*****************************************************************
06/13/06 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 14.140
*****************************************************************
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 [progchat_action] China, Russia refuse to join Iran sanctions
2 Guardian Unlimited: Poll: U.S. in Iraq Greater Threat Than Iran
3 Guardian Unlimited: West Lobbies for Iran Enrichment Freeze
4 Guardian Unlimited: Nonaligned Nations Prepare to Back Iran
5 Guardian Unlimited: Nonaligned Nations Prepare to Back Iran
6 IRNA: Moscow urges start of talks between Iran, Group 5+1
7 AFP: Iran in focus as regional group meets in Shanghai
8 IRNA: Larijani says Iran ready to cooperate to resolve nuclear row -
9 IRIB PERSIAN NEWS: US should abondon its hostile treat
10 IRIB PERSIAN NEWS: IRI ready to remove nuclear concerns
11 AFP: China, Russia refuse to join Iran sanctions statement -
12 AFP: China and Russia reject joint statement on Iran nuclear program
13 AFP: Rice consults world powers on Iran nuclear row
14 US: AFP: New poll shows US image sinking abroad
15 IRNA: IAEA's Board of Governors meets for second day
16 IRNA: India, France nuclear deal not linked to Indo-US deal
NUCLEAR REACTORS
17 US: NRC: Sunshine Act Meeting Notice
18 US: Guardian Unlimited: Giuliani Lays Out Energy Strategy in N.Y.
19 AU ABC: Ruptured reactor pipe cuts production
20 RIA Novosti: Russia to launch first floating NPP in 2010 - nuclear o
21 US: Platts: DOE, NRC to start on licensing strategy for NGNP this ye
22 US: POAC: NRC preliminary report finds no reason to block renewal of
23 Platts: Norwegian minister says no to nukes;2.6bn renewable fund lau
24 Platts: ITER "at the heart" of France's energy strategy: De Villepin
25 Independent: Atomic energy chief quits after buyout vetoed
26 US: APP.COM" NRC draft report spurs sharp debate |
27 TheStar.com: Ontario opts for nuclear plants
28 TheStar.com: Accept nukes, McGuinty says
29 US: NRC: Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.; Establishment of Atomic S
30 US: NRC: In the Matter of EnergySolutions, LLC (formerly Envirocare
31 globeandmail.com: Ontario wants Ottawa to guarantee reactors' costs
32 Scotsman: Blair accused of brushing aside nuclear energy advice
33 US: KTVB.COM: Senators get update on nuclear reactor
34 Telegraph: Nuclear chief resigns and could join suitors for BNG
35 icNorthWales: Nuclear plant cancer shock
36 US: Viewpoint: Nuclear power: promise or peril
37 NEWS.com.au: Pipe ruptures at Sydney N-reactor
38 TIME Pacific Magazine: Plugging in to Nuclear --
NUCLEAR SECURITY
39 US: UPI: Nuke workers' ID theft unknown for a year
NUCLEAR SAFETY
40 US: Guardian Unlimited: Hearings Set for Proposed Biodefense Lab
41 US: Platts: Illinois governor signs radioactive release reporting bi
42 US: DesMoinesRegister.com: Army investigates plant explosion
43 US: Idaho Statesman: Downwinders rail at government
44 US: Times Argus: 'Atomic veterans' from earlier in era seek compensa
45 US: NRC: RIN 3150-AH48: National Source Tracking of Sealed Sources
NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE
46 Bush and Howard plan Australian nuclear dump - Green Left
47 US: Pueblo Chieftain: Senate panel approves bill to fund chem demil
48 US: Brattleboro Reformer: Dry cask storage plan at VY inches ahead
49 US: NRC: In the Matter of EnergySolutions, LLC (formerly Envirocare
50 US: Daily Herald: Large turnout for river cleanup
PEACE
US DEPT. OF ENERGY
51 Guardian Unlimited: Energy Dept. Tells Workers of Data Theft
52 CONTRA COSTA TIMES: Appeals court considers Livermore 'hot lab'
53 Seattle Times: Hanford workers warned of security breach
54 Seattle Times: Federal judge strikes down Hanford nuclear-waste init
55 Tri-City Herald: Fluor Hanford employee data found
56 Tri-City Herald: I-297 ruled unconstitutional
57 DOE: International Energy Agency Meeting
58 DOE: Office of International Regimes and Agreements; Proposed
59 Knox News: Hacker could have OR workers' data
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
FULL NEWS STORIES
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
1 [progchat_action] China, Russia refuse to join Iran sanctions
Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2006 00:51:50 -0500 (CDT)
China, Russia refuse to join Iran sanctions statement
by Michael Adler
Tue Jun 13, 2:38 PM ET
VIENNA (AFP) - China and Russia refused to join with other world powers in a
statement that would threaten sanctions over Iran's nuclear program,
during diplomatic jostling at the UN nuclear watchdog.
In a further blow to US efforts to present a united front at a meeting here
of the International Atomic Energy Agency, non-aligned nations were
preparing a text reaffirming Tehran's right to enrich uranium.
Diplomats played down the significance of the cracks, however, saying member
states on the IAEA's 35-nation board of governors would try not to hinder an
international offer to Iran of benefits if it reins in its nuclear
ambitions.
"Everybody feels they want this package (of benefits) to have every possible
chance of success," a Western diplomat told AFP.
China and Russia -- both Iranian allies and trading partners -- had joined
Britain, France, Germany and the United States on June 1 in urging Iran to
halt enrichment and join talks offering trade and other benefits in return
for it guaranteeing not to make nuclear arms.
The offer threatened UN Security Council action, including sanctions, if
Iran failed to comply.
A second Western diplomat said the United States had been seeking a new
statement in Vienna from the six world powers calling on Iran to accept the
June 1 offer and setting out both possible benefits and sanctions for Iran.
But Russia and China were reluctant to sign up this time.
Russia and China "didn't want a reference to sanctions or punitive actions"
in such a statement at the IAEA, the diplomat said.
A senior European diplomat said the failure to agree on a joint statement at
the IAEA board was no surprise.
The six world powers have never managed to get a united statement on the
matter at the IAEA, which oversees cooperation by nations with the nuclear
Non-Proliferation Treaty and set off the current crisis when it in February
cited Iran for NPT safeguards violations, the European diplomat said.
US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice discussed Iran on Tuesday with
Chinese Foreign Minister Li Zhaoxing by telephone, a Chinese foreign
ministry spokeswoman said in Beijing.
"China will continue to play a constructive role to help peacefully solve
the Iran nuclear issue through negotiations," the Chinese spokesman said on
the ministry's Internet site.
A vigorous debate on Iran but no resolution is expected at this week's
meeting IAEA governing board meeting, with the Iranian issue due to come up
officially Thursday or Friday during the week-long meeting.
The EU-3, which have spearheaded negotiations with Iran, are expected to
issue a joint statement of their own. Each of the six powers engaged with
the Iran nuclear crisis will also issue individual statements.
Iran is examining the major powers' offer of benefits and is expected to
respond by the end of the month.
Iranian MP Kazem Jalali said in Tehran Tuesday that Iran would not suspend
uranium enrichment -- a key precondition set by the major powers for
talks -- and was only willing to negotiate on the modalities of the
sensitive work, which makes nuclear reactor fuel but also atom bomb
material.
A Western diplomat said the IAEA meeting had "no influence on the overall
situation," although this diplomat and others admitted that Iran would try
to exploit any division, perceived or real, among the world powers.
Delegates from several non-aligned nations, of which China is a member, were
nevertheless preparing a statement that supported Iran's right to
enrichment, as enshrined in the NPT, diplomats said.
A non-aligned diplomat said his group would "hold to a statement made by
non-aligned foreign ministers in Kuala Lumpur in May," that backs Iran's
right to enrich.
Diplomats said Washington was fighting to prevent non-aligned states on the
IAEA board from issuing such a statement as the United States wants to keep
up pressure on Iran.
But many non-aligned states aspire to nuclear technology and are as much
concerned about protecting their right to enrich uranium as Iran's,
diplomats said.
The non-aligned diplomat said the bloc was planning a statement that would
renew a message first issued May 30 in Malaysia, when the the Non Aligned
Movement affirmed the right to atomic energy and opposed any attack on
nuclear facilities.
The United States wanted the bloc, which numbers some 16 mostly developing
nations on the IAEA board, to stick to the February IAEA resolution that
many of the non-aligneds had supported and which had called on Iran to
suspend uranium enrichment.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20060613/ts_afp/iranpoliticsnuclear
This email was cleaned by emailStripper, available for free from
http://www.papercut.biz/emailStripper.htm
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
Everything you need is one click away. Make Yahoo! your home page now.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/AHchtC/4FxNAA/yQLSAA/XgSolB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->
*****************************************************************
2 Guardian Unlimited: Poll: U.S. in Iraq Greater Threat Than Iran
From the Associated Press
[UP]
Tuesday June 13, 2006 8:01 PM
AP Photo BAG112
By WILL LESTER Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON (AP) - The presence of U.S. troops in Iraq is
considered a greater threat to Mideast stability than the
current government in Iran, according to a new poll of European
and Muslim countries.
The poll found that people in Britain, France, Germany, Spain
and Russia rated the presence of troops in Iraq higher than the
government in Iran as a threat, according to polling by the Pew
Research Center for the People &the Press. Views of U.S. troops
in Iraq were even more negative in countries like Indonesia,
Egypt, Jordan, Turkey and Pakistan.
Iran's nuclear program is seen as a serious threat by
international leaders, who have been pressuring Iran to drop
that program. Leaders of the United States, Russia, China,
France and Britain and Germany have offered Iran, which says its
nuclear program is for peaceful purposes, incentives to suspend
uranium enrichment.
But the war in Iraq trumps the Iranian situation as a perceived
danger to the world at a time when the image of the United
States and its war on terrorism continues to drop
internationally.
America's image rebounded in some countries last year after the
U.S. offered aid to tsunami victims, but those gains have
disappeared, the Pew poll found.
The 15-nation poll also found:
-Overall support for the U.S.-led war on terrorism has declined
even among close allies.
-Favorable opinions of the United States continue to fall, with
sharp declines in Spain, Turkey and India.
-People in the United States and European countries are far more
likely than those in Muslim countries to view the victory of
Hamas in the Palestinian elections as a negative development.
-Western European nations and predominantly Muslim nations have
sharply different views on Iran, which the U. S.. claims is
developing nuclear weapons.
-Majorities in 10 of 14 foreign countries - including Britain -
say the Iraq war has made the world more dangerous.
-Concern about global warming is low in China and United States,
the two largest producers of greenhouse gases, while high
elsewhere.
The polling in 15 countries of samples ranging from about 900 to
2,000 adults was conducted in April and May and has a margin of
error ranging from 2 to 6 percentage points. The polling
included Muslim oversamples in the European countries. In China,
India and Pakistan, the polling was based on urban samples.
---
On the Net: http://www.people-press.org
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
3 Guardian Unlimited: West Lobbies for Iran Enrichment Freeze
From the Associated Press
[UP]
Tuesday June 13, 2006 9:16 PM
AP Photo LKW108
By GEORGE JAHN Associated Press Writer
VIENNA, Austria (AP) - Western countries pushed Tuesday for
broad support on the need for Iran to freeze uranium enrichment,
but nonaligned countries backed Tehran, saying all countries
have the right to pursue a nuclear program for civilian use.
A statement drawn up by the 16-nation nonaligned bloc at the
board meeting of the International Atomic Energy Agency
``reaffirmed the basic and inalienable right'' of all countries
to develop, produce and use atomic energy ``for peaceful
purposes, without any discrimination and in conformity with
their respective legal obligations.''
The statement - made available to The Associated Press ahead of
delivery when Iran comes up on the agenda later in the week -
was mostly a repetition of a communique issued last month at a
meeting in Malaysia of the nonaligned bloc's foreign ministers.
Iran says it has a right to enrich uranium for purposes of
generating electricity under the Nuclear Nonproliferation
Treaty. The United States and its allies assert the claim is a
cover for attempts to develop a weapons program using highly
enriched uranium in the core of nuclear warheads.
While the focus now is on negotiations with Iran - including
newfound U.S. willingness to join in multinational talks if
Tehran agrees to freeze enrichment - the Bush administration has
refused to unequivocally rule out military action should Tehran
remain defiant.
The statement from the nonaligned bloc warned that ``any attack
or threat of attack against peaceful nuclear facilities ...
constitutes a grave violation of international law.''
The U.S. and its allies were focusing on key nations with clout
among nonaligned countries such as Brazil, India and Argentina,
urging them to put pressure on Iran in individual statements to
accept an offer for talks on its nuclear program, diplomats
said.
One diplomat familiar with the consultations among the
nonaligned countries said that supporters of Tehran's stance
engaged in a ``shouting match'' Monday with those leaning toward
the Western line. The diplomats spoke on condition of anonymity
because the consultations were confidential.
The Western push suffered a setback Monday with revelations that
China and Russia were not prepared to join America and its
European allies in a unified message insisting that Tehran halt
enrichment.
Their reluctance reflected lingering differences along East-West
lines among the six world powers that two weeks ago appeared to
be in agreement about how to engage Iran over enrichment and to
persuade it to give up technology that could be used to make
nuclear arms.
Resistance by Russia and China to tough U.N. action contributed
to Washington's decision last month to reverse decades of policy
and agree to join in multinational talks with Iran - if Tehran
accepts a package of rewards, freezes enrichment during the
talks and places a long-term moratorium on such activity.
In a symbolic sign of support by Moscow, Deputy Foreign Minister
Sergei Kislyak was among those with top EU foreign policy
official Javier Solana when he delivered the incentives package
to Tehran last week. Russia has said it is prepared to join any
negotiations with Iran, and China has indicated it might also do
so.
Still, other diplomats spoke of more potential divisions. China,
Russia and possibly Germany might push to allow Iran some
tightly controlled and small-scale enrichment rather than see
talks founder, they said. Russia and China also might balk at
enforcing selective U.N. sanctions on Iranian officials and
activities.
Long-term, verifiable suspension of Iranian enrichment is a
``red line'' for the United States and its key Western allies,
one diplomat said.
When asked Monday if Iran would suspend enrichment for the sake
of negotiations, spokesman Gholam Hossein Elham repeated the
government line that enrichment is Iran's ``obvious right.''
Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki was to meet
Wednesday in Madrid with his Spanish counterpart, Miguel Angel
Moratinos, for talks on the nuclear standoff. A Spanish Foreign
Ministry spokesman said Mottaki was coming in place of Iran's
top nuclear negotiator, Ali Larijani, who canceled a trip to
Europe this week for health reasons.
---
Associated Press writer Veronika Oleksyn contributed to this
report.
--- On the Net: International Atomic Energy Agency:
http://www.iaea.org
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
4 Guardian Unlimited: Nonaligned Nations Prepare to Back Iran
From the Associated Press
[UP]
Tuesday June 13, 2006 12:16 PM
AP Photo VIE111
By GEORGE JAHN
Associated Press Writer
VIENNA, Austria (AP) - Western countries at a 35-nation U.N.
meeting pushed Tuesday for consensus on the need for Iran to
freeze uranium enrichment, but diplomats said that most
nonaligned countries were preparing to endorse Tehran's right to
continue the work.
The diplomats, who spoke on condition of anonymity because they
were divulging confidential information, said the 16
International Atomic Energy Agency board members from the
Nonaligned Movement were likely to issue a joint statement at
odds with Western efforts on enrichment.
The language would be similar to a statement issued last month
by foreign ministers of nonaligned nations in Malaysia, the
diplomats told The Associated Press.
That declaration ``reaffirmed the basic and inalienable right''
of all countries to develop, produce and use atomic energy ``for
peaceful purposes, without any discrimination and in conformity
with their respective legal obligations.''
Iran says it has a right to enrich uranium for purposes of
generating electricity under the Nuclear Nonproliferation
Treaty. The United States and its allies assert the claim is a
cover for attempts to develop a nuclear weapons program.
When asked Monday if Iran would suspend enrichment for the sake
of negotiations, Iranian spokesman Gholam Hossein Elham repeated
the government line that enrichment is Iran's ``obvious right.''
With the group statement decidedly favoring Iran, the United
States and its allies were focusing on key nations with clout
among nonaligned countries - such as Brazil, India and Argentina
- that have sided with them in the past. They are urging them to
put pressure on Iran in individual statements to accept an offer
for talks on its nuclear program, said the diplomats.
One of the diplomats familiar with confidential consultations
among nonaligned countries said those backing Iran's stance
engaged in a ``shouting match'' with those leaning toward the
Western line on Monday.
The Western push already suffered a setback Monday with
revelations that China and Russia were not prepared to join the
United States and its European allies in a unified message
insisting that Tehran halt enrichment.
Their reluctance reflected the East-West divide among the six
world powers that just two weeks ago appeared to be in agreement
about how to engage Iran over enrichment and to persuade it to
give up technology that could be used to make nuclear arms.
Resistance by Russia and China to tough U.N. action contributed
to Washington's decision last month to reverse decades of policy
and agree to join in multinational talks with Iran - if Tehran
accepts a package of incentives, freezes enrichment during the
talks and places a long-term moratorium on such activity.
British Foreign Secretary Margaret Beckett announced at the end
of high-level talks in Vienna on June 2 that all five permanent
Security Council members plus Germany supported the joint
approach on engaging Iran. But the signs of discord Monday
reflected continuing differences.
China, Russia and possibly Germany might push to allow Iran some
tightly controlled small-scale enrichment rather than see talks
founder. Russia and China also might balk at enforcing selective
U.N. sanctions on Iranian officials and activities.
