*****************************************************************
03/28/06 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 14.74
*****************************************************************
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 Iran: The Keys to the Nuclear Crisis
2 IRNA: President: Any decision denying Iran's right to access nuclear
3 Guardian Unlimited: Tehran Wants to Set Up Nuke Fuel Facility
4 Guardian Unlimited: Straw rejects military action against Iran
5 AFP: Flurry of UN activity amid signs of progress on Iran statement
6 AFP: Security Council holds informal session on Iran nuclear crisis
7 AFP: Rice to visit Europe for talks on Iran
8 AFP: Russia demands clear reply from Iran on nuclear offer -
9 IRNA: Merkel meets ElBaradei on Iran's nuclear program
10 Xinhua: DPRK to build nuclear armed forces against US attack
11 Guardian Unlimited: Indian Officials in D.C. for Nuke Deal
12 IRIB PERSIAN NEWS: US cannot put in practice its threat
13 Arab League Head Pushes Commercial Nuke Power For Nuke Weapons
14 IRNA: Israel not interested at all in nuclear weapons-free Mideast -
15 Guardian Unlimited: Arab Nations Urged to Enter Nuclear Club
16 RIA Novosti: Russian company guarantees nuclear fuel deliveries to S
17 AFP: Saudis, with Pakistani help, working on nuclear programme -
NUCLEAR REACTORS
18 [NukeNet] CLEAN NUCLEAR POWER?
19 US: Study Links "Smog" to Arctic Warming
20 Moscow Times: Russia Picks Site for New Nuclear Center
21 London Times: Energy can be cleaner, if deadlock is broken -
22 Guardian Unlimited: Nuclear reactions
23 US: NRC: NRC to Discuss 2005 Performance at Sequoyah Nuclear Power P
24 US: newsobserver.com: Utility: Nuclear good for climate
25 RIA Novosti: China ready to join Russia in floating NPP construction
26 RIA Novosti: Russian nuclear tech exporter ready to complete Slovaki
27 US: Rutland Herald: Entergy Nuclear to move ahead on power boost
28 US: JOURNAL NEWS: NRC, Entergy to meet with public on Indian Point
29 US: APP.COM: Ruling due on reactor hearing |
30 US: NRC: NRC to Discuss 2005 Performance at Watts Bar Nuclear Power
31 US: CourierPost: Radioactive pile causes a stir in Newfield -
32 US: CourierPostOnline: Slag pile details outlined
33 Xinhua: Argentine-built nuclear reactor to start operation in Sydney
34 Toronto Star: Give nuclear plan full environmental assessment
35 US: NRC: Notice of Issuance of Amendment to Materials License SNM-25
36 US: NRC: NRC to Discuss 2005 Performance Assessment for LaSalle Nucl
37 US: Newsday: Activists say accidents are not the only risk of nuclea
38 SouthAfrica.info: SA's 'small, safe' nuclear power -
39 US: NRC: NRC Begins Special Inspection at Texas A University’s Resea
40 US: WFSB: DEP concludes radiation in goat milk wasn't from Millstone
41 US: NRC: Sunshine Act; Notice of Meetings
NUCLEAR SECURITY
42 US: Today's GAO Reports - March 28, 2006
43 US: Guardian Unlimited: Radioactive Matter Gets Into U.S. in Test
44 US: Guardian Unlimited: U.S. Looks to Put Inspectors in Bahamas
NUCLEAR SAFETY
45 [du-list] Navy Shipboard Vietnam cancers linked to water
46 US: toledoblade.com: Federal agency plans to offer beryllium tests
47 US: Courier Post: Study finds link between cancer, nuclear power pla
NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE
48 US: New NIRS Report Challenges All US Radioactive Waste Policies
49 [NukeNet] YUCCA : "MAKE UP MORE STUFF"
50 US: [NukeNet] Presentation - Film - Navajos and Uranium mining
51 US: [NukeNet] SCOOP - THE ROY PROCESS
52 Las Vegas SUN: Republican candidates for governor disavow Guinn tax
53 US: NEWS.com.au: Withdraw uranium opposition, Labor told -
54 US: NEWS.com.au: China fires nuclear reaction
55 US: NEWS.com.au: Expand uranium mining: Campbell
56 Nevada Appeal: Feds continue to bully Nevada over Yucca
57 US: Australian Financial Review: Uranium prices predicted to get hot
58 ForUm: Bulgaria to transport nuclear materials via Ukraine
59 reviewjournal.com: YUCCA MOUNTAIN: Scientists tout technology, resea
60 US: AFP: Australian PM upbeat about prospects of nuclear deal with C
61 AFP: Local gov't okays test run at nuclear reprocessing plant -
62 US: Morris Daily Herald: Nuclear spill disclosure bill clears Senate
63 US: Midland Reporter-Telegram: With license pending, survey shows An
64 US: AU ABC: NT Govt mulls uranium sales timeframe.
65 US: AU ABC: Uranium deal with China close, Govt says
66 US: UPI: China gains access to Aussie uranium
PEACE
US DEPT. OF ENERGY
67 [NukeNet] response to DOE's expressions of interest, GNEP
68 Knox News: Problems dog process at Y-12
69 Knox News: ORNL, UT may help on project
70 KKTV: Rocky Flats Museum
71 DOE: DOE Conducts Energy Saving Assessment at W.L. Gore &
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
FULL NEWS STORIES
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
1 Iran: The Keys to the Nuclear Crisis
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2006 21:01:30 -0600 (CST)
Le Nouvel Observateur
Week of Thursday 16 March 2006
The Islamic Republic at the UN Security Council
Is the prospect of an Iranian atomic bomb inevitable? How soon? What
would the consequences be for the Middle East? And what can the
international community still do?
1) What is known about the Iranian nuclear program?
We know that this program has existed for almost twenty years, that
it remained totally clandestine until 2002 and that some part of it - the
scope of which no one knows - is still secret. Thanks to the
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), we also know:
1) that Iran produces small quantities of plutonium in research
laboratories.
2) that it is (almost) capable of converting uranium into gas and has
the ability to do that on a large scale at Ispahan.
3) that Teheran has acquired or built several hundred machines
designed to enrich that gas: the famous centrifuges that produce,
according to their configuration, either fuel for an electric power
station or fissile matter for an atomic bomb.
4) that the Islamic Republic intends to install tens of thousands of
centrifuges in Natanz soon, but that Iranian engineers have not yet
mastered the know-how required for them to run smoothly.
5) that the Iranian Army is testing medium range missiles,
potentially capable of propelling a nuclear load for over 1,000
kilometers.
Virtually anything else is nothing but a theory.
2) Is this program necessarily military?
Teheran repeats that its objective is civilian: that it's all about
producing electricity. "Why reject this explanation totally?" asks Bruno
Tertrais, from the Foundation for Strategic Research. "The country is
overflowing with oil and gas, but those resources will be exhausted.
Consequently, it's not absurd for a big nation like Iran to plan for
post-hydrocarbons. The Shah already had that idea ..." But it appears
that it's something else. "Even if there is no formal proof, the clues to
the principally military character of this program are numerous and
corroborating," says Pascal Boniface, Director of the Institute for
International and Strategic Relations (IRIS). In the main, there's the
secrecy that has surrounded this matter for so long. Teheran's refusal to
fully cooperate with the IAEA, its connections with the network of Abdul
Qadeer Khan, father of the Pakistani bomb, and the traces of highly
enriched uranium the inspectors have found on several machines. But for
the specialists, the most troubling indicator is the recent discovery by
the UN agency of plans for the construction of half-hemispheres made out
of uranium metal. In fact, there is no known usage for such pieces up
till now that is not military. According to the IAEA, these
half-hemispheres fit into the composition of the bomb's "explosive
heart."
"Thus, in all probability, Iran is looking to provide itself with the
means to build an atomic bomb," says Bruno Tertrais, "but nothing proves
that the political decision to actually build that bomb has been taken.
Teheran wants to imitate Japan and not cross the nuclear "threshold" -
that is, to reach the technical and industrial level that would allow it
to produce a weapon in several months, if necessary." However a number of
experts believe that the Islamic Republic wants to cross that "threshold"
and that the American decision to invade Iraq has only strengthened its
determination.
3) How long would it take for Iran to produce an atomic weapon?
The scenarios vary a great deal according to the experts and the
circumstances. From 1995 to last summer, American secret services
asserted on several occasions that Iran would have an atomic bomb "within
five years," in other words, a deadline that has already been overshot
several times. In August 2005, to general surprise, they "leaked" a new
estimate: ten years, or 2015. Why such an extension? The spies justify
their caution by the fact that the Iranian enrichment program encountered
numerous difficulties and that Teheran would not have enough fissile
material before "the beginning of the next decade." A further deadline
that could also be interpreted as a confession of impotence: being tied
down in the Iraq war would make any American military action against Iran
impossible for some years from now, in any case. Several American and
European specialists bet on a nearer date: 2009 or 2010, without bringing
any more evidence to bear.
4) Must we prevent Iran from possessing nuclear weapons?
According to IAEA Director and Nobel Peace prize winner Mohamed El
Baradei, we must "stop thinking that it's morally unacceptable for
certain countries to want nuclear weapons and morally acceptable for
others to lean on them for their defense." But since the June 2005
election of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who proclaims his desire to
wipe Israel off the map, the West distrusts the true intentions of the
Islamic Republic more than ever. And for most analysts, a violation of
the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) by Teheran would also risk bringing
about a very worrying proliferation dynamic in the Middle East. Iran's
nuclearization could also revive the atomic ambitions of Saudi Arabia,
Egypt, even Turkey and establish the definitive failure of international
non-proliferation agreements.
5) Why have the negotiations undertaken by the Europeans failed?
In 2003, France, Germany and Great Britain engaged in negotiations
with Iran for two principle reasons. On the one hand, the Europeans were
- and remain - worried about the constantly increasing reach of Iranian
missiles with a potential nuclear capacity, missiles that could hit
London, Paris, or Berlin one day. On the other hand, right in the middle
of the American war in Iraq, the European troika wanted to prove to the
world that proliferation problems can be settled diplomatically. After
two and a half years of discussions, the failure is bitter. Certainly
Iran has suspended its most sensitive activities on two occasions and
consequently apparently lost a little time. But several experts assert
that these voluntary stoppages were more due to technical problems than
the skill of European negotiators. Last July, the troika made a global
offer to the Islamic Republic: in exchange for the cessation of its
enrichment activities and the opening of all its atomic sites and
archives to IAEA inspectors, Europe would furnish it with light water
nuclear plants (which do not risk being hijacked for military purposes),
would support its candidacy at the WTO, and renew big trade negotiations
that had been abandoned at the beginning of the nuclear crisis. But
Teheran rejected this proposition out of hand. Why? "It's simple: the two
parties' red lines are not compatible," explains Bruno Tertrais. "Iran
wants to promote nuclear enrichment, which the Europeans want to
absolutely prohibit it from doing." There is, it seems, another reason.
"The Americans did not want to participate in these negotiations and
offer the Iranians what might have convinced them: the lifting of the
embargo they've imposed on Teheran since 1979 and the assurance that they
won't attack them," adds Pascal Boniface. Whatever the case, to try to
overcome the impasse, Moscow submitted an intermediate solution in
November 2005 that was accepted by the West and China: the creation of an
Irano-Russian company that would operate in Russia under IAEA control.
New rejection by Teheran, which vociferously declares its desire to
perform enrichment on its own soil. All diplomatic paths having been, in
their estimation, exhausted, the Iranians announced at the beginning of
2006 that they were resuming their sensitive activities, suspended a few
months earlier, including the construction of centrifuges. A slap in the
face for Europe and the whole diplomatic community.
6) What can the Security Council do?
Probably not much. Last week, after multiple threats, the IAEA
consequently transferred the Iranian case to the United Nations' supreme
decision-making body, the Security Council. Motive: Teheran's multiple
breaches of its obligations as a signatory to the Non-proliferation
Treaty. That's an apparent victory for the United States, which has
loudly demanded this transfer for nearly three years. But what new stage
can it attain?
The fifteen members of the Security Council will probably first
launch a solemn - but not comminatory - appeal at Iran. Then, if Teheran
persists, will come the time for sanctions. "The Council will only be
able to take limited measures," explains Bruno Tertrais, "such as
restrictions on the movements of Iranian leaders or the freezing of their
accounts abroad." For there is good reason to bet that two permanent
members will not want to go further than that. Russia, on the one hand,
has just sold surface to air missiles to Iran and is negotiating, among
other things, the supply of fighter planes. Moscow also fears the
destabilization of its southern border in the case of a serious crisis
with the Islamic Republic. On the other hand, there's China, which is
getting ready to sign a gigantic oil and gas contract with Teheran that
is indispensable for its pursuit of economic growth.
The United States will undoubtedly also not seek to move towards the
use of force. Scalded by the Iraqi fiasco of beginning 2003, it wants to
preserve the - very fragile - unity of the international community with
regard to this case. In fact, only Europe - or almost only - envisages
taking more severe measures with respect to Teheran. For several months,
France and Great Britain have been reflecting upon establishing a battery
of "targeted" sanctions that "would spare" the Iranian people. They would
only affect the nuclear program, the Guardians of the Revolution and the
regime's leaders. But no one can predict the impact of such measures.
Under pressure, Iranian leaders could decide to accelerate their race to
the bomb rather than slow it down.
7) Is military action against Iran conceivable?
Stuck in the Iraqi quagmire, the United States does not really
contemplate this eventuality - at least not in the short term. But while
the British Foreign Affairs Minister excludes it "under any
circumstances," Washington obviously wants to be able to brandish this
threat. "Only one thing would be worse than military intervention: that
Iran possess nuclear weapons," repeats Republican Senator John McCain.
Consequently, Pentagon strategists make known that they are working on
scenarios for an attack on Iranian nuclear sites. That could come from
B-2 Stealth bombers stationed in Missouri or from the attack submarines
that cross through the region. As long as it doesn't come from Israel:
Israeli Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz, who originally came from Iran, has
declared that "under no circumstances could Israel tolerate Iran being in
possession of nuclear weapons." The Israelis assert that they have all
the firepower necessary for these preventative strikes. But questions
remain about the range of action of the Hebrew state's bombers.
In fact, a military operation would only serve to delay the Iranian
program, not to destroy it. For the Iranians learned their lessons from
the 1981 bombardment of Osirak in Iraq: they have dispersed and buried
their installations. Only the Ispahan conversion factory is situated far
from an urban center and seems to be little protected. On top of that,
the consequences of such an operation could prove to be catastrophic for
the region's stability. Iran could counter-attack by launching its Shahab
missiles against Israel and American bases in the Middle East. The
Islamic Republic could also stir up the sectarian war in Iraq and
organize a Shiite uprising against American troops. It could also
re-launch Hezbollah attacks against Israel's north. As for the closing of
the Strait of Hormuz through which close to 25% of the world's oil
transits, that would make the price per barrel explode ...
8) How far is the Iranian state prepared to go?
If tensions exist between the different decision-making bodies of the
Iranian government, the nuclear question unifies more than it divides.
There's even a consensus in the country on this subject. "Even those who
are opposed to nuclear weapons, including the lawyer and Nobel Peace
Prize winner Chirin Ebadi, defend Iran's right to civilian nuclear
technology," says Pascal Boniface. But that is not to say that there is
unanimity with respect to the manner of conducting negotiations. Three
attitudes are perceptible within Teheran's power circles. There are those
who favor pursuit of the nuclear program whatever the cost. This first
group includes president Ahmadinejad and the "Kayan" journal which has
always maintained that Iran should quit the Non-Proliferation Treaty. The
second group, represented by Ali Larjani, the head of the Iranian nuclear
issues negotiators, believe that the pursuit of the nuclear cycle "is
Iran's inalienable right," but would like to continue the negotiations
within the framework of international treaties. For the third group,
which is also the most marginal, the costs of pursuing the nuclear cycle
outweigh its advantages. That group also supports a direct dialogue with
the United States. Former president Rafsandjani could share that point of
view. The great unknown remains: the position of Supreme Guide Ali
Khamenei, the ultimate decision-maker on the nuclear issue.
Whatever the case, the nuclear arm-wrestling contest is but one
symptom of Iran's new ambitions. The Americans being bogged down in Iraq
and the increase in the price of gas allow Teheran to claim loud and
clear its status as a regional power. All the more so in that Iran has
seen its position strengthened by its enemies' (Saddam Hussein's and the
Taliban's) defeat and by its friends' victories (the Shiites in Iraq's
elections, Hamas in Palestine). Persuaded that a confrontation with
America is inevitable, the Iranian president prefers to precipitate this
confrontation while the balance of power is in his favor. According to
the International Crisis Group, "We are not at the beginning of a
conflict between Iran and the United States, but in the middle of this
conflict which comprises the theatres of Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria,
Lebanon, and Israel."
Chronology of the Iranian Crisis
August 2002: A group of Iranian exiles asserts that Iran is secretly
constructing two nuclear sites. Satellite photos confirm their
statements.
December 2002: Iran agrees to IAEA inspections.
June 2003: The IAEA accuses Iran of not revealing the extent of its
nuclear program.
October 2003: After a meeting with the French, German, and British
Foreign Affairs Ministers, Iran agrees to suspend its nuclear enrichment
activities.
September 2004: Iran resumes its uranium conversion activities. The IAEA
demands that it stop.
November 2004: Iran agrees to suspend its activities while it begins
negotiations with the three European countries.
August 2005: The new Iranian president rejects the European offer. The
Ispahan enrichment factory starts up again.
September 2005: Very hard IAEA report against Iran.
November 2005: Moscow makes another proposal, also rejected by Teheran.
January 2006: Iran resumes its sensitive activities.
March 9, 2006: the IAEA transmits the case to the Security Council.
*****************************************************************
2 IRNA: President: Any decision denying Iran's right to access nuclear
energy, worthless -
Gachsaran, Kohkiloyeh-Boyer Ahmad prov, March 27, IRNA
Iran-President-Nuclear
President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on Monday said that any decision
on Iran's nuclear dossier which denies the country's right to
access nuclear energy for peaceful purposes will be worthless
for the Iranian nation.
Speaking at the gathering of people in Gachsaran's Takhti
Stadium, he added that the nation will pursue the issue.
Turning to use of nuclear energy in peaceful programs as the
inalienable right of Iranians, Ahmadinejad said that Iran will
not quit such a right.
"The enemies are against our scientific progress and intend to
deprive Iran of its undeniable right by resorting to threats and
psychological warfare. All Iranian people call for access to
peaceful nuclear energy.
"The nation is completely against injustice and tyranny on the
international scene. The Iranians rather favor promotion of
peace and tranquility across the world based on justice and
through kindness," he added.
The chief executive called on everyone to attempt promote
justice and spirituality in the country.
Ahmadinejad pointed to some of the features of Prophet (PBUH)
and said that he dedicated his entire life to Jihad. Mohammad
(PBUH), alone, confronted all deviations, ethical corruptions,
tyrannies and injustice and went through a lot of difficulties.
"As a consequence, the great Islamic civilization materialized
in Medina, while kindness spread throughout the world,"
concluded the president.
The oil-rich city of Gachsaran is situated to the south of
Kohkiloyeh-Boyer Ahmad province.
*****************************************************************
3 Guardian Unlimited: Tehran Wants to Set Up Nuke Fuel Facility
From the Associated Press
[UP]
Tuesday March 28, 2006 6:01 PM
AP Photo VAH101
By JUDITH INGRAM
Associated Press Writer
MOSCOW (AP) - Iran has proposed setting up a nuclear fuel
production facility within its borders with international help,
the Iranian Embassy said Tuesday, days before the five permanent
U.N. Security Council members and Germany meet to discuss
Tehran's suspect program.
The new proposal is an alternative to Russia's offer to host
Iran's nuclear fuel production as a way to ease concerns that
enrichment conducted in Iran could be used to develop weapons.
Iran maintains its atomic program is for generating electricity.
Russia said its enrichment offer was contingent on Iran resuming
a moratorium on domestic enrichment, but the Iranians rejected
that link.
``In terms of satisfying its needs, Tehran cannot remain
dependent on international suppliers,'' the Iranian government
said in the statement.
``Iran would welcome the creation of an international nuclear
fuel center on its territory with the participation of other
countries and in the framework of an international consortium.''
Iran also reiterated that Security Council intervention in the
dispute would ``escalate tensions, entailing negative
consequences that would be of benefit to no party.''
The statement came as top diplomats from the United States,
Britain, China, France, Germany and Russia scheduled a Thursday
meeting in Berlin.
Talks at the United Nations have stalled, with Russia and China
wary of the tough language America, Britain and France are
pushing to include in a draft statement on Tehran's nuclear
activities. That language includes a demand that Iran stop
uranium enrichment, a key process that can produce either fuel
for a nuclear reactor or the material for a nuclear warhead.
The Security Council has the power to impose economic and
political sanctions.
Russia and China are demanding that any statement reinforce the
primacy of the U.N. nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic
Energy Agency, in confronting Iran.
Russian Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov said Tuesday his nation's
offer to host Iranian enrichment remains on the table, but
``Iran should say unambiguously whether it is planning to accept
or reject the offer in order to allay the international
community's concerns,'' the Interfax news agency reported.
Britain, France and Germany broke off more than two years of
talks with Iran in January, saying there was no point in
continuing to negotiate after Tehran said it would restart
enrichment.
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
4 Guardian Unlimited: Straw rejects military action against Iran
Matthew Tempest, political correspondent
Tuesday March 28, 2006
Jack Straw today insisted that military action against Iran
would be neither "appropriate or conceivable", as he unveiled
the Foreign Office's priorities for the next 10 years.
Speaking in London to a conference of Britain's 200 ambassadors,
recalled from around the world for the two-day conference, the
foreign secretary said there would be no "international
consensus" for action on Iran, although there was growing
agreement about Tehran's "intransigence".
And, in a separate white paper, Mr Straw set out energy security,
terrorism and illegal immigration as Foreign Office priorities
for the next ten years.
Mr Straw's comments came two days before a meeting of foreign
ministers in Germany to discuss the next steps to take against
Iran.
Before the meeting went into private session, he told ambassadors
and the press: "I have made clear often enough the fact that I do
not regard military action as appropriate or conceivable, nor do
I believe that there would be any international consensus for
that."
But he warned that there were "anxieties" between countries, such
as Russia and China, which have different interests in the Middle
Eastern state.
In the white paper, entitled Active Diplomacy for a Changing
World, Mr Straw underlined the concerns surrounding Britain's
declining energy reserves and the "tensions" resulting from
large-scale migration.
The paper also carries a new emphasis on consular support for
British nationals in difficulty abroad, following the
publication last week of the Foreign Office's consular guidance.
On energy, the paper notes that Britain now imports more gas
than it exports - relying on supplies from Norway, Russia,
Algeria and the Gulf - and would face the same situation with
oil by 2010.
"Security of supply will become more important for the UK as we
become dependent on importing energy from more distant, diverse
and unstable regions," it said.
"As the UK relies increasingly on importing energy, we need to
work internationally to support open and diversified energy
markets that ensure long-term security of supply."
The paper acknowledged the economic and cultural benefits of
managed migration, but said that illegal immigration undermined
social cohesion and weakened public confidence in the rule of
law.
"It can also provoke tensions in the places large numbers of
migrants travel through or where they settle. Illegal
immigration is often fostered by criminal networks, which
exploit migrants," it said.
"International cooperation is central in tackling this issue.
Those who have no right to remain in the UK must leave or face
being removed. We expect other governments to take back their
nationals who are illegally in the UK."
Other priorities, repeated from the last white paper in 2003 -
which was the first time the FCO had ever put out a so-called
'mission statement' - include making the world safer from global
terrorism and weapons of mass destruction and promoting
sustainable development and poverty reduction "underpinned by
human rights, democracy, good governance and protection of the
environment".
Mr Straw said the expertise of his department's staff in local
areas, including Iran, was a key tool in finding progress
through complex diplomatic territory.
He said: "Equally the negotiations over Iran's nuclear programme
rely on expertise in technologically complex issues, a deep
understanding of Iran and the region, and contacts and influence
around the world to build what is now a growing international
consensus in the face of Iran's intransigence.
"You cannot build expertise and experience overnight and you
cannot get it off the internet either.
"We would not have achieved what we have in this and many other
areas without a global, professional, diplomatic network. These
professional skills bring real benefits to the British people."
The Tory foreign affairs spokesman, Keith Simpson, said the
document showed Labour had "lurched from its 1997 'ethical
foreign policy' to its 1999 'doctrine of humanitarian
intervention' to arrive at 'active diplomacy' in 2006".
28.03.2006: Full text: Active diplomacy for a changing world
[UP]
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
5 AFP: Flurry of UN activity amid signs of progress on Iran statement -
UNITED NATIONS (AFP) - Key members of the UN Security Council
reported some progress in efforts to agree a statement urging
Iran to come clean on its nuclear program.
Envoys of Britain, China, France, Russia and the United States
-- the five permanent, veto-wielding members of the Council
known as the P-5 -- held three rounds of informal talks and were
to meet again later in the afternoon.
