuclear power up to 60% in three decades. "Asia: Nuclear energy is becoming more and more vital to the growing economies. Without it, Asia's bazillion factories would come to a grinding halt." I'm not a historical scholar by any stretch, but I am a big history buff and the he history of atomic energy fascinates me. In the 1940s, the U.S. government began buying large amounts of uranium in the effort to produce the world's first atomic bomb. I mean, a country didn't simply go down to Wal-Mart in those days and buy some. So, it was a major undertaking. Don't laugh, maybe someday we will all have little nuclear reactors in our backyards, and instead of going to get some more wood for the fireplace, you'll have to run to Wal-Mart to get a bag of uranium. Nuclear power plants, as we know them, fired up in 1959. That was when the first privately funded nuclear energy plant came on-line, in Illinois. Fast-forward, and by the 1970s that number had exploded (pardon the pun) to 250 nuclear reactors that were planned across the United States - but the dream train of cheap, easy energy derailed a bit. The disaster in Pennsylvania changed all that. I was just a kid, but I remember that accident. Three Mile Island was a nightmare. My wife Katrin was just a kid when Chernobyl happened. She lived in nearby Estonia. They had to stay inside for days, she told me. Anyway, the Three Mile Island nuclear power plant accident came close to Armageddon in 1979. Remember that movie? The China Syndrome? In the movie, Jack Lemmon works in a nuclear power plant that is going to have a meltdown. This movie is the kind of hysteria that made the public fear nuclear energy, and basically put the brakes on new construction. People didn't want it near their homes, and I can't say I blame them. Public ignorance and fear of nuclear power changed the course of nuclear energy, as we've known, it for a very long time. Starting in the 1980s, utilities were canceling plants hand over fist. This resulted in the almost complete collapse of the uranium market. And then, to beat down the market even further, uranium got hit square in the jaw. This second blow came when the Soviet Union fell apart in 1991. Enriched uranium that was removed from Russian bombs was blended down to reactor-grade fuel and put on the market. But, it gets worse. The third punch came when the Clinton administration dumped 55 million pounds of "yellowcake" (uranium in the form of a yellowish powder) on the market, via a government-owned uranium enrichment program. This was what really caused the freefall for uranium prices - until now. American uranium production peaked in 1980 at 43.7 million pounds, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration. That was the proverbial nail in the coffin for the exploration of uranium. New research and development ground to a halt, as mines could no longer afford to operate, and exploration was basically a waste of time, energy and money. According to Uraniumletter International, Wyoming once had eight uranium operations, which produced 12 million pounds per year. Today, things are different - a lot different. Wyoming now has none. Ouch! I could go through each state and many countries around the world and cite examples just like that from reports I have read. It seems clear that because of these widespread shutdowns, the once-overflowing uranium supply dwindled in just five to 10 years. Things didn't seem so bad during the 1990s; the lack of new supply from functioning mines has been supported by other sources. There were excess inventories, for example, and there was also the dismantling and recycling of nuclear weapons, especially from Russia. Also, reprocessed reactor fuel was added to the mix. But many of those quick fixes are no longer available. The president's State of the Union address was a rallying cry to uranium producers to get moving...finally, reality is setting in. The dwindling supply of oil and spiraling high prices of fossil fuels are driving interest in nuclear energy as the possible power source that will be used to meet current and future global demand. Three Mile Island and Chernobyl, unless you lived there, of course, are distant memories to most Europeans and Americans. On their minds are the prices at the pumps and their home heating bills. Bottom line: New supplies of uranium will come at a much higher cost, which in turn, will continue to put upward pressure on the future price of uranium. Regards, Kevin Kerr for The Daily Reckoning P.S. My co-editor at Outstanding Investments, Justice Litle, is looking at many of these uranium companies. After all, there's no use in building a reactor if you don't have the fuel to make it work. Justice is in charge of the Outstanding Investments portfolio, and he is doing a fantastic job. He has already recommended great uranium stocks that he's had his eagle eye on, and I think there are more to come. For a sneak peek at these stocks, see our new special report: The Four Horsemen of the Petrocalypse http://www1.youreletters.com/t/339970/12028951/784173/0/ Editor's Note: With 15 years of experience, Kevin Kerr is a true veteran of the commodities markets. A licensed commodities trader since 1989, he's worked the trading pits in Chicago and New York with legends like Paul Tudor Jones, and he's even traded commodity derivatives in London. Over Kevin Kerr's career he's dealt with everything from cotton to currencies to oil and natural gas. If you take a look at Kevin's track record with his commodities trading service, Resource Trader Alert, you'll see for yourself that he is no stranger to the natural resource markets: Get Rich Trading Real Resources http://www1.youreletters.com/t/339970/12028951/784117/0/ To unsubscribe from this groups send a message to du-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com. In the body of the message type unsubscribe and send. ***************************************************************** 45 Deseret News: Huntsman is urged to veto second waste bill [deseretnews.com] Friday, March 3, 2006 HB100 violates Utah's constitution, groups say By Joe Bauman and Lisa Riley Roche Deseret Morning News Even as a jubilant Gov. Jon M. Huntsman Jr. celebrated the success of his first major veto, activists are calling for him to shoot down another highly controversial environmental bill passed by the 2006 Legislature. The Senate voted to override Huntsman's veto of SB70, the bill that would have stripped him of the authority to unilaterally ban establishment of a new low-level radioactive waste disposal facility or enlargement of the one operating in Tooele County. But on Wednesday, the last day of the Legislature's 2006 General Session, the House failed to take up the issue, meaning the veto stands. It stands because, under the Utah Constitution's Article VII, Section 8, a special override session can be called if a governor disapproves a bill after the regular legislative session is over. But in this case, the veto came during the session, as did the Senate's override effort. "The veto stands," Huntsman told reporters on Thursday. He said he was jubilant about the failure to override. That outcome was "very, very important," Huntsman said. He characterized SB70 as an attempt to "dilute