But long-term, verifiable suspension of Iranian enrichment is a
``red line'' for the United States and its key Western allies,
one diplomat said.
While the IAEA meeting is not expected to formally focus on the
Iranian nuclear standoff until Thursday, the issue has dominated
the meeting from its opening Monday.
---
Associated Press writer Veronika Oleksyn contributed to this
report.
---
On the Net:
International Atomic Energy Agency: http://www.iaea.org
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
5 Guardian Unlimited: Nonaligned Nations Prepare to Back Iran
From the Associated Press
[UP]
Tuesday June 13, 2006 5:01 PM
AP Photo VIE111
By GEORGE JAHN
Associated Press Writer
VIENNA, Austria (AP) - Western countries pushed Tuesday for
broad support on the need for Iran to freeze uranium enrichment,
but nonaligned countries backed Tehran, saying all countries
have the right to pursue a nuclear program for civilian use.
A statement drawn up by the 16-nation nonaligned bloc at the
board meeting of the International Atomic Energy Agency
``reaffirmed the basic and inalienable right'' of all countries
to develop, produce and use atomic energy ``for peaceful
purposes, without any discrimination and in conformity with
their respective legal obligations.''
The statement - made available to The Associated Press ahead of
delivery when Iran comes up on the agenda later in the week -
was mostly a repetition of a communique issued last month at a
meeting in Malaysia of the nonaligned bloc's foreign ministers.
Iran says it has a right to enrich uranium for purposes of
generating electricity under the Nuclear Nonproliferation
Treaty. The United States and its allies assert the claim is a
cover for attempts to develop a weapons program using highly
enriched uranium in the core of nuclear warheads.
While the focus now is on negotiations with Iran - including
newfound U.S. willingness to join in multinational talks if
Tehran agrees to freeze enrichment - the Bush administration has
refused to unequivocally rule out military action should Tehran
remain defiant.
The statement from the nonaligned bloc warned that ``any attack
or threat of attack against peaceful nuclear facilities ...
constitutes a grave violation of international law.''
The U.S. and its allies were focusing on key nations with clout
among nonaligned countries such as Brazil, India and Argentina,
urging them to put pressure on Iran in individual statements to
accept an offer for talks on its nuclear program, diplomats
said.
One diplomat familiar with the consultations among the
nonaligned countries said that supporters of Tehran's stance
engaged in a ``shouting match'' Monday with those leaning toward
the Western line. The diplomats spoke on condition of anonymity
because the consultations were confidential.
The Western push suffered a setback Monday with revelations that
China and Russia were not prepared to join America and its
European allies in a unified message insisting that Tehran halt
enrichment.
Their reluctance reflected lingering differences along East-West
lines among the six world powers that two weeks ago appeared to
be in agreement about how to engage Iran over enrichment and to
persuade it to give up technology that could be used to make
nuclear arms.
Resistance by Russia and China to tough U.N. action contributed
to Washington's decision last month to reverse decades of policy
and agree to join in multinational talks with Iran - if Tehran
accepts a package of rewards, freezes enrichment during the
talks and places a long-term moratorium on such activity.
In a symbolic sign of support by Moscow, Deputy Foreign Minister
Sergei Kislyak was among those with top EU foreign policy
official Javier Solana when he delivered the incentives package
to Tehran last week. Russia has said it is prepared to join any
negotiations with Iran, and China has indicated it might also do
so.
Still, other diplomats spoke of more potential divisions. China,
Russia and possibly Germany might push to allow Iran some
tightly controlled and small-scale enrichment rather than see
talks founder, they said. Russia and China also might balk at
enforcing selective U.N. sanctions on Iranian officials and
activities.
Long-term, verifiable suspension of Iranian enrichment is a
``red line'' for the United States and its key Western allies,
one diplomat said.
When asked Monday if Iran would suspend enrichment for the sake
of negotiations, spokesman Gholam Hossein Elham repeated the
government line that enrichment is Iran's ``obvious right.''
---
Associated Press writer Veronika Oleksyn contributed to this
report.
---
On the Net:
International Atomic Energy Agency: http://www.iaea.org
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
6 IRNA: Moscow urges start of talks between Iran, Group 5+1
Moscow, June 13, IRNA
Russia-Iran-5+1
Russian Foreign Ministry spokesman Mikhail Kamynin on Tuesday
expressed the hope that negotiations between Iran and the Group
5+1 will begin on Iran's nuclear issues on the basis of the
group's recent proposed package of incentives.
The European Union foreign policy chief Javier Solana on June 6
presented Iran with a new package of incentives and penalties
approved by the five permanent members of the United Nations
Security Council -- China, Russia, Britain, France and the
United States -- plus Germany (Group 5+1) in exchange for Iran's
suspension of uranium enrichment.
He stressed that the negotiations should find strategies for
materialization of Iran's legitimate rights in pursuance of
nuclear energy for peaceful purposes.
On the other hand, these strategies must secure implementation
of the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), Kamynin said.
The package of incentives contains several proposals that help
strengthen cooperation between the Islamic Republic of Iran and
the IAEA on the confidence-building basis and will also pave the
way for development of Iran's nuclear energy, he reiterated.
The Russian minister further expressed the hope that since the
package has taken into consideration Iran's long-term interests,
it would be studied carefully by the Iranian officials.
*****************************************************************
7 AFP: Iran in focus as regional group meets in Shanghai
by Benjamin Morgan Tue Jun 13, 12:18 AM ET
SHANGHAI (AFP) - China will this week host leaders from Russia
and Central Asian states for a regional club touted as a growing
power, with the added presence of Iran " /> Iran's president
expected to draw global attention.
The Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), founded 10 years ago
as part of efforts to fight terrorism, religious extremism and
separatism in the region, is being described by China as an
increasingly significant political group.
Its annual leaders' summit will on Thursday be held in Shanghai,
bringing together the presidents of original member states
China, Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan along with
Uzbekistan, which joined in 2001.
The leaders of Iran, Pakistan and Mongolia will also attend,
with their nations granted observer status in 2004, as will
Afghan President Hamid Karzai as an official "guest".
India, also an observer nation, will send its petroleum minister.
"The SCO is constantly developing and expanding, attracting the
attention of the world community," assistant Chinese foreign
minister Li Hui said Monday.
Yet while the SCO leaders will be intent on pushing its own
agenda of expanding trade, security and defense ties, Iranian
President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is almost certain to steal the
headlines.
The SCO participation of Iran, currently in the midst of a
standoff with the West over its nuclear energy program, has
drawn fire from the United States, which remains wary about
China and Russia's cozy relationship with Tehran.
"It strikes me as strange that one would want to bring into an
organization that says it's against terrorism... one of the
leading terrorist nations in the world -- Iran," US Defense
Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said this month.
Although Washington accuses Tehran of sponsoring terrorism,
Beijing and Moscow disagree.
China and Russia have significant business interests in Iran,
with energy-hungry Beijing in negotiations for a slice of the
Islamic Republic's oil reserves, the world's fourth largest.
China and Russia have stymied US efforts for UN Security
Council-led sanctions against Iran.
Tehran says it has a right to a civilian nuclear program and
denies US accusations it is trying to build an atomic bomb.
Guo Xiangang, an Iranian expert at the China Institution of
International Studies, a government think-tank, said the Iranian
nuclear issue would likely not be on the agenda during the SCO
summit.
However he expected it to be discussed when Ahmadinejad holds a
scheduled post-summit bilateral meeting with Chinese President
Hu Jintao
" /> Hu Jintaoon Friday.
Ahmadinejad is also due to give a speech at the summit and hold
a press conference on Friday before departing China.
Aside from Iran's attendance, the SCO has also provoked concerns
in the West that it is trying to fashion itself as a
counterweight to growing US influence in central Asia.
This was highlighted at last year's SCO leaders' summit in
Almaty when the group called for a timetable for the withdrawal
of American bases from central Asia.
Nevertheless, China has dismissed such concerns as baseless and
assistant foreign minister Li insisted on Monday that the SCO
"does not target any country".
Independent Moscow-based defense analyst Pavel Felgenhauer said
fears over the organization's growing status were premature as
SCO nations had few real common interests.
"It doesn't have a military dimension, military exercises, joint
staff or anything like NATO " /> NATO," said Felgenhauer. "The
alliance is very loose because the interests do not coincide."
The SCO has, however, recently expanded its original mandate to
broader security issues as well as economics and trade.
The move reflects central Asia's increasing importance as a
source of oil and gas, especially for China," said David Zweig,
a political analyst at Hong Kong's University of Science and
Technology.
"(The meeting) signifies to a certain extent China's ability to
have greater influence in this part of the world -- in an area
that is now very important to China for energy and security
reasons."
Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
8 IRNA: Larijani says Iran ready to cooperate to resolve nuclear row -
Algiers, June 13, IRNA
Iran-Nuclear-Larijani
Secretary of Iran Supreme National Security Council (SNSC) said
here Monday that Iran is ready to cooperate fully to resolve the
concerns of Persian Gulf nations.
Speaking at a press conference Ali Larijani, responding to a
question on whether Persian Gulf countries' concerns are real or
stems from US pressure, said "We do not make judgments on
positions taken by the Persian Gulf states, you are free to make
your own analysis."
"We are ready to remove all outstanding concerns on the issue,"
he reiterated.
"Persian Gulf states are our valuable friends and the point
should be made that Iran has never threatened its neighbors."
On anther question whether the aim of his trip to Egypt and
Algeria is to describe Iran's position regarding nuclear row, or
looking to garner support of Arab nations, Larijani added "We
regularly consult all nations that have common interest with us
including Algeria."
"As secretary of Arab League Amr Moussa has said Arab nations
support Iran's position on the nuclear issue."
Iran nuclear dossier is moving on the path similar to what
other ations have opted to have access to peaceful nuclear
energy, Larijani underlined.
All the members of International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)
and signatories to the Non-Proliferation Treaty have the right
to have peaceful nuclear program, he said.
When asked if Iranians and Algerians have discussed nuclear
ooperation, he added "Tehran's position is clear and as far as
cooperation with other nations is concerned we are ready to do
so within the framework of IAEA."
He also alluded to the India-US nuclear cooperation as a token
of double standards by Washington.
"Of course India is friend of Iran and we do not have any
problems with India's nuclear cooperation with other nations,
but the problem is that while India has nuclear weapons and is
not a signatory to the NPT, the US cooperate with it, but it
resorts to belligerent and threatening posture towards Iran."
The problem lies with the US and its policies of double
standards, he reiterated.
Iran is ready to discuss removing any ambiguities in its
nuclear activities, but these should be without preconditions,
he said.
On whether Algerian president Abdelaziz Bouteflika offered his
official support in nuclear issue, he said that Algerian
officials have always supported Iran's position and today the
Algerian president was also explicit in its views on this matter.
Iran's Supreme National Security Council Secretary arrived in
the Algerian capital, Algiers, Monday heading a high-ranking
delegation to hold talks with Algerian officials on Iran's
nuclear case.
Larijani arrived here from the Egyptian capital, Cairo, where
he held talks Sunday with Egyptian officials.
On hand to welcome Larijani and his delegation upon their
arrival here was Algerian Foreign Minister Mohamed Bedjaoui.
Larijani conferred here Monday with Algerian President
Abdelaziz Bouteflika on expansion of mutual cooperation between
the two countries.
Speaking to reporters after the meeting, Larijani said the two
sides share common interests.
During the meeting, the two sides reviewed various mutual,
regional and international developments, mainly those related to
Iran's nuclear dossier, he said.
He also conferred on Sunday with Egyptian president and foreign
minister on issues of mutual interests.
He outlined latest developments in Iran's nuclear case
regarding the Group 5+1 new package of incentives for Tehran.
The European Union foreign policy chief Javier Solana on June 6
handed over a new package of incentives approved by the five
permanent members of the United Nations Security Council --
China, Russia, Britain, France and the United States -- plus
Germany (Group 5+1) in exchange for Iran's suspension of uranium
enrichment.
News sent: 00:03 Tuesday June 13, 2006 Print
*****************************************************************
9 IRIB PERSIAN NEWS: US should abondon its hostile treat
2006/06/13
Algiers, June 13 - Iran's Secretary of Supreme National Security
Council (SNSC) Ali Larijani in a press conference here on Monday
said direct talks between Iran and America could be constructive
when the Americans abandon their hostile behavior towards Iran
and use logical methods.
Responding to a question concerning the possibility of beginning
direct talks between Iran and America, Larijani said the issue
is fully related to the American behavior; if they change their
point of views concerning regional issues and stop hostility,
the negotiation can be done and can be constructive.
He went on to say negotiation by itself is neutral, but the most
important thing is how the talks are directed; if negotiation is
done in a proper manner it could be constructive, otherwise it
could be destructive.
mk
Copyright 2004, All Rights Reserved By Islamic Republic of Iran
Broadcasting News Network Sponsored By IRIB News Computer Center.
E-Mail: Webmaster@IRIBNEWS.ir
*****************************************************************
10 IRIB PERSIAN NEWS: IRI ready to remove nuclear concerns
2006/06/13
09:59:58 Þ.Ù
Algiers, June 13 - Secretary of Iran's Supreme National Security
Council (SNSC) said here Monday that Iran is ready to cooperate
fully to resolve the concerns of Persian Gulf nations.
Speaking at a press conference, Ali Larijani said "We are ready
to remove all outstanding concerns on the issue."
"Persian Gulf states are our valuable friends and the point
should be made that Iran has never threatened its neighbors."
On another question whether the aim of his trip to Egypt and
Algeria is to describe Iran's position regarding nuclear row, or
looking to garner support of Arab nations, Larijani added "We
regularly consult all nations that have common interest with us
in cluding Algeria."
"As secretary of Arab League Amr Moussa has said Arab nations
support Iran's position on the nuclear issue."
Iran's nuclear case is moving on the path similar to what other
nations have opted to have access to peaceful nuclear energy,
Larijani underlined.
All the members of International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and
signatories to the Non-Proliferation Treaty have the right to
have peaceful nuclear program, he said.
When asked if Iranians and Algerians have discussed nuclear
cooperation, he added "Tehran's position is clear and as far as
cooperation with other nations is concerned we are ready to do
so within the framework of IAEA."
He also alluded to the India-US nuclear cooperation as a token
of double standards by Washington.
"Of course India is friend of Iran and we do not have any
problems with India's nuclear cooperation with other nations,
but the problem is that while India has nuclear weapons and is
not a signatory to the NPT, the US cooperate with it, but it
resorts to belligerent and threatening posture towards Iran."
The problem lies with the US and its policies of double
standards, he reiterated.
Iran is ready to discuss removing any ambiguities in its nuclear
activities, but these should be without preconditions, he said.
On whether Algerian President Abdelaziz Bouteflika offered his
official support in nuclear issue, he said that Algerian
officials have always supported Iran's position and today the
Algerian President was also explicit in its views on this
matter.
Iran's Supreme National Security Council Secretary arrived in
the Algerian capital, Algiers, Monday heading a high-ranking
delegation to hold talks with Algerian officials on Iran's
nuclear case.
Larijani arrived here from the Egyptian capital, Cairo, where he
held talks Sunday with Egyptian officials.
mk
Copyright 2004, All Rights Reserved By Islamic Republic of Iran
Broadcasting News Network Sponsored By IRIB News Computer Center.
E-Mail: Webmaster@IRIBNEWS.ir
*****************************************************************
11 AFP: China, Russia refuse to join Iran sanctions statement -
by Michael Adler Tue Jun 13, 3:36 PM ET
VIENNA (AFP) - China and Russia refused to join with other world
powers in a statement that would threaten sanctions over Iran "
/> Iran's nuclear program, during diplomatic jostling at the UN
nuclear watchdog.
In a further blow to US efforts to present a united front at a
meeting here of the International Atomic Energy Agency " />
International Atomic Energy Agency, non-aligned nations were
preparing a text reaffirming Tehran's right to enrich uranium.
Diplomats played down the significance of the cracks, however,
saying member states on the IAEA's 35-nation board of governors
would try not to hinder an international offer to Iran of
benefits if it reins in its nuclear ambitions.
"Everybody feels they want this package (of benefits) to have
every possible chance of success," a Western diplomat told AFP.
China and Russia -- both Iranian allies and trading partners --
had joined Britain, France, Germany and the United States on June
1 in urging Iran to halt enrichment and join talks offering trade
and other benefits in return for it guaranteeing not to make
nuclear arms.
The offer threatened UN Security Council action, including
sanctions, if Iran failed to comply.
A second Western diplomat said the United States had been seeking
a new statement in Vienna from the six world powers calling on
Iran to accept the June 1 offer and setting out both possible
benefits and sanctions for Iran.
But Russia and China were reluctant to sign up this time.
Russia and China "didn't want a reference to sanctions or
punitive actions" in such a statement at the IAEA, the diplomat
said.
A senior European diplomat said the failure to agree on a joint
statement at the IAEA board was no surprise.
The six world powers have never managed to get a united statement
on the matter at the IAEA, which oversees cooperation by nations
with the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and set off the current
crisis when it in February cited Iran for NPT safeguards
violations, the European diplomat said.
US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice
" /> Condoleezza Ricediscussed Iran on Tuesday with Chinese
Foreign Minister Li Zhaoxing by telephone, a Chinese foreign
ministry spokeswoman said in Beijing.
"China will continue to play a constructive role to help
peacefully solve the Iran nuclear issue through negotiations,"
the Chinese spokesman said on the ministry's Internet site.