The flurry of diplomatic activity comes as foreign ministers of
the P-5 plus Germany prepared to meet Thursday in Berlin to try
to map out a long-term strategy on how to deal with Iran's
refusal to halt uranium enrichment, which could be used in bombs.
"I think we've got a certain momentum," US ambassador John
Bolton told reporters. "The ministers are getting together in
Berlin on Thursday and I think for their purposes and for ours
we'll try to reach agreement here before that."
"We may succeed, we may not succeed but that's what we are
working on," he added. He described the purpose of the Berlin
ministerial meeting as "long-range thinking".
"We are making some progress," said China's UN envoy Wang
Guangya, who stressed that differences between the Western
powers on one side and Russia and China on the other had been
narrowed in the latest consultations.
The 15-member Security Council has been trying in vain for
nearly three weeks to agree on a Franco-British statement,
backed by Washington, that calls on Iran to honor its
international commitments.
The text aims to reinforce demands from the UN nuclear watchdog,
including immediate suspension of all uranium enrichment
activities and a return to a nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty
(NPT) protocol that allows for wider inspections of its nuclear
facilities.
Russia and China have opposed language in the proposed statement
that would even hint at punitive measures against Iran, an ally
and key trading partner.
Another key stumbling block is a demand by Russia and China that
the proposed statement reaffirmed the pre-eminent role of the
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) in dealing with the
nuclear crisis.
"Let the IAEA play the leading role ... reinforce the role of
the IAEA. I think we are moving in that direction," Wang said.
"All of us have said we want to strengthen the hand of the IAEA
and I think that will be clear in the text when it comes out but
the Security Council has a role too and that will be clear,"
Bolton said.
France's UN envoy Jean-Marc de la Sabliere concurred, saying the
proposed non-binding statement, which must be approved by all 15
council members, "will be consistent with the idea that both
(the IAEA and the Security Council) have to play their role."
Meanwhile UN chief Kofi Annan said: "The Iranians will have to
heed the advice of (IAEA head Mohamed) ElBaradei and convince
the international community that their intention is only for
peaceful use of nuclear energy."
"I think it ought to be possible for them to come back to the
(negotiating) table."
Germany, France and Britain, the so-called EU-3, have pursued
three years of inconclusive negotiations to coax Tehran off its
nuclear program in exchange for economic incentives.
On Tuesday, Russia called for an "unambiguous" reply from Iran
on an offer to resolve an international standoff over Tehran's
nuclear program as Security Council talks moved into high gear.
"Iran must give an unambiguous agreement or refusal to this
offer so that all the worries in the international community are
resolved," Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov said at a press
conference in Moscow.
Several rounds of negotiations in recent weeks between Moscow
and Tehran on a Russian proposal to undertake uranium enrichment
on Iran's behalf have failed to yield any concrete results.
Iran earlier agreed "in principle" to the offer but then blamed
the United States for holding back a deal.
AFP
*****************************************************************
6 AFP: Security Council holds informal session on Iran nuclear crisis -
Mon Mar 27, 9:38 PM ET
UNITED NATIONS (AFP) - Members of the UN Security Council held
informal talks on the Iranian nuclear crisis but again failed to
break the impasse over a draft statement demanding a halt to
Iranian uranium enrichment activities.
Diplomats said envoys of Britain, China, France, Russia and the
United States -- the five veto-wielding permanent members of the
council known as the P-5 -- had two rounds of talks, one in the
morning and the other in the afternoon.
In between the two, the P-5 envoys huddled informally with their
colleagues from the 10 other non-permanent council members to
brief them on their deliberations.
The five ambassadors said late Monday that they would meet again
Tuesday morning. There was no word on the substance of the
discussions, particularly on the contentious issues.
The Security Council has been trying in vain for the past two
weeks to reach agreement on a Franco-British statement, backed
by Washington, that calls on Iran
" /> to honour its international nuclear commitments.
But Russia and China have opposed language in the proposed
statement that would even hint at punitive measures against
their ally and key trading partner.
"We don't have a deal but we continued our discussions, we will
continue them and we edged forward... but it's edging forward,"
said Britain's UN envoy Emyr Jones Parry.
"There's still a lot of work to do," chimed France's UN
ambassador Jean-Marc de La Sabliere.
His Chinese counterpart Wang Guangya told AFP that little
progress was made.
"We will refer back to capitals and come back tomorrow," he
noted.
Wang earlier Monday said the Europeans had made several new
proposals while the Russians also submitted their own ideas.
After the P-5 meeting with the 10 other council partners,
Japan's UN envoy Kenzo Oshima told reporters: "I don't know if
it's appropriate to call it a deadlock, the talks are going on
and it's not an easy process."
But he said he did not expect an agreement to emerge before a
meeting of foreign ministers from the P-5 and Germany scheduled
for Thursday in Berlin.
"If they are to meet Thursday in Berlin, one would expect as the
most likely ...that there will be no agreement before that. It's
not easy," Oshima said.
The United States succeeded last month in persuading the
International Atomic Energy Agency
" /> (IAEA) to refer the matter to the Security Council, which
has the authority to impose punitive measures, including
sanctions.
The United States, which is sending Secretary of State
Condoleezza Rice
" /> to the Berlin meeting, accuses Iran of seeking to develop
nculear weapons under the cover of an atomic power program.
Iran rejects the allegation and says it has the right as a
signatory of the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty to pursue
uranium enrichment.
Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
7 AFP: Rice to visit Europe for talks on Iran
Mon Mar 27, 10:58 AM ET
WASHINGTON (AFP) - US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice " />
will leave on a trip to Germany, France and Britain for talks on
Iran " /> 's nuclear program and other issues, a State Department
official said.
Rice will meet with officials of the so-called EU-3 at a time
when talks within the UN Security Council on a statement calling
Iran to account for its suspected nuclear weapons activities have
been snagged.
"Secretary Rice will be traveling to the UK, France and Germany,
leaving this Wednesday and returning Sunday," said the State
Department official, who asked not to be named.
He said the discussions during the four-day trip would cover a
wide range of topics, "but I am sure Iran will be a major
feature of it."
Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
8 AFP: Russia demands clear reply from Iran on nuclear offer -
[Sergei Ivanov]
MOSCOW (AFP) - Russia called for an "unambiguous" reply from
Iran on an offer to resolve an international standoff over
Tehran's nuclear programme as UN Security Council talks moved
into high gear.
"Iran must give an unambiguous agreement or refusal to this
offer so that all the worries in the international community are
resolved," Defence Minister Sergei Ivanov said at a press
conference.
Ivanov's comments came as representatives of the five permanent
UN Security Council members plus Germany readied to meet Thursday
in Berlin to try to work out a way forward.
Several rounds of negotiations in recent weeks between Moscow
and Tehran on a Russian proposal to undertake uranium enrichment
on Iran's behalf have failed to yield any concrete results.
Russia has said the offer remains on the table but Ivanov
appeared to echo growing frustration among Russian officials
with Iran's negotiating tactics.
Iran earlier agreed "in principle" to the offer but then blamed
the United States for holding back a deal.
The offer is aimed at reassuring Europe and the United States,
which fear that if Iran is allowed to carry out the fuel cycle
work itself, it will divert the technology for a weapons
programme.
Tehran says its nuclear programme is part of a drive for
peaceful civilian energy.
Iran appeared to blow cold water on Russia's offer, saying in a
statement Tuesday that Tehran "cannot make itself dependent on
international suppliers."
Nevertheless, it went on, "Iran welcomes the creation of an
international centre for supplying nuclear fuel with the
participation of other countries in the framework of an
international consortium on its own territory."
Late Monday, negotiations between envoys from the five permanent
Security Council countries -- Britain, China, France, Russia and
the United States -- ended a first session of informal talks on
the dossier without agreement on a draft statement demanding a
halt to Iranian uranium enrichment activities.
In between the two rounds of talks in New York they also huddled
informally with their colleagues from the 10 other non-pernament
members.
The five ambassadors said late Monday that they would meet again
Tuesday. There was no word on the substance of the discussions.
The Security Council has been trying in vain for the past two
weeks to reach agreement on the Franco-British statement, backed
by Washington, that calls on Iran to honour its international
commitments.
Russia and China have opposed language in the proposed statement
that would even hint at punitive measures against Iran, an ally
and key trading partner.
But Ivanov on Tuesday sought to stress that Russia was in line
with its Security Council partners.
"The Russian position is no different from the position of the
rest of the international community. Russia is categorically
against proliferation or the threat of proliferation of nuclear
weapons, and I absolutely agree that this menace exists," he
said.
Beijing for its part said Tuesday that the upcoming six-nation
meeting in Berlin was "an important part" of efforts to solve
the standoff.
AFP
*****************************************************************
9 IRNA: Merkel meets ElBaradei on Iran's nuclear program
Berlin, March 27, IRNA
Germany-IAEA-Iran
German Chancellor Angela Merkel met here on Monday with the
Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)
Mohammad ElBaradei to discuss Iran's nuclear program.
No details of their talks at the chancellery were released to
press.
The head of the UN nuclear agency was also scheduled to hold
talks with German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier,
Economic Minister Michael Glos and members of the foreign policy
committee of the German parliament later in the evening.
Merkel and ElBaradei have repeatedly urged a diplomatic solution
to the Iranian nuclear row.
*****************************************************************
10 Xinhua: DPRK to build nuclear armed forces against US attack
www.xinhuanet.com
www.chinaview.cn 2006-03-28 19:55:08
Special report: Six-party talks -- 5th round
Related: Bush reaffirms preemptive strategy
DPRK urges US to lift financial sanctions
DPRK denounces US, ROK drills
PYONGYANG, March 28 (Xinhua) -- The Democratic People's
Republic of Korea (DPRK) on Tuesday vowed to build nuclear armed
forces for self-defense against possible U.S. preemptive nuclear
attack.
A signed commentary of the DPRK's official newspaper Minju
Joson denounced a U.S. national security strategy report, which
regards the DPRK as an "outpost of tyranny."
U.S. President George W. Bush reiterated the preemptive
policy, which he first outlined in 2002, in his 49-page long
national security strategy report released on March 16.
"Under such situation where the U.S.-threatened preemptive
nuclear attack was impending in actuality, the DPRK had no other
option but to make a bold decision to build nuclear armed forces
for self-defence," said the commentary.
The paper said that the U.S. strategy shifted its foreign
policy away from decades of deterrence and containment toward a
more aggressive stance of attacking enemies before they attack
the United States.
"As soon as it took office, the Bush administration newly
adopted its nuclear strategy focused on the DPRK and started
posing undisguised threat of nuclear attack against the DPRK,"
said the Minju Joson.
In the commentary, Pyongyang was also strongly against the
financial sanction imposed by the U.S. last October before the
second phase of the fourth round of six-party talks.
"At the crucial moment when both sides were to move in
actuality toward the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula,
the United States took financial sanctions against the DPRK"
under such unreasonable pretexts as counterfeit notes and money
laundering, added the Minju Joson.
The DPRK has denied the U.S. allegations and ruled out
participation in a new round of disarmament negotiations until
the sanctions are lifted. Enditem
Editor: Zhu Jin
Copyright ©2003 Xinhua News Agency. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
11 Guardian Unlimited: Indian Officials in D.C. for Nuke Deal
From the Associated Press
[UP]
Tuesday March 28, 2006 5:01 AM
By FOSTER KLUG Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON (AP) - India's foreign secretary is visiting
Washington this week, the start of a monthlong effort to help
President Bush sell his landmark civilian nuclear cooperation
deal to a skeptical Congress.
Foreign Secretary Shyam Saran's trip, scheduled to begin
Tuesday, includes meetings with U.S. lawmakers and State
Department officials. Following his visit, a string of Indian
ministers will meet in coming weeks with U.S. officials and
speak at think tanks, press conferences and business gatherings
across Washington. They will argue that a U.S.-Indian deal to
share nuclear technology and fuel is crucial for a close U.S.
ally determined to meet massive energy demands.
Hard questions, however, are expected from lawmakers, some of
whom worry the deal could ruin international efforts to stop the
spread of nuclear weapons technology.
Jon Wolfsthal, a nonproliferation analyst with the Center for
Strategic and International Studies, said Congress was largely
shut out of earlier negotiations on the deal. Meetings with
Indian ministers, he said, will give lawmakers a chance to push
India on issues the Bush administration has said India considers
as deal-breakers, such as trying to get India to sign a
moratorium on the production of nuclear materials.
Lawmakers, he said, ``are going to want to find out for
themselves where the limits of Indian flexibility are.''
Christine Fair, a South Asia analyst with the congressionally
funded U.S. Institute of Peace, said the Indians ``know they
have an uphill battle.''
``There are a lot of skeptics in Congress who do not believe
that we need to have a nuclear deal inked with the Indians for
our relationship with the Indians to go forward,'' she said.
Since Bush and Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh agreed to
pursue an accord on nuclear cooperation earlier this month in
India, administration officials have waged an aggressive
campaign to convince lawmakers and the public that the deal is
the cornerstone of a new global partnership with India.
They say the pact brings India into the nonproliferation
mainstream by increasing international inspections and putting
U.N. safeguards on India's civilian nuclear power industry. The
deal also reduces India's dependence on fossil fuels, supporters
say, by allowing it to build more nuclear power plants.
Critics say U.S. and Indian efforts are an attempt to sell a
flawed deal to lawmakers increasingly willing to question Bush's
leadership as the president's popularity plummets and elections
approach.
Henry Sokolski, executive director of the Nonproliferation
Policy Education Center and a former Pentagon official, said the
Indians' visit reflects a State Department that does not ``think
they can sell this thing alone. They need all the help they can
get.''
Congress is considering a bill that would exempt India from U.S.
laws that restrict trade with countries that have not submitted
to full nuclear inspections. New Delhi has refused to sign the
international Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and conform to
its inspection regime.
The United States and India agreed in early March that India
would separate its civilian and military nuclear facilities. The
two countries still must negotiate the conditions, duration and
scope of the overall cooperation plan.
Rep. Ed Markey, D-Mass., said in a statement Monday that the
Bush administration ``is looking to snooker Congress into
signing an agreement now, promising that details will follow
later.''
The Bush legislation, he said, reduces ``Congress to the role of
a passive rubber-stamp with respect to one of the most critical
nuclear nonproliferation issues of the last decade.''
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
12 IRIB PERSIAN NEWS: US cannot put in practice its threat
2006/03/28
Moscow, March 28 - Deputy Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mohammadi
said on Monday that the US cannot put into practice its threats
against Iran.
Interviewed by the Russian daily Nizavisimaya Gazeta, he said
that given the US is now engaged in two wars in Afghanistan and
Iraq, it cannot also fight with Iran.
"Iran's powerful armed forces, makes it distinct from Iraq and
Afghanistan. Therefore, entering into war with such a country
will be quite hard for the US," he added.
The deputy minister referred to the country as a big warehouse
stockpiled with gunpowder and said that even a single lighted
match thrown at it will explode everything.
"In such a case, all the neighboring countries will also be
damaged and the US seems to have realized it," he added.
Mohammadi said that Iran's nuclear activities were launched 27
years ago, immediately after the victory of the Islamic
Revolution, and that the Iranians have learned how to confront
the US.
"They intend to launch another revolution in Iran and so far as
they do not understand the concept of the Islamic Revolution,
this crisis will continue," he added.
Concerning the perspective of Iran-Russia relations under the
light of the recent developments concerning Iran's nuclear
program, the official said that both states should continue
their strategically favorable ties.
"The West has never considered Russia as its loyal and
permanent ally. But to us, Russia is mostly an Asian rather than
European country. In other words, we are aboard the same vessel.
"Iran is a big and ancient country enjoying outstanding
scientific and cultural status. When the West was still
dominated by dark thoughts, we were what we are. The West should
respect our inalienable rights. Such problems appear when there
is no understanding," he concluded.
Copyright 2004, All Rights Reserved By Islamic Republic of Iran
Broadcasting
*****************************************************************
13 Arab League Head Pushes Commercial Nuke Power For Nuke Weapons
Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2006 00:23:14 -0500
Anyone with a commercial nuclear power reactor
has the ability to make nuclear weapons. Bush and
much of the "deveolped" world's current push for
even more of them bespeaks a literal insanity and
subconcious suicidal/fratricidal mentality that
must be stopped at all costs. Is the path of
Armageddon starting to unroll before the world's
eyes via "civilian" nuclear power, that is "Atoms
For War"?
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/international/AP-Arab-Summit.html
Head of Arab League Pushes Nuke Programs
a.. E-Mail This
b.. Printer-Friendly
c.. Save Article
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Published: March 28, 2006
Filed at 6:45 p.m. ET
KHARTOUM, Sudan (AP) -- The head of the Arab
League called on Arab states Tuesday to work
toward ''entering the nuclear club'' by developing
atomic energy -- a new concern for a Western world
already trying to rein in Iran's nuclear ambitions
and fretting about a possible Mideast arms race.
Amr Moussa's comments came as a surprise at a
troubled Arab League summit meant to tackle crises
ranging from Iraq to the Palestinian peace
process.
U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan warned Arab
leaders that the Mideast faces one of its most
critical periods.
''You are meeting today here while the whole Arab
world and the region is witnessing turmoil,''
Annan said in a statement read by an envoy.
But Arab leaders seemed unlikely to take serious
action. In private sessions before the summit,
Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari castigated
Arab governments, saying their promises at the
summit to help Iraq were ''rhetoric.''
The summit has already been undermined by low
attendance. Ten heads of state from the league's
22 members stayed away, most notably Egypt's
president and Saudi Arabia's king -- two regional
heavyweights and top U.S. allies.
Moussa spoke to the gathered leaders at the
opening of the summit, saying, ''I would like to
call on the Arab world to enter into the world of
peaceful use of nuclear energy with all speed and
momentum.''
''This is a legal right ensured for all states
that are party to the Nuclear Nonproliferation
Treaty,'' he said.
No Arab country is known to have a significant
program for nuclear energy, and few have shown a
drive to do so.
But Moussa's call was likely to cause concern in
the United States and Europe, which are pressing
for U.N. Security Council action on Iran's nuclear
program. Washington accuses Iran of seeking to
develop nuclear weapons, an accusation Tehran
denies, saying it seeks only to generate
electricity.
The issue of Iran has divided Arab leaders.
Countries close to Iran, including Kuwait and the
United Arab Emirates, have expressed concern over
its program, focussing on safety issues and the
threat of a possible regional arms race. Moussa,
an Egyptian, quarreled publicly with the Emirates'
foreign minister after he urged Gulf leaders to
focus on Israel, not Iran.
Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir accused the West
of double standards on the nuclear issue.
''This is an issue which should not be a subject
of discrimination. For the international community
to be honest, Israel should be pushed to sign the
Nonproliferation Treaty and open its nuclear
installations for inspection,'' he said in a
speech to the summit Tuesday.
The issue of Iran's standoff with the West was on
the agenda for the summit, but the political
turmoil and violence in Iraq and the issue of how
to deal with a new Hamas-led Palestinian
government loomed larger.
The annual Arab summits regularly conclude with
resolutions that often fail to yield concrete
action. This year, though, leaders received
messages asking them to be assertive.
Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, whose
country is not a member of the league but who was
invited as a guest, encouraged the leaders to make
democratic changes, respect human rights and
accept accountability.
''After that, our efforts to maintain peace and
security will be more effective,'' he told them.
Among the resolutions agreed upon is one that
promises help for Iraq and to eventually open
embassies there, a top demand of the Baghdad
government.
But Iraq's Zebari dismissed the resolutions as
''rhetoric'' and told his Arab counterparts to
deal realistically with Iraq, according to Arab
diplomats who participated in the private
discussions Sunday.
''You should learn from the mistakes of Saddam
Hussein,'' he said when some of the ministers
pressed for a more anti-Western stance in the
summit resolutions, according to the diplomats,
who spoke on condition of anonymity because the
meeting was private.
When the ministers complained about his comments,
Zebari retorted with an Iraqi proverb: ''Ask an
experienced man, not just a learned one.''
*****************************************************************
14 IRNA: Israel not interested at all in nuclear weapons-free Mideast -
Berlin, March 28, IRNA
Germany-Mideast-Israel
Israel is not interested at all in joining a nuclear weapons-free
zone in the Middle East, a German university professor said on
Tuesday.
"Israel has never admitted to having nuclear weapons. The
future (Israeli) government - however it might look like - has
not the least interest in a nuclear weapons-free zone in the
region," said Guenter Meyer of the Johannes Guttenberg
University, located in the southwestern German city of Mainz, in
a brief interview with IRNA.
"Why should Israel voluntarily abandon its deterrence potential
as the only nuclear power and who can force the Israeli
government to do so?" the scholar asked rhetorically.
Meyer also stressed that neither right-wing candidates for the
Israeli prime minister position, Benjamin Netanyahu and Ehud
Olmert, are "not interested in a stabile peace in the Near East
because this could only be achieved jointly with the
Palestinians".
Meanwhile the German expert accused the US government of having
a "double moral" towards Israel by ignoring the ongoing human
rights violations and brutal occupation policy of Palestine.
*****************************************************************
15 Guardian Unlimited: Arab Nations Urged to Enter Nuclear Club
From the Associated Press
[UP]
Tuesday March 28, 2006 2:46 PM
AP Photo NN107
By TANALEE SMITH Associated Press Writer
KHARTOUM, Sudan (AP) - Secretary-General Amr Moussa called on
Arab leaders Tuesday to move toward a goal of ``entering the
nuclear club'' and making use of atomic energy for peaceful
purposes.
The absence of at least 10 heads of state, including President
Hosni Mubarak of Egypt and Saudi Arabia's King Abdullah, raised
concerns of a lackluster summit in a year where many had hoped
to see serious efforts at dealing with regional troubles.
The 22-member Arab League is contending with complex issues
involving Iraq's future and how to deal with a Hamas-led
government in the Palestinian territories.
The U.S. State Department has urged Arab leaders to ``be as
supportive as possible of the new Iraqi government'' by sending
ambassadors and providing economic assistance to Baghdad.
For their part, Arab governments - already suspicious of
non-Arab Iran - have been irritated by plans for talks on Iraq
between Iranian and U.S. officials.
Moussa was particularly emphatic about Iraq in his address.
``Any solution for the Iraqi problem cannot be reached without
Arabs, and Arab participation,'' he said. ``Any result of
consultations without Arab participation will be considered
insufficient and will not lead to a solution.''
Moussa called on Arabs ``to enter into the nuclear club and make
use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes,'' a plea that comes
as the world is wary about nearby Iran's nuclear ambitions.
In his opening speech, Algerian President Abdelaziz Bouteflika,
host of last year's summit, called on Iraqis to close ranks to
avoid a sectarian conflict pitting the country's Shiite majority
against the once-dominant Sunni Arab minority.
Iraq's neighbors, he said, should ``honestly cooperate with the
Iraqi people to preserve the country's integrity and unity.''
The host, Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir, used his opening
speech to praise Palestinian elections and denounce Israel and
Western countries that have threatened to cut off aid in
response to the victory of the militant Hamas.
``We say no to robbing the Palestinian people of their
democratic choice, no to punishing the Palestinian people for
exercising their right to choose who rules, and no to succumbing
to Israel's violations of all the promises it made,'' he said,
winning the applause of the audience of heads of state and
delegates.
Hamas' landslide election victory in January has raised fears of
a halt in the Mideast peace process. The United States and
European Union have threatened to cut direct financial aid vital
to keeping the Palestinian Authority running, and Washington has
pressed its Arab allies to follow suit.
However, a resolution to be adopted by the leaders meeting in
Khartoum will pledge continued Arab funding for the Palestinian
Authority.
Al-Bashir also condemned ``terrorism in all its forms'' and
called for the use of all means to fight it. But he asked for an
international conference to ``agree on an objective definition
of terrorism'' - a long-standing demand by several Arab nations.
Sudan is also hoping to win Arab backing for its position on the
conflict in its Darfur region, where it is resisting Western
pressure - and a U.N. resolution - for the African Union
peacekeeping force there to be replaced by a bigger U.N. force.
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
16 RIA Novosti: Russian company guarantees nuclear fuel deliveries to S.Korea
28/ 03/ 2006
MOSCOW, March 28 (RIA Novosti) - A subsidiary of Russia's top
civilian nuclear power company said Tuesday it would ensure
stable nuclear fuel supplies to South Korea.
Tekhsnabexport (Tenex), a producer and exporter of nuclear
materials, said it was considering various options for expanding
its presence in the Asia Pacific, rejecting allegations by U.S.
company Palmco that it was seeking to crowd the Americans out of
the South Korean nuclear market.
The Russian and U.S. companies have been involved in a long
running legal dispute.
Their cooperation began in 1988, when the two companies signed a
long-term contract for the delivery of low-enriched uranium for
nuclear power plants in South Korea.
Tenex said it was planning to continue cooperation with Palmco
under earlier contracts for nuclear fuel supplies to South
Korea.
Tekhsnabexport has been supplying nuclear materials
(low-enriched uranium) to South Korea for almost two decades.