the authority of the office of governor, or the executive branch, on matters as important as waste and radioactive waste. . . . "These are significant policy calls," he said. It is important for the governor's office to retain the authority to make such decisions, Huntsman added. Jason Groenewold, director of Health Environment Alliance of Utah, and a prime campaigner against SB70, praised Huntsman for "sending a strong statement that Utah will not make it easier to dump nuclear waste" in the state. Without going so far as to promise another veto, Huntsman said he will take a hard look at HB100 (substitute version). That measure, sponsored by Rep. Aaron Tilton, R-Springville, passed the House on Feb. 14 and the Senate late Wednesday night. If it becomes law, it will require "entities that do business in the state" to post a bond when beginning environmental litigation, whether in state or federal court. The bond is supposed to cover lost wages and revenues caused by any delay attributable to the legal action. Otherwise, the corporation or group filing suit would have its corporate status dissolved, meaning it can no longer do business in Utah. "There are, so far as I can tell, some constitutional problems to that," Huntsman said Wednesday, discussing the bill. "I'm not warm to it right now." He said that next week, he and his staff will examine the bills passed by the Legislature, and he does not want to say now what he will do. But he signalled HB100 may cause him to once again dig out his veto pen. "This is one that I would flag to you, even at this early date, that I have some concerns about," he said. The Utah Chapter of the Sierra Club also has concerns about HB100. It has launched a campaign, asking members to contact Huntsman and urge a veto. HB100 "would hinder ordinary folks working on environmental issues from getting involved in the process," said Mark Clemens, Utah Chapter lobbyist. "It's intended to intimidate people and organizations from becoming involved." By restricting access to the courts to those able to afford the bond, he said, HB100 apparently violates clauses in the U.S. and Utah constitutions "guaranteeing full access to the courts." © 2006 Deseret News Publishing Company [ ***************************************************************** 46 Deseret News: EnergySolutions completes acquisition of BNG America Salt Lake-based EnergySolutions said Thursday it has completed its acquisition of BNG America. BNG, with headquarters in Virginia, had been a subsidiary of British Nuclear Group. The owners of Envirocare of Utah bought BNG America and merged it with Envirocare and an Envirocare division, Scientech D, to create EnergySolutions. R. Steve Creamer, president and chief executive officer of EnergySolutions, said the acquisition "enables the company to provide a full range of waste management services, from classification and decommissioning and decontamination to disposition. It is a significant part of our ongoing strategy to provide innovative and cutting-edge solutions for the nuclear industry." The acquisition includes the North American rights to the reprocessing technology currently in use in Great Britain on spent nuclear fuel. © 2006 Deseret News Publishing Company [ ***************************************************************** 47 Bellona: Russia to invest $10 billion in uranium mining and processing As part of a plan to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions and accelerate energy output, the Russian government will pump $10 billion in to expanding its base of rapidly depleting uranium resources, highly placed government officials told Russian media earlier this week. Russia's uranium ore deposits (marked in yellow). Bellona Charles Digges, 2006-03-01 13:46 The programme is headed up by the Rosatom and Natural Resources Ministry and is forecasted by officials to increase Russia’s annual uranium output by six times by 2020, thus ensuring uranium ore supplies for existing nuclear power plants as well as those that Russia has said it plans to build. The announcement follows quickly on the heels of the US White House’s energy budget, which was sent to Congress last month. The budget included a $250 million proposal that would unite Russia and the United States in reprocessing spent nuclear fuel (SNF) from around the world and, in turn, selling it to countries who use nuclear power, but have no nuclear weapons programme. Bush and Russia wish to join forces in making nuclear fuel The Bush administration will propose in the budget it hands 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 bilateral reprocessing deal—if passed by Congress and given the nod by Russia—would establish a quasi-monopoly for Russia and the United States as the world’s sole SNF repressors and fuel suppliers, possibly driving Britain and France off the international reprocessing market. Putin: More nuclear power for Russia Also last month, President Vladimir Putin said nuclear power's share of Russia's energy use would increase from 15 percent to 25 percent by 2030. To achieve that goal, Russia plans to build 40 new nuclear reactors by 2030. The uranium investment plan comes at a time when Russia is seeking to increase its nuclear energy production to decrease its dependence fossil fuels. Bellona asserts that, while the latter proposition is a laudable and reachable goal, switching many of the country’s energy dependencies to nuclear power will cause incalculable environmental harm in the future. But Russia’s undying attraction to the development of nuclear power virtually assures the Natural Resources Ministry will not be exploring the use of renewables and alternative energies any time soon. This is of special note, as officials have yet to determine how to fund the $10 billion uranium drive, and alternative sources of power—such as solar and wind power—are many times cheaper than building and properly maintaining nuclear power plants. Flagging uranium production An official from Russia’s Federal Subsoil Resource Use Agency (Rodnedra), part of the Natural Resources Ministry, was alarmist at a Moscow news conference, saying that Russian stockpiles of uranium ore will evaporate in less than a decade. "Our geological exploration has greatly lagged behind production for the last 10 to 15 years because the government did not spend any money on it," Anatoly Ledovskikh, head of the agency, said Monday at a news briefing, according to the Russian newswire Interfax. In 2005, the country's three uranium producers mined a mere 3,325 tonnes—approximately one-fifth of the 16,000 tonnes Russia annually consumes fuelling nuclear power stations and to meet military needs and export obligations, Ledovskikh said. Russia had to draw on reserves to fill the uranium demand for 2005, he said. To increase future supply, Interfax reported, the government would double production at existing uranium mines and start exploration at a number of fields in Siberia and Buryatia. It would also set up joint ventures with CIS partners—most likely with uranium-rich Kazakhstan. What about radioactive waste? But several environmental questions remain unanswered after the presentation of the Natural Resources Ministry’s new uranium investment plan. Russian government