A vigorous debate on Iran but no resolution is expected at this
week's meeting IAEA governing board meeting, with the Iranian
issue due to come up officially Thursday or Friday during the
week-long meeting.
The EU-3, which have spearheaded negotiations with Iran, are
expected to issue a joint statement of their own. Each of the
six powers engaged with the Iran nuclear crisis will also issue
individual statements.
Iran is examining the major powers' offer of benefits and is
expected to respond by the end of the month.
Iranian MP Kazem Jalali said in Tehran Tuesday that Iran would
not suspend uranium enrichment -- a key precondition set by the
major powers for talks -- and was only willing to negotiate on
the modalities of the sensitive work, which makes nuclear
reactor fuel but also atom bomb material.
A Western diplomat said the IAEA meeting had "no influence on
the overall situation," although this diplomat and others
admitted that Iran would try to exploit any division, perceived
or real, among the world powers.
Delegates from several non-aligned nations, of which China is a
member, were nevertheless preparing a statement that supported
Iran's right to enrichment, as enshrined in the NPT, diplomats
said.
A non-aligned diplomat said his group would "hold to a statement
made by non-aligned foreign ministers in Kuala Lumpur in May,"
that backs Iran's right to enrich.
Diplomats said Washington was fighting to prevent non-aligned
states on the IAEA board from issuing such a statement as the
United States wants to keep up pressure on Iran.
But many non-aligned states aspire to nuclear technology and are
as much concerned about protecting their right to enrich uranium
as Iran's, diplomats said.
The non-aligned diplomat said the bloc was planning a statement
that would renew a message first issued May 30 in Malaysia, when
the the Non Aligned Movement affirmed the right to atomic energy
and opposed any attack on nuclear facilities.
The United States wanted the bloc, which numbers some 16 mostly
developing nations on the IAEA board, to stick to the February
IAEA resolution that many of the non-aligneds had supported and
which had called on Iran to suspend uranium enrichment.
Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
12 AFP: China and Russia reject joint statement on Iran nuclear program
by Michael Adler Tue Jun 13, 7:40 AM ET
VIENNA (AFP) - China and Russia have rejected joining the West in
a joint statement urging Iran " /> Iranto halt uranium
enrichment, in diplomatic maneuvering ahead of a debate at the UN
nuclear watchdog.
Diplomats played down the significance of this however, as China
and Russia have already joined Britain, France, Germany and the
United States in a ministerial agreement on June 1 calling on
Iran to halt enrichment and join in talks on guaranteeing it will
not make nuclear weapons.
"The effort didn't work to do a joint statement in Vienna," a
senior European diplomat told AFP.
But the diplomat said the six world powers "have never managed to
get an EU-3 (Britain, France and Germany) plus three statement in
Vienna," at meetings of the watchdog International Atomic Energy
Agency " /> International Atomic Energy Agency(IAEA) which
oversees cooperation by nations with the nuclear
Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).
A vigorous debate on Iran but no resolution is expected at this
week's IAEA meeting of its 35-nation board of governors, with
the Iranian issue expected to come up Wednesday or Thursday.
The EU-3 are expected to issue a statement of their own, with
each of the six countries that have made the offer to Iran
issuing individual statements.
Iranian allies Russia and China are both reluctant to threaten
sanctions against Iran for nuclear work which the United States
says show that Tehran wants to develop atomic weapons.
But the two nations closed ranks with the three European Union
" /> European Unionpowers plus the United States in offering
Iran talks on trade, security and technology benefits if it
would suspend uranium enrichment, which makes nuclear reactor
fuel but also atom bomb material.
Iran is currently examining the benefits package and is expected
to respond by the end of the month.
"This has no influence on the overall situation," a Western
diplomat said about the developments in Vienna, although this
diplomat and others admitted that Iran would try to exploit any
division, perceived or real, among the world powers.
But delegates from several non-aligned nations, of which China
is a member, clearly do want to make a point, as they are
preparing a statement that supports Iran's right to enrichment,
as enshrined in the NPT.
A non-aligned diplomat said his group would "hold to a statement
made by non-aligned foreign ministers in Kuala Lumpur in May,"
that backs Iran's right to enrich.
Diplomats said Washington was fighting to prevent non-aligned
states on the IAEA board from issuing such a statement, which
also is an expression of non-aligned concern over a US proposal
to have nuclear fuel available in a multilateral reserve so that
countries do not develop the ability to enrich uranium on their
own.
The non-aligned diplomat said the bloc was planning a statement
that would renew a message first issued May 30 in Malaysia, when
the the Non Aligned Movement affirmed the right to atomic energy
and opposed any attack on nuclear facilities.
"The Americans are not happy with that statement and told that
to the NAM members," the diplomat said.
The United States wanted the bloc, which numbers some 16 mostly
developing nations on the IAEA board, to stick to a February
IAEA resolution calling on Iran to suspend uranium enrichment.
"The US point of view is that the Iranians should not be allowed
to feel relaxed about enrichment, that the goal is to keep the
pressure on them," the diplomat said.
A senior US State Department official said Washington did not
want Tehran to press on with its enrichment activites while
drawing out negotiations with the rest of the world.
With Iran being called on to answer the benefits offer within
weeks, "we don't want the Iranian authorities to be considering
this indefinitely," a senior US State Department official said.
"We don't want to be back into a situation we've seen before
where they say they are prepared to negotiate but at the same
time they just continue with their nuclear activities," the
official said.
Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
13 AFP: Rice consults world powers on Iran nuclear row
Tue Jun 13, 6:33 PM ET
WASHINGTON (AFP) - US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice " />
Condoleezza Riceconsulted world powers on Iran " /> Iran's
disputed nuclear program, the State Department said. 
[ src=] Rice telephoned her Chinese counterpart Li
Zhaoxing, said State Department spokesman Sean McCormack,
confirming an announcement by the Chinese foreign affairs
ministry.
The top US diplomat was "just touching base on the issue of Iran.
"She's had a few conversations with some of her foreign minister
colleagues, just to touch base on where we stand," the spokesman
said.
A senior State Department official, speaking on condition of
anonymity, said Rice had spoken late Monday with Japanese
Foreign Minister Taro Aso and on Tuesday with here counterparts
Margaret Beckett of Britain and Frank-Walter Steinmeier of
Germany.
"She is going to have some other talks" during the day, he said,
citing Russia's chief diplomat, Sergei Lavrov.
Asked about the essence of her conversation with Aso, the State
Department official said the two chief diplomats had discussed
"what role Japan might play" with respect to Iran.
Japan has not directly participated in the discussions on Iran
of the five permanent members of the United Nations
" /> United NationsSecurity Council -- Britain, China, France,
Russia and the United States -- as well as Germany.
Germany has partnered with Britain and France in the so-called
EU-3 which has spearheaded negotiations with Iran.
In announcing the telephone conversation between Li and Rice,
the Chinese foreign ministry said that "China will continue to
play a constructive role to help peacefully solve the Iran
nuclear issue through negotiations."
The phone discussion came after China refused to join with other
big powers in threatening sanctions over Iran's nuclear program.
The world powers are awaiting a response from Iran on their
proposal to offer trade and other incentives in exchange for
Tehran's suspension of uranium enrichment activities.
China and Russia -- both Iranian allies and trading partners --
had joined Britain, France, Germany and the United States on
June 1 in urging Iran to halt uranium enrichment and join talks
guaranteeing it will not make nuclear arms.
Iran insists its nuclear program is purely civilian, and rejects
accusations it is covertly building atomic weapons.
Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
14 AFP: New poll shows US image sinking abroad
by Isabel Malsang Tue Jun 13, 5:59 PM ET
WASHINGTON (AFP) - The Iraq " /> Iraqwar and the leadership of
President George W. Bush " /> President George W. Bushhelped drag
down the global image of the United States for the second year
straight, according to a new released study.
The war and Bush's leadership were the main points provoking
negative reactions from people in other countries, especially
those in predominantly Muslim nations, according to an annual
poll by the Pew Global Attitudes Project.
But the poll also showed a growing convergence of views between
the United States and the Europeans on issues like Iran
" /> Iran's alleged nuclear weapons aspirations and the
Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
"There is widespread sentiment -- especially in the West -- that
countries that do not have nuclear weapons should be prevented
from developing them," Pew noted.
The survey of 17,000 people in 14 nations -- released on the
same day Bush made a surprise visit to Baghdad to meet Iraq's
new leaders -- shows a growing chasm of opinion between the
United States and both its western allies and Muslim countries.
"The war in Iraq is a continuing drag on opinions of the United
States, not only in predominantly Muslim countries but in Europe
and Asia as well," Pew said.
In 10 out of 14 countries, a majority of people felt the US-led
invasion and occupation of Iraq has made the world more
dangerous.
While 51 percent of Americans think the world is safer, only 30
percent of Britons agree -- and just 7 percent of Spaniards and
eight percent of Chinese. Only in Nigeria and India did more
people -- 41 percent in both -- feel safer than not.
Among allies, 56 percent Britons expressed a favorable opinion
of the United States, nearly the same as last year but down from
70 percent in 2003 and 83 percent in 2000.
United States garnered favorable opinions from 39 percent of
French, 37 percent of Germans and 23 percent of Spaniards, all
several percentage points down from last year.
US popularity in predominantly Muslim countries ranged from 12
percent in Turkey (down from 23 percent in 2005) to 30 percent
in Indonesia. While in this group the US image mostly fell, in
Pakistan, which is involved in the US-led war on terror,
favorable opinions rose to 27 percent from 23 percent.
Confidence in Bush's international leadership followed a similar
pattern, with 30 percent of British expressing confidence in
him, compared to 37 percent last year and just over half in 2004.
Among Germans, 25 percent were confident in Bush; as were 15
percent of French, seven percent of Spaniards and 21 percent of
Russians.
Bush's numbers were highest in India (56 percent), Nigeria (52
percent) and the United States itself (50 percent). But in
Muslim countries, he scored only 20 percent in Indonesia, 10
percent in Pakistan, and yet worse in Egypt, Jordan and Turkey.
Despite the slump in the US image, Pew pointed out that on
specific issues of global concern a growing number of people are
in line with Washington's views, especially on Iran under
President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
The view that Iran is a moderate or great danger to the region
or world rose significantly from 2003 to 85 percent in Germany,
64 percent in Spain, 78 percent in France, 52 percent in Russia,
and 50 percent in China. Germany, France, China and Russia are
closely involved in talks to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear
weapons.
But also more suspicious of Tehran are Jordan (44 percent),
Turkey (35 percent), Egypt (34 percent) and Indonesia (36
percent).
Meanwhile, the poll also showed a growth in sympathy for Israel
" /> Israelin France (38 percent compared to 24 percent in
2004), Germany (37 percent up from 24), Britain (24 percent up
from 22).
Spaniards remain strongly sympathetic to the Palestinians, as do
people in Muslim nations, the survey showed.
Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
15 IRNA: IAEA's Board of Governors meets for second day
Vienna, June 13, IRNA
IAEA-Meet-Iran
The 35-member Board of Governors of the International Atomic
Energy Agency (IAEA) met for the second day here on Tuesday.
Iran's Ambassador to the Vienna-based International Atomic
Energy Agency Ali-Asghar Soltaniyeh told IRNA here earlier today
that the session this afternoon will look into ways of
strengthening technical cooperation in the IAEA.
The Iranian envoy, who was speaking minutes before the opening
of the session, said that the scientific and technical reports
of the agency for the year 2005 will also be reviewed by the
35-member governing board in this afternoon's session.
As to verification of states' nuclear compliance, Soltaniyeh
said the latest status of countries' compliance with the
Additional Protocol and a report by the consultative committee
created to strengthen IAEA safeguards will be discussed at the
meeting.
The proposal made recently by the US, Russia, France, Britain,
China and Germany on the fuel cycle system will also be reviewed
this afternoon, the Iranian envoy said.
He said that the IAEA Board of Governors may raise the issue of
Iran's nuclear activities on Tuesday afternoon or Wednesday.
A statement of the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) member states on
the right of states to nuclear energy will probably be read at
the meeting, he said.
The IAEA Board of Governors opened it season's meeting in
Vienna on Monday, the meeting to continue until Wednesday
evening or Thursday morning.
*****************************************************************
16 IRNA: India, France nuclear deal not linked to Indo-US deal
New Delhi, June 13, IRNA
India-France-Nuclear deal
Dismissing suggestions that its nuclear deal with India was
"predicated upon" the successful passage of the Indo-US civilian
nuclear agreement in the US Congress, France has said it will
continue to press for waiver of restrictions on India at the
Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) and the UN atomic energy agency
(IAEA).
"We would like to clarify that the Franco-Indian nuclear
cooperation declaration (signed in February this year) is not
predicated upon or linked to the successful passage of the
Indo-US nuclear deal by the (US) Congress," said French envoy to
India Dominique Girard in an interview with leading Indian news
agency PTI here.
Girard's remarks assume significance after India and the US
formally launched negotiations here yesterday for a bilateral
nuclear cooperation agreement.
"What happens to the Indo-US nuclear deal is a bilateral matter
between both countries and it is not a condition for furthering
our nuclear relations with India," he said.
"We, on our side, are fully convinced regarding India's stand
on the separation of its civilian and nuclear facilities and its
commitment on use of nuclear material," Girard said.
Asked what stand France would take on the waiver of
restrictions on India with regard to supply of nuclear fuel by
the 45-member NSG and the Interanational Atomic Energy Agency,
Girard said his country would "wholeheartedly back" any effort
by India in its "legitimate quest for nuclear energy."
"In fact, our support for India in the field of civilian
nuclear energy preceded the Indo-US nuclear agreement signed in
July last year," Girard pointed out.
"However, we would like India to effectively address the
concerns of certain skeptical members of the Nuclear Suppliers
Group (NSG) regarding opening up of its (nuclear) facilities (to
international inspections), its separation plan, use of nuclear
fuel and safeguards," he said.
"Though many countries, like the US and UK, besides France
support the waiver of restrictions on India, bodies like the NSG
work on consensus and the need to evolve that is very crucial,"
the French ambassador said.
Girard said he believed India would be able to "successfully
convince" members of the international community and "mobilize
support" from other countries in this regard.
Asked about China, which has not yet come out with its stand on
a waiver for India at the recently concluded Nuclear Suppliers
Group meeting in Rio de Janerio, Girard said Beijing has its
"own concerns" and said "it was for them to decide what future
stand they would take."
"We are absolutely and totally for a waiver for India at the
NSG.
It will be good for the international community to have India,
a country with a good nuclear track record, to be gifted with a
new status," he said.
*****************************************************************
17 NRC: Sunshine Act Meeting Notice
FR Doc 06-5387
[Federal Register: June 13, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 113)]
[Notices] [Page 34165] From the Federal Register Online via GPO
Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr13jn06-102]
Agency Holding the Meeting: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Date: Weeks of June 12, 19, 26, July 3, 10, 17, 2006.
Place: Commissioners' Conference Room, 11555 Rockville Pike,
Rockville, Maryland.
Status: Public and Closed.
Matters to be Considered: Week of June 12, 2006 There are no
meetings scheduled for the Week of June 12, 2006.
Week of June 19, 2006--Tentative Friday, June 23, 2006 9 a.m.
Affirmation Session (Public) (Tentative) a. AmerGen Energy
Company, LLC (License Renewal for Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating
Station) Docket No. 50-0219, Legal challenges to LBP-06-07 and
LBP-06-11 (Tentative) b. Nuclear Management Company, LLC
(Palisades Nuclear Plant, license renewal application), Appeal by
Petitioners of LBP-06-10 (ruling on standing, contentions, and
other pending matters) (Tentative).
9:30 a.m. Discussion of Security Issues (Closed--Ex. 1). Week of
June 26, 2006--Tentative There are no meetings scheduled for the
Week of June 26, 2006.
Week of July 3, 2006--Tentative There are no meetings scheduled
for the Week of July 3, 2006.
Week of July 10, 2006--Tentative There are no meetings scheduled
for the Week of July 10, 2006.
Week of July 17, 2006--Tentative There are no meetings scheduled
for the Week of July 17, 2006.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: By a vote of 5-0 on June 6, 2006, the
Commission determined pursuant to U.S.C. 552b(e) and Sec.
9.107(a) of the Commission's rules that ``Discussion of
Management Issues (Closed-- Ex. 2)'' be held June 8, 2006, and on
less than one week's notice to the public.
*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, TTD: 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: June 8, 2006.
R. Michelle Schroll, Office of the Secretary.
[FR Doc. 06-5387 Filed 6-9-06; 10:09 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-M
*****************************************************************
18 Guardian Unlimited: Giuliani Lays Out Energy Strategy in N.Y.
From the Associated Press
[UP]
Tuesday June 13, 2006 10:46 PM
AP Photo NYHM101 By BETH FOUHY Associated Press Writer
NEW YORK (AP) - Stepping up his political visibility as he
contemplates a run for president, former Mayor Rudolph Giuliani
laid out an energy strategy Tuesday that calls for more use of
nuclear power and ethanol.
Speaking to the Manhattan Institute, a conservative think tank,
Giuliani called for a comprehensive effort to wean the nation
from petroleum. The Republican said there was no national
strategy to do so, but avoided criticizing President Bush and
congressional leaders.
In his State of the Union address, Bush also called for reducing
the nation's reliance on foreign oil, in part through increased
use of alternative fuels.
Giuliani said the best way for the U.S. to end its reliance on
foreign oil is to diversify its own sources of energy.
``I think you can be independent by being diversified, the way
many of you are familiar with a terrific portfolio,'' he said.
Giuliani said nuclear power has had a remarkably safe track
record despite lingering concerns about the accidents at the
Three Mile Island and Chernobyl nuclear plants in the 1970s and
1980s.