© 2005 RIA Novosti
*****************************************************************
17 AFP: Saudis, with Pakistani help, working on nuclear programme -
BERLIN (AFP) - Saudi Arabia is working secretly on a nuclear
programme, with help from Pakistani experts, a German magazine
reports in its latest edition, citing Western security sources.
The German magazine Cicero says that during the Hajj pilgrimages
to Mecca in 2003 through 2005, Pakistani scientists posed as
pilgrims to come to Saudi Arabia in aircraft laid on by the
oil-rich kingdom.
Between October 2004 and January 2005, some of them took the
opportunity to "disappear" from their hotel rooms, sometimes for
up to three weeks, it quoted German security expert Udo Ulfkotte
as saying.
According to Western security services, the magazine added,
Saudi scientists have been working since the mid-1990s in
Pakistan, a nuclear power since 1998 thanks to the work of the
now-disgraced Pakistani scientist Abdul Qadeer Khan.
Cicero, which will appear on newstands on Thursday, also quoted
a US military analyst, John Pike, as saying that Saudi bar codes
can be found on half of Pakistan's nuclear weapons "because it
is Saudi Arabia which ultimately co-financed the Pakistani
atomic nuclear programme".
The magazine also said satellite images prove that Saudi Arabia
has set up in Al-Sulaiyil, south of Riyadh, a secret underground
city and dozens of underground silos for missiles.
According to some Western security services, long-range
Ghauri-type missiles of Pakistani-origin are housed inside the
silos.
AFP
*****************************************************************
18 [NukeNet] CLEAN NUCLEAR POWER?
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2006 17:56:46 -0800
NukeNet Anti-Nuclear Network (nukenet@energyjustice.net)
'Clean' nuclear power?
From Mr John Busby
February 22, 2005 UK Times
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,59-1494615,00.html
Sir, Papers delivered to the World Nuclear Association’s
annual symposiums show an industry in crisis in that primary
supplies of uranium provide only 55 per cent of the current
demand, the balance coming from the so-called secondary
sources of ex-weapons material, inventories and reworked
mine tailings. The papers indicate that the secondary
sources are running down.
The 36 reactors under construction (letter, February 17) can
only be supplied by the scheduled closing of many of the 430
existing reactors, whose life is in some cases being
extended by ignoring the safety implications associated with
the deterioration in the materials of their construction as
a result of irradiation.
Even if nuclear power is “carbon dioxide clean”, which it is
not, the contribution it makes to global energy supplies is
a mere 2½ per cent. Using the lower grades of uranium ore as
the higher grades are depleted leads to even more carbon
dioxide being released from the less efficient mining,
milling and enrichment involved.
Nuclear power offers neither sustainability nor a “clean”
overall fuel cycle and cannot contribute to an alleviation
of global warming. There is no “nuclear option”.
Yours faithfully,
JOHN BUSBY,
Oakwood,
Melford Road, Lawshall,
Bury St Edmunds IP29 4PY.
February 17.
Posted for educational and research purposes only,
- in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 -
_______________________________________________________________________
Subscribe/Unsubscribe Here: http://www.energyjustice.net/nukenet/
Change your settings or access the archives at:
http://energyjustice.net/mailman/listinfo/nukenet_energyjustice.net
*****************************************************************
19 Study Links "Smog" to Arctic Warming
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2006 21:01:38 -0600 (CST)
NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies
Tuesday 14 March 2006
NASA scientists have found that a major form of global air pollution
involved in summertime "smog" has also played a significant role in
warming the Arctic.
In a global assessment of the impact of ozone on climate warming,
scientists at the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS), New
York, evaluated how ozone in the lowest part of the atmosphere changed
temperatures over the past 100 years. Using the best available estimates
of global emissions of gases that produce ozone, the GISS computer model
study reveals how much this single air pollutant, and greenhouse gas, has
contributed to warming in specific regions of the world.
According to this new research, ozone was responsible for one-third
to half of the observed warming trend in the Arctic during winter and
spring. Ozone is transported from the industrialized countries in the
Northern Hemisphere to the Arctic quite efficiently during these seasons.
The findings have been accepted for publication in the American
Geophysical Union's Journal of Geophysical Research-Atmospheres.
Ozone plays several different roles in the Earth's atmosphere. In the
high-altitude region of the stratosphere, ozone acts to shield the planet
from harmful ultraviolet radiation. In the lower portion of the
atmosphere (the troposphere), ozone can damage human health, crops and
ecosystems. Ozone is also a greenhouse gas and contributes to global
warming.
Ozone is formed from several other chemicals found in the atmosphere
near the Earth's surface that come from both natural sources and human
activities such as fossil fuel burning, cement manufacturing, fertilizer
application and biomass burning. Ozone is one of several air pollutants
regulated in the United States by the U. S. Environmental Protection
Agency.
The impact of ozone air pollution on climate warming is difficult to
pinpoint because, unlike other greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide,
ozone does not last long enough in the lower atmosphere to spread
uniformly around the globe. Its warming impact is much more closely tied
to the region it originated from. To capture this complex picture, GISS
scientists used a suite of three-dimensional computer models that starts
with data on ozone sources and then tracks how ozone chemically evolved
and moved around the world over the past century.
The warming impact of low-altitude ozone on the Arctic is very small
in the summer months because ozone from other parts of the globe does not
have time to reach the region before it is destroyed by chemical
reactions fueled by ample sunshine. As a result, when it is summertime in
the Northern Hemisphere, ozone-induced warming is largest near the
sources of ozone emissions. The computer model showed large summer
warming from ozone over western North America and eastern Europe/central
Asia, areas with high levels of ozone pollution during that time of year.
The new results identify an unexpected benefit of air pollution
control efforts worldwide, according to lead author Drew Shindell. "We
now see that reducing ozone pollution can not only improve air quality
but also have the added benefit of easing climate warming, especially in
the Arctic."
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The research was supported by NASA's Atmospheric Chemistry Modeling and
Analysis Program.
*****************************************************************
20 Moscow Times: Russia Picks Site for New Nuclear Center
Wednesday, March 29, 2006. Issue 3381. Page 5.
By Yuriy Humber Staff Writer
Russia has picked the town of Angarsk as the site for its
international nuclear fuel service center, part of an initiative
to assume a greater role in the international nuclear processing
industry, a government official said Monday.
The Federal Atomic Energy Agency will seek approval from the
international nuclear watchdog to have an existing chemicals
plant in Angarsk certified as an international service center,
an agency spokesman said by telephone.
The Angarsk Electrolysis Chemical Complex already houses uranium
conversion and enrichment facilities.
The proposed location comes to light two months after President
Vladimir Putin first pitched Russia as a site for one of a
handful of international centers -- to be overseen by the
International Atomic Energy Agency -- to provide a full cycle of
processing services on behalf of other countries.
Putin's proposal coincided with international concerns over
Iran's plans to commence nuclear enrichment.
"Angarsk would not accommodate all the elements of the
international program. But, it could deal with [uranium]
enrichment," among other processing functions, agency spokesman
Sergei Novikov said. The training of personnel to operate
nuclear power plants and the setting up of waste storage
facilities would be located elsewhere, he said.
Should Angarsk receive final approval from the IAEA, it is
likely to be presented by Russia at the Group of Eight meeting
this summer as its site of choice for a full-cycle processing
facility.
In addition to Russia's proposals, G8 heads of state are also
expected to look at a U.S. initiative focusing on recycling
nuclear waste, dubbed the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership, or
GNEP.
During a recent visit to Moscow, U.S. Energy Secretary Samuel
Bodman invited Russia to give financial and technological
know-how to the GNEP.
"Essentially, it's now for Presidents Putin and Bush to work out
at the G8 meeting how the two initiatives will work together.
Then we'll see progress on setting up the centers," a source
close to the federal agency said.
The Angarsk plant, situated 100 kilometers west of Lake Baikal,
already offers conversion and enrichment facilities, exporting
about half of its production to countries including the United
States, Europe, China and Japan. The complex employs about 6,300
people, according to its web site.
"Many thought one of the closed towns in the Urals or
Krasnoyarsk would be picked," said Alexander Pikayev, a nuclear
issues expert at the Institute of World Economics and
International Relations.
In its favor is Angarsk's close proximity to sizeable energy
resources, he added.
As international efforts continue to dissuade Iran from domestic
uranium enrichment, the Angarsk chemical plant could also
feature in the proposal for a Russian-Iranian joint venture to
solve that problem, sources close to the federal agency said.
In that venture, Russia would be willing to cede partial
financial control of the Angarsk operation but would not allow
access to the technological side. This would reduce the risk of
proliferation, the sources said.
© Copyright 2006 The Moscow Times. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
21 London Times: Energy can be cleaner, if deadlock is broken -
Britain - Times
The Times March 29, 2006
Analysis
By Camilla Cavendish
THE Prime Minister's desire to bring America, India and China to
the table on climate change is worthy.
It is not clear, however, whether persuading them to sign up to
his new goals on climate change in principle will entice them
into action.
Business needs more than vague promises to get the clear signal
about long-term investment that Tony Blair hopes for.
There is already a global agreement on greenhouse gas emissions:
it is called the Kyoto Protocol. India and China are signed up in
principle but, like other developing nations, they are not bound
by its targets.
The initiative is an advance on Kyoto in only one respect: it is
intended to break the deadlock with America, which sees Kyoto as
a leftist conspiracy.
Mr Blair hopes to capitalise on the progress in the American
position that was made at the Gleneagles summit last year, when
they agreed that climate change was in part man-made.
Kyoto has not been a great success, for sure. Only two of the
European signatories, Britain and Sweden, look set to meet its
targets for reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
But it is arguable that the very existence of the protocol has
prompted individual US states, most notably California, New York
and Oregon, into setting their own targets for reducing carbon
emissions.
They expect that whoever becomes President in 2008 will be forced
to act. It is not yet clear whether a new pact would accelerate
that process. But here are some of the "clean technologies" that
will be under discussion:
# "Clean coal" technology: This is top of the American agenda. A
new generation of the old smokeless fuels is being tested from
which the carbon dioxide emitted could be recovered after
burning, then stored underground. Carbon capture and storage
processes are extremely new. BP opened its pioneering reservoir
in the desert in Algeria in 2004. Some green groups suggest that
there are dangers in an "out of sight, out of mind" solution.
# Nuclear power: The chestnut is gaining favour with Mr Blair. It
is clean, carbon-free and proponents claim relatively cheap,
although that is disputed. France produces 78 per cent of its
electricity from nuclear. There is still no solution for making
waste absolutely safe, or for securing power stations against
terrorist attack.
# Renewable energy sources: Solar, wind and water are all
carbon-free and often underestimated. A key issue is how to store
energy that can come intermittently. Sharp, the Japanese
electronics company, claims to be close to a breakthrough on
making the storage of solar energy more efficient.
# Energy efficiency: Often overlooked, but potentially hugely
powerful. The Rocky Mountain Institute in Colorado has built cars
and buildings that save up to 80 per cent of energy through
clever design and insulation. Combined heat and power can reduce
wastage substantially and are lauded in the Government's climate
change review.
# Hydrogen: The great hope of the future. Hydrogen fuel cells can
power cars, producing only water. Their widespread use is a long
way off, however.
Copyright 2006 Times Newspapers Ltd.
*****************************************************************
22 Guardian Unlimited: Nuclear reactions
Impetus within the EU for a revival of atomic energy
is gathering pace, writes David Gow
Tuesday March 28, 2006
The overwhelming majority of EU leaders at last week's EU
summit, including Tony Blair, gave strong backing to a revival
of nuclear power as the answer to Europe's need to reduce its
growing dependence on overseas energy supplies and to combat
climate change.
Only Germany and Austria explicitly rejected the nuclear option
in secret summit talks, according to senior German diplomats who
pointed out that Angela Merkel, the country's chancellor and a
trained physicist, favoured it personally but was bound by her
social democrat coalition partners to reject it.
Article continues
Andris Piebalgs, the EU energy commissioner and author of this
month's green paper on a common energy policy, made plain in an
interview that revived atomic power was not the "silver bullet"
for meeting Europe's triple objectives of security of supply,
sustainable development and competitiveness.
"There are no silver bullets, and you cannot believe that, if
you build new nuclear power stations, that will solve
everything," he told Guardian Unlimited. "Countries with
expertise are well-placed to replace existing plant or build new
stations, but we should not say that nuclear energy will meet
all three objectives cheaply and efficiently. It has huge costs
and lots of complications, including the issue of waste and
final storage."
Mr Piebalgs, a Latvian, insisted that countries pursuing the
nuclear option needed to follow the example of Finland, which is
building Europe's first new nuclear plant since the Chernobyl
disaster 20 years ago - a French-designed pressured-water
reactor.
"Finland's decision was based on a thorough analysis of the
nuclear option and a political debate, including about safe
final storage, so each citizen knows that he is not condemning
his children to a dangerous future," he said. "The only genuine
silver bullet is energy efficiency and conservation."
The summit last week endorsed the notion of an EU plan to reduce
energy consumption by 20% by 2020 along with a target of raising
the current 6% of primary energy use provided by renewables to
20% by the same date.
But Ms Merkel and other leaders rejected Mr Piebalgs's proposal
for a single European energy regulator to police the market,
providing the framework for investment in common gas and
electricity grids that, together with new power plants, could
cost 1000bn (£69bn) between now and 2030. By then, the EU will
be importing 70% of its energy from abroad, mainly gas from
Russia, Algeria and Norway, as North Sea reserves run out.
Mr Piebalgs, who also favours the use of clean-coal and
carbon-sequestration as well as biomass within each country's
energy mix, insisted that dropping the single regulator was not
a problem - provided the 25 national regulators acted according
to common rules within the single market and encouraged
networks, including pipelines and grids, to function on a
cross-border basis.
"It doesn't mean Brussels is taking over the networks, but
accurate information is needed on both sides of the grid to
encourage investment and overcome the bottlenecks or congestion
which prevent the export of supplies across national borders,"
he said, suggesting a pan-EU supply observatory based within the
commission.
A few days before last week's summit, José Manuel Barroso, the
commission president, failed to persuade the Russian president,
Vladimir Putin, to ratify a proposed energy charter that would
allow EU companies access to his country's gas pipelines and
enable them to invest in upstream activities. Russia supplies
one-quarter of the EU's gas.
"Russia has the biggest untapped reserves of energy, and we need
access to these. Russia has not ratified the charter but it
hasn't rejected it, and we would like it to follow complete
liberalisation in its gas sector, giving clear access to its
pipes for third countries," he said.
He insisted the EU, after the - exaggerated - fears raised by
Russia's decision to turn off gas supplies to neighbouring
Ukraine earlier this year, had won a breakthrough in persuading
Mr Putin to be a reliable long-term supplier. Javier Solana, the
EU foreign policy head, is to conduct further talks with Russia
on this issue, but Mr Piebalgs insisted companies would
negotiate on price and volume.
He said: "Russia will not use gas for short-term political
goals, but long-term it's different and Europe, like Russia,
needs to diversify its supplies. We would like to have a lot of
suppliers while Russia, whose firms such as Gazprom are entering
the EU market, needs a lot of consumers."
Mr Piebalgs indicated that a critical answer to Europe's
long-term supply needs was to increase the market for liquefied
natural gas (LNG), which could be imported from several
countries. He suggested LNG should provide 20%-25% of European
energy within the next 25 years.
Useful link
EU competition commission
[UP]
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
23 NRC: NRC to Discuss 2005 Performance at Sequoyah Nuclear Power Plant
News Release - Region II - 2006-00
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
Office of Public Affairs, Region II
61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, GA 30303
No. II-06-008 March 28, 2006
CONTACT: Ken Clark (404) 562-4416
Roger D. Hannah (404) 562-4417 E-mail: opa2@nrc.gov
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff is scheduled to meet
with Tennessee Valley Authority officials April 5 to discuss the
NRCs annual assessment of safety performance at the Sequoyah
nuclear power plant, located near Soddy-Daisy, Tenn. The period
covered is the calendar year 2005.
The 2:00 p.m. meeting at the Sequoyah Training Center is open to
public observation. Before the meeting ends, NRC staff will be
available to answer public questions on the plants safety
performance, as well as the agencys role in ensuring safe
operation of the facility.
Each year the NRC staff assesses the performance of the Sequoyah
plant and all of the nations other commercial nuclear power
plants, NRC Region II Administrator William Travers said. This
meeting gives us a chance to discuss our assessment with the
company, with local officials and with residents near the plant.
Our aim is to make this information available to the public and
answer any questions people may have about our oversight.
The report says the Sequoyah plant operated safely during 2005.
The NRC uses color-coded inspection findings and performance
indicators to assess nuclear plant performance. The colors start
with green and increase to white, yellow or red, commensurate
with the safety significance of the issues involved. Both
Sequoyah reactors received green inspection findings from the
NRC during 2005, which means that all were of low safety
significance. As a result, Sequoyah will receive the baseline,
or normal, level of NRC inspections during 2006.
A letter sent from the NRC Region II Office to plant officials
addresses the performance of the plant during the period and
will serve as the basis for the meeting discussion. It is
available on the NRC web site at
www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/LETTERS/seq_2005q4.pdf [PDF
Icon] .
Routine inspections are performed by NRC Resident Inspectors
assigned to the plant and by inspection specialists from the
Region II Office in Atlanta, and the agencys headquarters in
Rockville, Md. In addition to the baseline inspections in 2006,
the NRC plans inspections of Sequoyahs Independent Spent Fuel
(Dry Cask) Storage Installation and inspections of Unit 2
containment building sumps and the Unit 2 reactor pressure
vessel heads and head penetration nozzles. These inspections are
part of the agencys review of sump clogging and vessel head
penetration cracking at pressurized water reactors.
Current performance information for Sequoyah Unit 1 is available
on the NRCs web site at
www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/SEQ1/seq1_chart.html and at
www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/SEQ1/seq2_chart.html for
Sequoyah Unit 2.
Last revised Tuesday, March 28, 2006
*****************************************************************
24 newsobserver.com: Utility: Nuclear good for climate
March 28, 2006
Raleigh · Durham · Cary · Chapel Hill
Progress reports on global warming
'We don't have many options,' CEO McGehee said.
John Murawski, Staff Writer Progress Energy CEO Robert McGehee
said Monday the surest way to combat global warming is by
building nuclear power plants.
His comments amplified a report the Raleigh utility issued
Monday on how it's preparing to make electricity in an world
constrained by global warming. Progress Energy issued the report
in response to activist investors who are trying to encourage
utilities linked to high greenhouse emissions from coal plants
to use alternative energy sources.
McGehee said that short of a national policy that taxes or
limits the activities of the auto, chemical and utility
industries, Progress Energy's best option is nuclear, a form of
energy that doesn't spew air pollutants and imperil the planet's
climate.
The company is considering building a new reactor at its Shearon
Harris site in Wake County. McGehee said the only foreseeable
obstacles are flawed forecasts of customer growth or significant
public opposition.
"We don't have many options," he said, in a discussion with The
News &Observer editors and writers.
A defense of nuclear power is not exactly what the investors had
hoped to hear, but the groups lauded Progress Energy for
acknowledging the reality of global warming and outlining its
efforts to tackle the problem.
"This conclusion they need to focus on nuclear is a little
premature," said Will Thomas, director of socially responsible
investing for the Church of the Brethren Benefit Trust, one of
the investor groups. "But other than this tendency to focus on
the one solution, I think they've done a good first step."
Other investors were the City of New York Comptroller's Office
and Boston Common Asset Management.
Among other utilities the investors pressed, three refused to
issue reports, said Dan Bakal, director of electric power
programs at Ceres, a Boston nonprofit that advised the Progress
Energy shareholders.
Nearly half the electricity produced by Progress Energy in the
Carolinas comes from coal-burning power plants, which produce
pollution linked to climate change. But to build new coal or
natural-gas plants probably won't make sense financially or
environmentally, McGehee said.
Global warming is associated with rapidly melting ice caps, a
corresponding rise in ocean levels, and extreme weather.
"We do think that it's a real issue," McGehee said. "It may be
hard to quantify, as to the extent of the impact, but man is
having an impact and something needs to be done."
Progress Energy officials say that solar, wind and other
renewables can help at the margins, but are not feasible on a
large scale today and would significantly drive up the cost of
electricity.
Environmentalists counter that alternative energy is cheaper
than nuclear power; they want the state to require Progress
Energy and Duke Power to produce or buy a portion of their power
from renewable sources. Several dozen states have rules in place
that obligate utilities to produce up to 30 percent of their
power from alternative energy sources.
The N.C. Utilities Commission is expected to hold hearings this
year on these and other energy policies.
Last year less than 2 percent of the electricity Progress Energy
produced in the Carolinas comes from renewable energy sources
such as solar panels, hydro generators and burning animal offal
and other wastes.
Progress Energy is hoping to add new alternative energies to its
fuel mix, and is testing mixing wood chips with coal later this
year at the Sutton Plant in Wilmington.
In addition, the company is negotiating to generate electricity
in Florida by burning e-Grass, a flammable crop that grows
rampantly. The project would begin next year and generate 120
megawatts of electricity, which is about 13 percent of the
capacity of the 915-megawatt Shearon Harris nuclear plant.
Online: To read Progress Energy's complete report to investors
on global warming, go to:
www.progress-energy.com/environment/climatechange.asp. Staff
writer John Murawski can be reached at 829-8932 or
murawski@newsobserver.com.
© Copyright 2006, The News & Observer Publishing Company
A subsidiary of The McClatchy Company
*****************************************************************
25 RIA Novosti: China ready to join Russia in floating NPP construction
28/ 03/ 2006
BEIJING, March 28 (RIA Novosti) - Russia and China look set to
take their already substantial energy cooperation to a new
level, as a Russian official from the country's top civilian
nuclear body said Tuesday that Beijing was ready to join efforts
to construct floating nuclear power plants.
"China has openly stated it was willing to cooperate in this
field, including in terms of investment," said Vitaly Ryabov, a
department head at the Federal Agency for Nuclear Power.
The official's comments echo a source in a Russian delegation
that visited Beijing last fall who said that China was
considering extending a loan for the construction of one such
unit in northern Russia.
If the plans are followed through, it will be the latest chapter
in Russia's dealings with its energy-hungry neighbor, following
the signing of a contract to supply Beijing with 80 billion
cubic meters of natural gas a year earlier this month. Russia
already supplies China with Siberian crude, and an offshoot of a
proposed pipeline to the Pacific Ocean could lead to a
substantial increase in oil bound for the rapidly developing
Asian giant.
With China set to up its nuclear energy capacities dramatically
by 2020, Russia's nuclear agency is showcasing the country's
achievements in the field at the Nuclear Industry China 2006
exhibition, running in Beijing from March 28 through 31, which
brings together producers and suppliers of equipment and
technology for nuclear power plants. It is one of the events on
the program of the Year of Russia in China, a series of
cultural, economic and other events designed to promote
bilateral ties.
Ryabov said Russia regarded China as a promising partner in the
sphere of peaceful nuclear energy and was conducting joint
research with the country into fast breeder reactors.
© 2005 RIA Novosti
*****************************************************************
26 RIA Novosti: Russian nuclear tech exporter ready to complete Slovakian NPP
28/ 03/ 2006
MOSCOW, March 28 (RIA Novosti) - Russia's main exporter of
nuclear technology started presenting proposals in Slovakia
Tuesday to complete the construction of the second part of a
major nuclear power plant, the company said.
The Atomstroiexport presentation for the Mohovce plant will
last for three days and will focus on Russia's ability to finish
the construction of the third and fourth power-generating units.
"Slovakia is highly interested in the Russian proposals,"
Atomstroiexport said in a news release.
According to the Russian company, new technical solutions to
ensure safety at the NPP equipped with VVER-440 reactors are
particularly attractive to the Slovakian side, but a spokesman
said the Russian proposal was one of many Slovakia was
considering.
"Czech company Skoda and other European companies will compete
for the project, but Atomstroiexport has reason to hope it will
play a proactive part in the work," the representative said.
The Soviet Union and Czechoslovakia signed an intergovernmental
agreement to build the Mohovce plant, which is about 120
kilometers (75 miles) east of Bratislava, in 1980. The first
power-generating unit was commissioned in 1998, and the second
in 2000. However, work on the second part of the NPP was
suspended in 1992, when the construction of the third and fourth
units was 70% finished and the technological elements were 30%
ready.
European environmentalists, especially in neighboring countries,
have consistently raised objections to the plant, citing
concerns over its Soviet-era design and fears that the Chernobyl
disaster of 1986 could be repeated.
However, work will now continue where it was left off, after a
decision to complete the construction was made. Last July,
Atomstroiexport arranged for a Russian delegation to visit the
NPP for experts to study the site, the state of equipment and
technical documentation as well as to discuss Russia's possible
participation in the completion of the third and fourth units.
© 2005 RIA Novosti
*****************************************************************
27 Rutland Herald: Entergy Nuclear to move ahead on power boost
Rutland Vermont News & Information
March 28, 2006
By Herald Staff
BRATTLEBORO — Entergy Nuclear said Monday that it has determined
the source of the mystery sound that had halted the power boost
at the Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant, and the plant is safe
to move to the next power plateau.
However, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission said it would need a
couple of days to evaluate Entergy's studies and data before
giving the go-ahead to boost power by another 5 percent.
Robert Williams, spokesman for Entergy, said the source of the
acoustic vibration was the force of the steam traveling across a
side steam line in the plant.
Williams said Jay Thayer, Entergy site vice president, had
earlier compared the sound to the blowing of a flute across an
open key.
"After extensive evaluation of the data gathered at this
plateau, our conclusion is that the plant can be safely raised
to the next plateau, and we've forwarded the results to the
NRC," Williams said.
Williams said the company would wait for the NRC to review the
information and see if the regulator had any questions.
"We will now evaluate the submittal, something we expect to take
several days to a week," said Neil Sheehan, spokesman for the
NRC, via e-mail.
After almost three years of study, Entergy received final
permission from the NRC March 2, but the plant ran into
immediate problems after it boosted power by 5 percent two days
later. The nuclear reactor has permission to increase power
production by 20 percent.
*****************************************************************
28 JOURNAL NEWS: NRC, Entergy to meet with public on Indian Point
By GREG CLARY
If you go
There will be two public meetings today — one at 2:30 p.m.
regarding Indian Point's operation in 2005, the second at 6:30
p.m. regarding a radioactive water leak at the site.
Both meetings are at Crystal Bay on the Hudson at Charles Point
Marina in Peekskill. The address is 5 John Walsh Blvd.,
Peekskill, NY 10566.
For directions, visit or call 914-737-8332.
(Original publication: March 28, 2006)
BUCHANAN Members of the public will get a chance today at two
meetings to hear how Indian Point is operating and what the
plans are for finding and controlling a leak of radioactive
water at the nuclear plants.
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission is hosting a 2:30 p.m. meeting
to review Indian Point's 2005 operations with officials from
Entergy Nuclear Northeast, the plants' owners. That meeting is
open to the public, though participation is limited to a
question-and-answer period, if time allows.
The second meeting, which starts at 6:30 p.m., is also being run
by the NRC and will open with presentations from that agency,
Entergy and the state regarding leaks of tritium, strontium 90
and nickel 63. Plenty of time is planned for public comments and
questions.
Company and agency officials say it is likely that some of the
underground contaminated water is reaching the Hudson River,
though both say there is no threat to public safety.
The two meetings will take place at Crystal Bay on the Hudson, a
restaurant in Peekskill, less than a mile from Indian Point.
At least one grass-roots anti-nuclear activist criticized the
NRC for choosing a location so close to the plants and not
centrally located.
"We're hearing that there's tremendous interest in the meeting
because people are concerned about this leak," said Darcy
Casteleiro, a spokeswoman for the Indian Point Safe Energy
Coalition, a group of 70 citizen, health, environmental and
public-interest groups.
"But it's a very hard location for many people to get to. It's
not accessible to public transportation, and two weeks' advance
notice is not much time."
NRC spokesman Neil Sheehan said the agency has used the location
for other meetings over the years and decided to use it this
year after discussing other options.
"We always look for a site that accommodates as many people as
possible," Sheehan said. "You can never make everybody happy."
Officials for Riverkeeper, an environmental group that has
called for closing the nuclear plants, said they hope to hear a
clear plan for cleaning up the site.
"I would hope the NRC comes out and says they're committed to
having Entergy stop the leak and clean up the pollution," said
Philip Musegaas, a Riverkeeper policy analyst.
Copyright 2006 The Journal News,. Inc. newspaper serving
Westchester, Rockland and Putnam Counties in New York. Use of
this site signifies your agreement to the and , updated June 7,
2005.
*****************************************************************
29 APP.COM: Ruling due on reactor hearing |
Asbury Park Press Online
Tuesday, March 28, 2006
Safety at issue in relicensing
BY NICHOLAS CLUNN STAFF WRITER
When it comes to the 103 commercial nuclear reactors in the
United States, the one inside the Oyster Creek Generating Station
in Lacey stands apart.
Operating since 1969, Oyster Creek is the nation's oldest.
And now that AmerGen Energy Co. wants permission from federal
safety regulators to run Oyster Creek for an additional 20
years, the plant that can power as many as 600,000 homes may be
one of the country's most controversial.
Of the 27 reviews of plants that have either obtained or are now
seeking renewals, only four, including the one involving Oyster
Creek, have required the attention of the highest officials at
the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
The five presidentially appointed commissioners will soon rule
on whether to uphold a decision by three judges at the NRC. Last
month, the judges, who represent the Atomic Safety and Licensing
Board, granted plant activists a public hearing on a key safety
issue.
Board judges have only granted one other hearing requested
during a license renewal proceeding, but the hearing never
happened because the commissioners in 2002 overruled the judges.
They rejected the hearing because the contentions raised were
not germane to the renewal review, which focuses solely on
environmental and aging issues.
The hearing would have allowed a nuclear power industry
watchdog, the Nuclear Information and Resource Service in
Washington, and a local activist group to challenge a renewal
that was eventually obtained by two plants in the Carolinas.
In the granting of hearings on Oyster Creek and the Carolina
plants — McGuire and Catawba — the presence of local plant
critics was key, said Paul Gunter of NIRS, the watchdog group.
"To get into the proceeding, you not only have to have a
dispute, but you also have to have a party involved that can be
affected directly," he said. "If we didn't have any people in
the area, it would be impossible."
NIRS is also one of the groups that petitioned for a hearing on
Oyster Creek.
Other activist organizations behind the contention are Jersey
Shore Nuclear Watch; Grandmothers, Mothers and More for Energy
Safety; the New Jersey Public Interest Research Group; the New
Jersey Environmental Federation; and the Sierra Club.
In their contention, the activists said AmerGen's
aging-management plan for a section of a radiation barrier,
called the drywell liner, is inadequate because it failed to
include a schedule for operators to measure the liner's
thickness.
The liner is a 100-foot-tall steel vessel shaped like an
inverted light bulb. Inside the bulb is the reactor vessel, a
container in which atoms are split to make heat.
In the event of an accident, the liner is designed to keep
dangerously radioactive and highly pressurized steam and gas
from entering the environment.
Activists have been concerned about the liner's thickness
because plant operators found about 20 years ago that some of
the metal had rusted away. The corrosion, resembling scum in a
dirty bathtub, occurred all around the liner's lower portion.
While operators arrested the rusting with an epoxy coating in
1993, the thickness of the corroded areas has not been measured
since 1996. The activists want the drywell measured regularly,
especially before the NRC decides on relicensing.
AmerGen has agreed to perform a measurement prior to 2009, but
not necessarily before the NRC's renewal decision. The company
also has told the NRC that it will measure the liner once every
10 years after the upcoming inspection, which could happen this
year or in 2008.
Nicholas Clunn: (609) 978-4597 or nclunn@app.com
Copyright © 2006 Asbury Park Press. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
30 NRC: NRC to Discuss 2005 Performance at Watts Bar Nuclear Power Plant
News Release - Region II - 2006-00
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
Office of Public Affairs, Region II
61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, GA 30303
No. II-06-009 Maarch 28, 2006
CONTACT: Ken Clark (404) 562-4416
Roger D. Hannah (404) 562-4417 E-mail: opa2@nrc.gov
with Tennessee Valley Authority officials April 4 to discuss the
NRCs annual assessment of safety performance at the Watts Bar
nuclear power plant, located near Spring City, Tenn. The period
covered is the calendar year 2005.
The 3:00 p.m. meeting at the Watts Bar Training Center near the
plant is open to public observation. Before the meeting ends,
NRC staff will be available to answer public questions on the
plants safety performance, as well as the agencys role in
ensuring safe operation of the facility.
Each year the NRC staff rates the performance of the Watts Bar
plant and all of the nations other commercial nuclear power
plants, NRC Region II Administrator William Travers said. This
meeting gives us a chance to discuss our assessment with the
company, with local officials and with residents near the plant.
Our aim is to make this information available to the public and
answer any questions people may have about our oversight.
The NRC report says the Watts Bar plant operated safely during
2005. The NRC uses color-coded inspection findings and
performance indicators to assess performance. The colors start
with green and increase to white, yellow or red, commensurate
with the safety significance of the issues involved. The report
said TVAs investigation and corrective actions for a white
finding having to do with cooling water silt problems during the
last quarter of 2004 was thorough and appropriate. It also said
cross-cutting issues raised in mid 2005 in the area of human
performance due to failure to implement procedures during
operations and refueling outage preparations, have been
corrected.
Based on the plants performance during 2005, the NRC said Watts
Bar will receive the baseline, or normal, level of inspections
during 2006. The NRC also plans to conduct non-routine
inspections of the plants steam generator replacement project,
of planned upgrades to the containment building sump, and
inspections of the storage and preservation of Unit 2, which has
never been licensed to operate.
A letter sent from the NRC Region II Office to plant officials
addresses the performance of the plant during the period and
will serve as the basis for the meeting discussion. It is
available on the NRC web site at
www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/LETTERS/wb_2005q4.pdf [PDF
Icon] .
Routine inspections are performed by NRC Resident Inspectors
assigned to the plant and by specialists from the Region II
Office in Atlanta, and the agencys headquarters in Rockville,
Md.
Current information for the Watts Bar plant is available on the
NRC web site at:
www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/WB1/wb1_chart.html.
Last revised Tuesday, March 28, 2006
*****************************************************************
31 CourierPost: Radioactive pile causes a stir in Newfield -
South Jersey's Web Site
Tuesday, March 28, 2006
By MEG HUELSMAN
Gannett New Jersey
NEWFIELD
Mayor Rick Westergaard has teamed with Vineland Mayor Perry
Barse to fight a borough firm's plan to seal a 35-foot pile of
radioactive dust and rock for 1,000 years.
"We have passed a resolution saying that we want the waste
removed from the site and cleaned up properly," Westergaard
said. "We do not want the waste to stay in our town."
Shield-alloy Metallurgical Corp. wants to place a permanent cap
on the 76,000 cubic yards of low-grade radioactive material at
its West Boulevard site rather than move the slag to a disposal
facility.
Company officials say the capped slag pile will not endanger
residents. They also say the cost of moving the slag could be as
high as $50 million.
But local officials and residents want the waste moved so the
67 1/2-acre site can be redeveloped.
The state Department of Environmental Protection also is
pushing the corporation to remove the slag.
"We believe that allowing this waste to remain in Newfield will
pose an undue burden on the community and should not be
allowed," Acting Environmental Commissioner Lisa Jackson wrote
to Sen. Robert Menendez, D-Hoboken, in February. "The
radioactive waste at the facility has been accumulating for over
forty years."
Menendez, Gov. Jon S. Corzine and state Sen. Fred H. Madden,
D-Washington Township, have expressed concerns about the
containment plan.
Dave Smith, environmental manager for Shield-alloy, said moving
the slag to allow the property's reuse would be "the best
solution."
But he said the $50 million price tag "would put the company in
dire straits. I'm not sure if it could withstand that type of
cost."
The firm, which maintains there is no direct health threat from
the site, is working with the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
to create a long-term plan that would cover the pile with soil,
then seal the slag in a 27-foot-high dome. Under the plan, the
mound would be fenced in, seeded with grass and sit untouched
for 1,000 years while the material decomposes.
The NRC rejected Shield-alloy's proposal in January for several
reasons, including failure to provide adequate financial
assurance.
The company proposed spending $750,000 to seal the slag and
creating a $5 million trust fund to maintain the site for 1,000
years.
The radioactive material is dumped in the rear of the property.
If someone sat on the pile all day, every day for an entire
year, 100 microrems of radiation would be emitted. In
comparison, Colorado residents are exposed to 350 microrems of
radiation each year because the elevation places them closer to
the sun and western rocks are slightly radioactive naturally,
Smith said.
The radioactive slag pile has not grown since 2000, when
Shield-alloy ceased production that used raw ore, the pile's
source material.
The company submitted its first decommissioning plan in August
2002, and it was rejected the next year. A revised plan was
filed in October 2005 and denied Jan. 26.
"We have not accepted a decommissioning plan," NRC Project
Manager Ken Kalman said. "We try to work with state agencies,
but in a case like this, which is very complex, we may differ."
Shield-alloy was classified as a Superfund site in 1983 for
contaminated soil and groundwater. Hexavalent chromium, a toxic
metal, permeated the groundwater, and the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency listed the site as a national priority in 1984.
To remedy the groundwater contamination, DEP called for a
pump-and-treat solution, which draws water through a filtration
system and then releases the clean water back into the ground.
That plan is projected to take another 60 to 70 years.
To speed the process, Shield-alloy hired a new contractor, TRC
Environmental Corp., to help clean up the groundwater using new
technology. TRC's plan will eliminate the area's groundwater
pollution within the next five to seven years, Smith said.
Copyright 2006 CourierPostOnline.com. All rights reserved
*****************************************************************
32 CourierPostOnline: Slag pile details outlined
South Jersey's Web Site
Tuesday, March 28, 2006
Question: How much material is on the site?
Answer: There are 76,000 cubic yards of radioactive slag, a
heavy, solid material.
Q: What materials are in the radioactive slag pile?
A: Uranium and thorium.
Q: Why was the pile created?
A: The pile consists of waste materials from raw ore used in
the creation of aluminum alloys. The material is not
manufactured radiological waste, but slightly radioactive rock
that occurs in nature and is considered unusable by steel
manufacturers.
Q: When did the pile start?
A: The pile began in the early- to mid-1950s and continued to
grow until operations ceased in 2000.
Q: Is any person or the water supply in danger?
A: No. The DEP is addressing groundwater contamination. A
pump-and-treat filtration system has been installed. The
radioactive slag does not pose a threat to residents, company
officials say.
Q: What are the possible solutions?
A: The waste can be removed, but it will cost an estimated $50
million. Alternatively, a cap would help reduce exposure to the
material.
Q: What's next?
A: Shieldalloy officials will meet with Nuclear Regulatory
Commission to revise its proposal.
Copyright 2006 CourierPostOnline.com. All rights reserved
*****************************************************************
33 Xinhua: Argentine-built nuclear reactor to start operation in Sydney
www.xinhuanet.com
www.chinaview.cn 2006-03-28 10:30:07
BUENOS AIRES, March 27 (Xinhua) -- The 180-million-dollar
nuclear reactor built by a team of technicians from the
Argentine firm INVAP will start operation in Sydney next week,
and be at full capacity in the second half of this year, INVAP
officials said on Monday.
The Australian reactor is the biggest high-tech export in
Argentine history, according to INVAP's chief, Hector Otegui.
The formal inauguration of the Australian reactor would be
held later this year, said Otegui, adding that Argentine
President Nestor Kirchner would attend the ceremony, the first
Argentine head of state to visit Australia.
INVAP is a conglomerate that builds electronic equipment,
energy systems (including wind turbines), and food preservation
systems.
INVAP won the bid in April 2002 to build the facility, which
is the largest single investment in the history of Australian
science.
The reactor, built at Australia's only nuclear facility in
Sydney, is to replace an aging plant that produces radioisotopes
used in the diagnosis and treatment of cancer patients. Enditem
Editor: Lin Li
Copyright ©2003 Xinhua News Agency. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
34 Toronto Star: Give nuclear plan full environmental assessment
Tue. Mar. 28, 2006. | Updated at 04:39 AM
High noon for Canada's CANDU
Nobody can seriously question that CANDU nuclear reactor
technology has been a disaster in Ontario because of its high
cost and technical breakdowns. In 1997, 8 of 20 reactors were
forced to shut down because of performance and safety problems.
We know the existing CANDU reactor design has proven to be a
lemon. And anybody who thinks that Ontario should invest in
Atomic Energy of Canada Limited's new untested reactor design
should have a saliva test.
So is the answer a shift to American-style light water reactors?
Both CANDU and American-style reactors can have catastrophic
accidents. Passively safe reactors have yet to be designed or
demonstrated and a meltdown in Southern Ontario could devastate
Canada's heartland.
Your article characterizes the debate about nuclear power as a
choice between Canadian CANDU technology and American-style
light water reactors. In fact, the real choice is between
nuclear power and the green energy technologies that are
cheaper, cleaner, safer and more reliable. A serious commitment
to conservation and renewable energy would allow Ontario to
phase out both coal and nuclear power. So far the Dalton
McGuinty government has given us a plan that repeats the
mistakes of the past by relying on nuclear power and gives lip
service to green energy.
Even worse, the government has not allowed any meaningful forum
for public debate or consultation. The McGuinty nuclear plan
should be subjected to a full environmental assessment. Nothing
less is acceptable for this $80 billion plan that will affect
our future for generations to come.
Copyright Toronto Star
*****************************************************************
35 NRC: Notice of Issuance of Amendment to Materials License SNM-2509;
FR Doc E6-4445
[Federal Register: March 28, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 59)]
[Notices] [Page 15478-15479] From the Federal Register Online via
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr28mr06-91]
Portland General Electric Company; Trojan Nuclear Plant AGENCY:
Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Notice of issuance of license amendment.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jill S. Caverly, Project
Manager, Spent Fuel Project Office, Office of Nuclear Material
Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC 20555. Telephone: (301) 415-8500; Fax number:
(301) 415-8555; E-mail: .
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
(NRC or the Commission) has issued Amendment No. 6 to Special
Nuclear Materials License SNM-2509 held by Portland General
Electric Company (PGE) for the receipt, possession, transfer, and
storage of spent fuel at the Trojan Independent Spent Fuel
Storage Installation (ISFSI), located in Columbia County, Oregon.
The amendment is effective as of the date of issuance.
By application dated May 23, 2005, PGE requested to amend the
Trojan ISFSI license (SNM-2509) to revise the methodology applied
in the Final Safety Analysis Report. The application requested
NRC's review and approval of revised methodology used to
determine the controlled area boundary for the Trojan ISFSI and
reduce the controlled area from 300 meters from the edge of the
pad to 200 meters from the edge of the pad. This amendment
complies with the standards and requirements of the Atomic Energy
Act of 1954, as amended (the Act), and the Commission's rules and
regulations. The Commission has made appropriate findings as
required by the Act and the Commission's rules and regulations in
10 CFR Chapter I, which are set forth in the license amendment.
In accordance with 10 CFR 72.46(b)(2), a determination has been
made that the amendment does not present a genuine issue as to
whether public health and safety will be significantly affected.
Therefore, the
[[Page 15479]] publication of a notice of proposed action and an
opportunity for hearing or a notice of hearing is not warranted.
Notice is hereby given of the right of interested persons to
request a hearing on whether the action should be rescinded or
modified. Also in connection with this action, the Commission
performed an Environmental Assessment and determined that a
Finding of No Significant Impact was appropriate for this action.
Further Information: The NRC has prepared a Safety Evaluation
Report (SER) that documents the information that was reviewed and
NRC's conclusion. In accordance with 10 CFR 2.390 of NRC's
``Rules of Practice,'' final NRC records and documents regarding
this proposed action including the amendment request dated May
23, 2005, and the SER are publically available in the records
component of NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management
System (ADAMS). These documents may be inspected at NRC's Public
Electronic Reading Room on the Internet at . These documents may
also be viewed electronically on the public computers, located at
the NRC Public Document Room (PDR), O1F21, One White Flint North,
11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852.
The PDR reproduction contractor will copy documents for a fee.
Persons who do not have access to ADAMS or who encounter problems
in accessing the documents located in ADAMS, should contact the
NRC PDR Reference staff by telephone at 1-800-397-4209 or (301)
415-4737, or by e-mail to .
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 17th day of March 2006.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Jill S. Caverly, Project Manager, Licensing Section, Spent Fuel
Project Office, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards.
[FR Doc. E6-4445 Filed 3-27-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
*****************************************************************
36 NRC: NRC to Discuss 2005 Performance Assessment for LaSalle Nuclear Power Plant
News Release - Region III - 2006-01
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
Office of Public Affairs, Region III
801 Warrenville Road, Lisle IL 60532
No. III-06-012 March 28, 2006
CONTACT: Jan Strasma (630) 829-9663
Viktoria Mitlyng (630) 829-9662 E-mail: opa3@nrc.gov
representatives of Exelon Generation Co. on Thursday, April 6,
to discuss the agencys assessment of safety performance for last
year at the LaSalle Nuclear Power Plant. The plant is located at
Seneca, Ill.
The meeting, which is open to the public, is scheduled to begin
at 3 p.m. at the Brookfield Township Hall, 2099 E. 27th Road, in
Seneca. The NRC will respond to questions or comments before the
close of the meeting
The NRC continually reviews the performance of the LaSalle plant
and the nations other commercial nuclear power facilities, NRC
Region III Administrator James Caldwell said. This meeting will
provide an opportunity for a discussion of our annual assessment
of safety performance with the company and with local officials
and residents who live near the plant. Our goal is to explain
the NRC oversight process and make as much information as
possible available to the public regarding our regulation of
these facilities.
A letter sent from the NRC Region III Office to plant officials
addresses the performance of the plant during the period and
will serve as the basis for the meeting discussion. It is
available on the NRC web site at:
http://www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/LETTERS/lasa_2005q4.pdf
[PDF Icon] .
The NRCs assessment concluded that the LaSalle plant operated
safely during the period. The NRC uses color-coded inspection
findings and performance indicators to assess nuclear plant
performance. The colors start with green and then increase to
white, yellow or red, commensurate with the safety significance
of the issues involved.
All of the inspection findings and performance indicators for
LaSalle during 2005 were determined to be green. As a result of
this performance, the NRC will conduct the normal, baseline
level of inspections during the upcoming year.
Routine inspections are performed by two NRC Resident Inspectors
assigned to the plant and by inspection specialists from the
Region III Office in Lisle, Ill., and the agencys headquarters
in Rockville, Md. Among the areas of plant operations to be
inspected this year by NRC specialists are emergency
preparedness, monitoring of gaseous and liquid effluents, and
radioactive material processing and transportation.
Current performance information for LaSalle is available on the
NRCs web site at:
http://www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/LASA1/lasa1_chart.html
and
http://www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/LASA2/lasa2_chart.html.
Last revised Tuesday, March 28, 2006
*****************************************************************
37 Newsday: Activists say accidents are not the only risk of nuclear plants
Mar 28, 2006
By GEOFF MULVIHILL Associated Press Writer
TRENTON, N.J. --
Despite questions about its validity, a new study on childhood
cancer rates in the areas around nuclear power facilities is
fueling opponents of a bid to extend the license of the aging
Oyster Creek plant.
In an article published last week in the peer-reviewed
International Journal of Health Services, a researcher claims to
have found a correlation between radiation in the areas
surrounding nuclear power plants and childhood cancer rates. The
company that runs Oyster Creek says the study is flawed.
The contention, which the study's author said should be verified
by other researchers, was the focus of a Statehouse news
conference held Tuesday by opponents of the bid by Oyster Creek's
owner to keep the plant open for 20 more years after the plant's
present license expires in 2009.
Suzanne Leta, who works on energy issues for the New Jersey
Public Interest Research Group, said the study is important
because it suggests that nuclear power plants are a danger not
only because of the effects of large amounts of radiation that
might leak out during an accident, but also because of
potentially harmful effects of low levels of regularly emitted
radiation.
"You've got to be preventative," Leta said.
The study, which looked at the areas around Oyster Creek and
also the Indian Point plant and the Brookhaven National
Laboratories in New York, found that cancer rates in children
under 10 seemed to closely mirror the level of radiation found
in baby teeth five years earlier.
Five years after the radiation levels rose in the late 1980s,
for example, the cancer rate in children under 10 also
increased.
Radiation samples were taken from baby teeth collected by
researchers and tested for Strontium-90, a radioactive chemical.
The chemical itself is linked to health risks, but it's useful
to researchers because, unlike some radioactive byproducts, it
is relatively easy to trace.
Oyster Creek, which is owned by Chicago-based Exelon, opened in
1969 and is the oldest operating commercial nuclear plant in the
United States.
Joe Mangano, the national coordinator of the Norristown,
Pa.-based Radiation and Public Health Project and the study's
author, said further studies should be done to verify his
findings. He said the information should be considered by the
Atomic Safety and Licensing Board as it considers renewing the
license for Oyster Creek.
Exelon spokesman Pete Resler said Mangano's study had problems.
"Mr. Mangano's work has been around for about 30 years
attempting to link Strontium-90 to childhood cancer," Resler
said. "Ever since the beginning, it has been fully refuted by
mainstream science."
In fact, in 2004, the New Jersey Department of Environmental
Protection questioned some of Mangano's findings about Strontium
levels and found that nearly all Strontium in the environment
came from Cold War-era aboveground nuclear weapons tests rather
than nuclear power plants.
Phillip Patton, an associate professor of health physics at the
University of Nevada-Las Vegas, said that the data for the study
appeared to be accurate. But he said some of the data may not be
statistically significant and that it may be a leap to use it to
argue against nuclear power plants.
He said that cancer rates could be even higher around coal
plants, for example.