officials said nothing of how they plan to store the additional waste that will result from increased uranium processing and more nuclear power plants. Both ministry officials and Rosatom failed to mention if they would be conducting any environmental impact studies—as required by Russian law—to ensure environmental safety in the stepping up of increased mining and processing. They also failed to mention anything related to storing the radioactive waste that would come of new nuclear power plants in Russia’s already overburdened storage infrastructure. At present, Russia is groaning under the weight of 15,000 tonnes of spent nuclear fuel (SNF) and has no viable plan for dealing with its disposition. Minatom, Rosatom’s predecessor, dabbled in siting a geologic repository—the safest known method for storing radioactive waste—on the Kola Peninsula and in central Sibera near Krasnoyarsk, but officials have yet to move these plans off the drawing board. Russia to avoid foreign uranium markets According to the Environmental Ministry's plan, Russia would mine 60 to 70 percent of its uranium needs by 2015, with a further 30 percent coming from joint ventures in CIS countries, Vladimir Bavlov, deputy head of the Federal Subsoil Resource Use Agency said at the briefing, the Moscow Times reported. As global uranium prices are nearly twice what Russia's state nuclear fuel monopoly TVEL pays domestic producers, the country needs to shun turning to international markets, he told the news conference. In 2005, TVEL paid $17.30 per pound for yellowcake uranium, mined at the Priargunsky Combine, Russia's largest uranium producer. The world price for yellowcake in 2005 was $27.30 per pound, according to a report published by the investment bank UBS earlier this month, Interfax reported. Securing supplies of uranium comes at a time of increasing energy consumption for Russia and the rest of the world—and which poses difficult questions to energy providers about whether to go with renewable and alternative sources, or to go nuclear. Russia needs an additional 40 gigawatts of nuclear energy annually within 20 years to meet Putin's energy target, Rosatom director Sergei Kiriyenko said recently in a speech published on the Rosatom web site. By 2030, global annual nuclear power usage will amount to 600 gigawatts, according to US Energy Department (DOE) estimates, and 570 gigawatts by to Russia's estimates, Kiriyenko said. Under the Natural Resources Ministry’s plan, production at the country's largest uranium producer, the Priargunsky plant in Krasnokamensk, is set to almost double from 3,300 tonnes to more than 5,500 tonnes per year, Interfax said. The mining enterprise, which is 84 percent owned by TVEL, currently accounts for 7.5 percent of world uranium ore output. The smaller Khigda and Dalur mines, which together accounted for just 200 tonnes of ore in 2005, will be brought to 1,000 tonnes and 2,000 tonnes annual production capacity within a decade. "We'll take on ourselves not only the risks of geological exploration but also bind ourselves to deliver uranium to factories for enrichment," said Bavlov at the news conference. A key part of the plans will be to begin production at Elkonsky Gorst, a deposit in south Sakha, that has proven resources of 342,000 tonnes, Bavlov noted at the new conference. "As of now, the infrastructure around Elkonsky Gorsk is in place. We expect it to mine annually 3,000 tonnes in 10 years, and 6,000 tonnes in 15 years," Bavlov said. Russia also has some early-stage uranium resources in eastern Siberia and several uranium veins discovered in Buryatia, Bavlov said. The country's total proven uranium reserves are estimated at 615,000 tonnes, according to Federal Subsoil Resource Use Agency data, Interfax reported. 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 ***************************************************************** 48 reviewjournal.com: Yucca Mountain repository costs may drop after new review Mar. 03, 2006 STEPHENS WASHINGTON BUREAU
WASHINGTON -- The Energy Department is revising costs to build a Yucca Mountain repository after a redesign that was initiated last fall and a new campaign that links the waste site to other ambitious nuclear initiatives. DOE Deputy Secretary Clay Sell said Thursday that he had ordered a re-evaluation from the $57.6 billion that was the department's most recent published cost estimate for the nuclear waste repository, issued in May 2001. Repository project manager Paul Golan said new estimates might emerge later this year, after DOE selects new designs for spent fuel canisters and for the industrial complex at Yucca Mountain where nuclear waste would arrive for placement. Speaking with reporters after an appearance on Capitol Hill, Sell suggested repository costs would decrease upon review. Officials said last fall that new designs for the above-ground complex would eliminate several "multibillion-dollar" fuel-handling facilities. There also has been growing speculation among industry and congressional officials that DOE plans further changes at Yucca Mountain, 100 miles northwest of Las Vegas, as part of a new waste reprocessing initiative called the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership. The Bush administration is preparing a Yucca Mountain bill expected to be introduced in Congress in the coming days that could provide clues. Sell said some details of how the repository might relate to the reprocessing initiative remained undetermined. Golan said he was not told he must find specific savings within the Yucca project. Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal, 1997 - 2006 Stephens Media GroupPrivacy Statement ***************************************************************** 49 Planet Ark: US Government Plans Steps to Advance Nevada Nuclear Dump March 3, 2006 WASHINGTON - The Bush administration is planning steps to advance its long-stalled proposal to build a nuclear waste dump in the Nevada desert, officials told Congress Wednesday. The government's plan to build an underground waste dump in the Nevada desert about 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas is more than 10 years behind schedule and still plagued by scientific foul-ups and political stonewalling. Paul Golan, an acting director at the Department of Energy, did not tell the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee when the department will send its proposal to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. That step was originally planned for 2004. But Golan said the department will publish a schedule of when it intends to make such a submission "later this summer." "We believe that submission of our license application should not be driven by artificial dates," Golan said. The NRC must sign off on the plan before Yucca Mountain can begin accepting waste from the nation's 103 nuclear power plants. Spent fuel from US nuclear plants -- which supply about 20 percent of US electricity -- is piling up. More than 50,000 tons (45,500 metric tons) of it is stored at over 100 temporary locations in 39 states. The administration hoped to open the site in 2010 and allow 77,000 tons (70,000 metric tons) of waste to be stored deep underground. On another front, the Environmental