He urged governors and state legislators to make it easier for
nuclear power plants to get operating permits.
He also called for more hybrid cars and tax incentives for
ethanol, a fuel distilled from corn and mixed with gasoline.
Backers have long argued that ethanol reduces dependence on
foreign oil and reduces greenhouse gases.
Ethanol is especially important in Iowa, a corn producing state
that is also home to the caucuses that begin the presidential
nominating process.
Last month, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, a potential Democratic
presidential candidate, outlined an energy plan that called for
a massive expansion of ethanol use.
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
19 AU ABC: Ruptured reactor pipe cuts production
ABC Sydney | Local News | Story
Wednesday, 14 June 2006. 07:39 (AEDT)Wednesday, 14 June 2006.
The Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation
(ANSTO) has begun investigating the cause of a break down at its
southern Sydney reactor.
A ruptured pipe in a radioactive hot cell in ANSTO's Lucas
Heights reactor has cut isotope production by half, with
Australia's only manufacturer of radioisotopes saying it will be
at least three weeks before production can resume.
The isotopes contain technetium that is used in nuclear medicine
scans of bones and organs.
Supplies of another radio pharmaceutical, which can be used for
some heart imaging, have been increased.
An ANSTO spokeswoman says the first imports are expected to
arrive within days and supplies should return to normal by the
end of the week.
She says it is expected to take two to three weeks to
investigate the cause of the rupture and return to full
production.
*****************************************************************
20 RIA Novosti: Russia to launch first floating NPP in 2010 - nuclear official
13/ 06/ 2006
MOSCOW, June 13 (RIA Novosti) - Russia will construct the
world's first floating nuclear power plant by the end of 2010,
the head of the federal NPP construction agency said Tuesday.
The NPP will mainly provide power supplies for Sevmash shipyard
company, which won a tender in May to build a floating reactor
for a low-power thermal and electric power plant that will sell
one fifth of its energy to the energy-hungry Asia-Pacific region.
Sergei Obozov of Rosenergoatom said that an agreement on
construction of the plant would be signed Wednesday by federal
nuclear agency head Sergei Kiriyenko on a visit to Sevmash.
"The project will cost 9.1 billion rubles [$337 million] and
will be commissioned in October 2010," Obozov said.
© 2005 RIA Novosti
*****************************************************************
21 Platts: DOE, NRC to start on licensing strategy for NGNP this year
Washington (Platts)--12Jun2006
DOE and NRC staff plan to begin developing a licensing strategy
this year for the Next Generation Nuclear Plant Project, Dennis
Spurgeon, assistant secretary of nuclear energy, said today.
Testifying before the Senate Energy and Natural Resources
Committee, Spurgeon said DOE is making progress on the NGNP
project, which calls for building a very high-temperature
gas-cooled reactor at Idaho National Laboratory that can produce
both electricity and hydrogen.
Idaho Senator Larry Craig, who chaired the hearing, said the
committee wanted an update on the project's status. Spurgeon said
DOE was making progress toward deployment of a demonstration
plant by 2021.
Two others testifying -- Regis Matzie of Westinghouse Electric
Co. and Dan Keuter of Entergy Nuclear -- said they supported the
project but urged DOE to make its highest priority the Nuclear
Power 2010 program to build new LWRs.
Terms & Conditions
Copyright © 2006 - Platts, All Rights Reserved
[The McGraw-Hill Companies]
*****************************************************************
22 POAC: NRC preliminary report finds no reason to block renewal of
Oyster Creek license
The commission is now giving the public a nearly three-month
window to voice their objections to its environmental impact
report, which was released Friday.
[PressofAtlanticCity.com]
By ZACH PATBERG Staff Writer, (609) 978-2010 Published:
Tuesday, June 13, 2006 Updated: Tuesday, June 13, 2006
LACEY TOWNSHIP — The Nuclear Regulatory Commission found that
any environmental effects caused by the Oyster Creek Generating
Station were not serious enough to prevent the renewal of its
operating license.
The commission is now giving the public a nearly three-month
window to voice their objections to its environmental impact
report, which was released Friday.
The report focused heavily on concerns raised at various public
meetings, including possible harm the nuclear plant could have on
aquatic life and endangered species as well as the effects of
chlorine discharge, NRC spokeswoman Diane Screnci said. It also
addressed what Screnci labeled the 92 issues identified in the
generic environmental impact statement, which include air and
water quality and socioeconomic impact.
“Based on its review, the NRC staff has preliminarily
determined that the adverse environmental impacts of the license
renewal for Oyster Creek are not so great that preserving the
option of license renewal for energy planning decision makers
would be unreasonable,†an NRC statement said.
The commission has been reviewing Oyster Creek's license renewal
application since the plant's parent company, AmerGen, submitted
it in July.
But Screnci stressed that the Lacey Township plant was not yet in
the clear for a 20-year license extension. The commission will
come out with a final report in January that will take into
consideration any comments made during the public discussion
period, which runs from now until Sept. 8.
A public meeting is scheduled at 1:30 p.m. July 12 at the Quality
Inn in Toms River.
“We encourage anyone who has an opinion to come and voice
it,†Screnci said.
Paul Gunter, a spokesman for the Nuclear Information and
Resource Service, which heads a coalition of environmental
groups, predicts no shortage of criticism at the meeting.
He lambasted the commission for not focusing on key issues,
including corrosion on the drywall liner of the structure
holding the plant's reactor and what he considered an antiquated
design to hold radioactive waste on the plant's roof that was
susceptible to terrorist attack.
“The fact that none of these are addressed and everything is
OK according to the NRC does not foster confidence that its
oversight of the application is adequate,†said Gunter.
Screnci, however, said these issues did not fall under
environmental impact and will be reviewed in the commission's
safety report, which will come out in August.
AmerGen spent $7.4 million and more than 93,000 man hours
preparing the application.
“We knew we had a sound application,†spokeswoman Rachelle
Benson said. “We're not surprised with NRC's findings and
we're confident in the next step, which is the safety review.â€
To e-mail Zach Patberg at The Press:
*****************************************************************
23 Platts: Norwegian minister says no to nukes;2.6bn renewable fund launched
London (Platts)--12Jun2006
Nuclear power is not considered an option for resolving the
predicted power crisis in Norway, energy minister Odd Roger
Enoksen told Platts Monday, as he launched a NOK20 billion
(Eur2.57 billion) fund to back increased production of renewable
energy.
Critics have recently called for the introduction of nuclear
power to Norway, the sixth largest hydro power producer in the
world, as a response to increased consumption and a power supply
shortage in mid-Norway that has been predicted to occur in the
near future.
But Enoksen said nuclear power was not considered an option
by the government.
"We don't need it," Enoksen told Platts at the Eurelectric
annual convention and conference in Oslo.
"We have a large potential in renewables and hydro power,
CO2 capture and gas fired plants," he said.
At the Oslo conference, Enoksen launched an "ambitious"
NOK20 billion fund to support increased production of renewable
energy in Norway, which he said would strengthen the security of
power supply.
"This is an ambitious move which confirms Norway's position
as a leading nation within the development of renewable energy.
The initiatives will contribute to strengthening the security of
energy supply in Norway, and it's a considerable contribution to
reaching the government's target of a more environmentally
friendly and diverse energy system," Enoksen said in a statement.
The fund, which will be managed by Enova, will contribute to
the government's target of increasing production of renewable
energy by 30 terawatt hours from 2001 to 2016.
Meanwhile, Norwegian utility Nord-Trondelag
Elektrisitetsverk (NTE) has won a license to go ahead with the
development of the 249 megawatt Ytre Vikna wind farm in
mid-Norway. The farm will consist of about 99 wind turbines, with
an estimated annual production of 879 gigawatt hours.
"Ytre Vikna wind power farm is an important contribution to
strengthening the security of supply in Norway," Enoksen said.
For similar stories, request a free trial to Platts Power in
Europe at
Copyright © 2006 - Platts, All Rights Reserved [The McGraw-Hill
Companies]
*****************************************************************
24 Platts: ITER "at the heart" of France's energy strategy: De Villepin
London (Platts)--13Jun2006
ITER is "at the heart" of France's energy strategy, Prime
Minister Dominique de Villepin said on a visit June 9 to
Cadarache, where the International Thermonuclear Experimental
Reactor is to be built in the context of a six-party cooperation.
De Villepin said his government has three priorities in energy
policy: "(low) cost, supply security, and (protection of the)
environment."
The reactor, which is aimed to demonstrate net energy production
from inertial confinement fusion, is expected to cost some 10
billion euros in euros of 2002 (US$12.6 billion) to build and
operate over 30 years, beginning in 2015.
De Villepin said France would "continue to conduct an ambitious
nuclear policy," calling ITER "an essential element of this
strategy."
Until the advent of successful fusion, however, Villepin said,
France will develop fourth-generation fission reactors, with a
decision on the first such reactor to be made by the government's
Atomic Energy Committee this fall. For more news, request a free
trial to Platts Nucleonics Week at
http://www.platts.com/Request%20More%20Information/
Copyright © 2006 - Platts, All Rights Reserved
[The McGraw-Hill Companies]
*****************************************************************
25 Independent: Atomic energy chief quits after buyout vetoed
By Saeed Shah
Published: 13 June 2006
The chief executive of the United Kingdom Atomic Energy
Authority is to step down following speculation that he wanted
to lead a management buyout and rumours of clashes with the
organisation's chairman.
Dipesh Shah announced yesterday that he would not seek an
extension to his contract, when the current three-year term as
chief executive of UKAEA expires in the autumn. Mr Shah, 53, has
been linked in recent weeks with leading a management buyout of
the clean-up arm of the state-owned organisation.
He said that he was quitting because UKAEA had moved into the
next phase of its development. "I have immense confidence in the
future of the organisation. In the last three years, we have
achieved a great deal," Mr Shah said. He said that the
organisation had now been split into three divisions: a business
arm that does clean-up work at Britain's nuclear sites; a unit
that looks after nuclear sites; and a research department
studying nuclear fusion.
Mr Shah said that UKAEA had made no decision on the
privatisation of the clean-up business and he did not expect an
imminent decision. "There are a range of options that are
reviewed by the board on a continuous basis," he said.
He admitted, however, that, had the sell-off proceeded, he was
interested in leading a management buyout - the unit has been
valued at £450m. He is believed to have sounded out private
equity backers for a bid.
"Were a change of ownership contemplated, I would have been
happy to consider chairing that [buyout]," Mr Shah said.
The ultimate decision about privatising UKAEA lies with the
Government. Executives are thought to have become increasingly
impatient with the lack of progress towards privatisation. Some
UKAEA sources attributed his departure partly to a clash with
Barbara Thomas Judge, the organisation's non-executive chairman.
Insiders alleged that she interfered with the running of UKAEA.
One source said: "Dipesh's life was made impossible by his
chairman. I think that the board's opposition to an MBO was the
last straw."
Mr Shah said he would not comment on individuals. But he added:
"I have enjoyed the full support of my executives and members of
the board throughout my tenure."
Mr Shah will now seek new roles. He is already part-time
chairman of the utility Viridian and a non-executive director at
the defence group Babcock. Ms Judge, an American, holds
directorships and other senior positions at over a dozen
companies and organisations. A lawyer by background, she was the
first woman to chair the UKAEA. Ms Judge, who is married to the
businessman Sir Paul Judge, could not be reached for comment.
In a statement, she said: "On behalf of the board, I want to be
the first to thank Dipesh for his important contribution to
UKAEA's development and for his leadership of the executive
team."
UKAEA has teamed up with the engineering group Amec and a US
partner, CH2M Hill, to bid for £56bn worth of clean-up work at
Britain's civil nuclear sites. The decommissioning of the 20
electricity-generation, fuel-reprocessing and nuclear-research
sites is valued at £2bn a year and about half of the contracts
are due to be let by the end of 2008.
© 2006 Independent News and Media Limited
*****************************************************************
26 APP.COM" NRC draft report spurs sharp debate |
Asbury Park Press Online
Tuesday, June 13, 2006
PRELIMINARY CONCLUSION: Oyster Creek's environmental impact
small, federal study says
06/13/06
BY TODD B. BATES ENVIRONMENTAL WRITER
The Oyster Creek nuclear power plant has a small
impact on the environment, and alternatives — such as a new
coal, natural gas or nuclear power plant — might have a greater
impact, a draft federal study says.
Preliminarily, "there are no environmental impacts that would
preclude" renewing the Lacey plant's operating license,
according to a U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission statement on
the Web.
Plant opponents and environmental activists, some of whom want
cooling towers to be built at Oyster Creek to slash losses of
Barnegat Bay marine life, were not happy with the findings in
the NRC's draft supplemental environmental impact statement.
"For them to not find any significant environmental impact is
abominable," said Janet Tauro of Brick, a member of
Grandmothers, Mothers and More for Energy Safety.
"The NRC is not an agency that represents the public," she said
Monday. "It's an agency that represents the industry . . . and
that is why the whole agency needs congressional oversight, not
only oversight but overhaul by Congress."
NRC spokesman Neil A. Sheehan said the draft environmental
statement is just that, a draft.
"I think anyone who takes the time, who looks at the actual
document, would be impressed by the depth of the review, and
it's not complete yet," he said.
The thick document is the latest development in Oyster Creek's
bid to extend its NRC operating license by 20 years until 2029.
Its current license is to expire on April 9, 2009, according to
the NRC statement.
The 636-megawatt plant, which opened in 1969, generates enough
electricity to power 600,000 homes.
The NRC relicensing process centers on plant safety and
potential environmental impact.
The NRC held public meetings in Toms River in November to
discuss the environmental review process and get public comment.
It has scheduled two meetings on the draft impact statement on
July 12 in Toms River.
"We did take the comments that we received last November very
seriously," Sheehan said, and the draft is based on that
information as well as work done by NRC and consultants' experts.
According to the NRC's draft document, "current measures to
mitigate the environmental impacts of plant operation were found
to be adequate."
The NRC staff's preliminary recommendation is that "the
commission determine that the adverse environmental impacts of
license renewal for (Oyster Creek) are not so great that
preserving the option of license renewal for energy-planning
decision-makers would be unreasonable," the draft said.
If the operating license is not renewed and the plant closes
before or when its license expires, "the adverse impacts of
likely alternatives would not be smaller than those associated
with continued operation" of the plant, according to the draft.
"The impacts may, in fact, be greater in some areas," the draft
said.
Alternatives to Oyster Creek include a new natural gas-fired,
coal-fired or nuclear power plant at the site or elsewhere, the
draft said.
Reactions vary
"We're pleased . . . with the NRC's findings that . . . our
operations have a minimal impact on the environment," Oyster
Creek spokeswoman Rachelle Benson said. "If we continue to
operate for 20 more years, we will continue to . . . make sure
that environmental strategies are incorporated in all of our
work activities."
But Paul Gunter, director of the Reactor Watchdog Project for
the Nuclear Information and Resource Service, Takoma Park, Md.,
said the NRC does not appear to be protecting "the public
health, safety and security . . . or the environment, but rather
a (power) production agenda."
The NRC draft document says New Jersey may require "additional
mitigation . . . that would result in further reduction of
impacts related to cooling-system operation."
Lisa P. Jackson, commissioner of the state Department of
Environmental Protection, said last week that she's not ready to
change the agency's preference that Oyster Creek build cooling
towers.
Cooling towers would reduce losses of aquatic life trapped
against Oyster Creek water intake screens or pulled into the
plant, a DEP fact sheet says.
The DEP also has given plant operator AmerGen Energy Co. the
option of upgrading the current system and restoring wetlands.
In an e-mail sent Monday, DEP spokeswoman Elaine Makatura said
the draft NRC document is "huge" and the DEP will review it and
provide comments by Sept. 8.
In all, the NRC looks at 92 environmental issues when
considering renewing a plant's license.
The NRC staff concludes that the impacts of 69 generic issues
for plants are small, "except for collective off-site
radiological impacts from the fuel cycle and high-level waste
and spent fuel, which were not assigned a single significance
level," the draft said.
And Oyster Creek's impacts would not be greater on those issues,
according to the draft.
Of the remaining 23 issues, the draft addresses ones that apply
at Oyster Creek. And the NRC staff concludes that for each of
them, "the significance of the potential environmental impacts"
of renewing Oyster Creek's license is small, the draft said.
This story includes material from previous Press stories. Todd
B. Bates: (732) 643-4237 or tbates@app.com
Copyright © 2006 Asbury Park Press. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
27 TheStar.com: Ontario opts for nuclear plants
Jun. 13, 2006. 12:01 PMROB
FERGUSON AND ROBERT BENZIEQUEEN'S PARK BUREAU
It will cost Ontarians $46 billion to whip the province's
troubled electricity system into shape to keep lights, air
conditioners and factories running for the next 20 years.
The plan unveiled by Energy Minister Dwight Duncan today
includes refurbishing existing nuclear plants, building new
reactors on those sites and doubling the amount of renewable
power — such as hydroelectric and wind — now being used.
Power savings through conservation are also forecast to double.
The nuclear option, however, will end up supplying roughly the
same amount of power as it does today — half the province's
needs — as old units go out of service. That percentage is
expected to decline to about 40 per cent by 2025, according to
the new plan.
“It is a balanced approach,” Duncan said.
Environmental groups warned yesterday they are prepared for
“trench warfare” to fight additional nuclear generation.
The government said it's not sure how many new nuclear reactors
will be needed.
That depends on how many old ones can be refurbished, but
critics noted the former Ontario Hydro botched refurbishments of
older reactors in the 1990s, resulting in huge cost overruns.