Privacy Policy. Copyright 2006 Newsday Inc.
*****************************************************************
38 SouthAfrica.info: SA's 'small, safe' nuclear power -
Charlie Schimdt
28 March 2006
Climate change is just one of the problems linked to
carbon-based fuels that have sparked a renewed interest in
nuclear power. While stakeholders debate the merits of this
approach, the nuclear industry and its supporters are exploring
next-generation reactors that might be safer and less expensive
than the ones used today. The pebble bed modular reactor (PBMR),
which is based on a decades-old German design, ranks among the
top contenders.
PBMR's supporters describe the technology as inherently safe and
appropriate not just for rich, industrialised countries but also
for developing nations. "The beauty of the pebble bed reactor is
that you don't need an MIT PhD to run it," muses Andrew Kadak, a
professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology's
department of nuclear science and engineering. "That means you
can use it even in countries that don't have the degree of
history or background in nuclear technology that we have in
Western Europe or here."
PBMR proponents point to another advantage: each reactor module
generates about 170 megawatts of electrical power (MWe), far
less than the 1 000 MWe produced by a standard light water
reactor. PBMR can thus be scaled according to need: several
modules can be connected in tandem to power a city, and one
could supply the needs of a smaller town. Conceivably, the
reactors could supply small, remote villages far from an urban
electricity grid.
South Africa, which seeks a global role in next-generation
nuclear technology, now leads PBMR's commercial development. The
country expects to complete construction on a demonstration
plant near Cape Town, a city of 3-million people, by 2010.
What's more, the South African firm PBMR Pty, which is
constructing the plant, ultimately hopes to build 30 pebble bed
reactors throughout the country, says Jaco Kriek, the company's
CEO. PBMR Pty is actively trying to license its technology in
the US, and Westinghouse Electrical Co, owner of half the
world's nuclear power plants, recently purchased a major stake
in the company.
PBMR Pty also recently signed a memorandum of understanding with
Chinergy, a Chinese company that plans to build its own
demonstration plant near Beijing. China currently has the
world's only operational PBMR plant - an experimental research
model in Beijing housed at Tsinghua University. According to
Kadak, who is collaborating on PBMR development with the
scientists at Tsinghua University, China's long-term goals are
to build PBMR plants throughout the country's interior. "The
size is right for their needs," he explains.
How does it work?
The pebble bed design was first conceived in the 1950s by
Rudolf Schulten, a physicist in Germany. Hoping to create a
safer nuclear reactor, Schulten came up with a novel idea: he
would pack tiny particles of uranium into thousands of graphite
spheres, each about the size of a tennis ball. The radioactive
balls, which he called pebbles, could be cooled by helium gas,
which would power a turbine as it flowed out of the reactor
vessel. The uranium itself is sequestered at low density within
the pebbles and shielded by their graphite casings. This ensures
that the uranium can never get hot enough to melt, and the
catastrophe of a nuclear meltdown can be avoided.
[Diagram of the pebble fuel used in the pebble bed modular
reactor]
The idea took hold and, in the mid-1960s, scientists in Germany
built a prototype pebble bed reactor that ran successfully for
21 years. A much larger, commercial-scale unit went online in
the 1980s, but it was hobbled by design flaws and a growing
environmental movement that shut down Germany's nuclear power
industry altogether.
But even as PBMR technology was fading in Germany, it was
re-emerging in South Africa, where industry and government
officials thought its size and scalability were well suited for
domestic power needs. Eskom, the largest South African utility
company, bought rights to the PBMR design in 1993 and helped
create PBMR Pty to advance the technology.
Now, at its R facility at Pelindaba, near the capital city
Pretoria, PBMR Pty builds on the German design. The facility
creates the reactor's pebbles by coating uranium dioxide fuel
particles with alternating layers of carbon and silicon. The
coated particles are pressed into mixtures of graphite powder
and phenolic resin, which are machined into the characteristic
spheres, each containing only about nine grams of uranium.
When operational, the reactor is designed to drop fresh pebbles
into its core while used pebbles are extracted from below. After
every cycle of the reactor, each pebble's residual fuel level
will be measured electronically. PBMR officials predict that
each of the 456 000 pebbles in a typical reactor will pass
through the core six times over a period of three years.
The helium gas used to cool the core will get extremely hot -
about 900°C, which is nearly three times the temperature
produced in a typical light water reactor. This intense heat
makes the reactor more efficient in terms of fuel-to-energy
conversion, Kadak says. However, he adds that numerous design
features ensure that the reactor never reaches the minimum of 3
000°C required to melt the core and unleash an environmental
disaster.
For example, even if a failure occurs during operations, Kadak
says, the reactor will come to a standstill and dissipate heat
on a decreasing curve, without releasing radioactivity.
Moreover, he adds that the helium cooling system and pebble
design generate less nuclear waste than that produced by the
light water reactors currently in use. A five-reactor PBMR
generates nearly 1 000 MWe of power and five to six tons of
depleted uranium per year, which is comparable to the output of
a single light water reactor.
Environmentalists' challenge
Environmentalists aren't convinced, however. In January 2005,
Earthlife Africa, an environmental group, convinced the Cape
Town high court to rescind approval of the proposed plant,
citing omissions in PBMR Pty's environmental impact statement.
"This is a demonstration plant, and no one knows if it's even
going to work," says Olivia Andrews, a campaign coordinator with
Earthlife Africa in Cape Town. "The company is using us as
guinea pigs." Andrews, who acknowledges that the group opposes
all forms of nuclear power, claims PBMR Pty withheld information
about higher-than-projected costs for the project. "PBMR is
financially risky, and the company's feasibility studies are
overly optimistic," she says.
Kriek acknowledges that in its early stages, PBMR won't compete
cost-effectively with coal, but he suggests that economies of
scale and engineering improvements will produce savings in the
long term. "You have to understand the upfront costs for the
technology are very large; we have over 50 PhDs in this
company." He adds that a fresh public hearing process was
launched in November 2005 and that the company plans to resubmit
its environmental impact statement with additional disclosures
as soon as possible.
The global outlook
During the next 25 years, PBMR Pty plans to export as many as
75 reactors in developed and developing markets, including other
countries in Europe and Africa. Kadak anticipates that nuclear
proliferation risks from global PBMR use could be controlled by
the International Atomic Energy Agency through an a
certification and oversight system to monitor operation and fuel
handling. Used pebbles also constitute a poor source of material
for nuclear terrorism, Kadak adds. The pebbles contain so little
uranium - just nine grams each - that tens of thousands would be
required to make a bomb. He emphasises that this is a detectable
number.
"The grand vision is to create a global training centre for PBMR
operations that would coordinate fuel supplies and waste
disposal and also address problems related to infrastructure
shortages," Kadak says.
Meanwhile, US officials with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission
(NRC) are negotiating with PBMR Pty in efforts to certify the
technology in the US. Some hope exists that the PBMR technology
could become one of the Generation IV nuclear technologies that
Bush administration officials in the US Department of Energy are
trying to promote. The technologies are being sold as safe,
economical, proliferation-resistant, and ready for prime time in
the next 15 to 20 years.
NRC spokesperson Scott Burnell describes the PBMR's safety
record as "interesting on a small scale." Although avoiding
comment on how PBMR might fare as a Generation IV candidate, he
concedes that NRC is closely watching its evolution in South
Africa. But Kadak insists that PBMR is the best Generation IV
candidate, not just because its modularity promotes siting
flexibility; he says that the high temperatures at which it
operates are well suited for electrolysis reactions that split
hydrogen gas from water. Thus, he argues that PBMR could play a
key role in fostering an emissions-free hydrogen economy, which
many see as the ultimate solution to global warming.
Nevertheless, PBMR - like all nuclear technology - still faces
nuclear-waste questions and worries over terrorism. The extent
to which these concerns derail nuclear power and relegate its
historical peak to the latter half of the 20th century remains
to be seen.
Charlie Schimdt is a US-based freelance science and technology
writer. He was recently in South Africa as a guest of the
International Marketing Council of South Africa.
The pebble bed modular reactor system (Image: PBMR Ltd)
Each pebble of fuel contains only nine grams of uranium and is
roughly the size of a tennis ball (Image: PBMR Ltd)
*****************************************************************
39 NRC: NRC Begins Special Inspection at Texas A University’s Research
Reactor
News Release - 2006-
NRC NEWS U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public
Affairs Telephone: 301/415-8200 Washington, DC 20555-0001
E-mail: opa@nrc.gov www.nrc.gov
No. 06-042 March 28, 2006
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has begun a special
inspection at Texas A&M Universitys Nuclear Science Center
Research Reactor, following a reported potential radiation
overexposure of one of its workers.
The university reported the potential overexposure on March 15
(event report # 42424 at
http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/event-status/event/
2006/20060316en.html) indicating that an employee involved in
neutron activation analysis work at the Texas A&M Nuclear
Science Center potentially received 76 rem to the right hand
during the month of January. The annual radiological exposure
limit for extremities is 50 rem.
The licensee stated that there were no increased radiation
levels around the reactor, nor were there any unusual processes
that could have caused an unanticipated increase in radiation
levels and, therefore, the licensee had not considered the
indicated dose reading accurate. According to the licensee, the
individual also potentially received 38 rem to the same hand
during the month of February. Once this second potential high
exposure was found, the licensee reported the potential
overexposure. The licensee's investigation is ongoing.
On March 20, an NRC inspector responded to the research
facility and will stay on to lead the special inspection. The
inspectors will seek to understand the circumstances surrounding
the event and its probable causes, including conditions
preceding the event, chronology, equipment performance,
precursors, human factors considerations, quality assurance
considerations, and radiological considerations.
A written report of the special inspection will be issued about
45 days following the completion of the inspection. It will be
available on the NRC website. Texas A&Ms research reactor was
licensed to operate in 1961 by NRCs predecessor, the Atomic
Energy Commission.
Last revised Tuesday, March 28, 2006
*****************************************************************
40 WFSB: DEP concludes radiation in goat milk wasn't from Millstone
HARTFORD, Conn. -- The state Department of Environmental
Protection said Tuesday that radioactive material found in two
samples of goat milk did not come from Millstone Power Station in
Waterford.
At Gov. M. Jodi Rell's request, the agency reviewed thousand of
environmental samples taken near the Millstone nuclear facility
over the past 35 years. It found levels of radiation similar to
those found around the world because of radioactive fallout from
weapons testing and the Chernobyl incident, according to the
report.
DEP said two samples of milk taken from a goat in 2001 had
slightly higher levels of radiation than thousands of other
samples of vegetation, soil, cow and goat milk taken near the
plant.
But the agency said the radioactive material in the milk did not
share the characteristics of materials that would have been
produced by Millstone.
DEP also said the levels were within acceptable limits
established by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and the
International Atomic Energy Agency.
The citizens group Connecticut Coalition Against Millstone has
raised questions about the goat milk samples, carting a goat
around the state to make its point. A message seeking comment
was left with the group's president.
The goat lives about five miles from Millstone on a farm in
Waterford.
"While we appreciate the concerns some people may have about
Millstone, we do not believe the two isolated samples of goat
milk, or any of the other samples reviewed by my staff for that
matter, indicate any unsafe activity by the plant," said DEP
Commissioner Gina McCarthy.
Copyright 2006 Associated Press. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
41 NRC: Sunshine Act; Notice of Meetings
FR Doc 06-3031
[Federal Register: March 28, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 59)]
[Notices] [Page 15479] From the Federal Register Online via GPO
Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr28mr06-92]
Agency Holding the Meetings: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Dates: Weeks of March 27, April 3, 10, 17, 24, May 1, 2006.
Place: Commissioners' Conference Room, 11555 Rockville Pike,
Rockville, Maryland.
Status: Public and closed.
Matters to be Considered: Week of March 27, 2006 There are no
meetings scheduled for the Week of March 27, 2006.
Week of April 3, 2006--Tentative Monday, April 3, 2006 3:55
p.m.--Affirmation Session (Public Meeting) (Tentative). a. USEC,
Inc. (American Centrifuge Plant); Geoffrey Sea appeal of
LBP-05-28 (Tentative).
b. USEC, Inc. (American Centrifuge Plan)--Appeal of LBP-05-28 by
Portsmouth/Piketon Residents for Environmental Safety and
Security (PRESS) (Tentative).
c. Hydro Resources, Inc.--Petition for Review of Partial Initial
Decision on Phase II Cultural Resource Challengers (Tentative).
Week of April 10, 2006--Tentative There are no meetings scheduled
for the Week of April 10, 2006.
Week of April 17, 2006--Tentative There are no meetings scheduled
for the Week of April 17, 2006.
Week of April 24, 2006--Tentative There are no meetings scheduled
for the Week of April 24, 2006.
Monday, April 24, 2006 2 p.m.--Meeting with Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission (FERC), FERC Headquarters, 888 First St.,
NE., Washington, DC 20426, Room 2C (Public Meeting).
Wednesday, April 26, 2006 1 p.m.--Discussion of Management Issues
(closed--ex. 2). Thursday, April 27, 2006 1:30 p.m.--Meeting with
Department of Energy (DOE) on New Reactor Issues (Public
Meeting).
This meeting will be webcast live at the Web address
http://www.nrc.gov .
Week of May 1, 2006--Tentative Tuesday, May 2, 2006 9:30
a.m.--Briefing on Status of Emergency Planning
Activities--Morning Session (Public Meeting) (Contact: Eric
Leeds, 301-415-2334).
1 p.m.--Briefing on Status of Emergency Planning
Activities--Afternoon Session (Public Meeting).
This meeting will be webcast live at the Web address
http://www.nrc.gov .
Wednesday, May 3, 2006 9 a.m.--Briefing on Status of
Risk-Informed, Performance-Based Regulation (Public Meeting)
(Contact: Eileen McKenna, 301-415-2189).
This meeting will be webcast live at the Web address
http://www.nrc.gov .
* * * * * *The schedule for Commission meetings is subject to
change on short notice. To verify the status of meetings call
(recording)--(301) 415- 1292. Contact person for more
information: Michelle Schroll, (301) 415- 1662.
* * * * * The NRC Commission Meeting Schedule can be found on the
Internet at:
http://www.nrc.gov/what-we-do/policy-making/schedule.html. * * *
* * The NRC provides reasonable accommodation to individuals with
disabilities where appropriate. If you need a reasonable
accommodation to participate in these public meetings, or need
this meeting notice or the transcript or other information from
the public meetings in another format (e.g., braille, large
print), please notify the NRC's Disability Program Coordinator,
Deborah Chan, at 301-415-7041, TDD: 301-415-2100, or by e-mail at
DLC@nrc.gov. Determinations on requests for reasonable
accommodation will be made on a case-by-case basis.
* * * * * This notice is distributed by mail to several hundred
subscribers; if you no longer wish to receive it, or would like
to be added to the distribution, please contact the Office of the
Secretary, Washington, DC 20555 (301-415-1969). In addition,
distribution of this meeting notice over the Internet system is
available. If you are interested in receiving this Commission
meeting schedule electronically, please send an electronic
message to dkw@nrc.gov. Dated: March 23, 2006.
R. Michelle Schroll, Office of the Secretary.
[FR Doc. 06-3031 Filed 3-24-06; 1:15 pm] BILLING CODE 7590-01-M
*****************************************************************
42 Today's GAO Reports - March 28, 2006
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2006 16:07:03 -0500
The Government Accountability Office (GAO) today released the following reports, correspondences and testimonies:
Reports
1. Combating Nuclear Smuggling: Corruption, Maintenance, and Coordination Problems Challenge U.S. Efforts to Provide Radiation Detection Equipment to Other Countries. GAO-06-311, March 14.
http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-06-311
Highlights - http://www.gao.gov/highlights/d06311high.pdf
2. Combating Nuclear Smuggling: DHS Has Made Progress Deploying Radiation Detection Equipment at U.S. Ports-of-Entry, but Concerns Remain. GAO-06-389, March 22.
http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-06-389
Highlights - http://www.gao.gov/highlights/d06389high.pdf
3. Offshoring in Six Human Service Programs: Offshoring Occurs in Most States, Primarily in Customer Service and Software Development. GAO-06-342, March 28.
http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-06-342
Highlights - http://www.gao.gov/highlights/d06342high.pdf
4. International Remittances: Different Estimation Methodologies Produce Different Results. GAO-06-210, March 28.
http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-06-210
Highlights - http://www.gao.gov/highlights/d06210high.pdf
Correspondences
1. Border Security: Investigators Successfully Transported Radioactive Sources Across Our Nation's Borders at Selected Locations. GAO-06-545R, March 28.
http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-06-545R
2. Hurricane Katrina: Status of the Health Care System in New Orleans and Difficult Decisions Related to Efforts to Rebuild It Approximately 6 Months After Hurricane Katrina. GAO-06-576R, March 28.
http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-06-576R
Testimonies
1. Combating Nuclear Smuggling: Challenges Facing U.S. Efforts to Deploy Radiation Detection Equipment in Other Countries and in the United States, by Gene E. Aloise, director, natural resources and environment, before the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. GAO-06-558T, March 28.
http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-06-558T
Highlights - http://www.gao.gov/highlights/d06558thigh.pdf
2. Border Security: Investigators Transported Radioactive Sources Across Our Nation's Borders at Two Locations, by Gregory D. Kutz, managing director, forensic audits and special investigations, before the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. GAO-06-583T, March 28.
http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-06-583T
Highlights - http://www.gao.gov/highlights/d06583thigh.pdf
3. Federal Aviation Administration: An Analysis of the Financial Viability of the Airport and Airway Trust Fund, by Gerald L. Dillingham, director, physical infrastructure, before the Subcommittee on Aviation, Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. GAO-06-562T, March 28.
http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-06-562T
Highlights - http://www.gao.gov/highlights/d06562thigh.pdf
4. Homeland Security: Better Management Practices Could Enhance DHS's Ability to Allocate Investigative Resources, by Richard M. Stana, director, homeland security and justice, before the Subcommittee on National Security, Emerging Threats, and International Relations, House Committee on Government Reform. GAO-06-462T, March 28.
http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-06-462T
Highlights - http://www.gao.gov/highlights/d06462thigh.pdf
These and other GAO products are available from the "Reports and Testimony" section of GAO's Internet site, http://www.gao.gov.
Subscribe to this or other E-mail updates about GAO products at the "Subscribe to Updates" section of http://www.gao.gov.
Remove yourself from this mailing list by sending an E-mail message to: listserv@listserv.gao.gov with the message: unsubscribe daybook in the message body.
Order printed copies of any of these items from GAO:
202-512-6000 (voice)
202-512-2537 (TDD)
202-512-6061 (fax)
Members of the press may request copies from the Office of Public Affairs, 202-512-4800.
===========================================================
This list is produced by the Government Accountability Office
to provide daily information about GAO Reports and Testimony.
Access GAO on the web at http://www.gao.gov
*****************************************************************
43 Guardian Unlimited: Radioactive Matter Gets Into U.S. in Test
From the Associated Press
[UP]
Tuesday March 28, 2006 8:46 AM
By LIZ SIDOTI Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON (AP) - Installing radiation detectors at U.S. entry
points is taking too long and costing too much, says a
congressional watchdog agency whose undercover investigators
breached security by slipping nuclear material into the United
States.
In a test last year, the small amounts of cesium-137, which is
used in industrial gauges, triggered radiation alarms in Texas
and Washington state. The material was enough to make two small
``dirty bombs,'' officials said, yet U.S. customs agents
permitted the investigators to enter the United States because
they were tricked with counterfeit documents.
The Bush administration says that within 45 days it will give
U.S. Customs and Border Protection agents the tools they need to
verify such documents in the future.
Senators were to grill administration officials on security
problems identified during the Government Accounting Office's
undercover operation during a Senate Homeland Security
subcommittee hearing Tuesday.
In a series of reports, the GAO, which is the investigative arm
of Congress, found that the Homeland Security Department's goal
of installing 3,034 radiation detectors by September 2009 across
the United States - at border crossings, seaports, airports and
mail facilities - was ``unlikely.''
Investigators also said the government probably will spend $342
million more than it expects to complete the job, given its
current costs and pace. Between October 2000 and October 2005,
they said, the government spent about $286 million installing
radiation monitors inside the United States.
``We suffer from a massive 'blind spot' in our cargo security
measures,'' Sen. Norm Coleman, R-Minn., said in a statement.
Coleman also said the GAO's border security investigation
``demonstrated that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission is stuck
in a pre-9/11 mind-set in a post-9/11 world and must modernize
its procedures.''
The commission, in charge of overseeing nuclear reactor and
nuclear substance safety, disagreed.
``Security has been of prime importance for us on the materials
front and the power plant front since 9/11,'' commission
spokesman David McIntyre said.
To test security at U.S. borders with Mexico and Canada, GAO
investigators last year represented themselves as employees of a
fake company and obtained cesium-137.
They attempted to cross into the United States with the
substance - enough to possibly create two crude radiological
bombs that could spread radiation if spread by the blast of a
conventional explosive.
When stopped, the investigators presented counterfeit shipping
papers and NRC documents that allegedly permitted them to
receive, acquire, possess and transfer radioactive substances.
Investigators found that customs agents weren't able to check
whether a person caught with radioactive materials was permitted
to possess the materials under a government-issued license.
``Unless nuclear smugglers in possession of faked license
documents raised suspicions in some other way, CBP officers
could follow agency guidelines yet unwittingly allow them to
enter the country with their illegal nuclear cargo,'' a report
said. It described this problem as ``a significant gap'' in the
nation's safety procedures.
Vayl Oxford, who heads the Homeland Security Department's
Domestic Nuclear Detection Office, said the substance could have
been used in a radiological weapon with limited effects.
Jayson Ahern, the assistant customs commissioner for field
operations, said a system for U.S. customs agents to confirm the
authenticity of government licenses will be in place within 45
days.
False radiation alarms are common - sometimes occurring more
than 100 times a day - although the GAO said inspectors
generally do a good job distinguishing nuisance alarms from
actual ones. False alarms can be caused by ceramics,
fertilizers, bananas and even patients who have recently
undergone some types of medical procedures.
---
Associated Press Writer Ted Bridis contributed to this report.
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
44 Guardian Unlimited: U.S. Looks to Put Inspectors in Bahamas
From the Associated Press
[UP]
Tuesday March 28, 2006 9:16 AM
AP Photo WX106
By TED BRIDIS
Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON (AP) - U.S. customs inspectors could be stationed by
this fall at the largest seaport in the Bahamas, where the Bush
administration is hiring a Hong Kong conglomerate to help detect
nuclear materials inside cargo, a senior customs official said.
Any such agreement will require approval by the Bahamian
government. Diplomatic talks are expected to begin soon to put
agents from U.S. Customs and Border Protection at the sprawling
Freeport Container Port, just 65 miles from Florida's coast.
``We're now looking at going over there to begin discussions,''
Jayson Ahern, assistant customs commissioner for field
operations, told The Associated Press on Monday. ``It does
require bilateral discussions with another country, but we're
cautiously looking at being there by the fall.''
A story last week by the AP described a no-bid, $6 million
contract the administration is finalizing with Hutchison Whampoa
Ltd. in the Bahamas, and generated criticism of the arrangement
from some U.S. lawmakers and security experts.
The administration has acknowledged the deal represents the
first time a foreign company will be involved in running
sophisticated U.S. radiation-detection equipment at an overseas
port without American customs agents present.
Ahern was expected to testify at a Senate oversight hearing
Tuesday on radiation detectors in the United States. On the eve
of the hearing, Ahern said the Homeland Security Department
intended to station U.S. inspectors in the Bahamas by spring
under its port-security program, called the Container Security
Initiative, but plans were delayed.
Some lawmakers said negotiations were overdue. The senior
Democrat on the House Homeland Security Committee said the
decision was ``absolutely the right thing to do.''
``If foreign governments and operators do not oppose U.S.
security programs, then the Department of Homeland Security
should be doing everything it can to deploy teams and secure
foreign ports,'' said Rep. Bennie Thompson of Mississippi.
``Unfortunately, all I see happening in this administration is
feet-dragging and action only after bad decisions have been made
public.''
Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y. said: ``The only thing missing from
the advanced security formula in the Bahamas was the presence of
U.S. customs agents. Now that it appears they will be added, it
will be a large step forward for port security.''
The pending diplomatic talks were confirmed by John Meredith,
the group managing director for Hutchison's port subsidiary,
which runs the Bahamas port.
``They are getting close to fixing up a deal between the Bahamas
and the U.S.,'' Meredith told the AP. ``If they want to put
American people out there to have a look at it, that's fine. But
people should respect also that you've got to have trusted
partnerships, both with the private sector and with foreign
governments.''
The Bahamas contract is close to being finalized by the National
Nuclear Security Administration, part of the Energy Department.
It has said employees of Hutchison - the world's largest ports
operator - will drive the towering, truck-like radiation scanner
at the port under the direct supervision of Bahamian customs
officials.
Any positive reading would set off alarms monitored
simultaneously by Bahamian customs inspectors at Freeport and by
U.S. customs officials working at an anti-terrorism center in
northern Virginia.