Protection Agency hopes to issue a proposal by year-end that would assure safe radiation doses from the site for 1 million years, which would satisfy a court order that threatens to derail the project. Bill Wehrum, acting assistant administrator for air and radiation for the Environmental Protection Agency, told the committee his agency hopes to finish its proposal by year end. Sen. Harry Reid, a Nevada Democrat and ardent opponent of the site for safety reasons, told the panel that the repository "will never be built because the project is mired in scientific, safety and technical problems." Reid proposed handling nuclear waste through "dry cask storage," a process that would allow nuclear reactors to store waste on-site. He and Senator John Ensign have introduced a bill requiring nuclear utilities to use the casks. Sen. James Inhofe, chairman of the Senate energy panel, said the project needs to move to the licensing stage, and issued a report titled "Yucca Mountain: The Most Studied Real Estate on the Planet." by Lisa Lambert REUTERS NEWS SERVICE ***************************************************************** 50 AS: Toxic Rocket fuel in most Americans rocket-fuel-toxin www.ascribe.org Fri Mar 3 10:16:30 2006 Pacific Time White House Delays Release of Study Showing Toxic Rocket Fuel in Most Americans WASHINGTON, March 3 (AScribe Newswire) -- Following a published report that the Bush Administration is holding up a study that shows most Americans carry a toxic rocket fuel chemical in their bodies at levels close to federal safety limits, Environmental Working Group (EWG) is calling for the immediate release of the study so EPA and state agencies can take steps to protect the public. Risk Policy Report, an independent newsletter, reported Feb. 28 that the White House Office of Science &Technology Policy is pressuring the Centers for Disease Control to delay the release of a study that tested for perchlorate in human blood samples from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES). An EPA source told the newsletter that CDC has found levels of perchlorate that "leave no margin of safety" for the public, compared to EPA's current risk limit. The article is available at http://epa.iwpnewsstand.com/epanewsstand_nletters.asp?NLN=risk. Perchlorate, the explosive ingredient in solid rocket fuel, has contaminated drinking water and soil in at least 35 states, with most of the known contamination coming from military bases and defense contractors. Tests by EWG, academic scientists in Texas and Arizona, state officials in California and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration have found perchlorate in milk, produce and many other foods and animal feed crops from coast to coast. Perchlorate is a thyroid toxin, and animal tests show that even small amounts can disrupt normal growth and development in fetuses, infants and children. The NHANES study is a followup to a CDC study last year that found perchlorate in the urine of every one of 61 Atlanta residents tested, even though concentrations of perchlorate in the city's drinking water are very low. Last year, scientists at Texas Tech University also found perchlorate in every sample of human milk from 36 mothers. In a letter to Dr. Julie Gerberding, director of the CDC, EWG Senior Vice President Richard Wiles said the results of the study of Atlanta residents "indicate that food is likely a major source of perchlorate exposure, and that perchlorate exposure is likely to be widespread in the general population." The letter is available at http://www.ewg.org . Although the EPA has no timetable for developing a national drinking water standard for perchlorate, both Massachusetts and California are moving forward with their own safety standards. The proposed standards - 1 part per billion in Massachusetts and 6 ppb in California - are far below EPA's recently adopted risk limit of 24.5 ppb, which is a level used as a guidance for cleaning up perchlorate- contaminated sites. When the EPA announced the risk limit, it acknowledged the need for "national guidance on relative source contribution" - exactly the information the NHANES data could provide. "In the absence of national safety standards, the CDC should not be sitting on data so clearly needed to protect the public from a chemical that appears to be widespread in drinking water and food," wrote Wiles. "The NHANES perchlorate data should be released immediately." - - - - CONTACTS: Bill Walker or Renee Sharp, EWG, 510-444-0973; EWG Public Affairs, 202-667-6982 Media Contact: See above. AScribe Newswire / www.ascribe.org / 510-653-9400 ***************************************************************** 51 Salt Lake Tribune: Huntsman hints at veto of bill on suits Article Last Updated: 03/03/2006 2:09 AM MST HB100: Governor cites constitutionality issues over environmentalists going to court to stop projects By Judy Fahys The Salt Lake Tribune Gov. Jon Huntsman Jr. hinted Thursday he might veto a bill targeting environmentalist lawsuits because it impinges on constitutional rights. HB100, passed Wednesday in the final 75 minutes of the 2006 Legislature, would require Utah organizations to post bonds before going to court to try to stop new projects like roads, bridges and landfills. "I'm not warm to it,” Huntsman told reporters, citing “constitutionality issues.” It would be the second bill Huntsman vetoed this year. He vetoed a bill in February that would have weakened his authority over commercial waste, including radioactive and toxic waste. But House members allowed the session to end without taking an override vote on SB70. Sponsoring Rep. Aaron Tilton, R-Springville, billed his HB100 as an antidote to Legacy Parkway-style legal delays and defended its constitutionality. Sen. Curt Bramble, R-Provo, said Huntsman had the right to decide the issue as he chooses but added that the measure would bring accountability to environmental lawsuits. "I think it's good policy," said Bramble, who carried the bill in the Senate. "I don't think the courts should be used as a tool of extortion on any side of the political spectrum." A six-page review of HB100 by the Legislature's lawyers concluded there was not a "high probability" the bill would be ruled unconstitutional. But it did detail numerous "obvious constitutional or statutory concerns." Tilton's colleagues welcomed the bill anyhow as a way of broadcasting a message that Utah is not the right place for environmental lawsuits. The House approved it, 53-18, three weeks ago. Hard-pressed senators passed it, 20-8, shortly before adjourning. Environmental groups have insisted from the start the measure would, if enacted, be an unfair and illegal obstacle to the courts. They say HB100 would violate both the state and federal constitutions and promised to make that case in court. Jonathan Tichy, a Salt Lake City attorney, called Huntsman “savvy” for recognizing the bill's practical and constitutional pitfalls. While testifying before a Senate committee last month, he said HB100 would interfere with basic rights guaranteeing access to state and federal courts. “It's really nothing,” he said, “but a full employment bill for lawyers who are thrilled at the idea of attacking this bill on the basis