To that end, the government will do a feasibility study on
refurbishments and begin environmental assessments on new plants.
“While some units may be refurbished, it may not be feasible to
do so in all cases,” Duncan said.
At a minimum, one or two nuclear units costing $2-$3 billion
will be needed, one energy ministry official said.
Duncan did not set a new deadline for closing heavily polluting
coal-fired power plants. The government has broken two promised
dates already.
Legal Notice: Copyright Toronto Star Newspapers Limited. All
rights reserved. Distribution, transmission or republication of
*****************************************************************
28 TheStar.com: Accept nukes, McGuinty says
Argues Ontario will go dark without some new reactors
Energy minister is to announce `specific' details today
Jun. 13, 2006. 01:00 AM
ROBERT BENZIE AND ROB FERGUSONQUEEN'S PARK BUREAU
Premier Dalton McGuinty says Ontarians have no choice but to
accept the new nuclear power reactors his government will
announce this morning.
On the eve of the province's long-expected announcement
outlining Ontario's future power supply mix, McGuinty said
yesterday it is a matter of keeping the lights on.
"Fifty per cent of our generating capacity at present comes from
nuclear and we will not duck this issue. Governments have done
that in the past, I refuse to do that," the premier told
reporters after an event at the University of Toronto's Hart
House.
His comments came after the Toronto Star first disclosed
confirmation of the new reactors in yesterday's editions.
The premier said the government's response to last December's
1,100-page report by the arm's-length Ontario Power Authority on
the supply mix would not pull punches.
The OPA recommended Ontario refurbish or build new nuclear
plants over the next 20 years to generate 12,400 megawatts of
electricity.
Such an undertaking could cost $35 billion to $40 billion and
mean a dozen new or rebuilt reactors.
"We're going to put in place a plan that will be aggressive. It
will carry us through to 2025. It'll be revised every three
years in keeping with the process," said McGuinty.
"But we'll be aggressive with respect to renewables, with
respect to conservation, and with respect to new generation.
I've said before, when we're talking about new generation there
are no quick fixes here," he said, acknowledging he could pay a
political price for his decision in next year's provincial
election.
"There are all kinds of great political reasons for running away
from this. But we will not do that."
Canadian Press reported yesterday that six new sites will be
considered for reactors with the possibility of at least one new
plant with twin reactors.
NDP Leader Howard Hampton charged that the "$40-billion nuclear
mega-scheme is another Liberal letdown."
While Progressive Conservative Leader John Tory acknowledged a
need for more nuclear facilities in Ontario, he said McGuinty
has dithered on the issue "in an appalling manner."
Energy Minister Dwight Duncan said he will be "very specific"
today at Queen's Park when he outlines Ontario's nuclear plans,
alternative generation ideas and conservation initiatives.
Duncan declined to say whether Ontario would favour federal
government-owned Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd., which builds the
CANDU reactors already in use here, over foreign-owned firms.
Nor would the minister say whether the province's own Ontario
Power Generation, which runs reactors in Darlington and
Pickering, or Bruce Power, operator of the nuclear plant in
Tiverton, would get the nod over other companies not yet here.
The government can expect heavy opposition, warned Shawn-Patrick
Stensil of Greenpeace.
"It might be trench warfare in the end, but we're prepared to do
that," he told a news conference held by environmental groups.
The groups said the government is making a huge mistake with a
plan relying heavily on nuclear power and other major generating
plants instead of dramatically boosting efforts on conservation
and renewable energy.
They are "the only way to keep the lights on without frying the
planet," said Keith Stewart, a climate change adviser with the
World Wildlife Federation.
Stewart noted he's having a solar hot water heating system
installed at his home for $5,700 — the kind of upfront cost he
says the province should subsidize.
Environmentalists say McGuinty is trying to fool people with
claims more nuclear energy is the only option because it will
take at least 10 years of public hearings, environmental
assessments, other approvals and construction before any new
plant is up and running.
Legal Notice: Copyright Toronto Star Newspapers Limited. All
*****************************************************************
29 NRC: Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.; Establishment of Atomic Safety
FR Doc E6-9180
[Federal Register: June 13, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 113)]
[Notices] [Page 34170] From the Federal Register Online via GPO
Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr13jn06-105]
and Licensing Board Pursuant to delegation by the Commission
dated December 29, 1972, published in the Federal Register, 37 FR
28,710 (1972), and the Commission's regulations, see 10 CFR
2.104, 2.300, 2.303, 2.309, 2.311, 2.318, and 2.321, notice is
hereby given that an Atomic Safety and Licensing Board is being
established to preside over the following proceeding: Entergy
Nuclear Operations, Inc. (Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station).
A Licensing Board is being established pursuant to a March 21,
2006 notice of opportunity for hearing (71 FR 6101 (March 27,
2006)) to consider the respective May 25 and May 26, 2006
requests of Pilgrim Watch and the Massachusetts Attorney General
challenging the January 25, 2006 application for renewal of
Operating License No.
DPR-35, which authorizes Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.
(Entergy), to operate the Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station at 2028
megawatts (Mwt) thermal.
The Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. renewal application seeks to
extend the current operating license for the facility, which
expires on June 8, 2012, for an additional twenty years.
The Board is comprised of the following administrative judges:
Ann Marshall Young, Chair, Atomic Safety and Licensing Board
Panel, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC
20555-0001. Richard F. Cole, Atomic Safety and Licensing Board
Panel, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC
20555-0001.
Nicholas G. Trikouros, Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel,
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001.
All correspondence, documents, and other materials shall be filed
with the administrative judges in accordance with 10 CFR 2.302.
Issued at Rockville, Maryland, this 7th day of June 2006.
G. Paul Bollwerk, III, Chief Administrative Judge, Atomic Safety
and Licensing Board Panel.
[FR Doc. E6-9180 Filed 6-12-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
*****************************************************************
30 NRC: In the Matter of EnergySolutions, LLC (formerly Envirocare of
FR Doc E6-9181
[Federal Register: June 13, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 113)]
[Notices] [Page 34165-34167] From the Federal Register Online via
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr13jn06-103]
Utah, LLC); Order Modifying Exemption from 10 CFR Part 70 AGENCY:
Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Issuance of Order Modifying Exemption from Requirements
of 10 CFR part 70.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: James Park, Environmental and
Performance Assessment Directorate, Division of Waste Management
and Environmental Protection, Office of Nuclear Material Safety
and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington,
DC 20555- 0001. Telephone: (301) 415-5835, fax number: (301)
415-5397, e-mail: .
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Introduction The Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC) is issuing an Order pursuant to section 274f of
the Atomic Energy Act to EnergySolutions, LLC (formerly
Envirocare of Utah, LLC) concerning EnergySolutions' exemption
from certain NRC licensing requirements for special nuclear
material. This Order reflects the change in company name from
Envirocare of Utah, LLC to EnergySolutions, LLC.
II. Further Information EnergySolutions, LLC (EnergySolutions)
operates a low-level waste (LLW) disposal facility in Clive,
Utah. This facility is licensed by the State of Utah, an
Agreement State. EnergySolutions also is licensed by Utah to
dispose of mixed waste, hazardous waste, and 11e.(2) byproduct
material (as defined under section 11e.(2) of the Atomic Energy
Act of 1954, as amended). By letter dated March 3, 2006,
EnergySolutions notified the NRC that the company had changed its
name from Envirocare of Utah, LLC and requested that the NRC
reflect this name change in identified NRC staff documents.
Section 70.3 of 10 CFR part 70 requires persons who own, acquire,
deliver, receive, possess, use, or transfer special nuclear
material (SNM) to obtain a license pursuant to the requirements
in 10 CFR part 70. The licensing requirements in 10 CFR part 70
apply to persons in Agreement States possessing greater than
critical mass quantities as defined in 10 CFR 150.11. Pursuant to
10 CFR 70.17(a), ``the Commission may . . . . grant such
exemptions from the requirements of the regulations in this part
as it determines are authorized by law and will not endanger life
or property or the common defense and security and are otherwise
in the public interest.'' By previous Orders, Envirocare of Utah,
LLC was exempted from certain NRC regulations and was permitted,
under specified conditions, to possess waste containing SNM in
greater quantities than specified in 10 CFR part 150, at its LLW
disposal facility located in Clive, Utah, without obtaining an
NRC license pursuant to 10 CFR part 70. The first such Order was
published in the Federal Register on May 21, 1999 (64 FR 27826).
The most recent revision to this Order was published in the
[[Page 34166]] Federal Register on August 1, 2005 (70 FR 44123).
The modified Order set forth below reflects the change in company
name from Envirocare of Utah, LLC to EnergySolutions, LLC. No
other substantive changes to the August 1, 2005 Order have been
made.
The exemption conditions would be revised as follows.
III. Modified Order 1. For waste with no more than 20 weight
percent of materials listed in Condition 2, concentrations of SNM
in individual waste containers must not exceed the following
values at time of receipt: Table A
-----------------------------------------------------------------
------- Maximum SNM concentration in waste containing the
described materials (g SNM/g waste)
-------------------------------------- Maximum of 20 SNM nuclide
weight percent of No materials materials listed listed in
in condition 2 condition 2 and no more than 1 weight percent
of beryllium
-----------------------------------------------------------------
------- U-235 (>50%) a................... 6.2E-4
5.4E-4 U-235 (=50%)..................... 6.9E-4
6.1E-4 U-235 (=20%)..................... 8.3E-4
7.4E-4 U-235 (=10%)..................... 9.9E-4
8.8E-4 U-235 (=5%)...................... 1.0E-3
9.6E-4 U-235 (=3%)...................... 1.3E-3
1.1E-3 U-235 (=2%)...................... 1.7E-3
1.5E-3 U-235 (=1.5%).................... 2.3E-3
2.1E-3 U-235 (=1.35%)................... 2.8E-3
2.5E-3 U-235 (=1.2%).................... 3.5E-3
3.2E-3 U-235 (=1.1%).................... 4.5E-3
4.2E-3 U-235 (=1.05%)................... 5.0E-3
4.8E-3 U-233............................ 4.7E-4
4.3E-4 Pu-239........................... 2.8E-4
2.6E-4 Pu-241........................... 2.2E-4
1.9E-4
-----------------------------------------------------------------
------- Percentage value refers to weight percent enrichment in
U-235.
For enrichments that fall between identified values in the table,
the higher value is the applicable value (e.g., for an enrichment
of 14 weight percent U-235, the applicable concentration limit is
that for 20 weight percent U-235).
For waste with more than 20 weight percent of materials listed in
Condition 2, concentrations of SNM in individual waste containers
must not exceed the following values at time of receipt: Table B
-----------------------------------------------------------------
------- Maximum SNM concentration in waste containing the
described materials (g SNM/g waste)
-------------------------------------- Radionuclide Unlimited
Unlimited quantities of quantities of materials listed materials
listed in conditions 2 in condition 2 and 3
-----------------------------------------------------------------
------- U-235 (>50%)..................... 3.4E-4
1.2E-5 U-235............................ N/A
3.1E-4 a U-233............................ 2.9E-4
1.1E-5 Pu-239........................... 1.7E-4
7.5E-6 Pu-241........................... 1.3E-4
5.3E-6
-----------------------------------------------------------------
------- a For uranium at any enrichment with sum of materials
listed in Condition 2 and beryllium not exceeding 45 percent of
the weight of the waste.
Plutonium isotopes other than Pu-239 and Pu-241 do not need to be
considered in demonstrating compliance with this condition. When
mixtures of these SNM isotopes are present in the waste, the
sum-of- the-fractions rule, as illustrated below, should be used.
The concentration values in Condition 1 are operational values to
ensure criticality safety. Where the values in Condition 1 exceed
concentration values in the corresponding conditions of the State
of Utah Radioactive Material License (RML), the concentration
values in the RML, which are averaged over the container, may not
be exceeded. Higher concentration values are included in
Condition 1 to be used in establishing the maximum mass of SNM
for non-homogeneous solid waste and liquid waste.
The measurement uncertainty values should be no more than 15
percent of the concentration limit, and represent the maximum
one-sigma uncertainty associated with the measurement of the
concentration of the particular radionuclide. When determining
the applicable U-235 concentration limit for a specific
enrichment percentage, the analytical uncertainty shall be added
to the result (e.g., for a measurement value of U-235 enrichment
percentage of 1.1 +/-0.2, the U- 235 concentration limit
corresponding to an enrichment percent of 1.35 shall be used).
This shall be applied to analytical methods employed by the
generator prior to receipt and by EnergySolutions upon receipt.
The SNM must be homogeneously distributed throughout the waste.
If the SNM is not homogeneously distributed, then the limiting
concentrations must not be exceeded on average in any contiguous
mass of 600 kilograms of waste.
Liquid waste may be stabilized provided the SNM concentration
does not exceed the SNM concentration limits in Condition 1. For
containers of liquid waste with more than 600 kilograms of waste,
the total mass of SNM shall not exceed the SNM concentration in
Condition 1 times 600 kilograms of waste. Waste containing free
liquids and solids shall be mixed prior to treatment. Any solids
shall be maintained in a suspended state during transfer and
treatment.
2. Except as allowed by Tables A and B in Condition 1, waste must
not contain ``pure forms'' of chemicals containing carbon,
fluorine, magnesium, or bismuth in bulk quantities (e.g., a
pallet of drums, a B- 25 box). By ``pure forms,'' it is meant
that mixtures of the above elements, such as magnesium oxide,
magnesium carbonate, magnesium fluoride, bismuth oxide, etc., do
not contain other elements. These chemicals would be added to the
waste stream during processing, such as at fuel facilities or
treatment such as at mixed waste treatment facilities. The
presence of the above materials will be determined by the
generator, based on process knowledge or testing.
3. Except as allowed by Tables A and B in Condition 1, waste
accepted must not contain total quantities of beryllium,
hydrogenous material enriched in deuterium, or graphite above one
tenth of one percent of the total weight of the waste. The
presence of the above materials will be determined by the
generator, based on process knowledge, physical observations, or
testing. 4 Waste packages must not contain highly water soluble
forms of uranium greater than 350 grams of uranium-235 or 200
grams of uranium-233. The sum of the fractions rule will apply
for mixtures of U-233 and U-235. Highly soluble forms of uranium
include, but are not limited to: Uranium sulfate, uranyl acetate,
uranyl chloride, uranyl formate, uranyl fluoride, uranyl nitrate,
uranyl potassium carbonate, and uranyl sulfate. The presence of
the above materials will be determined by the generator, based on
process knowledge or testing.
5. Waste processing of waste containing SNM will be limited to
stabilization (mixing waste with reagents), micro-encapsulation
and macro-encapsulation using low-density and high-density
polyethylene, macro-encapsulation with cement grout,
spray-washing, organic destruction (CerOx process and Solvent
Electron Technology process), and thermal desorption.
[[Page 34167]] EnergySolutions shall confirm that the SNM
concentration in the rinse water does not exceed the limits in
Condition 1 following spray- washing, prior to further treatment.
If the rinse water is evaporated, the evaporated product shall
comply with the requirements in Condition 1. EnergySolutions
shall perform sampling and analysis of the liquid effluent
collection system at a frequency of one sample per 300 gallons or
when the system reaches capacity, whichever is less.
EnergySolutions shall track the SNM mass of waste treated using
the CerOx process. When the total concentration of SNM is 85
percent of the sum of the fraction rule in Condition 1,
EnergySolutions shall confirm the SNM concentration in the phase
reactor tank and replace the solutions. The 10 percent enriched
limit shall be used for uranium-235. The contents of the phase
reactor tank should be solidified prior to disposal.
When waste is processed using the thermal desorption process and
the Solvent Electron Technology process, EnergySolutions shall
confirm the SNM concentration following processing and prior to
returning the waste to temporary storage.
6. EnergySolutions shall require generators to provide the
following information for each waste stream: Pre-shipment Waste
Description. The description must detail how the waste was
generated, list the physical forms in the waste, and identify
uranium chemical composition.
Waste Characterization Summary. The data must include a general
description of how the waste was characterized (including the
volumetric extent of the waste, and the number, location, type,
and results of any analytical testing), the range of SNM
concentrations, and the analytical results with error values used
to develop the concentration ranges.
Uniformity Description. A description of the process by which the
waste was generated showing that the spatial distribution of SNM
must be uniform, or other information supporting spatial
distribution.
Manifest Concentration. The generator must describe the methods
to be used to determine the concentrations on the manifests.
These methods could include direct measurement and the use of
scaling factors.
The generator must describe the uncertainty associated with
sampling and testing used to obtain the manifest concentrations.
EnergySolutions shall review the above information and, if
adequate, approve in writing this pre-shipment waste
characterization and assurance plan before permitting the
shipment of a waste stream. This will include statements that
EnergySolutions has a written copy of all the information
required above, that the characterization information is adequate
and consistent with the waste description, and that the
information is sufficient to demonstrate compliance with
Conditions 1 through 4. Where generator process knowledge is used
to demonstrate compliance with Conditions 1, 2, 3, or 4,
EnergySolutions shall review this information and determine when
testing is required to provide additional information in assuring
compliance with the Conditions. EnergySolutions shall retain this
information as required by the State of Utah to permit
independent review.
At Receipt EnergySolutions shall require generators of SNM waste
to provide a written certification with each waste manifest that
states that the SNM concentrations reported on the manifest do
not exceed the limits in Condition 1, that the measurement
uncertainty does not exceed the uncertainty value in Condition 1,
and that the waste meets Conditions 2 through 4.