Under the contract, no U.S. officials would be stationed
permanently in the Bahamas with the radiation scanner.
Separately, there are no U.S. customs agents checking cargo
containers in Freeport under the U.S. customs port-security
program.
Last week, Thompson said he was concerned there will be
inadequate oversight in the Bahamas. Citing the AP story,
Thompson sought assurances from the administration over the
no-bid contract and asked when U.S. customs inspectors might be
sent there permanently.
Hutchison Whampoa is among the shipping industry's most
respected companies and was an early adopter of U.S. anti-terror
measures. But its billionaire chairman, Li Ka-Shing, also has
substantial business ties to China's government that have raised
U.S. concerns over the years.
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
45 [du-list] Navy Shipboard Vietnam cancers linked to water
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2006 17:55:16 -0800
Subject: Navy Shipboard Vietnam cancers linked to water
Navy Shipboard Vietnam cancers linked to water
WED 22 MAR 2006, Page 003
By: Simon Kearney
SAILORS who served on naval ships during the Vietnam War have been
told their ships' drinking water, which was contaminated with Agent
Orange, could be causing their cancers.
The Department of Veterans Affairs is investigating a link between
the number of cancers among sailors and the desalinated water on
board some ships, which contained dioxins from the deadly defoliant.
The alarm relates to ships that took on water in Vung Tau harbor in
Vietnam between 1965 and 1972, specifically HMAS Sydney, which made
23 trips to Vietnam during the war, and her escort ships
.
Between 1980 and 1994 as many as 170 navy personnel died from cancers
potentially related to the water on the ships, according to the
Mortality of Vietnam Veterans cohort study.
An updated mortality study on Vietnam veterans is due to be released
later this year.
The problem was identified nearly three years ago when the National
Research Center for Toxicology found that desalinated drinking water
taken from the estuary was contaminated with Agent Orange, which was
sprayed widely across the country during the war.
``We are investigating what the issues associated with water and
water taken from Vietnamese waters are, and the RMA (Repatriation
Medical Authority) have made some progress in that in terms of
providing some linkages,'' Department of Veterans Affairs secretary
Mark Sullivan said in a Senate budget estimates hearing last month.
He said drinking the water was linked to prostate cancer, bone marrow
cancer, and two cancers of the lymphatic system, non-Hodgkin's
lymphoma, and Hodgkin's lymphoma.
``It (RMA) is still considering the medical and scientific evidence
for the inclusion of a potable water factor in the investigations for
malignant neoplasm of the lung (lung cancer), soft tissue sarcoma,
malignant neoplasm of the larynx (throat cancer) and acute myeloid
leukemia,'' Mr Sullivan said.
The Department of Veterans Affairs is urging former navy personnel
who have these conditions and served on ships that anchored in Vung
Tau harbor to submit or resubmit claims.
``What we encourage all veterans to do, if they are unwell or have a
condition or disease and they have any suspicion that that condition
is related to their service, is to put in a claim. We will
investigate it,'' Mr Sullivan said.
However, Vietnam Veterans Association of Australia president Ron
Coxon said the Government had not gone far enough because veterans
had to prove they spent a total of 30 days drinking the water.
``They talk about 30 cumulative days but we don't know how much of
the dioxin actually settled in the tank because they never cleaned
them,'' he said.
The initial toxicology report found that distilling seawater
concentrated the dioxins in the water navy personnel were drinking
and washing in to above safe levels. The report was an attempt to
explain why more navy personnel were dying after the war than other
veterans.
Of the 55,000 Australians who served in Vietnam, 12,376 were in the
navy.
Opposition veteran's affairs spokesman Allan Griffin said the
Department of Veterans Affairs was not being active enough about
warning veterans who might be at risk.
(Gee, I think we just discussed that very issue regarding our own
government called outreach.)
(I would also think that includes any ships that stopped in Guam for
stores and potable water.}
Simon Kearney
The Australian newspaper
2 Holt Street
Surry Hills
NSW 2010
E-mail: kearneys@theaustralian.com.au
Tom Trefts
Unified Veterans Coalition
www.xsorbit27.com/users5/unifiedveteranscoalition/
To unsubscribe from this groups send a message to
du-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com. In the body of the message type
unsubscribe and send.
*****************************************************************
46 toledoblade.com: Federal agency plans to offer beryllium tests
Tuesday, March 28, 2006
ELMORE, Ohio - A federal agency announced yesterday that it will
offer free testing for beryllium sensitization for people living
or working near the Brush Wellman Inc. facility here.
The Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry said those
concerned about past beryllium exposures may be eligible for a
blood test for beryllium "sensitization," a kind of allergic
reaction. People who are sensitized could develop chronic
beryllium disease, which affects the lungs.
The agency will host a public information session at 4 p.m.
April 25 at Woodmore High School, 633 Fremont St.
Brush Wellman is considering a new plant in Elmore at a cost of
up to $60 million, including $9 million in federal funding.
The Toledo Blade Company, 541 N. Superior St., Toledo, OH 43660
, (419) 724-6000
*****************************************************************
47 Courier Post: Study finds link between cancer, nuclear power plants
South Jersey's Web Site
Tuesday, March 28, 2006
TRENTON (AP) -- A new study on childhood cancer rates in the
areas around nuclear power facilities is fueling opponents of a
bid to extend the license of the aging Oyster Creek plant.
In an article published last week in the peer-reviewed
International Journal of Health Services, a researcher claims to
have found a correlation between radiation in the areas
surrounding nuclear power plants and childhood cancer rates.
The contention, which the study's author said should be verified
by other researchers, was the focus of a Statehouse news
conference held today by opponents of the bid by Oyster Creek's
owner to keep the Lacey Township, Ocean County, plant open for 20
more years after the plant's present license expires in 2009.
Suzanne Leta, who works on energy issues for the New Jersey
Public Interest Research Group, said the study is important
because it suggests that nuclear power plants are a danger not
only because of the effects of large amounts of radiation that
might leak out during an accident, but also because of
potentially harmful effects of low levels of regularly emitted
radiation.
"You've got to be preventative," Leta said.
The study, which looked at the areas around Oyster Creek and also
the Indian Point plant and the Brookhaven National Laboratories
in New York, found that cancer rates in children under 10 seemed
to closely mirror the level of radiation found in baby teeth five
years earlier.
Five years after the radiation levels rose in the late 1980s, for
example, the cancer rate in children under 10 also increased.
Radiation samples were taken from baby teeth collected by
researchers and tested for Strontium-90, a radioactive chemical.
The chemical itself is linked to health risks, but it's useful to
researchers because, unlike some radioactive byproducts, it is
relatively easy to trace.
Oyster Creek, which is owned by Chicago-based Exelon, opened in
1969 and is the oldest operating commercial nuclear plant in the
United States.
Company officials did not immediately return a call seeking
comment today.
Joe Mangano, the national coordinator of the Norristown,
Pa.-based Radiation and Public Health Project and the study's
author, said further studies should be done to verify his
findings. He said the information should be considered by the
Atomic Safety and Licensing Board as it considers renewing the
license for Oyster Creek.
Phillip Patton, an associate professor of health physics and the
University of Nevada-Las Vegas, said that the data for the study
appeared to be accurate. But he said some of the data may not be
statistically significant and that it may be a leap to use it to
argue against nuclear power plants.
He said that cancer rates could be even higher around coal
plants, for example.
*****************************************************************
48 New NIRS Report Challenges All US Radioactive Waste Policies
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2006 15:39:21 -0500
A new report from Nuclear Information and Resource Service (NIRS)
finds that all of the stated U.S. radioactive waste policies have
failed, and/or hold no potential for success. The group
recommended as it did 12 years ago that an independent
Blue-Ribbon Commission be established to start from ground zero
and establish new, workable, scientifically-defensible
radioactive waste policies. Had the U.S. done this 12 years ago,
about seven billion dollars would have been saved that have been
spent on a pyrrhic effort to open the proposed and unsuitable
Yucca Mountain, Nevada nuclear waste dump.
The report also dismisses reprocessing currently a cause
celebre among the Bush administration and a few of its
Congressional backers as a radioactive waste management
approach. Reprocessing would not only not solve the radioactive
waste problem, it would lead to new dangers to the environment
and public health and to increased risk of nuclear weapons
proliferation.
Said lead author Kevin Kamps of NIRS, The U.S. has no better idea
of what to do with high-level atomic waste than it did 20 years
ago; given current circumstances, it will have no better idea 20
years from now. Shipping wastes through 45 states and the
District of Columbia to bury it in a leaky volcanic earthquake
zone doesn't make sense, neither does setting up a parking lot
for defective radioactive waste casks. What is needed is a
complete re-evaluation of our radioactive waste programs, and
that needs to be done before construction of any more nuclear
reactors is even considered.
The new report, titled Radioactive Wreck: The Unfolding Disasters
of U.S. Irradiated Nuclear Fuel Policies, also argues that the
proposed Private Fuel Storage waste dump on the Skull Valley
Goshutes Indian Reservation in Utah is both unworkable and
environmentally racist, that no full-scale, physical testing of
radioactive waste transport canisters is planned, that
radioactive waste fuel pools at existing reactors pose numerous
safety and security problems, while dry cask storage at nuclear
reactor sites does not work as well as it is supposed to and is
vulnerable to terrorist attacks as well as
accidents.
The Bush administration is expected to propose legislation in the
near future to attempt to salvage its failed radioactive waste
policies by expanding the legal limit on the amount of waste
Yucca Mountain could accept, seeking a new interim storage
program to alleviate the stress on nuclear utilities holding
their own waste causes them, taking the Yucca Mountain program
off-budget in order to get around the Congressional
appropriations process and oversight of the bungled program, and
likely other provisions. Many of these measures have been
attempted before, and rejected by Congress and/or former
President Clinton's veto pen.
The expected introduction of the bill, and the Bush
administration's recent GNEP (Global Nuclear Energy Partnership)
program only reinforce the report's conclusions that U.S.
radioactive waste policy is in complete disarray, with no
workable or scientifically-sound options being presented to the
public.
The NIRS report, published in NIRS' publication
The Nuclear Monitor is available at:
NukeNet Anti-Nuclear Network (nukenet@energyjustice.net)
"
'
Editorial: "Make Up More Stuff"
April 2 - 3, 2005
On Tuesday a House subcommittee, chaired by Rep. Jon Porter, R-Nev., will
hold a hearing into allegations that scientific records involving the Yucca
Mountain project were falsified. Last month the Energy Department disclosed
the existence of e-mails sent by U.S. Geological Survey employees working
on the Yucca Mountain project's quality assurance program, messages that
discussed fabricating scientific information about how water moves through
the mountain. On Friday the Associated Press disclosed the content of some
of the e-mails, which, to put it simply, are chilling.
"I don't have a clue when these programs were installed. So I've made up
the dates and names," a U.S. Geological Survey employee wrote in one
e-mail. "This is as good as it's going to get. If they need more proof, I
will be happy to make up more stuff." In yet another e-mail, the AP
reported, the same employee wrote to a colleague about what appear to be
his sentiments about quality assurance: "In the end I keep track of 2 sets
of files, the one that will keep QA happy and the ones that were actually
used."
How damaging the e-mails are to the Yucca Mountain project's credibility --
and its future -- can't be overstated. After all, a federal employee is
blithely discussing tampering with scientific work that goes to the very
heart of whether Yucca Mountain can safely contain nuclear waste. If, as
Nevada officials have contended, water can travel more rapidly through the
mountain than the Energy Department asserts, then there is a real
likelihood of the water corroding the canisters holding the nuclear waste,
enabling the deadly substance to escape. Such a finding would be a
show-stopper, resulting in Yucca Mountain being unable to receive a license
to operate from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
When Yucca Mountain eventually meets its demise, we'd suggest that a
fitting epitaph could come from one of the aforementioned e-mails. Our
favorite: "If they need more proof, I will be happy to make up more stuff."
We can't think of a more apt description for the absolute disregard for
science at Yucca Mountain.
===========
"
March 31, 2005
FBI steps into Yucca document investigation
By Suzanne Struglinski
<suzanne@lasvegassun.com>
SUN WASHINGTON BUREAU
WASHINGTON -- The FBI is examining the documents allegedly falsified by
government employees working on the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste
repository, a federal official says.
Chad Bungard, deputy staff director and chief counsel at a House Government
Reform subcommittee, said he was told from the beginning of the inspector
general investigations at the Interior and Energy departments that the FBI
would also be involved.
The FBI press office would not confirm the agency's involvement or comment
on the matter. The inspector general offices at each department also would
not comment due to ongoing investigations.
Bungard said this will be pursued as a criminal matter until the Justice
Department finds otherwise.
"That is why we are only giving our redacted information on Friday. We
don't want to compromise anything," Bungard said.
The House Federal Workforce and Agency Organization Subcommittee, of which
Rep. Jon Porter, R-Nev., is chairman, is to hold a hearing April 5 looking
at the department's discovery earlier this month of e-mails sent by U.S.
Geological Survey employees that suggest they falsified scientific
information on how water moves through the mountain.
Water movement is a key issue in determining the proposed repository's
safety because it can help radiation move through the mountain and possibly
into the groundwater under the mountain.
Porter will review the documents today when he returns to Washington. The
department handed them over on Tuesday.
"My instincts tell me this is the tip of the iceberg," Porter said.
The "sound science" argument has been used all along to convince Congress
-- and the public -- that the dump plan is safe, but Porter said if the
data has been tampered with, it puts the whole project in jeopardy. Porter
said that at his hearing he will seek answers to such questions as how long
the departments knew about these problems and why changes to data were made.
Rep. Shelley Berkely, D-Nev., said that like Porter she suspects the
problems unveiled by the Energy Department go beyond what is known right
now, which proves arguments for the last two decades that the project
should not move forward.
She said she believes she knows the motives for the alleged falsification.
"When the science didn't match the reality, they used politics to change
the science in order to match the reality," she said.
She welcomed the FBI's involvement because tampering with scientific data
threatens the future health and safety of Nevadans.
"That someone or a group of people colluded to falsify the scientific data
on which the entire Yucca Mountain project is based is nothing less than
criminal and should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. There
is no excuse for it," Berkley said, adding that those responsible should be
"put away for a good long time."
Jack Finn, spokesman for Sen. John Ensign, R-Nev., said Ensign was pleased
the FBI was involved, since that is what the senators asked for.
Ensign and Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., sent a letter to
Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and FBI Director Robert Mueller a day
after the Energy Department's announcement about the e-mails asking for an
investigation and for protection of the documents involved.
Rep. Jim Gibbons, R-Nev., believes the FBI will be an "impartial and
unbiased" investigator, said spokeswoman Amy Spanbauer. She said the issue
is obviously a serious matter that brings the whole integrity of the
project into question.
The investigation is the latest stumbling block for Yucca Mountain, which
has hit a series of troubles with funding and its planned license
application since being approved as the nation's nuclear waste repository.
A federal appeals court found that the Environmental Protection Agency did
not follow the law when determining how long the mountain should hold
radiation, a key scientific standard. The EPA is now reworking the standard.
* See also: NucNews Links and Archives (by date) at
http://nucnews.net * (Posted for educational and
research purposes only, in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107) *
_______________________________________________________________________
Subscribe/Unsubscribe Here: http://www.energyjustice.net/nukenet/
Change your settings or access the archives at:
http://energyjustice.net/mailman/listinfo/nukenet_energyjustice.net
*****************************************************************
50 [NukeNet] Presentation - Film - Navajos and Uranium mining
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2006 17:56:39 -0800
NukeNet Anti-Nuclear Network (nukenet@energyjustice.net)
Would anyone be interested in hosting this program below?
Greetings. I am producing an important and timely documentary film entitled
WOVEN WAYS. I believe the film would be of interest to members of Peace
Action, and I'd very much like to inquire about making a presentation to
your organization as a guest speaker.
WOVEN WAYS shares the stories of Navajo weavers, the sheep that sustain
their art and culture, and the environmental issues that threaten the
living bonds between them. Deadly uranium and dirty coal power pose serious
problems for the Navajo living on the Reservation. America s thirst for
energy is having profound negative affects on the Navajo. WOVEN WAYS is a
story of beauty and hope, in the face of grave environmental injustices.
The film gently unravels the sacred connection each woman has to her sheep
and the land, and exposes the interventions that threaten their culture,
health, and well-being.
The Navajo are waging an important struggle against uranium and coal. While
some Americans might feel that this issue as theirs to fight, not ours, the
truth is that costly, dangerous and unsustainable coal and nuclear power
are bad for us all. Peace-loving people everywhere understand this, as I m
confident your members do.
We have just edited a 30 minute work-in-progress DVD of our film, which we
re happy to screen as part of the presentation. Documentary film is a
powerful medium in contemporary culture, one capable of amassing widespread
empathy, of mobilizing support, and changing the course of events. An
opportunity exists to help the Navajo fight the exploitation of resources
on their land that has cost them their health and threatens their way of
life. If you d like to learn more about the film, please visit the website
at www.wovenways.org.
I look forward to hearing from you and wish you well with your many
important endeavors.
Warmest regards,
Linda
Linda Helm Krapf, Producer/Director
WOVEN WAYS
PO Box 46
Sergeantsville, NJ 08559
609.397.4054
_______________________________________________________________________
Subscribe/Unsubscribe Here: http://www.energyjustice.net/nukenet/
Change your settings or access the archives at:
http://energyjustice.net/mailman/listinfo/nukenet_energyjustice.net
*****************************************************************
51 [NukeNet] SCOOP - THE ROY PROCESS
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2006 17:59:09 -0800
NukeNet Anti-Nuclear Network (nukenet@energyjustice.net)
Guest Article: Making Nuclear Waste Less Harmful
Friday, 29 August 2003, 12:36 pm
Opinion: Guest Opinion
A Process To Render Nuclear Weapons & Waste Less Harmful
By Dennis F. Nester,
special for NuclearNo.com,
Originally published 20 June 2003
- Recycling plutonium from warheads into MOX nuclear reactor fuel only
perpetuates the security and environmental problems of bomb grade elements
- There is a better way which will completely transmute plutonium and other
high level nuclear waste known as the Roy Process
It was the TMI partial meltdown that moved Dr. Roy to spend the summer
school break proving calculations to see if it was possible to transmute
high level nuclear waste cost effectively. He found it could be done with
existing infrastructure, commercially available machinery and current
supporting technology.
Estimated cost to build a pilot facility was $80 million dollars. A
newspaper editor persuaded Dr. Roy to release his Roy Process to the press
which was published in November of 1979. (see article on web site below).
The Roy Process Brief Description
from the web site:
http://members.cox.net/theroyprocess
Is there a safe process to get rid of nuclear waste? Maybe! One possible
solution is a process invented by Dr. Radha R. Roy, former professor of
Physics at Arizona State University, and designer and former director of
the nuclear physics research facilities at the University of Brussels in
Belgium and at Pennsylvania State University.
Dr. Roy is an internationally known nuclear physicist, consultant, and the
author of over 60 articles and several books. He is also a contributing
author of many invited articles in a prestigious encyclopedia. He is cited
in American Men and Women of Science, Who`s Who in America, Who`s Who in
the World and the International Biographical Centre, England. He has spent
52 years in European and American universities researching and writing
recognized books on nuclear physics. He has supervised many doctoral students.
Roy invented a process for transmuting radioactive nuclear isotopes to
harmless, stable isotopes. This process is viable not only for nuclear
waste from reactors but also for low-level radioactive waste products.
In 1979, Roy announced his transmutation process and received international
attention. The Roy process does not require storage of radioactive
materials. No new equipment is required. In fact, all of the equipment and
the chemical separation processes needed are well known.
What`s the basis for the Roy Process? If you examine radioactive elements
such as strontium 90, cesium 137 and plutonium 239, you will see that they
all have too many neutrons. To put it very simply, the Roy process
transmutes these unstable isotopes to stable ones by knocking out the extra
neutrons. When a neutron is removed, the resulting isotope has a
considerably shorter half-life which then decays to a stable form in a
reasonable amount of time.
How do we knock out neutrons? By bombarding them with photons (produced as
x-rays) in a high- powered electron linear accelerator. Before this
process, the isotopes must be separated by a well-known chemical process.
It is feasible that portable units could be built and transported to
hazardous sites for on-site transmutation of nuclear wastes and radioactive
wastes.
To give an example, cesium 137 with a half-life of 30.17 years is
transformed into cesium 136 with a half-life of 13 days. Plutonium 239 with
a half-life of 24,300 years is transformed into plutonium 237 with a
half-life of 45.6 days. Subsequent radioactive elements which will be
produced from the decay of plutonium 237 can be treated in the same way as
above until the stable element is formed.
The Roy Process could be developed in three distinct phases, according to
Roy. Phase I consists of a theoretical feasibility study of the process to
obtain needed parameters for the construction of a prototype machine. Phase
II will involve the construction of a prototype machine and supporting
facilities for demonstrating the process. Phase Ill will consist of the
construction of large scale commercial plants based on the data obtained
from Phase II.
Cost estimates for Phase I and II are in the neighborhood of $10 million.
For Phase Ill, Roy estimates a cost of $70 million. Says Roy, `It will be
interesting to do a cost analysis of eliminating nuclear waste by using my
process and by burying it for 240,000 years - ten half-lives of plutonium -
under strict scientific control. There is also an ethical question: can we
really burden the thousands of generations yet to come with problems which
we have created? There is no God among human beings who can guarantee how
the geological structure of waste burial regions will change even after ten
thousand years, not to mention 240,000 years."
If you are interested in finding out more about this process, please
contact Dennis Nester, Roy`s agent, whose address is listed below.
A final note
To those who say that a process for transforming nuclear wastes is an
invitation to keep making them, I ask, when we find a cure for cancer,
shall we say it`s okay to continue to eat, drink and breathe carcinogens?
"There is no way one can change nuclear structure other than by nuclear
reaction. Burial of nuclear waste is not a solution." Radha Roy, Ph.D.
Professor Emeritus
"Do not be surprised if you learn that the nuclear industry makes billions
of dollars by being a part of government`s policy of burial of nuclear
wastes. It is not in their financial interest to try any other process.
They are not idealists. Radha R. Roy, Ph.D. Professor Emeritus
The below includes the Patent application claim.....describing other uses
for the Roy Process transmutation method
http://members.cox.net/theroyprocess/additional-uses-royprocess.html
*************
AUTHOR CONTACT DETAILS
Dennis F. Nester 4510 E. Willow Ave. Phoenix, AZ 85032 USA (602) 494-9361
theroyprocess@cox.net
Subscribe/Unsubscribe Here: http://www.energyjustice.net/nukenet/
Change your settings or access the archives at:
http://energyjustice.net/mailman/listinfo/nukenet_energyjustice.net
*****************************************************************
52 Las Vegas SUN: Republican candidates for governor disavow Guinn tax increase
March 27, 2006
By RYAN NAKASHIMA ASSOCIATED PRESS
LAS VEGAS (AP) - Republican gubernatorial candidates distanced
themselves Monday from GOP Gov. Kenny Guinn and said they would
never repeat his 2003 tax increase, the largest in state
history.
Rep. Jim Gibbons, Lt. Gov. Lorraine Hunt and state Sen. Bob
Beers all disavowed the tax package, which raised more than $833
million over two years. At Guinn's urging, the state later gave
taxpayers back $300 million in vehicle registration rebates
after the tax increase helped create a big surplus.
Hunt called the tax increase "disastrous," while Beers, who
opposed the increase in the legislature as an assemblyman, said:
"I actually lived through this nightmare."
When asked what he would do differently than Guinn, Gibbons
replied: "First of all, I would never have raised your taxes."
The three candidates appeared at a luncheon forum hosted by the
Republican Jewish Coalition at The Venetian casino hotel.
Guinn is prohibited by state law from seeking a third term in
2006, leaving the field open heading into November's general
election. Henderson Mayor Jim Gibson and state Sen. Dina Titus
are seeking the Democratic nomination.
On Monday the GOP candidates offered differing proposals on the
hotly debated topic of illegal immigration.
Beers proposed denying welfare and the state's Millennium
Scholarships to illegal immigrants.
Gibbons and Hunt proposed ways of documenting illegal workers to
ensure they pay taxes and eventually earn legal status.
All opposed a proposed nuclear waste repository at Yucca
Mountain, and each expressed concerns about introducing a
statewide property tax cap such as California's Proposition 13.
The landmark 1978 voter initiative has been blamed for causing
massive funding cuts to the state's public education system.
Hunt appealed to Republicans to support whichever candidate won
the primary, and the three candidates were mostly civil during
the forum moderated by radio talk show host Alan Stock.
"Whoever wins the primary, please get behind her, or him, and
let's put a Republican in the mansion," Hunt said.
However, Beers kept up his criticism of Gibbons, who is
considered the front-runner to win the August primary. Beers
said Gibbons supported extending collective bargaining rights
from local to state government employees such as prison guards,
which would inflate the cost of government.
"I have voted in the past against extending that unfair set of
rights to state employees," Beers said. "U.S. Rep. Gibbons has
come out in favor of doing just that and has been endorsed by
the union he promised that to."