of all of its constitutional flaws.” Also on Thursday, The Salt Lake Tribune obtained a memo from the Utah Department of Commerce that detailed roughly $221,000 in costs that would be incurred by the state Division of Corporations to carry out new duties under HB100 for the first two years. Lawmakers never addressed the funding request, which was not included in the standard paperwork for bills as part of a fiscal-impact note. Francine Giani, director of the Commerce Department, called the estimate “conservative” and could not say why it was not included with the bill during presentations to lawmakers. She noted the $110,000 annual expense would be required every year to cover the cost of a legally trained professional who could decide what bond would be appropriate in each case, to hold formal hearings and assess claims against the bond and disbursements. “This is something that would be completely new,” she said. “We're going to do the best we can.” The Utah Manufacturers Association, the Utah Mining Association and other industry groups supported the bill. Under it, entities registered with the corporations division - including nonprofits like environmental groups and homeowner associations - would face losing their certification to do business in the state if they do not post a bond before asking a court to block a new project for environmental reasons. The bond would be based on the builder's costs for delays, such as wages and benefits, construction materials, taxes and any other expenses in the event the environmental group loses the case. The bond would be needed for cases involving more than two dozen state and federal laws and actions involving state or federal environmental agencies. Many described the bill as an antidote to environmental lawsuits like the one led by the Sierra Club that delayed the Legacy Highway by three years. The project is going forward now under a settlement forged last fall by Huntsman, the environmentalists and lawmakers. But lawmakers are still seething, claiming the environmentalist suit added $800 million to the project's tab. The Department of Transportation projects the total at $685 million. Former Gov. Mike Leavitt cited litigation costs when he vetoed a similar “Legacy Reaction” bill in 2002. He concluded that citizens have a fundamental right to challenge government in the courts. fahys@sltrib.com --- Glen Warchol and Rebecca Walsh contributed to this report. © Copyright 2006, The Salt Lake Tribune. ***************************************************************** 52 Salt Lake Tribune: Envirocare finishes aquisition Article Last Updated: 03/02/2006 11:49 PM MST The Salt Lake Tribune EnergySolutions, formerly Envirocare of Utah, announced Thursday that it has finalized the acquisition of BNG America, the Arlington, Va.-based subsidiary of the British Nuclear Group. The purchase includes the North American rights to the reprocessing technology currently in use in Britain. © Copyright 2006, The Salt Lake Tribune. All material found on Utah Online is copyrighted The Salt Lake Tribune and associated news services. No material may be reproduced or reused without explicit permission from The Salt Lake Tribune. ***************************************************************** 53 PRN: Urenco Buys Westinghouse Interest in LES Source: Urenco Limited; Louisiana Energy Services; National Enrichment Friday March 3, 7:00 pm ET MARLOW, England, March 3 /PRNewswire/ -- Urenco announced today it was purchasing the 24.5% interest held by Westinghouse Electric Company (owned by BNFL) in Louisiana Energy Services (LES) and the National Enrichment Facility (NEF). Westinghouse decided to sell its minority interest in LES to Urenco at this time to allow the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) an opportunity to review Urenco as the full general partner rather than having to consider such an ownership change close to the issuance of the license. As the project approaches construction and operations, both companies agreed Urenco is in the best position to manage these activities. Dr Helmut Engelbrecht, Urenco Chief Executive Officer, who made the announcement from Urenco's Head Office in Marlow, United Kingdom confirmed: "The transfer of Westinghouse's interest to the Urenco Group will assist in the progress of the license application and will enable LES to build the NEF to serve its US customer base." Urenco looks forward to a timely review and approval by the NRC. Through Urenco as owner of LES, the ultimate shareholders in LES remain unchanged ie. BNFL (the U.K. government), UCN (the Dutch Government), and two German utilities (E.On and RWE). "This purchase will not change in any way the current LES management or our plans for constructing the NEF once we receive the NRC license. We believe all activities will remain on schedule and LES will work closely with the NRC to assure they have everything they need to approve our purchase of the Westinghouse interest," Engelbrecht continued by thanking the Westinghouse team for their hard work and support throughout the licensing process. LES President Jim Ferland said: "the Company will move quickly to submit all the necessary papers with the NRC and expects a smooth process to approve this ownership realignment. Urenco is an outstanding company and their ownership of LES will be well received by all of our employees, customers and contractors in the US," Ferland commented. The NEF project will provide more than 200 permanent jobs and more than 400 multi-year construction jobs in Southeast New Mexico. It will use a proven technology that has operated safely in Europe for 30 years. When the license application is approved, the NEF will introduce the world's most advanced uranium enrichment technology into the U.S. and provide an alternative domestic enrichment supply source to U.S. nuclear energy companies. LES is a partnership of major nuclear energy companies. Partners include Urenco and U.S. energy companies Duke Power, Entergy and Exelon. Notes to Editor: Urenco is an independent global energy and technology group with production from plants in Germany, The Netherlands and the United Kingdom, using Urenco's own centrifuge technology. Focus is on providing safe, cost effective and reliable uranium enrichment services for civil power generation within a framework of high environmental, social and corporate responsibility standards. Urenco's goal is to further increase worldwide market share while maintaining high profitability and to become the leading supplier in the extended global enrichment market. Source: Urenco Limited; Louisiana Energy Services; National Enrichment Copyright © 2006 PR Newswire. All rights reserved. Republication ***************************************************************** 54 Mos News: Nuclear Waste Plant Chief Dismissed Over Breach of Environment Safety in Central Russia - MOSNEWS.COM Created: 03.03.2006 11:58 MSK (GMT +3), Updated: 11:59 MSK A Russian court on Thursday ordered the dismissal of the director of the nation’s main nuclear waste processing plant who has been charged with violation of safety rules that led to the dumping of radioactive waste in rivers, the Interfax news agency reported. The court in the Ural Mountains city of