7. Sampling and radiological testing of waste containing SNM must
be performed in accordance with the following: one sample for
each of the first ten shipments of a waste stream; or one sample
for each of the first 100 cubic yards of waste up to 1,000 cubic
yards of a waste stream, and one sample for each additional 500
cubic yards of waste following the first ten shipments or
following the first 1,000 cubic yards of a waste stream. Sampling
and radiological testing of debris waste containing SNM (that is
exempted from sampling by the State of Utah) can be eliminated if
the SNM concentration is lower than one tenth of the limits in
Condition 1. EnergySolutions shall verify the percent enrichment
by appropriate analytical methods. The percent enrichment
determination shall be made by taking into account the most
conservative values based on the measurement uncertainties for
the analytical methods chosen.
8. EnergySolutions shall notify the NRC, Region IV office within
24 hours if any of the above conditions are not met, including if
a batch during a treatment process exceeds the SNM concentrations
of Condition 1. A written notification of the event must be
provided within 7 days.
9. EnergySolutions shall obtain NRC approval prior to changing
any activities associated with the above conditions.
Based on the staff's evaluation, the Commission has determined,
pursuant to 10 CFR 70.17(a), that the exemption of above
activities at the EnergySolutions disposal facility is authorized
by law, and will not endanger life or property or the common
defense and security and is otherwise in the public interest.
Accordingly, by this Order, the Commission grants an exemption
subject to the stated conditions.
The exemption will become effective after the State of Utah has
incorporated the above conditions into EnergySolutions'
radioactive materials license. In addition, at that time, the
Order published on August 1, 2005 will no longer be effective.
Pursuant to the requirements in 10 CFR Part 51, the Commission
has determined that an Environmental Assessment is not required
as the proposed action (change in company name) is administrative
and therefore falls within the categorical exclusion provisions
of 10 CFR 51.22(c)(11). IV. Availability of Documents Documents
related to this action, including the application for amendment
and supporting documentation, will be available electronically at
the NRC's Electronic Reading Room at .
From this site, you can access the NRC's Agencywide Document
Access and Management System (ADAMS), which provides text and
image files of NRC's public documents. The ADAMS accession number
for the document related to this notice is: EnergySolutions'
March 3, 2006 request (ML060740549).
If you do not have access to ADAMS or if there are problems in
accessing the documents located in ADAMS, contact the NRC's
Public Document Room (PDR) Reference staff at 1-800-397-4209,
301-415-4737, or by email to .
These documents may also be viewed electronically on the public
computers located at the NRC's PDR, O 1 F21, One White Flint
North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852. The PDR
reproduction contractor will copy documents for a fee.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland this 30th day of May, 2006.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Jack R. Strosnider, Director, Office of Nuclear Material Safety
and Safeguards.
[FR Doc. E6-9181 Filed 6-12-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
*****************************************************************
31 globeandmail.com: Ontario wants Ottawa to guarantee reactors' costs
POSTED AT 5:29 AM EDT ON 13/06/06
KAREN HOWLETT
From Tuesday's Globe and Mail
TORONTO — The Ontario government has offered Crown corporation
Atomic Energy of Canada first crack at building new nuclear
reactors for the province if Ottawa assumes responsibility for
any cost overruns, sources say.
In unveiling today its long-awaited plan to address the
province's looming electricity crisis, Ontario will include
measures to protect consumers from cost overruns associated with
building new reactors.
As part of that plan, government officials have been in talks
with the federal government about having AECL build the reactors
for a fixed price and by a fixed date, government and industry
sources said. The contract would include penalties for not
meeting these performance guarantees.
The federal government has been involved in the talks because it
would ultimately be on the hook for providing the guarantees as
the sole shareholder of AECL, the government sources said.
Premier Dalton McGuinty's government is looking at the so-called
turnkey operations in the hopes of avoiding the mistakes of past
nuclear projects, which saddled Ontarians with billions of
dollars in debts, the sources said.
AECL has joined forces with four other companies, including GE
Canada and SNC-Lavalin Nuclear, to create Team CANDU and has
pitched a business model to the Ontario government that the
group has used in other markets around the world. The model
includes delivering new nuclear power plants on a turnkey,
fixed-price basis, according to a backgrounder prepared by the
group.
Team CANDU says it has delivered six reactor projects on time
and on budget over the past decade.
Mr. McGuinty told reporters yesterday that the province faces a
severe energy shortfall over the next decade because previous
governments avoided making difficult decisions to address the
widening gap between supply and demand.
"We will not duck this issue," he said. "Governments have done
that in the past and I refuse to do that."
In an interview last month with The Globe and Mail's editorial
board, Mr. McGuinty would not say whether AECL will get the nod
if his government decides to build new nuclear reactors.
"But I can tell you that if we were to go with nuclear, we would
be looking at a turnkey operation," he said. "Don't come to us
with cost overruns. Been there. Done that."
It is no secret that new nuclear reactors are part of the
government's plan to address the province's urgent need for new
sources of electricity. In fact, Mr. McGuinty has signalled
repeatedly in recent months that his government will accept the
advice of the Ontario Power Authority and commit to a
multibillion-dollar nuclear program.
His government's formal response to the OPA's advice includes
refurbishing some of the province's existing fleet of reactors
that were built in the 1970s and 1980s as well as building new
ones, the sources said. The Darlington nuclear station, east of
Toronto, looks to be an ideal site because it has plenty of room
for more reactors, they said.
"I am told I am going to be very happy," John Mutton, mayor of
Clarington, the location of Darlington, said in an e-mail
message yesterday.
But memories of the province's earlier ventures with nuclear
power, including the $20-billion debt from cost overruns and
reactor breakdowns are still fresh in many people's memories.
The last time a new nuclear plant went on line in the province
was 1992. In 1997, Ontario Power Generation took seven of its 19
reactors off line because they weren't up to standard.
In late 2003, the government fired the top three executives of
OPG for botching the restoration of the Unit 4 nuclear reactor
at the Pickering A station, which was years late and millions of
dollars over budget when it came back on line in September of
2003.
Then last August, OPG scrapped plans to restart two other
mothballed reactors at the Pickering A station, saying it wasn't
economically viable to spend $2-billion refurbishing Units 2 and
3.
New Democratic Party Leader Howard Hampton and environmentalists
warned yesterday that the McGuinty government is going down the
wrong path by pursuing nuclear energy instead of more
conservation measures. Shawn-Patrick Stensil of Greenpeace
Canada said Ontarians are still paying debt retirement charges
on their bills for the earlier cost overruns.
"There is no reason to believe the nuclear industry's promise
that it won't happen again," Mr. Stensil said.
With a report from Murray Campbell
globeandmail.com and The Globe and Mail are divisions of Bell
Globemedia Publishing Inc., 444 Front St. W., Toronto, Canada M5V
2S9 Phillip Crawley, Publisher -->
*****************************************************************
32 Scotsman: Blair accused of brushing aside nuclear energy advice
Last updated: 13-Jun-06 00:39 BST
Prime Minister said to be biased towards building new generation
of nuclear plants.
Picture: John Giles/PA
JAMES KIRKUP POLITICAL EDITOR
+ PM accused of going too quickly in rush to authorise nuclear
plants
+ Tony Blair said to have "a very aggressive timetable" for
energy review
+ Despite doubts, new reactors likely to get okay next month
Story in full
TONY Blair has been accused by his own environmental watchdog of
ignoring its recommendations in his rush to authorise a new wave
of nuclear power plants.
The Environment Agency's attack on the Prime Minister also cast
doubt on the financial impact of investing billions of pounds in
a new generation of nuclear reactors.
Officials at the agency, the lead government body for
environmental protection in England, fear the Prime Minister's
energy review is biased towards the nuclear option.
The energy review is intended to reduce the country's use of
fossil fuels, which produce the carbon dioxide scientists say
contributes to global warming, and wean Britain off imported
energy sources such as natural gas.
It will also determine the fate of the British nuclear industry:
all existing reactors will be retired within a decade or so.
Mr Blair last month faced accusations of pre-empting his own
review when he told business leaders at a CBI dinner that
nuclear power was back on the agenda "with a vengeance".
The Environment Agency's submission to the energy review calls
for ministers to be "technology neutral," ensuring that all
types of low-carbon power generation - including nuclear, wind,
wave and solar - face a level financial and political playing
field.
Clive Bates, head of policy at the Environment Agency, yesterday
said the Prime Minister was not taking such a "technology
neutral" approach.
Appearing before MPs at Westminster, Mr Bates was asked if Mr
Blair was reflecting the agency's advice when he gave his speech
to the CBI.
Mr Bates replied: "No, he was not technology neutral. He may not
be listening to our advice."
He added that Mr Blair had set "a very aggressive timetable" for
the energy review.
Mr Bates was giving evidence to the Trade and Industry Committee
of the House of Commons, which is examining the case for new
nuclear power.
As part of that investigation, it also emerged yesterday that
the Environment Agency had warned Mr Blair that the
multi-billion pound investment required for new reactors risked
crowding out investment in renewable energy sources such as wind
and wave power.
"We are concerned about the displacement effect that a large
programme of investment in one capital-intensive technology like
nuclear may have on energy efficiency and renewable technology,"
the agency said in a document submitted to MPs.
The paper also warns the government not to put too much emphasis
on nuclear power, saying: "Nuclear power accounts for 8 per cent
of the UK's primary energy. The success of the energy review
will depend on developing a strategy for the other 92 per cent."
The agency's warning was echoed by Sir Menzies Campbell, the
Liberal Democrat leader, who yesterday told an audience of
business leaders: "Investment in nuclear will discourage
investment in other technologies that could supply capacity."
Also giving evidence to the MPs yesterday, the government's
chief nuclear safety inspector suggested a shortage of qualified
scientists could hamper attempts to ensure safety in an expanded
industry.
Mike Weightman, the chief nuclear inspector at the Health and
Safety Executive, said his agency was having difficulty
recruiting staff with the right skills, and that the situation
was likely to get worse. "I'm not happy with the skills base or
the education base to support the nuclear industry in the
future," Mr Weightman said.
But despite officials' warnings, Downing Street insiders say
there is now no doubt that Mr Blair will next month signal the
building of new reactors.
That may pose a political dilemma for the Scottish Executive,
which is opposed to new nuclear plants in Scotland for the time
being.
Highlands power line 'essential' for renewables target
AMBITIOUS targets to make Scotland the green powerhouse of
Europe will be met only if controversial plans to build giant
pylons across Scotland go ahead, it was claimed yesterday.
Scottish Renewables, the body representing the green industry,
predicts Scotland could meet a Scottish Executive target to
generate 18 per cent of electricity by next year, thanks to a
large increase in the number of wind farms.
By 2020 more than half the country's electricity could come from
renewables due to an increase in new technologies such as tidal
power generation.
However, Maf Smith, chief executive of the group, said expansion
beyond 2010 could not go ahead unless the Beauly to Denny power
line was upgraded to transmit power from marine and wind
generators in the north.
The claims drew anger from campaigners, who say the pylons will
damage the landscape, ruin the tourism industry and endanger
wildlife.
Mr Smith claimed the argument was based on "hard-nosed facts"
from independent organisations and universities.
Scottish Renewables says Scotland is already generating 16 per
cent of energy from renewable sources due to the recent increase
in wind farms, and this would rise to 30 per cent by 2010.
However, Mr Smith said meeting the inflated target of generating
more than half of electricity by 2020 relied on several factors.
Most importantly, Scotland required a stronger grid network to
transmit the energy from the north to the rest of the UK. He
also said the increase relied on improved energy efficiency and
developing new technologies.
Michael Hopkinson, of Highlands Against Pylons, said the Beauly
to Denny line would put 600 giant pylons in some of Scotland's
most important landscape, including national parks, and was not
worth the cost to tourism and nature.
LOUISE GRAY
The article says it all -
Is it not about time the Government itself took a vote of 'No
Confidence' in Mr Tony Blair? Get rid of him before he destroys
Britain totally!
The only agenda which Mr Blair has is HIS OWN! He is not
interested in the views of the people who live in Britain, of
whatever political persuasion - he is only interested in his own
opinions and promoting himself and his hair-brained schemes! Get
Real Mr Blair - and get out!
Keep your hands of Scotland too - we don't want any more Nuclear
Reactors thank you very much! Report as unsuitable 3.
brian, Switzerland / 5:34pm 14 Jun 2006
+
One can only hope that this direction the "soon to be ex" PM is
resisted at all levels and that the re-emergence of the
anti-nuclear movement is resurrected "with vengence".
Hopeless short-termism and immoral support for big, cumbersome
anti-humanity business.
I for one will be marching as this politician/big business led
move picks up speed. Report as unsuitable 4. Cecily /
7:31pm 14 Jun 2006
+
I think Blair is governing Britain in the best interests of the
United States,(Bush).There is a website to impeach him at
www.impeachblair.orgThis could be done without waiting for
another election.Nuclear power is not "fossil fuel free".Does
Blair think the thousands of tons of uranium ore climbs out of
the mine,twenty four hours a day, seven days a week,crushes
itself, extracts itself, enriches itself, loads itself on trains
and ships, and travels to the nuclear power station ALL BY
ITSELF? Report as unsuitable
5. R. Duncan, Seattle WA USA / 9:50pm 14 Jun 2006 +
Let's see. Nuclear energy for the UK & US? Ok. Nuclear weapons
for the UK & the US (and Israel)? Ok.
Nuclear energy and/or weapons for Iran? NOT OK!
Why? Because Iran is the designated crazy "bad guys" and might
do something like attack someone for no reason.
Who has attacked someone for no reason? Oh yea, THE US & THE UK
invaded Iraq!!!!!!! Who has threatened Iran? The UK & the US! The
hypocrisy makes me puke. I say BAN ALL NUCLEAR WEAPONS AND
ENERGY!! That solves it all. Report as unsuitable Add your
comment To post a comment you will first need to log in or
register. RSS feed of this article's comments Nuclear
energy
©2006 Scotsman.com| contact
*****************************************************************
33 KTVB.COM: Senators get update on nuclear reactor
Boise Idaho News,
10:24 AM MDT on Tuesday, June 13, 2006
Associated Press
IDAHO FALLS -- Senator Larry Craig remains optimistic about a
prototype nuclear reactor being developed at the Idaho National
Laboratory.
He was among lawmakers on the Senate's Energy & Natural
Resources Committee who were briefed on the progress of the
project.
It's getting $40 million this year, though some estimates have
put the pricetag at up to $2 billion over the next decade.
Right now, scientists are selecting a preferred design for the
new nuclear reactor they hope will be safer and produce less
radioactive waste than current reactors -- plus yield commercial
quantities of hydrogen along with electricity.
Craig says he looks forward to cutting the ribbon on the first
plant.
[KTVB.COM - Idaho's #1 website since 1995] [KTVB News Group]
2004, 2005 &2006 Edward R. Murrow award winner for best regional
website
2001, 2003, 2004 & 2005 Idaho Press Club General Excellence
award
©2006 KTVB-TV
*****************************************************************
34 Telegraph: Nuclear chief resigns and could join suitors for BNG
By Katherine Griffiths, City Correspondent
(Filed: 13/06/2006)
Dipesh Shah, chief executive of the UK Atomic Energy Authority,
has announced his resignation from the Government-owned nuclear
business.
Mr Shah, who has been in the post since November 2003, could now
form an alliance with one of the companies from around the world
vying to buy Britain's nuclear companies from the Government and
to win decommissioning work on ageing nuclear power stations.
[Dipesh Shah]
It is possible that Mr Shah could join up with the US company
CH2M HILL to make an offer for British Nuclear Group, which the
Government is keen to sell by next autumn.
Mr Shah, who worked his way up the BP empire, made a statement
yesterday saying he would leave UKAEA in November, when his
current three-year contract comes to an end. He refused to
comment on whether he was interested in joining CH2M HILL in a
possible bid for BNG. "I will not respond to specific situations
but I will look to take on a broader range of roles in the
engineering and environmental arenas and undoubtedly nuclear
will continue to be a strong interest," Mr Shah said.
Earlier this year, Mr Shah explored a possible management buyout
of UKAEA, which manages the clean-up of several sites, including
Dounreay, Harwell and Winfrith.
However, while the Government wants to privatise or sell
Britain's nuclear assets, it is understood that ministers were
not keen on a buyout of UKAEA. One of the reasons for this is
thought to be that it did not want UKAEA then to bid for BNG as
that would have created a monopoly in the decomissioning market.
Since May 2004, UKAEA's chairman has been Lady Barbara Thomas
Judge, the high profile American who is married to Sir Paul
Judge, millionaire philanthropist and former Premier Brands
boss. Lady Judge and Mr Shah are understood to have had an
uneasy working relationship.
Mr Shah said: "Some people are good chairman. Some people are
not", but he added that "boardroom tittle-tattle is not an
issue" in determing his departure from UKAEA. Otherwise I would
be leaving tomorrow and not in five months' time," he said.
Lady Judge said in a statement: "I want to be first to thank
Dipesh for his important contribution to UKAEA's development and
for his leadership of our executive team now poised to make
UKAEA a major player in the international nuclear clean-up
market."
© Copyright of Telegraph Group Limited 2006. | Terms &
*****************************************************************
35 icNorthWales: Nuclear plant cancer shock
Jun 13 2006
By Eryl Crump, Daily Post
A CANCER sufferer called for action last night amid claims
levels in women living near a nuclear power station were more
than 15 times the national average.
The shocking results of a study carried out around the former
Trawsfynydd station were analysed by an environmental scientist
who declared the cancer rates "alarmingly high".