Gibbons did not respond directly.
Afterward, Gibbons spokesman Robert Uithoven said the
congressman did not favor such rights for all state employees,
but told the Nevada Corrections Association he would support
collective bargaining for the group if it could win legislative
approval.
"It was just a question brought up in that particular meeting
with that particular group," Uithoven said.
Beers also promoted his Tax and Spending Control initiative,
which would amend the state constitution to cap state and local
government spending to the rate of inflation plus population
growth.
Gibbons and Hunt have opposed the proposal but vowed to be
fiscally conservative.
All contents copyright 2005 Las Vegas SUN, Inc.
*****************************************************************
53 NEWS.com.au: Withdraw uranium opposition, Labor told -
- Breaking News 24/7 -
From: AAP
March 29, 2006
ENVIRONMENT Minister Ian Campbell said state Labor governments
should withdraw their opposition to more uranium mining.
Australia and China are poised to sign a deal next week which
will open the door to uranium sales between the two countries.
The safeguards deal, to be signed by Prime Minister John Howard
and visiting Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao, is expected to increase
pressure on the states to allow more uranium mines beyond
Labor's three-mines policy.
State governments are standing firm on the policy, but Senator
Campbell said it made no sense when nuclear power offered a
solution to greenhouse gas emissions and climate change.
He said the problem of greenhouse gas emissions was
particularly bad in countries such as China, which rely heavily
on carbon-based energy and needed to move to renewable and
nuclear power to slow climate change.
*****************************************************************
54 NEWS.com.au: China fires nuclear reaction
| Business | Breaking News 24/7 -
(29-03-2006)
By Nigel Wilson and Andrew Trounson
URANIUM stocks soared yesterday after news that China and
Australia could sign an agreement on uranium exploration and
mining next week.
Shares in Rio Tinto subsidiary Energy Resources of Australia
(era.ASX:Quote,News), Australia's largest uranium exporter,
jumped 45c to $13.75.
BHP Billiton (bhp.ASX:Quote,News), which owns the world's
biggest uranium resource, at Olympic Dam, closed at $28.85, 17c
higher than its day's low.
Encounter Resources (enr.ASX:Quote,News), which also listed on
Friday, jumped 85 per cent to 88c, making it the biggest gainer
on the day.
The minnows performed spectacularly. Perth-based Energy Metals
rose 15 per cent to $2.53. Shares in Toro Energy, which more
than trebled on its debut last Friday, hit $1.49 before closing
10.5c lower.
Deep Yellow, which has uranium exploration licences in Australia
and Tanzania, rose 43 per cent to 16.5c.
Argonaut Securities equities dealer Andrew Venn said in Perth
that many of the uranium companies listing on the stock exchange
had yet to find a uranium resource, never mind contemplating
building a mine.
"You can get any price from $2 to 20c. It's blue sky rather than
fundamentals that investors are chasing," he said.
Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao, who arrives in Perth on Saturday
evening, is expected to sign agreements that will lead to China
buying uranium from Australia.
"The discussions with the Chinese have been going on for some
time. We have made very good progress," Prime Minister John
Howard said. "It's possible the discussions could be
satisfactorily concluded so that something could be said or
signed when the Chinese Premier visits Canberra next week."
Australia, which has the world's largest-known uranium reserves,
began talks last year with China to ensure any uranium supplied
would be used only for peaceful purposes.
China plans to boost use of electricity provided by nuclear
power stations fourfold by 2020 by building 28 nuclear power
plants to meet rising energy demand, according to the World
Nuclear Association.
The soaring prices of uranium stocks prompted warnings that new
producing uranium mines are years away, in part because of the
continuing three-mines policy adopted by the Labor Party and
enforced by state governments around the country, who control
exploration and mining approvals.
"I'd be surprised if there was a new uranium mine in Australia
before 2010," Ian Hore-Lacy, general manager of the Uranium
Information Centre in Melbourne, said.
"No companies appear to be seeking approvals for new mining
operations and you'd have to believe that it would take three or
four years for approvals and mine development to work through."
Shadow resources minister Martin Ferguson said the ALP had been
unaware of any agreement with China over uranium exploration,
but noted there were currently no special barriers to Chinese
interests being able to explore for uranium. "If a Chinese
investor wants to get involved, then they will have to meet the
normal commercial requirements of the Australian and state
governments," he said.
Yesterday The Australian confirmed that despite the declaration
by Summit Resources of a uranium province around Mt Isa, the
Queensland Government will not change its anti-mining stance.
BHP, which has said it will make a decision on expanding Olympic
Dam at Roxby Downs in South Australia by 2009, is not
considering developing a 35,000-tonne deposit at Yeelirrie in
Western Australia's Goldfields.
WA government sources said there was an agreement with the
deposit's former owner, WMC, that it would never be mined.
A BHP spokeswoman said the company's uranium aspiration were
fully engaged with expansion possibilities for Olympic Dam -
which has estimated reserves of 456,600 tonnes of contained
uranium oxide.
In the Northern Territory, Energy Resources of Australia is
planning to further explore its existing leases at Ranger with
the aim of continuing mining after 2008.
By that time ERA says it will have sufficient mined ore to
continue processing until 2014.
Copyright 2006 News Limited. All times AEDT (GMT + 11).
*****************************************************************
55 NEWS.com.au: Expand uranium mining: Campbell
Breaking News 24/7 -
From: AAP
March 28, 2006
ENVIRONMENT Minister Ian Campbell says Australia should allow
more mining of uranium to help tackle climate change.
Senator Campbell said also that more uranium exports to major
polluting nations such as China and India did not necessarily
mean Australia should take responsibility for extra nuclear
waste.
Prime Minister John Howard today said it was possible that a
uranium safeguards agreement would be signed next week with
China when Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao visits Australia.
The safeguards pact will open the way for China to begin talks
to buy uranium from Australian miners, including BHP Billiton,
which owns 30 per cent of reserves in Australia.
But state governments are standing firm against a change in
Labor's three-mines uranium policy, which will hamper China's
desire to explore for the metal in Australia.
Senator Campbell said an expansion of uranium mining and use of
nuclear technology was essential to counter greenhouse gas
emissions and global warming.
"It's incredibly important that all of the technologies are
available to solve climate change," he said.
"Nuclear is one of the existing technologies that we know that
can produce energy with low carbon emissions."
*****************************************************************
56 Nevada Appeal: Feds continue to bully Nevada over Yucca
Opinion
March 28, 2006
The U.S. Department of Energy is demonstrating once again that
it sees Nevada as an opponent in its headlong quest to complete
the Yucca Mountain nuclear-waste repository.
And that's just another way of saying that the feds don't care
about the concerns of state residents who would have to live
next to 77,000 tons of nuclear waste.
The agency's first step in changing that perception would be to
turn over an application for the repository that was completed
in 2004 by contractors seeking a license to open the dump.
But the agency has refused repeated requests from Nevada's
highest officials. Yucca critics suspect the document could show
the site would be unsafe after 10,000 years. The feds say that
information is protected by legal privilege.
Their argument ignores a far more important privilege, that of
Nevada's citizens to know everything about the project that they
may be forced to live with, especially since it was prepared on
the public's dime.
Now Nevada is going to court again, wasting time and money to
obtain something that the public needs to know.
Not that the feds will care ... they've made a practice of
wasting millions of dollars at Yucca Mountain.
The feds are also considering the state's request that it
release the results of investigations into whether scientists at
the site broke laws. More than a year ago, the state learned of
the allegations that scientists falsified data that may have
helped persuade President Bush and Congress to approve the Yucca
Mountain site in 2002.
It's commendable that the state is taking on the U.S. Department
of Energy once again. But it's troubling that the federal
government continues to snub its nose at the state.
And, unfortunately, it makes you wonder what else they may be
hiding.
All contents © Copyright 2006 nevadaappeal.com
Nevada Appeal - 580 Mallory Way - Carson City, NV 89701
*****************************************************************
57 Australian Financial Review: Uranium prices predicted to get hotter
March 29 2006
Staff reporter and Bloomberg
Spot uranium prices may surge as much as 45 per cent to a high
of $US58 a pound by mid next year, potentially driving further
gains for sharemarket-listed explorers hoping to cash in on
expectations that demand for the nuclear fuel will outstrip
supply over the next 10 years.
The growing political acceptance of uranium mining has spurred a
boom in uranium stocks that has investors paying between $US3
and $US4 a pound of uranium mineralisation, according to a
Resource Capital Research report released yesterday.
The report covers 22 global uranium exploration and development
companies and focuses on Australia, Canada and the United States.
The boutique research company forecasts the uranium price will
reach $US54 a pound in 2006, an increase of 35 per cent over the
current spot price of $US40 a pound, and $US58 a pound by
mid-2007.
Shares in Energy Resources of Australia, Energy Metals and
Australian uranium companies jumped yesterday. ERA rose 45¢ to
$13.75 and Energy Metals rose 40¢ to $6.
Shares in uranium explorer Toro Energy, which more than trebled
in their debut day of trading on March 24, jumped as much as 6.5
per cent to almost six times their issue price.
Encounter Resources, a uranium explorer that began trading on
March 24, jumped 85 per cent to 88¢, making it the biggest
gainer on the exchange yesterday.
"With the opportunity opening up of the Chinese market, it's
providing greater confidence in the market that all the
exploration spending going on is actually worthwhile," Fat
Prophets Fund Management senior resources analyst Gavin Wendt
said.
"If it was possible to add more enthusiasm to the whole uranium
sector, this has done it."
Australia, which has the world's largest-known uranium reserves,
started talks last year with China to ensure any uranium
supplied would be used only for peaceful purposes.
Miners such as Energy Metals and Compass Resources are competing
to explore for the fuel in Australia as demand surges.
Shares in BHP Billiton, which produces uranium at the Olympic
Dam mine in South Australia, had also benefited from optimism
about the metal, Mr Wendt said.
China plans to boost nuclear energy fourfold by 2020 by building
28 nuclear power plants to meet rising energy demand, according
to the World Nuclear Association.
Australia has 31 per cent of global uranium reserves although it
meets only 21 per cent of demand, according to government
figures, partly due to mining bans.
*****************************************************************
58 ForUm: Bulgaria to transport nuclear materials via Ukraine
News / 28 March 2006 | 17:17
The Cabinet of Ukraine inked the resolution ¹161 of March 27,
2006 regulating the transportation of nuclear materials from
Bulgaria to Russia via Ukraine.
The resolution approves of the draft agreement between the
Ukraine’s Cabinet, Bulgarian and Russian governments on the
transportation of nuclear materials between Bulgaria and the RF
via Ukraine.
The State Nuclear Regulation Committee Chairman Olena
Mykolajchuk is commissioned to sign the corresponding agreement
and to introduce insignificant changes if necessary.
Comments Greens. (17:24 | 28 March,2006) We shall not allow
that
All rights are reserved by © LTD. Inter-Media,
ForUm 2001-2006
*****************************************************************
59 reviewjournal.com: YUCCA MOUNTAIN: Scientists tout technology, research
Mar. 28, 2006
Waste repository project might use advances
By STEVE TETREAULT STEPHENS WASHINGTON BUREAU
WASHINGTON -- Spray-on metal coatings that could resist corrosion
for half of the cost of expensive alloys. Time-saving electron
beam welding that could seal canisters in a single pass.
Longer-lasting disc blades that might be able to cut through
2,000 feet of rock before wearing out.
New technologies and research paid for by the Department of
Energy for Yucca Mountain show promise for researching the
proposed Nevada nuclear waste site and for saving millions of
dollars, said scientists taking part in the studies.
Much of the work being conducted in science incubators are in
the early phases and could take years to explore. But DOE
officials said fruit-bearing elements could be incorporated into
the waste repository designs.
"The benefits are potentially enormous as far as performance and
cost standpoints," said John Wengle, director of the Office of
Science and Technology.
Wengle and other DOE officials and research team leaders
delivered presentations Thursday at the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, which would conduct license hearings for the
repository.
Some of the participants said research could allow DOE to hone
repository safety calculations or fill gaps in research.
No one discussed what might happen if research turned up
potential showstoppers for the project.
Researchers gathered by the Lawrence Berkeley National
Laboratory are taking a new thrust at the physical
characteristics of Yucca Mountain and how water might seep
through its cracks and fissures into repository storage areas.
"Our work is really a demonstration that Yucca Mountain site is
a real good site for disposal of nuclear waste," said Bo
Bodvarsson, director of the earth sciences division at the lab.
"This portfolio is going to help us demonstrate a significant
increase in repository performance."
But as work proceeds, the Energy Department is drawing questions
as to whether the follow-up research might complicate licensing
for the repository, which would be built on studies the
department conducted over the past 20 years.
How does DOE plan to integrate new features into a complex
undertaking that faces scrupulous review, DOE officials were
asked at the session by NRC staff and members of an NRC advisory
commission.
"Clearly there is much more to the story than we have heard so
far," said Lawrence Kokajko, deputy director of the high-level
waste repository safety division in the NRC's Office of Nuclear
Material Safety and Safeguards.
Bob Loux, a repository critic, said, "It seems to me there is a
huge disconnect between the science program and the Yucca
project.
"If they are developing good ideas in science, they ought to
have bought enough time to incorporate those into the program.
Otherwise why do it?" Loux, director of the Nevada Agency for
Nuclear Projects, said in a telephone interview.
The Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management is spending
$21.3 million on Yucca follow-up work this year that is spread
among the national laboratories and universities.
The University of Nevada, Las Vegas, the University of Nevada,
Reno, Nye County and Nevada-based Desert Research Institute are
among the groups receiving funding.
Besides the earth science studies, topics include understanding
how waste-bearing containers will corrode and how spent fuel
will behave once it is placed in the repository and starts to
decay.
"We are developing a community of experts who will address
issues unknown at the moment but will inevitably arise as the
project moves forward," said Rodney Ewing, a nuclear engineering
professor at the University of Michigan.
"At the end of the day, if you are telling a story out to
hundreds of thousands of years, the credibility of the
storyteller is important," Ewing said.
DOE and the Defense Department are teaming up on development of
iron-based amorphous metal coatings that are said to be
corrosion-resistant, DOE official Jef Walker said.
The iron-based coating material could be bought for $8 a pound
and sprayed onto waste containers, while costs for a
nickel-based alloy are double that or more, Walker said.
DOE's design calls for placing alloy sleeves on waste packages
entering the mountain.
Walker declined to estimate how much money might be saved but
said the amount was "substantial, possibly staggering."
Similar metal coatings could be applied on tunnel boring
machines to reduce wear and tear on cutting tool, Walker said.
The cutting discs now must be replaced after slicing through 500
feet of rock.
Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal, 1997 - 2006
Stephens Media GroupPrivacy Statement
*****************************************************************
60 AFP: Australian PM upbeat about prospects of nuclear deal with China
Tue Mar 28, 3:17 AM ET
CANBERRA (AFP) - Prime Minister John Howard said "very good
progress" had been made in negotiations on opening Australia's
vast uranium reserves up to China and a deal could be signed when
Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao visits next week.
In remarks that sent shares in Australian-listed uranium
producers and explorers soaring, Howard said there had been
progress in lengthy talks on Canberra's insistence that its
uranium is not used in Chinese nuclear weapons.
"We have made very good progress," Howard said during a joint
press conference in Canberra with visiting British Prime Minister
Tony Blair " /> Tony Blair.
"It's possible that the discussions could be satisfactorily
concluded so that something could be said or signed when the
Chinese premier visits Australia next week," he said.
Australia has some 40 percent of the world's known uranium
reserves and has been keen to increase exports to fuel China's
rapidly expanding nuclear power industry.
A senior Chinese official in Beijing said Monday the two
governments were poised to sign two deals, one on exports of
Australian uranium to China and another on Chinese involvement
in uranium exploration and mining in Australia.
Liu Jieyi, head of the foreign ministry's North American and
Oceanic Affairs Department, told reporters two draft texts had
been completed and would likely be signed during Wen's four-day
visit, which begins Saturday.
Liu stressed the agreements would cover the "peaceful use of
nuclear energy" and would be in line with safeguards laid down
by the International Atomic Energy Agency
" /> International Atomic Energy Agency.
During two days of meetings and speeches in Canberra, Blair and
Howard have repeatedly stressed the strategic importance of
helping the rapidly emerging economies of China and India
achieve energy security.
Both Blair and Howard suggested nuclear power would offer the
Asian giants a cleaner and more sustainable source of energy
than the polluting coal and oil-fired stations on which they now
rely.
Howard did not rule out lifting a ban on selling uranium to
India due to New Delhi's refusal to sign the nuclear
non-proliferation treaty, although he said the government was
"not contemplating" a change in policy.
He said Australia will send a delegation to India and the United
States next month to examine details of a new nuclear agreement
between the two countries.
Under the deal, India gains access to US nuclear technology in
exchange for it separating its civil and military atomic
programs and placing a majority of its reactors under
international inspection.
Howard's comments about a possible deal with Beijing raised the
prospect of cashed-up Chinese resources companies looking for
joint ventures in Australia, sending uranium companies
skyrocketing.
Encounter Resources, a company holding exploration rights in
parts of Western Australia, was up 40.5 cents or 85 percent at
88 cents.
Toro Energy, which holds uranium exploration ground in South
Australia, was up 8.5 cents or 6.6 percent at 1.395 dollars.
Deep Yellow, a Northern Territory explorer, was up five cents or
44 percent at 16.5 cents.
BHP Billiton, which owns one of the world's largest uranium
mines at Olympic Dam in South Australia state, rose seven cents
or 0.26 percent to 26.85 to a record closing high.
The country's other major uranium producer, Energy Resources
Australia (ERA) rose 45 cents or 3.5 percent to 13.75.
Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
61 AFP: Local gov't okays test run at nuclear reprocessing plant -
Tue Mar 28, 10:00 AM ET
TOKYO (AFP) - Local authorities in northern Japan authorised a
test run at the nation's first plant to extract plutonium and
uranium from spent nuclear fuel.
Shingo Mimura, governor of Aomori prefecture which hosts the
plant, announced the approval and offered draft safety
guidelines to plant operator Japan Nuclear Fuel Ltd.
"I believe this reprocessing plant will contribute a lot to the
nation's energy policies," Mimura told a news conference on
Tuesday.
Japan Nuclear Fuel is expected to begin trial operations by
Friday to reprocess spent fuel from other nuclear power plants.
The planned test run will mark a major step forward in Japan's
long-term reprocessing project.
Construction of the plant began in 1993, but the start of
operations has been delayed due to a series of problems
including a design fault in the cooling devices.
Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
62 Morris Daily Herald: Nuclear spill disclosure bill clears Senate
3/28/2006 3:35:00 PM
Dahl expects Blagojevich will sign tritium-leak response measure
into law
Herald Writer
SPRINGFIELD – State Senator Gary Dahl sees no reason why Gov.
Rod Blagojevich shouldn’t sign legislation to more closely
regulate nuclear generating stations in Illinois.
“Everybody’s been in favor of the bill,” the Granville
Republican said today. “The Illinois Environmental Protection
Agency supported this all the way through (the House and
Senate). I don’t see where the governor would hesitate to sign
it.”
Dahl is the chief Senate sponsor of House Bill 1620, which would
hold the state’s nuclear generating stations to more-strict
environmental standards. The Senate approved the measure Monday
in a 49-0 vote.
State Representative Careen Gordon, D-Morris, proposed HB 1620,
which passed in the House last week by a vote of 114-0. The bill
now returns to the House for approval of the amended version
before going to the governor for his signature.
Dahl said he talked Monday evening to Gordon, who told him she
was confident the legislation would not have any trouble passing
in the House this time around.
The bill is in response to recent tritium leaks at several
generating stations owned by Exelon Nuclear, including Braidwood
Station at Braceville, Dresden Station at Morris, and Byron
Station at Rockford.
Tritium is a naturally occurring isotope of hydrogen which emits
a very low level of radiation, and is found in more concentrated
levels in water used in nuclear generating stations.
Under the measure, nuclear plant owners and operators would be
required to report to the IEPA any accidental releases of a
contaminant within 24 hours. This includes illegal spills,
leaks, emissions, discharges, escapes, leaching, and disposal of
contaminants into groundwater, surface water, or the soil.
The IEPA would have a year after the bill goes into effect to
prescribe standards to the Illinois Pollution Control Board for
detecting and reporting unpermitted releases of contaminants.
The IPCB must then set standards to detect and report the
releases.
The legislation also requires the IEPA and Illinois Emergency
Management Agency to inspect, at least quarterly, every nuclear
station in Illinois for non-permitted releases.
Dahl did not believe the quarterly inspections would add more
staff to the agencies.
“I don’t see why it should,” he noted. “I would think there’d be
enough people there to get these done. It’s just a matter of
prioritizing. Sometimes we put so much paperwork into things we
don’t actually get the fieldwork done.”
HB 1620 is part of the Will-Grundy County response to a series
of tritium-laced water spills at Braidwood Station, beginning in
1996, but not made public until December 2005.
“I think this measure is going to be a help. The Braidwood
situation is growing way out of proportion. The problem I see is
that the vultures are circling,” said Dahl.
“We’re drawing in attorneys from all over the country. Exelon
has created some problems and needs to get its act straight.
“But we’re having class-action lawsuits, and who is getting rich
from this, the trial attorneys or the residents? My guess is,
it’s going to be the attorneys.”
Dahl said, up to now, Exelon has been willing to voluntarily
assist with fixing the water problem in the village of Godley,
south of Braidwood Station, and to assist in other ways as much
as it can.
“Putting myself in their position as a businessman, and I’m
trying to do what’s right and voluntarily being a good neighbor,
and my back’s to the wall with multi-million dollar lawsuits,”
he noted.
“And every time I open my mouth and say I want to do this and
that for them, then some high-powered attorneys are taking these
statements to court and saying, ‘You’re admitting guilt.’ And,
that’s too bad.”
In a related matter, Will County Board Chairman Jim Moustis met
last week with Illinois Congressional leaders on Capitol Hill to
discuss the radioactive water spills at Braidwood Station.
Moustis said in a prepared news release he was encouraged that
positive steps would be taken toward solving public health and
safety issues in the wake of the spills.
He also repeated his request for a review of all laws governing
the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
“As much as we need laws that hold companies accountable for
actions after the fact, our goal should be to make sure that
radiation leaks never happen at all,” he said in the news brief.
“Poison is poison, and that’s why we need a strong NRC with
strong laws they can enforce.”
Morris Daily Herald • 1804 N. Division St. • Morris, Illinois
60450 (815) 942-3221 • (800) 215-9778
*****************************************************************
63 Midland Reporter-Telegram: With license pending, survey shows Andrews backs Waste Control
Specialists
03/28/2006 -
Although the license is pending, Andrews shows support of
low-level radioactive waste disposal by Waste Control
Specialists.
By Ruth Campbell
Staff Writer
ANDREWS -- A draft license allowing Waste Control Specialists to
dispose of low-level radioactive waste could be issued by late
summer, Mike Woodward, an attorney representing the company said
Monday.
Woodward, attorney and lobbyist Kent Hance and Mike Baselice,
president of Baselice and Associates, were on hand to explain
results from a survey on Waste Control during an Andrews County
Commission meeting.
The survey was conducted after a Texas Commission on
Environmental Quality consultant expressed skepticism about the
level of support for low-level radioactive waste disposal in
Andrews, Hance said.
Waste Control currently stores low-level radioactive waste. Part
of the license application has to do with socioeconomic issues,
although the license is supposed to be decided on based on
science and technology, Hance said.
Texas Commission on Environmental Quality and Texas Department
of State Health Services officials said the low-level disposal
site license might be issued in early 2008 and a draft license
in August.
Richard Ratliff, radiation program officer for the Division of
Regulatory Services with the Texas Department of State Health
Services said a proposed license from his agency is likely by
the end of August. Those opposed to the license can then request
a hearing.
Baselice's survey was done Jan. 21-23 among 605 respondents,
including 172 in Andrews County. He also asked people about the
proposed high-temperature teaching and test reactor in the
county and Louisiana Energy Services proposed uranium enrichment
facility just over the line in Lea County, N.M.
Overall results showed people feel positive about all three
projects and they were even more positive after the survey was
concluded, Baselice said. Overall, 52 percent favored having
disposal available at the site and 64 percent in Andrews. Up to
77 percent of people in Andrews backed the idea after learning
more about the venture.
The image of Waste Control overall is 42 percent positive and 8
percent negative. In Andrews, it is 70 percent positive and 10
percent negative. Most people in Andrews feel Waste Control has
had a good impact on the local economy -- 40 percent overall and
56 percent in Andrews.
Seventy-four (74) percent of Andrews County residents want Waste
Control operating in the region rather than elsewhere and 63
percent overall feel likewise, Baselice said.
"The more people know about what you're doing and what we stand
for," the more positive the response, Hance told the audience in
the Andrews County Courtroom.
Response to the high-temperature teaching and test reactor has
also been favorable with 59 percent offering a positive
response, 11 percent negative and 34 percent with no opinion.