Yekaterinburg determined that Vitaly Sadovnikov, the director of the Mayak plant, could not remain in his post, Interfax said. The Russian Prosecutor General’s office said Sunday that he had sanctioned dumping of tens of millions of cubic meters of liquid radioactive waste into the Techa river in 2001-2004, even though the facility had enough money to prevent it, The Associated Press reported. Instead of preventing the damage to the environment, Sadovnikov had spent the money on maintaining a representative office in the Russian capital and lump payments to himself, it said. Mayak, located near the Ural Mountains city of Chelyabinsk, about 1,500 kilometers (950 miles) east of Moscow, produced nuclear weapons during Soviet times and is now Russia’s main nuclear waste processing plant. Some environmentalists say the area around it is among the most contaminated on the planet. Write us: info@mosnews.com Copyright © 2004 MOSNEWS.COM ***************************************************************** 55 Unian: President Wants to Store Used Nuclear Fuel in Ukraine http://www.unian.net [03.03.2006 09:41] At yesterday’s meeting on urgent measures to reform Ukraine’s municipal economy, Victor Yushchenko remarked that “the nation that consumes nuclear energy must know how to store used nuclear fuel and understand some controversial aspects of how power plants function”, according to the President’s press-office. He said Ukraine should formulate a atomic energy concept. Our country has four nuclear power plants with fifteen units but we do not know what to do with used nuclear fuel. According to international agreements, it is transported to the Russian Federation but the price we pay for these services constantly grows. Over the past three years, it increased from USD 245 to 720. This year, the country will have to spend USD 120 mln. However, this fuel has to be returned to Ukraine by 2012. We must solve the problem by that time, he said. The Head of State added that it was really important to distinguish between used nuclear fuel and nuclear waste. Waste can no longer be used, while fuel contains uranium and plutonium, which can be reused for nuclear reactors. UNIAN ***************************************************************** 56 Pahrump Valley Times: DOE: Yucca money won't be diverted March 3, 2006 RADIATION EXPOSURE STANDARDS LOWERED FOR NYE COUNTY By STEVE TETREAULT PVT WASHINGTON BUREAU WASHINGTON - The Energy Department does not plan to divert money from Yucca Mountain in order to research other forms of nuclear waste disposal, a DOE official told senators at a hearing Wednesday. While the Bush administration has linked the proposed Nevada repository to development of new reprocessing technologies for nuclear spent fuel, acting repository director Paul Golan said funding for the initiatives will remain separate. Golan responded to a concern by Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla., chairman of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, who convened the Yucca session. Inhofe, a repository supporter, said he wanted assurance that a new administration reprocessing effort, the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership, or GNEP, "should not deter the forward progress of Yucca Mountain." The idea that GNEP might tap into the nuclear waste fund set aside for Yucca Mountain has been raised in several quarters. Sen. Pete Domenici, R-N.M., has speculated publicly about the possibility. Also this week, Rep. John Dingell, D-Mich., a repository supporter, said he was worried that GNEP would "divert managerial attention" from Yucca Mountain, as well as money that utility ratepayers have been setting aside for repository construction, more than $20 billion so far. The hearing before Inhofe's committee gave Yucca critics a new opportunity to point out flaws in the repository project, while Inhofe and other supporters urged DOE to keep the project moving forward. Critics, including both Nevada senators and the state's nuclear waste director, focused on radiation safety rules being developed by the Environmental Protection Agency. The proposed EPA standard would allow somebody living on the outskirts of Yucca Mountain - think Beatty, Amargosa Valley and even Pahrump - to be exposed to 350 millirem of radiation annually, dramatically increasing the odds of contracting cancer, Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., charged. "Let's face it, this is such a nightmare," Boxer said, adding health standards for other radioactive materials are not as lenient. "We are changing our tradition and our history of how we view cancer risks." Sen. John Ensign, R-Nev., said EPA "was forced to create this ridiculous standard to make Yucca Mountain scientifically feasible on paper." William Wehrum, EPA acting assistant administrator for air and radiation, defended the agency's work. He said the action would limit radiation doses for a period up to 1 million years, an unprecedented standard. The 350 millirem is no higher than people living in other parts of the country who are exposed to "natural levels" of radiation, Wehrum said, adding further it would take effect only after the first 10,000 years of repository operations. Before then, an annual dose limit of 15 millirem would be in effect. By comparison, EPA officials say a routine chest X-ray emits 10 millirem and that a mammogram emits 30 millirem. Bob Loux, executive director of the Nevada Agency for Nuclear Projects, said the Yucca program has been delayed for so long that there would be time for the EPA to formulate a new radiation safety standard. Ensign and Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., promoted their bill that would require the Department of Energy shelve the Yucca project and keep spent fuel stored in dry casks at reactor sites. Yucca Mountain "is fraught with scientific, technical and geological problems," Reid said. "Our bill guarantees all Americans that our nation's nuclear waste will be stored in the safest way possible." But Sen. Jim DeMint, R-S.C., questioned the safety of keeping nuclear waste at power plants, saying such storage "is a perfect dirty bomb site." "We do need to look into our choices," DeMint said. "We assume we can leave things the same and be safer rather than moving ahead like we have been trying to do for a number of years." Golan said that nuclear waste kept in special casks and placed in reinforced steel and concrete canisters would be safe for 100 years, when it would likely need to be repacked. For comment or questions, please e-mail webmaster@pahrumpvalleytimes.com Copyright © Pahrump Valley Times, 1997 - 2006 ***************************************************************** 57 SF New Mexican: Geologist says LANL needs to upgrade wells Fri Mar 3, 2006 9:21 pm By ANDY LENDERMAN | The New Mexican A geologist says Los Alamos National Laboratory needs to spend $5 to $10 million to replace wells that monitor pollution and hire an independent company to come up with a new plan to watch for contamination. But the lab already is addressing the problem internally, a spokeswoman countered. Bob Gilkeson, who made a presentation to Concerned Citizens for Nuclear Safety on Thursday, said 14 of the lab's 33 wells can't properly