The figures were based on a face to face survey in Gwynedd
villages Llan Ffestiniog, Gellilydan and Cwm Prysor. Researchers
quizzed almost 1,000 people of all ages living in the three
communities close to the closed-down power plant.
The questionnaire asked about cancer within the targeted
households during 1996 to 2005. Their answers were then assessed
by Dr Chris Busby - a director with environmental consultancy
Green Audit.
The survey results are being broadcast on S4C's Y Byd ar Bedwar
programme tonight. Dr Busby said: "I would describe the last
three years as showing a meltdown in the situation in that area.
He added: "It's a really alarmingly high level of cancer. We have
the names and addresses of all the people involved, others can go
and speak with them."
The study found that among women under 50 rates of all cancer
were more than 15 times the national average. Breast cancer
levels in women aged 50 to 61 were five times the average level
for women of that age, according to the results.
Other cancers found included prostate and pancreatic cancer,
leukaemia and mesothelioma. One cancer sufferer is Coun Linda Ann
Jones, who represents the village on Gwynedd County Council.
She said: "Many villagers have often wondered whether radiation
from the nuclear power station is responsible for cancer levels
in the area.
"But up until now nobody has undertaken a conclusive study to
establish whether the rates are actually higher than normal."
The Welsh Cancer Intelligence and Surveillance Unit collate
cancer figures for the whole of Wales but have never published a
breakdown for small areas.
Unit director Dr John Steward last night questioned the
methodology used and said that the results were likely to be
biased by the way it was done.
He said: "It was obtained from door to door and therefore depends
on co-operation which will be higher in those with cases in the
family. It is based on self-reports which are not confirmed by
medical records."
But Dr Busby is adamant his conclusions should be taken
seriously. Trawsfynydd Power Station stopped operating in 1991
and is now being decommissioned.
A spokesman for British Nuclear Group Reactor Sites, who are now
responsible for the site, said: "Dis-charges from Trawsfynydd
have always been strictly controlled and monitored with limits
set by relevant regulators to ensure protection of public health.
Trawsfynydd has always operated within those limits."
Former environment minister Michael Meacher has described the
findings as a " sensational development".
A report analysing the questionnaire returns can be found on
www.llrc.org/traws.htm
* Y Byd ar Bedwar is broadcast at 8.25pm on S4C (with English
subtitles available).
erylcrump@dailypost.co.uk
*****************************************************************
36 Viewpoint: Nuclear power: promise or peril
Issue Date: June 16, 2006
It's all that stands between us and environmental disaster
By JOHN O'NEILL
Americans should be most grateful that we have a readily
available, economical, safe, environmentally friendly source of
electrical power from nuclear plants to help avert the global
warming that presents such potential disaster for our fragile
planet.
That's not the usual message in the media, which often give
airtime or newsprint to some perceived dire safety hazard or
other promoted by antinuclear groups to clueless reporters.
So let's take a look at the record. In 50 years there have been
no deaths from radiation exposure from nuclear plants in this
country. None. That's 3,100 reactor years of operation over 50
years. Add 5,500 reactor years of operation by the nuclear Navy.
None. Sixty years of transportation of nuclear materials. Still
none. And, yes, the industry has safely managed its waste and
will continue to do so.
Three Mile Island was a serious and expensive accident 27 years
ago, but no one was killed or injured. The upshot was that
companies with nuclear plants beefed up training and safety
procedures. The Chernobyl reactor was very different from the
technology used in American plants, had no thick containment
building to hold in radiation like plants in the rest of the
world, and had poorly trained operators. A similar accident in
this country is impossible.
The remarkable safety record of American nuclear power plants is
no accident. Nuclear plant design, construction and operation are
closely regulated by federal agencies. Scrupulous nuclear plant
owners established training institutions to ensure that personnel
are superbly prepared.
However, the primary reason that nuclear power is poised for a
renaissance is not its outstanding safety record but global
warming caused by coal and natural gas plants. If nuclear plants
aren't built, coal or natural gas plants will be needed to meet
the planet's insatiable demand for electricity. There aren't any
alternatives for large-scale electricity production and won't be
any for decades.
In the United States, 600 coal plants produce about 50 percent of
electricity; 103 nuclear plants produce about 20 percent; natural
gas, about 19 percent; hydroelectric, about six percent; oil,
three percent; and all other sources including solar, biomass and
wind, less than 3 percent.
Carbon dioxide emissions from the electric power sector
represented 39 percent of total U.S. energy-related emissions in
2004, with coal alone accounting for one-third. To our disgrace,
nearly 9 percent of global carbon dioxide emissions, the worst
culprit in global warming, come from U.S. fossil power plants.
Nuclear power produces no greenhouse gases. None. To meet new
electrical demand with coal and gas production while the polar
icecaps melt and sea levels rise, deserts expand and increasing
hurricanes and cyclones churn through the oceans is nuts.
The Department of Energy projects a need for 45 percent more
electricity in the United States by 2030. China, India, Russia
and others are racing to join the developed world, and their
needs for electricity will be staggering.
Some leaders in the environmental arena who once fought nuclear
power have changed their views. "Nuclear energy may be the energy
source that can save our planet from another possible disaster:
catastrophic climate change," said Patrick Moore, cofounder of
Greenpeace. He said "the rest of the environmental movement needs
to update its views."
"There is no sensible alternative to nuclear power if we are to
sustain civilization," said James Lovelock, the famed British
scientist and environmentalist who proposed the Gaia Hypothesis
that the Earth is a single organism.
Sad to say, 27 new nuclear plants are under construction in 11
countries, but none in the United States.
That will change. A 2005 poll shows that 70 percent of Americans
support building more nuclear plants, and 76 percent living near
nuclear plants are willing to see a new reactor built near them.
Congress included incentives for expansion of nuclear power in
the Energy Policy Act of 2005. As many as 12 to 19 new plants may
be ordered in the next three years, according to the Nuclear
Energy Institute in Washington.
One big loose end remains: permanent nuclear waste disposal. Used
fuel is temporarily and safely stored at reactor sites. In 2002
the president and Congress, in a bipartisan vote, approved Yucca
Mountain, Nev., for permanent storage. At Yucca Mountain, fuel
rods will be stored in canisters 1,000 feet below ground in a
remote desert area that has been geologically stable for millions
of years. The selection of Yucca Mountain follows two decades of
analysis by thousands of respected scientists representing dozens
of reputable organizations, at a cost of $9 billion. The site
will meet stringent federal standards.
Nuclear power is the only industry since the industrial
revolution that has managed and accounted for all its waste,
preventing environmental damage, said the Nuclear Energy
Institute.
Clearly, the poisoning of the earth by greenhouse gases has been
exacerbated because of misguided fears of nuclear power.
Said John Ritch, former U.S. ambassador to the International
Atomic Energy Agency: "Humankind cannot conceivably achieve a
global clean-energy revolution without a rapid expansion of
nuclear power to generate electricity."
John O'Neill is a former newspaper reporter and retired social
worker who wrote for the Atomic Industrial Forum, the nuclear
industry's trade association, from 1975 to 1983.
Failed technology has no part in energy plans of the future
By MICHAEL MARIOTTE
On May 26, 1958, President Dwight D. Eisenhower stood on a podium
and flipped a switch that ushered in the nuclear power age. By
turning on the Shippingport, Pa., nuclear power reactor, the
first commercial atomic reactor in the United States, President
Eisenhower made a giant stride toward his goal of "Atoms for
Peace" and energy independence for the country. Or so he thought.
Today, President George W. Bush has become enamored of the same
technology that captivated President Eisenhower. But with some 50
years of experience of safety failures, cost overruns, security
threats and unsolvable radioactive waste problems, President Bush
has much less justification.
The president would have us believe that nuclear power is the
future. With the reprocessing of radioactive waste, he says we
could have a limitless supply of nuclear fuel that can produce
hydrogen for future vehicles and electricity for "plug-in"
hybrids in the meantime. His version of atomic power would
produce electricity without greenhouse gas emissions. Then, he
says, we can declare independence from the bad Saudis, or
Venezuelans, or whoever the current oil boogeyman happens to be.
In fact, President Bush would bring us back to the 1950s - back
to an obsolete atomic technology with drawbacks that, since the
beginning, have outweighed whatever benefits it may once have
offered.
Give President Bush credit for this: He has identified the
problem correctly, or at least part of the problem. The United
States is addicted to oil, and that has to stop for the sake of
energy independence and the survival of the planet.
But the United States is also addicted to other greenhouse gas
emitters like coal, nuclear power and natural gas. It is way past
time that we move toward an energy policy that will reduce
greenhouse emissions while providing us with the energy we need
to heat and cool our homes and offices, to keep our beer cold and
our dinners hot, and for transportation.
President Bush's energy policy would not do that. It's too timid,
too reliant on the same big oil, big nuclear, big coal interests
that got us into this jam in the first place. Far from being
forward-thinking, it's a throwback to a futuristic vision from
the 1950s that never came about.
An energy policy for the 21st century would start with a simple
axiom: Do less harm to the earth while providing for our energy
needs.
As an obvious first step, one that President Bush has avoided, we
need to increase vehicle mileage standards. There is no other
action that the government could take that would more effectively
reduce oil imports and reduce greenhouse gas emissions at the
same time. A president who truly believed we are "addicted to
oil" would make this a centerpiece of his energy policy.
The next step is to focus our limited research and development
dollars on technologies that actually can succeed both at
providing energy and reducing emissions. Those technologies are
solar power, wind power, geothermal, and yes, in the future,
green hydrogen - hydrogen produced by renewable resources. We
also need to pursue distributed energy systems, to reduce
reliance on large power plants of any kind. When a 1,000-megawatt
nuclear plant goes down for refueling or repairs, another 1,000
megawatts of standby power needs to be there to replace it. With
a distributed energy system of numerous smaller-scale electrical
generators, expensive backup power is no longer needed.
Nuclear power plays no role in an effective energy policy for the
21st century. The epitome of 20th-century technological arrogance
and overkill, nuclear power has yet to solve any of the problems
that have plagued it from the beginning: safety, economics and
radioactive waste. And in the 21st century, nuclear power poses a
unique new threat as a terrorist target like no other.
Conversely, what terrorist would bother knocking down a windmill?
President Bush's recent embrace of reprocessing as a solution for
radioactive waste disposal is emblematic of the failures of
nuclear power. More than 50 years into the nuclear age, no nation
in the world has yet found an acceptable solution for handling
radioactive waste. In the United States, progress on opening the
proposed Yucca Mountain, Nev., nuclear waste site has deservedly
slowed to a crawl. Choosing reprocessing of nuclear fuel - a
dirty, dangerous, expensive endeavor spurned by the industry
itself - is more an admission that our radioactive waste programs
have failed than a real alternative. The terrible failures of
reprocessing in France and the United Kingdom, not to mention
failed efforts to build a "fast" reactor to take full advantage
of reprocessing, should be a red flag to the United States that
this path just won't work.
Moreover, the initial $250 million President Bush is requesting
for this program is the proverbial tip of the iceberg.
Implementation of a commercial-scale reprocessing program would
cost tens of billions of dollars and send electricity rates
soaring.
Our energy path forward is clear, but George Bush the oilman
still doesn't get it: We need to invest in sustainable energy
technologies and vastly increased energy efficiency. President
Bush took a first step by admitting our oil addiction. Now the
rest of us will have to bypass his 50-year-old program and
instead embrace those energy solutions that offer a future, not
more of the failed programs of the past.
Michael Mariotte is the executive director of the Nuclear
Information and Resource Service in Washington.
National Catholic Reporter, June 16, 2006
Copyright © The National Catholic Reporter Publishing Company,
115 E. Armour Blvd., Kansas City, MO 64111 All rights reserved.
TEL: 816-531-0538 FAX: 1-816-968-2280 Send comments about
this Web site to: webkeeper@natcath.org
*****************************************************************
37 NEWS.com.au: Pipe ruptures at Sydney N-reactor
(14-06-2006)
From: AAP
A PIPE inside a radioactive hot cell at Sydney's Lucas Heights
nuclear reactor has ruptured, halting the production of an
isotope used in medical procedures.
The small pipe at the Australian Nuclear Science and Technology
Organisation (ANSTO) reactor ruptured on Thursday, ANSTO
spokesman Craig Pierce said today.
"There is absolutely no radiation threat to the health of ANSTO
workers or the community," Mr Pierce said.
"Only one worker was in the vicinity of the incident, but after
examination he has been found not to have received any radiation
dose.
"No measurable contamination was found outside the immediate
area where the incident occurred, and there are no off-site
consequences."
An investigation into the cause of the rupture is due to report
in a couple of weeks.
The rupture occurred at a key stage in the production process of
medical isotopes used in nuclear medicine scans of bones and
organs.
As a result of the rupture, there will be a shortage of the
radiopharmaceutical technetium-99m over the next week which will
affect some, but not all, scheduled nuclear medicine procedures
in Australia.
Production at the site of another radio pharmaceutical, which
can be used for some heart imaging, has been increased.
Isotope imports will also help meet demand.
Production of technetium-99m would recommence once the
investigation was completed and the problem fixed, Mr Pierce
said.
*****************************************************************
38 TIME Pacific Magazine: Plugging in to Nuclear --
Jun. 19, 2006
As some greens learn to love atomic power, Australia weighs
whether to use its abundant uranium at home
ILLUSTRATION FOR TIME BY CHRISTOPHER NIELSEN
Monday, Jun. 12, 2006
For many Australians, nuclear power brings to mind glowing
earth and mutant babies. State and federal laws ban nuclear
development, more than 100 municipalities are self-declared
"nuclear free zones," and not a kilowatt of the nation's
electricity comes from uranium. But in Europe, Asia and North
America, millions of people live near nuclear reactors with no
more fuss than if they were grain silos. And fueling many of
those reactors is Australian uranium.
As familiarity displaces fear overseas, rising demand for
electricity and concerns about the environmental costs of
getting it from coal and gas are prompting many Australians to
rethink their prejudice against nuclear power. Physicist Martin
Sevior, who led a recent study of the issue at the University of
Melbourne, believes "there is a credible case for nuclear power
plants," provided Australia adopts lessons learned elsewhere.
According to zoologist Tim Flannery, whose book The Weather
Makers calls for urgent action on climate change, if Australia
replaced all of its coal-fired plants with nuclear ones, "we
would have done something great for the world."
Saying "we need to be open minded and forward looking enough to
at least examine" the nuclear question, Prime Minister John
Howard last week asked a panel of experts to do just that. But
the Labor Party and most environmental groups insist the only
right answer on nuclear is no. "No nuclear power in Australia.
That's our position," said Opposition Leader Kim Beazley, who
wants more effort put into solar, wind and clean-coal
technologies. With the debate set to generate a lot more heat
before it's over, here's a brief look at the issues that fuel
it.
Environment. Nuclear power's image makeover began when James
Lovelock—the British scientist whose "Gaia" theory likens the
Earth to a living organism—declared nuclear power "the only
green solution" to the world's energy needs. The coal-fired
power plants that generate 80% of Australia's electricity
produce huge quantities of carbon dioxide, which bears much of
the blame for global warming. Nuclear plants produce almost no
CO2. According to the csiro, replacing three of Australia's 24
coal plants with nuclear ones would cut carbon emissions from
power generation by almost 20%.
New technologies will soon make it possible to burn coal—of
which Australia has a 300-year supply—with a minimal release of
carbon dioxide. Victoria, Queensland and the federal government
have pledged almost $A1 billion to develop these technologies,
which could make coal-fired plants as greenhouse-friendly as
nuclear ones.
Opponents of nuclear power say no power source is as clean as
wind, sun and tides, and that these should be the focus of
energy planning. Nuclear advocates point out that reactors are
compact and don't require damming rivers or defacing rural
landscapes. For the same output, they say, a solar panel array
or wind farm would need 200-500 times as much land as an average
coal or nuclear plant. Also, because wind-farm and solar outputs
fluctuate, they must be backed up by coal, hydro or nuclear
power.
Safety. The world has 440 nuclear power stations, some of which
have been in operation for 50 years. In that time there have
been two dozen accidents. The only one that resulted in public
deaths or illness was the catastrophe at Chernobyl, Ukraine, in
1986, which caused some 100 deaths and 4,000 cancer cases.
Nuclear advocates say that plant would never have met
international standards, and that the lessons of past mishaps
make today's reactors safer than ever. Visiting Australia last
week, Greenpeace founder Patrick Moore told ABC Radio: "Within
10 miles of U.S. nuclear reactors, 80% of the people support the
reactor, because they have seen it operating for 10, 20, 30
years without any incident." A recent study by the Australian
Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation (ansto) found that
harm to public health from a nuclear plant would be
"negligible."
Waste disposal. Nuclear plants produce radioactive waste, which
must be carefully shielded and stored. According to Melbourne
University's Sevior, "the amount of waste that comes out of a
typical [nuclear] plant is around 30 tonnes a year. The amount
of waste that comes out of a coal-fired power plant is around
1,000 tonnes a day." Used fuel rods can be reprocessed into new
fuel, reducing the volume of waste that needs to be stored by
over 90%; turning the waste into synthetic rock reduces this
even further. If it's not reprocessed, this high-level waste
stays toxic for 1,000 years or more. Nuclear opponents say
storage is a serious problem and that existing facilities are
almost full. France, Sweden, Finland and the U.S. have built or
are planning long-term storage vaults deep underground; former
Prime Minister Bob Hawke has said that Australia, with "the
safest geological formations in the world," should consider
building similar facilities. Nuclear opponents say no form of
storage will ever be truly safe.