Louisiana Energy Services' National Enrichment Facility yielded
a 19 percent positive response overall and 10 percent positive
in Andrews County. Four percent was negative overall and 1
percent negative in Andrews County.
Response was higher in Lea County where the National Enrichment
Facility will be located.
Andrews Independent School District school board member Brad
Horton asked if Waste Control would continue to be a good
neighbor or if it planned to pull out of the area.
Hance said that thanks to Harold Simmons, chairman of the board
of Valhi Inc., parent company of Waste Control Specialists, and
the community, the business is moving forward.
"With the amount of money invested in this project, we want to,"
Hance said. "But even if we didn't want to we have to. We put
$120 million into this project."
©MyWestTexas.com 2006
*****************************************************************
64 AU ABC: NT Govt mulls uranium sales timeframe.
28/03/2006. ABC News Online
The Northern Territory Government says it is hard to know
whether the Territory will be the first jurisdiction to sell
uranium to China.
The Chinese Foreign Ministry has confirmed it is ready to sign
an agreement with Australia on the peaceful use of nuclear
energy, paving the way for uranium sales.
Territory Chief Minister Clare Martin says it would be up to Rio
Tinto to decide whether China can buy uranium from the active
Ranger mine.
She has restated Labor's policy of no new uranium mines,
despite extensive mineral exploration being under way in the
Territory.
"There is a large difference between exploration and any new
mine coming on line," she said.
"We're very proud of the fact we've got lots of exploration at
the moment and we're certainly very supportive of that, but
there is certainly no new uranium mine in the Territory at the
moment.
"There's a long time between minerals being found and
operations getting up and going."
*****************************************************************
65 AU ABC: Uranium deal with China close, Govt says
29/03/2006
Australian Broadcasting Corporation Lateline
Reporter: Dana Robertson
TONY JONES: Australia's uranium industry could be in for a
massive boost, with Chinese officials confident they'll sign a
uranium deal with Australia next week. The deal would allow
Australian uranium to be exported to China for power generation
and enable China to explore for uranium in Australia and produce
it here. It could also pave the way for India to access
Australia's vast uranium reserves. The renewed focus on nuclear
power comes as Tony Blair highlighted the issue of climate
change during his last day in Australia. Dana Robertson reports.
DANA ROBERTSON: They might be the leaders of Australia and Great
Britain, but today their eyes were firmly on Asia.
TONY BLAIR, BRITISH PRIME MINISTER: Just as we have our
relationship with Europe that is important, you have yours with
Asia and, in fact, this can help us both.
DANA ROBERTSON: Like so much else during this visit, Tony Blair
and John Howard are in steadfast agreement that there needs to
be a new international pact to tackle climate change. While
Britain has signed the Kyoto Protocol, Tony Blair called for a
dose of realism in the debate and heaped praise on Australia's
agreement with other Asia Pacific nations to combat greenhouse
emissions.
TONY BLAIR: I think the very fact you've now got a forum in
which you've got the US and China and India talking together
alongside countries like Australia is a very important, positive
sign.
DANA ROBERTSON: And both men agree that China's involvement is
crucial.
JOHN HOWARD, PRIME MINISTER: If Australia stopped all emissions,
it would take China 10 months to sort of make up for it.
TONY BLAIR: That is why it is just, as I say, a completely
unrealistic debate to say that you can have a climate change
agreement that doesn't involve China, and then America,
obviously, and, of course, India, which is also a country of a
billion people growing at a vast rate.
DANA ROBERTSON: The renewed discussion of China and India comes
as both countries are turning to Australia for the uranium they
need to fuel their rapidly growing economies. Australia has
almost half of the world's uranium reserves, but Labor's
three-mines policy has prevented the states from expanding the
industry. The South Australian Premier wants that to change.
MIKE RANN, SOUTH AUSTRALIAN PREMIER: The current national ALP
policy is anachronistic and therefore, is likely to be changed.
DANA ROBERTSON: And there are increasing signs the industry
could soon grow in the Northern Territory, where the Federal
Government controls mining. Chinese officials say they'll sign a
uranium deal with Australia when the country's premier visits
next week.
LIU JIEYI, CHINESE FOREIGN AFFAIRS OFFICIAL: These agreements
are all for the peaceful use of nuclear energy.
JOHN HOWARD: It's possible that the discussions could be
satisfactorily concluded so that something could be said or
signed when the Chinese Premier visits Australia next week.
DANA ROBERTSON: China says the agreement will be two-fold,
including both a promise China would only use the uranium for
peaceful purposes and a deal for joint mining operations. Any
deal with China could be the first step towards Australian
accommodating India's uranium demands, although it hasn't signed
the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and John Howard maintains
he's not contemplating a policy change. But he's also sent a
strong signal it's not completely off the agenda.
JOHN HOWARD: Whilst India is not a signatory to the treaty,
everybody knows that her behaviour since exploding a device in
1974 has been impeccable and I think that is something that
people have to bear in mind.
DANA ROBERTSON: Australia's sending a delegation to New Delhi
and Washington next month to find out more about the recent
US-India nuclear deal. Dana Robertson, Lateline.
*****************************************************************
66 UPI: China gains access to Aussie uranium
United Press International - Security &Terrorism -
3/28/2006 11:28:00 AM -0500
CANBERRA, Australia, March 28 (UPI) -- Chinese companies will be
permitted to mine uranium in Australia and export the product to
China under new government agreements.
The Australian said the agreements between Canberra and Beijing
were part of a treaty to be signed by Premier Wen Jiaboa, who
arrives in Australia Saturday.
The deal is expected to help China cut dependence on coal for
energy and also boost Australia's uranium mining industry once
state governments ease their exploration and production limits.
There are currently three uranium mines operating in Australia -
two in South Australia and one in the country's Northern
Territory. A fourth has been cleared for construction in South
Australia.
Exports for the 2004-2005 period were more than 10,000 tons. The
United States, EU countries, South Korea and Canada were
recipients.
The Howard government says the deal conforms to provisions of
the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.
© Copyright 2006 United Press
International, Inc. All Rights Reserved
*****************************************************************
67 [NukeNet] response to DOE's expressions of interest, GNEP
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2006 17:57:09 -0800
NukeNet Anti-Nuclear Network (nukenet@energyjustice.net)
Attn: Ms. Janet Surrusco
Contract Specialist, DOE
Idaho Office
Regarding: DOE seeking expressions of interest by March 31, 2006, to
propose and evaluate sites suitable for demonstrating advanced recycling
technologies under the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership (GNEP).
Dear Ms. Surrusco,
Ms. Lisa Cox in the Public Relations office of DOE gave me your name and
e-mail address for responding to the March 17, 2006 press release siting
March 31, 2006 as the deadline for submitting "expressions of interest - -
to propose and evaluate sites suitable for demonstrating advanced recycling
technologies under the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership (GNEP)." The only
instructions Ms. Cox could furnish me was that the submission should not
exceed four pages.
According to the press release, the site selection contest is for the
demonstration phase, but according to the authorizing document, HR2419,
2006 Water and Energy Appropriations act, page 9906, the site selection
contest was for siting a commercial Integrated Spent Fuel Recycling
facility, with four components:
(1) Reprocessing facility
(2) MOX fuel fabrication facility
(3) Vitrification facility
(4) Process storage.
The press release varies from HR2419 not only by indicating that the
contest is for a demonstration facility, but also states, "Three major
elements of DOE's GNEP technology plan are to demonstrate a
proliferation-resistant process to separate usable elements contained in
commercial spent nuclear fuel from its waste elements, to develop and
fabricate new fuels from the transuranic elements contained in spent fuel,
and to demonstrate the ability to consume transuranic fuels in an advanced
burner test reactor."
This announcement eliminates the mention of vitrification and process
storage and adds "to demonstrate the ability to consume transuranic fuels
in an advanced burner test reactor." Does this indicate that the "advanced
burner test reactor" is to be built at the same site as the reprocessing
facility? Is it to be built simultaneously with the demonstration phase of
the new reprocessing technology, UREX, UREX Plus, or UREX Plus La?
Does changing from the commercial site, as indicated in HR2419 to a test
facility have the effect of eliminating the NRC from the siting
phase? Once the technology clears the testing phase, will this facility
convert to a commercial reprocessing function?
Who is authorized to apply for the $5 million per site, which was
characterized as a "Site Selection Contest" in HR2419? This press release
stipulates that the awards are for site evaluation studies. Please clarify.
What is the point of having a site selection contest when the Savannah
River Site (SRS) has all of the elements except the advanced burner test
reactor, already at the site, or in the process of being constructed
there? In 2005 the Governor and the South Carolina Congressional
delegation came out in support of a reactor, proposed by NUSTART, to be
built there. That clears the way for the new fast breeder, which is the
old name for your "advanced burner test reactor."
Other elements specified in HR2419 already in place or on order at SRS, are:
(1) Reprocessing facility. F Canyon, the old reprocessing facility, is
still at SRS. The cost of conversion to the new UREX process or UREX Plus,
or UREX Plus La, would have to be compared with the cost and time
requirements of constructing a new facility.
(2) A MOX Fuel Fabrication Facility is already approved for SRS. The design
is not yet complete, so the costs of converting it from strictly using
plutonium from U. S. and Russian Nuclear Weapons to using UREX, or UREX
Plus would seem to be more economical than producing UREX Plus La,
and shipping it to a separate location where the material would again have
to be reprocessed to remove the lanthanides. The original price of the
MOX facility was $1 Billion, and has escalated to $3.8 Billion, with
construction scheduled to start in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2006, which
begins in July. The plans are only 70% complete, so tit could be changed
to accommodate reprocessed UREX , or UREX plus spent fuel.. Or perhaps the
timing would allow the conversion of the plutonium from weapons to be
performed first, then the facility would be converted to use the newly
designed spent fuel.
(3) The original HR2419 called for a vitrification facility. There is an
operational vitrification facility already at SRS. In 1990, Westinghouse
was granted a yearly contract in excess of $1 billion to do
environmental cleanup at the SRS, including emptying the 51 hugh carbon
steel tanks of waste left over from reprocessing plutonium and tritium for
nuclear weapons. Although only between 2 to 4 of the 51 tanks have been
partially emptied, and the volume of waste and the radiotoxicity is roughly
equal to what is was before the vitrification process began, there are now
an additional 2,000 vitrified glass logs to stored, somewhere
.
(4) Process storage is a new word for waste storage. Those 51 tanks, each
larger that the Georgia State Capitol Dome, contain reprocessing
waste. Since they have not been emptied, their capacity is not available
for process storage of UREX waste. However, they are there, and by the time
the UREX facility, the MOX facility and the new advanced burner test
reactor are up and running, I feel sure that DOE will have been able to
build a pipeline into the Atlantic ocean, as France and Great Britain have
done at their reprocessing facilities to pipe their nuclear waste into the
sea. This is not my recommendation. There have been thousands of taxpayer
funded studies on what to do with nuclear waste, yielding no solutions
after more than 50 years. Since this administration's rationale for trying
to revive reprocessing -- the dirtiest part of the nuclear fuel cycle -- is
"France and England are doing it. Will we follow their model of handling
their reprocessed waste?
The Bush administration has eliminated all but one EPA library and has
stopped electronic cataloging of EPA information. Who cares if we destroy
the oceans? Because France and England have taken the sea-going route,
should we? Family values seem to take a back seat under the nuclear
revival. What about the increased birth defects, leukemias and other
cancers as a result of radiation from every step of the nuclear fuel cycle
-- from the mining, the milling, enrichment, abnormal events, occurrences
and transients to the eventual burial of the highly lethal radwaste?.
As for increasing Global energy security, reducing the risk of nuclear
proliferation, and improving environmental quality, nuclear power and
reprocessing are not the way to go. Think global sustainable energy, wind,
tides, solar, biomass, and above all, energy efficiency. Coal-fired plants
could use fluidized bed combustion to remove greenhouse gases. This
technology was developed decades ago at Oak Ridge when DOE was ERDA and
tested by TVA and Duke Power.. It no longer is discussed. But when it was
developed, fluidized bed combustion was designed to be retrofitted on
existing coal-fired plants. Burning coal in a bed of pulverized limestone
captures the greenhouse gases and when the limestone is reprocessed,
provides elements that can be used to produce fertilizer. Now that is
REPROCESSING that master gardeners would approve of.
Compare the costs of this untested technology, UREX, UREX Plus, or UREX
Plus La, with fluidized bed combustion, Marine Ocean Turbines (tides) --
the latter successfully demonstrated in the UK, photovoltaic, a new
designed solar panel just developed in Africa, to be produced by a German
manufacturing company, and windmills, geothermal, other renewable sources
of energy, and energy efficiency. All provide what you are giving as
your reasons for pushing nuclear, at what could be a fraction of the cost
if implemented on a mass scale. Plus, you'd have far greater public
support. Unlike nuclear power, none requires the protection of a taxpayer
subsidized Price Anderson Act.
The purpose of this submission is not to recommend Savannah River Site, or
any other site, for a demonstration or commercial reprocessing facility,
but to point out the folly of offering still yet another enticement, called
bribes by all but the recipients, for a failed technology. It costs too
much, in dollars and in lives.
Before Congress gives DOE any further funding for reprocessing, a complete
Congressional investigation of the long and failed history of reprocessing
amd attempted environmental cleanup at SRS should be conducted. Just how
much will the entire GNEP cost, and how long will it take to
implement? With global warming, we don't have time to wait that long.
Respectfully submitted,
Jeannine Honicker
P. O. Box 637
LaGrange, Ga. 30241
djhonicker@msn.com
_______________________________________________________________________
Subscribe/Unsubscribe Here: http://www.energyjustice.net/nukenet/
Change your settings or access the archives at:
http://energyjustice.net/mailman/listinfo/nukenet_energyjustice.net
*****************************************************************
68 Knox News: Problems dog process at Y-12
Wet chemistry operations still not functioning full time
By FRANK
MUNGER, munger@knews.com
March 28, 2006
OAK RIDGE - In late 2004, the Y-12 nuclear weapons plant
celebrated the restart of "wet chemistry" operations - a set of
six chemical processes essential for recycling stocks of
bomb-grade uranium. It was the first time in a decade that the
Oak Ridge plant had full use of its uranium capabilities.
Since then, however, new problems have cropped up, and wet
chemistry continues to be an on-again, off-again capability at
Y-12 - much to the dismay of the plant's operators and overseers.
"Over the past 14 months, equipment and safety basis issues
continue to preclude these systems from achieving a sustained
operational tempo," staff members of the Defense Nuclear
Facilities Safety Board said in a Feb. 17 memo.
For instance, a pump failure prevented operation of the primary
extraction system for six months, and persistent problems have
resulted in a "significant backlog" of uranium solutions stored
in tanks and bottles, the memo said.
"These solutions are nearing the storage capacity for the
Enriched Uranium Operations building," the staff said in a memo
to the board's technical director in Washington, D.C. Steven
Wyatt, a federal spokesman at Y-12, confirmed that that progress
has been slowed because of "problems with old equipment and
infrastructure."
Wet chemistry processes are used to recover and purify quantities
of enriched uranium, which is used in nuclear warheads.
In response to questions, Wyatt said, "It is important that we
get this operation up to speed to allow for reducing the backlog
of stored uranium solution, but it is even more important to
ensure that we resume these operations safely."
Enriched uranium solutions must be kept in special containers
and handled with care to prevent the nuclear material from
reaching a critical state, with an uncontrolled nuclear chain
reaction.
Wyatt said there are "deliberate and controlled systems" in
place to make sure that wet chemistry processes are resumed
safely. He said BWXT, the government's managing contractor, has
made progress in handling some of the materials and is looking
at ways to improve the reliability of long-term operations at
Y-12.
Asked about the storage problems, Wyatt said the accumulation of
uranium in solutions "limits the flexibility of the plant to
respond to changes." But he said the storage situation has been
analyzed and determined to be safe.
Reducing the inventory of uranium in solutions will reduce the
operational risks at Y-12, and that is a priority, Wyatt said.
Senior writer Frank Munger may be reached at 865-342-6329.
© 2006 - Knoxville News Sentinel
*****************************************************************
69 Knox News: ORNL, UT may help on project
Bio-defense lab will test, develop vaccines
By LARISA BRASS, brass@knews.com
March 28, 2006
A joint bid by Kentucky and Tennessee on a planned $450 million
federal bio-defense laboratory could potentially involve
researchers and academicians from Oak Ridge National Laboratory
and the University of Tennessee.
And, in an interesting turn, Ohio-based Battelle, which
co-manages ORNL with UT, separately has partnered with the state
of Mississippi in a bid for locating the facility there.
The 500,000-square-foot National Bio and Agro-Defense Facility
would be built by the Department of Homeland Security to the
nation's highest safety designation, Biosafety Level 4. It would
be used by researchers to probe and develop vaccines for some of
the most dangerous diseases that can threaten livestock and human
populations, such as Ebola and foot-and-mouth disease.
The facility would employ about 400 people and have an annual
payroll of $30 million.
The University of Kentucky, UT and ORNL are part of the
two-state consortium that announced last month it would bid on
the project.
The facility would be in rural Pulaski County, Ky., 12 miles
north of Somerset and about a two-hour drive from Knoxville.
More recently, Mississippi, in partnership with Battelle,
announced its intent to bid. Bids are due by Friday.
"As a national laboratory, ORNL is by law available to all
teams," said John Doesburg, director of Homeland Security
Programs for ORNL's National Security Directorate. He said ORNL
and Battelle have set up "firewalls" between the teams so that
no proprietary information crosses lines.
Doesburg said the parties "purposely agreed in advance not to
discuss it with Battelle management to avoid any conflict of
interest. We have stuck to that agreement. Our team members are
not aware of any lab involvement in the Battelle bid with
Mississippi. We only know of the information ORNL has provided
to the planners of the (National Bio and Agro-Defense Facility)
site in Kentucky."
But with the economic development mission of ORNL co-manager
Battelle, does competing against its own lab for a national
project create a conflict of interest?
Tom McClain, Battelle's vice president for corporate
communications, downplayed that concern.
"Oak Ridge National Laboratory is a national resource, and as
such they could be on multiple teams, and they as a national
laboratory would have to affiliate with multiple teams
nonexclusively. Labs are often asked to do that," McClain said.
Such participation "is something we encourage we see that as the
laboratory's role and something appropriate for them to do," he
said.
Also, because UT-Battelle LLC is a separate company from
Battelle, Battelle is allowed by the federal government to bid
on its own with the Mississippi proposal team, McClain said.
Neither ORNL nor UT has made any financial or personnel
commitments to the project, Doesburg said.
"There's no commitments beyond the expression of interest in the
project," he said, but potentially ORNL could, with its network
of contacts in the research community, help staff such a
facility and would likely carry out research there.
An obvious tie-in with Oak Ridge would be the lab's mouse
genetics facility, which uses a colony of more than 14,000 mice
to do genetic research and testing for, among other things,
resistance to disease.
Doesburg said there also is work being done at ORNL specifically
on zoonotic diseases - diseases that can be passed from animals
to humans. Without bio-secure laboratory facilities, however, he
said, such work is typically limited to simulation and computer
modeling.
"I think it will be helpful for us because there are areas of
research you would like a facility with literally one-of-a-kind
equipment that you might have the ability to do certain kinds of
research," he said. "I think as all national labs, we work on
national challenges and national problems. Access to facilities
like these are very important."
UT's contribution would primarily be in the area of veterinary
medicine, said David Milhorn, UT vice president for research.
Milhorn said he doesn't know exactly what the relationship
between UT and the bio-research lab would be and whether, for
example, there would be joint appointments or any UT faculty
relocated to the new facility.
"We're still at the very early stages of planning in how this
would work out," he said.
Federal officials will narrow the list of possible sites early
this fall and choose a site in 2007. Construction will start in
2008 and should be finished by 2012.
Milhorn said UT officials were just beginning to talk among
themselves about the possibility of attracting the facility to
Tennessee when the state was approached by representatives from
Kentucky, who were already much farther along in the planning
stages, he said.
"I think we can combine our resources," he said. "They didn't
have a vet school; we do. We both have significant interest in
agriculture. (The potential site in Kentucky) is close to the
Interstate, not close to a populated area."
Milhorn quickly added that he wasn't concerned about danger from
the proposed laboratory, which he said would be "very, very
safe.
"But you have community buy-in requirements," he said. "And they
(Kentucky) had already started looking at that before we got
into the game."
Not all Kentuckians are buying in, however. Although touted as a
catalyst for economic development and high-paying jobs, some
locals close to the proposed lab site aren't thrilled with the
project, and local papers have reported protests at public
meetings and a petition circulating to can the initiative.
The Lexington Herald-Leader quoted one local beef farmer saying:
"I'm sure with all the government regulations, it's going to be
safe. But it's just like putting a prison next door to your
house. You don't know what kind of effect it's going to have."
Business writer Larisa Brass may be reached at 865-342-6318. The
Associated Press contributed to this report.
BIOTERRORISM DEFENSE LAB
+ What is it? The National Bio and Agro-Defense Facility, a
500,000 square-foot laboratory to study animal diseases and
bioterrorism.
+ Who's building it? Department of Homeland Security.
+ Bids due: March 31
+ Winner announced: Late 2006
+ Facility construction: 2008-2012
+ States to express interest: Kentucky and Tennessee
(submitting joint proposal); Mississippi, Texas
+ Nearest proposed location: Pulaski County, Ky.
+ Partners: U.S. Rep. Hal Rogers, R-Somerset; Kentucky Gov.
Ernie Fletcher; Tennessee Gov. Phil Bredesen; the universities
of Kentucky, Louisville and Tennessee; the Oak Ridge National
Laboratory; Kentucky Highlands Investment Corp.; the National
Institute for Hometown Security; and the Southeast Kentucky
Economic Development Corp.
2006 - Knoxville News Sentinel
*****************************************************************
70 KKTV: Rocky Flats Museum
Rocky Flats museum gets land donation
A rancher and developer is donating 1.4 acres near the former
Rocky Flats plant for the Rocky Flats Cold War Museum.
Museum board member Charles Church McKay recently donated the
land, which is located between Golden and Boulder east of
Colorado 93.
McKay is the nephew of Marcus Church, whose land was purchased
by the federal government in 1951 under threat of condemnation
for the nuclear weapons plant.
Board president Kim Grant says the donation was made on the
condition that the museum be financed and ready for
groundbreaking by January First, 2008.
Cleanup of the site finished late last year and the government
plans a wildlife refuge there.
The museum is to document the historical, social, environmental
and scientific aspects of the Rocky Flats Nuclear Weapons Plant
and the Cold War.
Gray Television Group, Inc.
Copyright © 2002-2006
*****************************************************************
71 DOE: DOE Conducts Energy Saving Assessment at W.L. Gore &
Associates Facility in Elkton, MD
March 28, 2006
WASHINGTON, D.C. The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) announced
that, beginning today, a three-day industrial Energy Saving
Assessment is taking place at the W.L. Gore & Associates
facility in Elkton, Maryland, as part of the comprehensive
national energy efficiency effort undertaken by the Bush
Administration. Through no-cost assessments, DOE is working
with major manufacturing facilities to identify energy- and
money-saving opportunities, primarily by focusing on steam and
process heating systems. President Bush has called on all
Americans to be more energy efficient. Private industry is
joining the federal government in taking a lead role in this
effort, Secretary of Energy Samuel W. Bodman said. DOEs
Energy Saving Teams will play a key role in assessing and
recommending energy efficiency strategies for some of the
largest industrial facilities across the nation. W.L. Gore &
Associates facility is a GORE-TEX fabrics plant and is in one of
several campuses that make up Gores 17-plant presence in and
around Elkton, MD, and Wilmington, Delaware. Perhaps best known
for its consumer products like GORE-TEX® fabric and ELIXIR®
guitar strings, W.L. Gore & Associates is a leading manufacturer
of thousands of advanced technology products for the
electronics, industrial, fabrics and medical markets. DOEs
Energy Saving Teams have completed visits to 29 large federal
facilities and are in the process of visiting 200
energy-intensive manufacturing facilities in the United States
as part of the national Easy Ways to Save Energy campaign
launched by Secretary Bodman on October 3, 2005. The first 18
energy saving assessments have identified, in aggregate, $61
million per year in potential energy cost savings and could
reduce natural gas consumption by more than 7 trillion Btu per
year, equivalent to the natural gas consumed by approximately
100,000 typical homes annually. Companies interested in a free
energy assessment can get more details at
http://www.eere.energy.gov/industry/saveenergynow/and request
brochures detailing Fifteen Tips to Help Your Plant Save
Energy. For tips on easy, inexpensive steps consumers can
take to lower their energy bills, please visit
http://www.energysavers.gov/ or call DOEs Energy Efficiency and
Renewable Energy Hotline at 1-877-337-3463.
Media contact(s): Chris Kielich, (202) 586-5806 [ ]
U.S. Department of Energy | 1000 Independence Ave., SW |
Washington, DC 20585 1-800-dial-DOE | f/202-586-4403 |
*****************************************************************
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:
*****************************************************************