detect pollution because they were installed improperly and had drilling additives like bentonite clay, which can conceal contamination, he said. "The specter of problems with this work over the last 10 years is very large," Gilkeson said. Gilkeson said he first consulted the lab on its well-monitoring program in 1997 and has worked on the groundwater-contamination issue for 10 years. Lab spokeswoman Kathy DeLucas said the lab is cooperating with the state Environment Department, the public and the National Nuclear Security Administration "to characterize the groundwater and develop a path forward for these wells. We've been listening to their concerns about the validity of the data, and we are developing a comprehensive and aggressive plan to review the data and address the concerns in a well-rehabilitation effort." DeLucas said the lab is conducting the review internally and will consider drilling new wells, if needed. "These are not new findings, and we've been reporting on them in public meetings for several years," DeLucas added. Gilkeson said the lab sacrificed installing the wells properly to lower costs and speed up the process. The lab notified the state Environment Department last December that it had found chromium, metal that can cause cancer when ingested, in one monitoring well in Mortandad Canyon. The chromium was four times the drinking-water standard of 100 parts per billion, the department said. Environment Secretary Ron Curry demanded the lab come up with an aggressive program to deal with the problem. The lab has now proposed a pilot project to rehabilitate two of the wells in an effort to clean them out, department spokesman Adam Rankin said. If that program works, he said, the state will request that the lab apply the method to other wells. And if there are no other alternatives, Rankin said, the state will have the lab drill new wells. He said the state believes several of the monitoring wells are "problematic." Contact Andy Lenderman at 995-3827 or alenderman@sfnewmexican.com. ***************************************************************** 58 Hanford News: Witnesses decry program changes This story was published Thursday, March 2nd, 2006 By Annette Cary, Herald staff writer The credibility of a compensation program for ill nuclear workers could be destroyed by proposed changes, witnesses said at a congressional hearing Wednesday. The changes appear to override science to limit spending on benefits, said Rep. John Hostettler, R-Ind., chairman of the House Judiciary Immigration, Border Security and Claims Subcommittee. The hearing was scheduled after a memo was leaked from the White House Office of Management and Budget that listed possible changes to the program to limit workers automatically eligible for benefits. The program makes $150,000 payments to workers at Hanford and other nuclear sites if they suffered cancer because of exposure to radiation. The federal government has decided on a case-by-case basis if Hanford workers received enough radiation to cause cancer. But in cases in which potential radiation exposures are unreliable, groups of workers can petition the federal government to be listed as a "special exposure cohort." Then workers would be automatically compensated without having to prove their radiation exposure caused the cancer. The memo called for a White House-led group to look at changes that would make the special exposure cohort designation more difficult to receive. "Some of the suggested changes would lose the perception of fairness and credibility of the whole program," said Dr. James Melius, a member of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health. "We can't have a secret review process." Petitions are evaluated by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, or NIOSH, before the advisory board makes a public recommendation to the secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services. The memo suggests that the White House should make the final determination, rather than the secretary. "It implies a lack of trust in the HHS decision," said Richard Miller, senior policy analyst for the Government Accountability Project. The memo also suggested addressing "any imbalance" in the membership of the advisory board and requiring a review by outside experts of recommendations by NIOSH. That would be in addition to the advisory board review. OMB appears to want to tilt the membership of the advisory board in favor of people "who will put their elbow on the scale to deny benefits," Miller said. The proposed changes would increase the amount of time needed to make decisions, Melius said. "There already is a significant problem with people who have waited years for a claims decision," he said. The Department of Labor is not trying to cut benefits to ill workers, said Shelby Hallmark, director for the Office of Worker's Compensation Programs. The proposed federal budget for the compensation program in fiscal year 2007 would be about $600 million less than the approximately $1.5 billion budgeted for the program this year. But that's not because of the proposed changes to the program outlined in the OMB memo, according to the Department of Labor. The Department of Labor expects to have decisions on a substantial backlog of claims in the program this year, Hallmark said. That would leave fewer payments to be made in 2007. But Miller said the OMB memo commended the Department of Labor for pointing out the potential for a large expansion of benefits through the designation of special exposure cohorts. © 2006 Tri-City Herald. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 59 Hanford News: Small firm gets Hanford contract This story was published Thursday, March 2nd, 2006 By Annette Cary, Herald staff writer A small Colorado company has won a subcontract worth up to $22 million to operate the Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility at the Hanford nuclear reservation. Washington Closure Hanford awarded the subcontract to S.M. Stoller Corp. of Lafayette, Colo., which operates a similar disposal site for mixed radioactive waste at the Idaho National Laboratory. "Stoller was the lowest of the four bidders, all of which were technically capable of doing the work," Jeff James, waste operations director for Washington Closure, said in a written statement. Washington Closure did not name the other bidders. Stoller has plans for some innovations to make ERDF operations more efficient and also was motivated to win the subcontract as a stepping stone to other Hanford work, said Jeff Biagini, Stoller's project manager for ERDF. "It made sense to broaden our horizon here," he said. Stoller's Richland office already does some ground water monitoring work at Hanford. Washington Closure Hanford, which holds a $1.9 billion contract for cleanup of Hanford's river corridor, must subcontract at least 30 percent of the work to small businesses. Stoller's contract at ERDF is for four years with two potential three-year extensions to bring it to a total of 10 years. The potential $22 million payment depends on the amount of work available to the company and is for the initial four years of the contract. The transition from present subcontractor Duratek to Stoller will begin immediately and could be completed as soon as April 1. "The Duratek subcontract has been in place since ERDF opened in 1996," James said. "They have provided excellent service over the past decade and we appreciate the work they have done." ERDF is a lined disposal site for Hanford wastes that are contaminated with low-level radioactive waste and low-level waste mixed with hazardous chemicals. Among the wastes it accepts are contaminated dirt and building rubble from waste sites and old buildings left from the past production of plutonium for the nation's nuclear weapons program. Stoller will be responsible for operating the landfill, which includes transporting and maintaining waste containers carried around the reservation by trucks, receiving waste, placing and compacting waste at ERDF and stabilizing or treating waste if needed. It also will control dust at ERDF. About 25 employees are needed for the work. Key positions will be filled by Stoller employees, including Biagini, who was project manager at ERDF from 1997 to 2002 under Duratek. Present craft workers at ERDF will continue working there as organized labor organizations decide. The Stoller team also includes E2 Consulting Engineers of Golden, Colo.; Washington Safety Management Solutions of Boise, a subsidiary of Washington Group International; Rogers Surveying of Richland; J-U-B Engineers of Kennewick; and American Electric of Richland. Stoller, which has about 420 employees, has been in business since 1959. ERDF began receiving waste in 1996 and has been expanded twice. More than 6.3 million tons of waste have been disposed there and its current capacity is 8 million tons. © 2006 Tri-City Herald. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 60 Pahrump Valley Times: DOE DOA due to TVA March 3, 2006 By STEVE TETREAULT PVT WASHINGTON BUREAU WASHINGTON - A federal judge has ordered the government to pay $34.9 million to the operator of two nuclear power plants in Alabama and Tennessee after the Department of Energy failed to meet a 1998 deadline to dispose of their nuclear waste. The ruling in favor of the Tennessee Valley Authority is the first one in which the department has been told to pay specific damages to a utility that is keeping highly radioactive spent fuel stored onsite while delays continue to hamper plans for a repository at Yucca Mountain in Nye County. Utilities that run most of the nation's 103 nuclear plants and some that have been mothballed have filed 61 lawsuits seeking similar damages. Attorneys expect utilities to win judgments in many of the cases, since an earlier round of lawsuits established that DOE had breached longstanding contracts to take ownership of thousands of tons of their spent fuel by Jan. 31, 1998. Industry officials have speculated damages could climb well into the billions of dollars, particularly since there appears to be no nuclear waste solution in sight while utilities continue to pile up waste and would be allowed to seek further compensation through the courts. Damage awards are paid through a special judgment account overseen by the U.S. Treasury that is essentially fueled by taxpayers, officials said. The Tennessee Valley ruling comes as Congress awaits legislation from the Energy Department in a new effort to jump-start Yucca Mountain. The decision, issued Jan. 31 by Judge Charles Lettow in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims, underscores the need for Congress to fix Yucca Mountain, or at least relocate spent fuel away from power plants, said Steve Kraft, nuclear waste director at the Nuclear Energy Institute. "The government is starting to take money out of your pockets as taxpayers and paying utilities for their failure to move fuel from our sites so that is what we are suggesting that Congress deal with," Kraft said. The lawsuit involved the three-reactor Browns Ferry nuclear plant in Limestone County, Ala., and the two-reactor Sequoyah facility in Hamilton County, Tenn. The Tennessee Valley Authority, a federal corporation and the nation's largest public power generator, operates two other nuclear power complexes but they were not part of the damage suit. TVA officials claimed costs of $35,683,438 to build "dry storage" facilities at the plants, including modifications so spent fuel assemblies could be loaded into steel and concrete casks and transported to storage pads. Roads and railroad bays needed to be rebuilt, underground utilities had to be moved, and "fail safe" cranes were installed, according to court documents. At Browns Ferry, security facilities needed to be expanded. Judge Lettow allowed all but $859,304 of the costs. The Energy Department had no immediate comment on Tuesday on the ruling or whether it planned to appeal. The ruling is significant because the TVA was awarded virtually the entire sum it sought for damages, said Jay Silberg, an attorney who represents utilities in 19 of the lawsuits although not the TVA case. Silberg said Congress may get motivated to speed nuclear waste bills if damage awards accumulate. "DOE continues to have its issues and whether this has any impact on them it probably will have more impact on Congress when it gets to see they will have to start paying off real dollars," Silberg said. Rep. Shelley Berkley, D-Nev., said she doubted the growing costs for nuclear waste storage will cause a stir. "With all due respect my colleagues are brain dead on this issue," Berkley said. Nevada lawmakers have sponsored bills that would redirect Yucca Mountain fees paid by ratepayers to reimburse utilities for keeping spent fuel at their sites rather than build a repository in Nevada. "Instead of wasting billions of dollars of taxpayer money we should be spending money for onsite dry storage," Berkley said. "The end result would be the same." The TVA case is the second one to emerge from the federal court of claims and the first to award damages to a utility. The court awarded no damages but left the door open for a future claim in the first case, which involved the Donald C. Cook plant in Michigan operated by the Indiana Michigan Power Company. Decisions in other cases are expected soon, including one involving nuclear waste stored at three nuclear plants in New England that already have been mothballed, and another from the Sacramento Municipal Utility District, where the judge at one point suggested the government void its contract and give ratepayers their money back. At the same time, the Energy Department reportedly is in settlement talks with some utilities. In 2004, DOE agreed to pay Exelon Corp., for keeping nuclear fuel at its plants until Yucca Mountain opens. Exelon, which operates 17 reactors, was to receive at least $300 million, and $600 million if the Yucca repository does not open until 2015. In December, Scana Corp., and Santee Cooper, the utilities that service most of South Carolina, reached a $9 million settlement for waste at a plant they operate in Jenkinsville, S.C. For comment or questions, please e-mail webmaster@pahrumpvalleytimes.com Copyright © Pahrump Valley Times, 1997 - 2006 ***************************************************************** 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: *****************************************************************