Mining and enrichment. Australia has abundant uranium—one-third
of the world's known reserves—but Labor policy limits the number
of mines to three. Some Labor M.P.s. are urging change. Said
Shadow Revenue Minister Joel Fitzgibbon: "It makes no sense to
sit on those reserves and deny ourselves valuable income."
Rising prices for uranium exploration stocks suggest that the
market believes restrictions will end. But uranium can't be used
for power generation until it's enriched. Australia has no
enrichment facility. Even some opponents of nuclear power say it
should build one, since enrichment could add millions of dollars
a tonne to the value of uranium exports.
Cost. The two sides differ on how to compare the costs of
nuclear and other power. Nuclear plants are hugely expensive to
build: an average-sized plant costs about $A2.5 billion. But
they need very little fuel—uranium yields up to 1 million times
as much energy as the same quantity of coal. The ansto study
found that, taking waste management costs into account, nuclear
power from an advanced plant "is cheaper than generating it from
coal or a [clean coal] station."
Unlike its uranium, Australia's fossil fuel reserves underpin
huge domestic industries. Opponents say nuclear power would put
thousands of jobs at risk. It's largely for economic reasons
that the premiers of New South Wales, Victoria and Queensland
have vowed not to lift their states' nuclear bans. Queensland
Nationals Senator Barnaby Joyce agreed: "I can't see the logic
of promoting competition to my state's major export."
Public opinion. Australians remain wary of nuclear power. A
Newspoll early this month found that 51% opposed building nuclear
power stations and 38% supported it. In the end, it's likely to
be popular feeling, rather than hard-nosed argument, that decides
whether Australia says nuclear or no.
From the Jun. 19, 2006 issue of TIME Pacific Magazine
Copyright © 2006 Time Inc. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
39 UPI: Nuke workers' ID theft unknown for a year
United Press International - NewsTrack -
6/13/2006 2:26:00 PM -0400
Newstrack: Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman Jr. has pulled
ALBUQUERQUE, N.M., June 13 (UPI) -- The theft of personnel
records of some 1,500 National Nuclear Security Administration
workers went undetected for a year, the Albuquerque Journal
reports.
The information was stolen by hackers from an NNSA computer at
Kirtland Air Force Base in New Mexico in 2004, but wasn't
discovered until last fall, and only made public Friday in a
congressional hearing.
NNSA spokesman Anson Franklin offered no reason for the delay,
but said senior agency managers were notifying affected workers.
"It's clear that we waited too long," Franklin said.
Marc Rotenberg, executive director of the Electronic Information
and Privacy Center in Washington said there is no law requiring
federal agencies to notify affected workers, although the
agencies are vulnerable to lawsuits if their identities are
used.
Officials said no classified nuclear weapons information was
taken when the personal records were.
© Copyright 2006 United Press International, Inc. All Rights
Reserved
*****************************************************************
40 Guardian Unlimited: Hearings Set for Proposed Biodefense Lab
From the Associated Press
[UP]
Tuesday June 13, 2006 10:31 AM
By SCOTT LINDLAW Associated Press Writer
SAN FRANCISCO (AP) - To the Bush administration, a biodefense
lab designed to test lethal agents including HIV, plague and
anthrax is vital to national security. But area residents have
visions of a biodisaster, and warn an accident could kill
thousands.
Years of legal wrangling were to culminate Tuesday when the 9th
U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals hears arguments about whether the
Department of Homeland Security should be permitted to open the
lab at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, about 50 miles
east of San Francisco.
The new facility would test some of the deadliest toxins known
to man in simulations of terrorist attacks. Construction is
complete, and the facility is set to open by August, said John
Belluardo, spokesman for the Department of Energy's National
Nuclear Security Administration.
Its actual mission is a matter of some dispute.
Opponents, citing government documents, said in court filings it
would ``aerosolize'' the bioagents ``in order to speed the
efficiency by which they could kill and spread disease.'' And if
the agents escaped into the air, it could be catastrophic,
killing hundreds or thousands, they say.
``If these bioagents are released into the environment in
significant quantities, they could cause massive human mortality
within the densely populated San Francisco Bay Area,'' the
opponents wrote in their court brief. That scenario was ``never
modeled nor considered'' by the Bush administration in its
safety assessments, the opponents say.
The lab sits in a region under which several faults lurk, and
the lawsuit warns an earthquake could trigger the release of
potentially deadly agents in the densely populated East Bay
region near San Francisco. Some 7 million people live in the
broader bay area.
Spokesmen for the government and Lawrence Livermore don't
dispute the lab would produce airborne pathogens. But they
firmly deny that advancing biological weapons is the facility's
aim, pointing out the United States signed the 1975 Biological
and Toxin Weapons Convention, a treaty that banned the
development, production and stockpiling of bioweapons.
And, they say, the Department of Energy's environmental
assessment found no serious risk of an accident.
The facility ``will significantly improve the nation's ability
to detect and respond to the threat of terrorism using
biological agents,'' the Department of Energy said in its court
brief. A court order blocking it ``would directly and adversely
impact the national security,'' the administration said.
The facility would test the agents, which could also include
hantavirus, influenza, hepatitis, Q fever, brucellis, herpes and
salmonella, among others, on live animals.
Two groups representing area residents and other project
opponents, Tri-Valley CARES and Nuclear Watch New Mexico, asked
a federal court to block the project in 2003. Their lawsuit
argued the Energy Department failed to follow the provisions of
the National Environmental Policy Act by moving ahead without a
full environmental impact review.
The lawsuit also argued that the Energy Department, which began
research on the site before the Department of Homeland Security
took it over, failed to comply with the Freedom of Information
Act by failing to turn over certain documents to the groups.
A federal district court judge sided with the Bush
administration in 2004, saying the administration had not
violated the two federal laws. The project's foes appealed,
saying the lower court had improperly excluded critical evidence
and wrongly interpreted the National Environmental Policy Act.
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
41 Platts: Illinois governor signs radioactive release reporting bill
Washington (Platts)--12Jun2006
An Illinois state law requiring reporting of radioactive releases
has been signed by Democratic Governor Rod Blagojevich, his
office said Sunday in a statement.
Effective immediately, House Bill 1620 requires nuclear
plants to "report releases of radioactive contaminants into the
soil, surface water or ground water to the state of Illinois"
within 24 hours and mandates quarterly inspections by the state's
environmental protection and emergency management agencies at
each of the state's six nuclear power plants--Braidwood, Byron,
Clinton, Dresden, LaSalle, and Quad Cities--all of which are
owned and operated by Exelon.
"People should not be afraid to drink water from their faucet
or give their children a bath. This new reporting requirement
will give people the information they deserve to know about
whether the water they use is safe," Blagojevich said.
---Steven Dolley, steven_dolley@platts.com For
similar news, take a trial to Platts Nucleonics Week at
Terms & Conditions
Copyright © 2006 - Platts, All Rights Reserved
[The McGraw-Hill Companies]
*****************************************************************
42 DesMoinesRegister.com: Army investigates plant explosion
BY JENNA JOHNSON REGISTER STAFF WRITER
June 13, 2006
An "exhaustive investigation'' has already begun into the
explosion at a southeast Iowa ammunition plant that presumably
killed two workers, still classified as missing, an Army
commander told reporters this afternoon at a news conference in
Middletown.
Technicians from two U.S. Army departments will be supported in
the investigation by the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and
Firearms, Iowa Army Ammunition Plant Commander, Lt. Jack Judy
said.
The blast occurred at around 10:10 a.m. Monday, Judy said,
Damage was concentrated around a collapsed bay near the plant's
production line one, he added.
Two other employees sustained minor injuries that did not
require treatment, the commander said.
The names of the four employees were not released at news
conference.
The 800 workers at the 19,300-acre Iowa Army Ammunition Plant
build missile warheads, tank ammunition, artillery rounds and
demolition charges.
The facility's last reported explosion - in March 2005 - ignited
a small fire but did not cause any injuries.
The last time there were fatalities at the plant was in 1968
when five people died, Judy.
Monday's blast destroyed a bay extending from the plant's main
building and damaged a wood wall near the bay's front. The main
building sustained some damage, and other adjacent bays were not
affected.
Judy said no one else at the site was injured because the
building where the plast took place "was designed to focus the
blast in a specific direction.''
On Monday, residents of Middletown, a community of 535, and
surrounding communities expressed shock and confusion to what
happened, but they knew little, saying only that they heard it
left "a crater as big as a house" inside the large,
high-security facility.
Middletown resident Mike Brown, 44, remembers fishing in ponds
at the plant when his grandparents farmed land on the plant's
30-square mile property before it was declared secure. He also
vaguely remembers other explosions.
"You'll be sitting here sometimes during the middle of the day
and you'll hear a big 'kaboom' and a shock wave," he said. "You
always wonder what happened."
The Burlington Fire Department, which provides ambulance service
to nearby Middletown, was not dispatched. The plant has its own
fire department.
Middletown City Councilman Charles Shirkey said the blast will
not only impact what is one of Des Moines County's largest
employers, but the communities from which many employees come to
work.
"Everybody hates to hear about something like this, even if it's
not somebody you know personally," he said. "It's still somebody
that has friends and family."
The Middletown plant once housed a secret federal nuclear
weapons program, which was revealed after many former workers
developed cancer. In 1975, production of nuclear weapons was
transferred to Amarillo, Texas.
In 2005, 364 former nuclear workers and surviving families were
approved to receive $150,000 from the government for each
employee made ill from working at the plant.
Line 1, in the building where the explosion happened, is where
the nuclear testing was performed before it returned to
producing conventional ammunition, former employees said.
"It's a dangerous business to be in; they take the greatest
safety precautions of anything else, but things happen," said
Robert Anderson of Wheaton, Ill., a former employee of the plant
who was among those compensated.
"You're working with the most dangerous substances known to
mankind; things go bang, and some things happen.''
Paula Graham of Fort Madison, a former employee of the plant
whose sister, also a former employee, died of cancer at age 25,
heard about Monday morning's explosion but was unaware that two
people were killed.
During her stint at the plant between the Korean and Vietnam
wars, explosions weren't rare, she said. "It's kind of like the
front lines of some places," she said. "I used to say the
soldiers weren't the only casualties of the war. People here,
just like the soldiers, are affected."
This article includes information from the Associated Press
Copyright © 2006, The Des Moines Register.
*****************************************************************
43 Idaho Statesman: Downwinders rail at government
06-14-2006
Rally participants demand cancelation of planned Nevada explosion
Darin Oswald / Idaho Statesman
Melvin A. Griffith, 74, gets help from his son, Melvin R.
Griffith, after attending the Idaho downwinders rally in Emmett
Sunday. The elder Griffith has leukemia. Cancer has claimed nine
members of the Griffith family.
Additional Images Darin Oswald / Idaho Statesman
Erin Johnson of Boise grew up in Emmett with her family, which
has lost three members to various forms of cancer. Idaho
downwinders held a rally at the Emmett City Park in Emmett
Sunday. Downwinders are convinced that fallout from nuclear
testing in the Nevada desert is the root of the health problems
many people in Gem County have been experiencing for decades.
EMMETT Downwinders told their stories with tears and breaking
voices at a rally in Emmett on Sunday, but the prevailing
emotion was anger at the government.
"We've been nice," said Doris Pattenger of Eagle after telling
the crowd that nuclear testing had damaged the health of 13 of
her family members. "Now we need to get mad."
"Yeah, hit 'em where it hurts!" an audience member shouted to
enthusiastic applause.
Tom Gatfield used his turn at the open microphone in Emmett City
Park to add that, "if we can't get our representatives to stop
being lieutenants to the executive branch, we need to replace
them even if it means voting for the other party."
About 80 people attended the rally to repeat the call for
federal compensation for Idaho's downwinders and demand that the
"divine strake," a massive non-nuclear explosion planned for
this month in Nevada but postponed, be canceled. They fear the
explosion could kick up existing radioactivity in the soil,
potentially repeating the scenario that created downwinders
people who contracted cancer as a result of nuclear bomb testing
in Nevada in the 1950s and '60s.
More than $440 million in compensation has been paid to
downwinders and their survivors in Nevada, Utah and Arizona, but
none to downwinders in Idaho. Four counties in Idaho Gem,
Blaine, Custer and Lemhi ranked in the nation's top five in
having the highest per capita thyroid dosage of radiation, Sen.
Mike Crapo said in a speech last year.
Patricia Cluff, who grew up on a dairy farm near Emmett, spoke
of drinking fresh milk, picking and eating cherries and washing
dirt from the windows after rainstorms, never knowing she was
being exposed to radioactivity. She, her siblings and her
children have had such a high incidence of cancer, she said,
that the University of Connecticut is doing a study on them.
"When I heard they were going to do another test, it made me
absolutely sick not for myself but for my grandchildren," she
said.
Event organizer Tona Henderson said the government "created
generations of downwinders, and now they're trying to do it
again. We don't want to be their lab rats."
Joanne Torrez of Boise said she had lost two downwinder aunts
and an uncle, and several friends in Blaine County. She is
fighting lymphoma herself.
Peter Rickards of Twin Falls said it was his understanding that
"they'll only do the test in Nevada when the wind is blowing
north. They're not going to do it when it's blowing toward Las
Vegas. Or Washington, D.C."
New Jersey native Lee Rigdon, who has spent the last 12 years in
Idaho, said she learned she was a downwinder when she saw a map
in Henderson's Emmett shop. Rigdon's former home in New Jersey
was in a fallout zone. She's had breast cancer and ovarian
cancer, she said, and her mother, daughter and granddaughter
have also been victims.
"Now they want to do it again and create another 60 years of
death, devastation and illness," she said. "We can't let this
happen again."
*****************************************************************
44 Times Argus: 'Atomic veterans' from earlier in era seek compensation
Vermont News & Information
June 11, 2006
By CORRIE MacLAGGAN Cox News Service
AUSTIN, Texas — After the atomic blasts, Joe Terry followed the
fallout.
In 1958 in Enewetak, an atoll in the Marshall Islands in the
South Pacific, he worked as a chief radarman for the U.S. Navy,
tracking radioactive cloud location and speed.
"Every time it rained, the ship was hotter than a pistol," said
Terry, 75, after telling his story to a federal panel that met
in Austin this week. "We didn't realize what it really was — you
don't feel it.
"But 30 years after, you really feel it. "
Terry, a great-grandfather from near Houston, was one of about
450,000 military personnel and civilians involved in nuclear
tests in Nevada or the Pacific between 1945 to 1962 or who
served in the post-World War II occupation of Hiroshima and
Nagasaki, Japan.
They are the atomic veterans.
They suffer from a catalog of cancers and other diseases that
they believe are linked to radiation exposure.
And they say the federal government's response has been sluggish
and inadequate.
Fewer than 220,000 survive.
Terry's list of ailments has included skin cancer, prostate
cancer, hypertension, diabetes and a disease that he says has
stumped his doctors and is eating away at his muscles.
He and about 10 other veterans made their case Thursday and
Friday at an Austin meeting of a federal advisory board
overseeing government response to the veterans' claims.
Determining whether radiation exposure led to the diseases, as
opposed to old age or other factors, involves scientific
analysis by a federal agency called the Defense Threat Reduction
Agency. Was the veteran actually exposed to radiation?
(Sometimes hard to prove because the work was usually
classified.) How much exposure did he or she receive? What is
the probability that that level of exposure would lead to this
type of cancer in a person with these characteristics?
About one in 1,000 atomic veterans could have developed cancer
because of their exposure while in the military, said members of
the panel, which includes physicists, doctors and an expert in
ethics. That is based on the average "dose " of radiation that
the veterans are thought to have received.
"There's a misunderstanding among the entire American public, "
said retired Navy Vice Adm. James Zimble, chairman of the
Veterans' Advisory Board on Dose Reconstruction and a former
surgeon general of the U.S. Navy. "There's an unrealistic fear
of ionizing radiation."
Nonsense, said R.J. Ritter, national commander of the
3,000-member nonprofit National Association of Atomic Veterans
Inc., which formed in 1979.
"It's not good enough; it's not conclusive, " the Houston
resident said of the board's findings. "There are guys dying —
that's conclusive. "
Ritter, the sole surviving member of a seven-member team of Navy
deep-sea divers stationed at Bikini Atoll in 1952, would like to
see every veteran who could possibly have been exposed receive
compensation. And he'd like to see the end of the "dose
reconstruction " program.
That program will cost the federal government $12 million this
budget year.
More than 1,400 claims from atomic veterans are stuck in a
backlog created when the Department of Veterans Affairs returned
more than 1,200 denied claims to the Defense Threat Reduction
Agency in 2003 for review. Cases stuck in the system are an
average of three years old.
Thomas Pamperin, the VA's compensation and pension service
assistant director for policy, could not say how many atomic
veterans receive health benefits because of radiation exposure.
But he said that the group is more likely to receive
compensation than other veterans. About 11 percent of the
nation's 24.5 million living veterans receive medical benefits.
Thomas Caffarello of Orlando, Fla., who monitored radiation
levels during atomic bomb tests in Kwajalein in 1948, now has
thyroid cancer, urinary bladder cancer, skin cancer and other
ailments. For more than a decade, he has been trying to prove to
the government that his diseases are connected to his work in
the Marshall Islands.
"They're waiting for all of us to die, " he said.
ENDIT Story Filed By Cox Newspapers For Use By Clients of the
New York Times News Service
NYT-06-09-06 1921EDT
*****************************************************************
45 NRC: RIN 3150-AH48: National Source Tracking of Sealed Sources
FR Doc E6-9179
[Federal Register: June 13, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 113)]
[Proposed Rules] [Page 34024-34025] From the Federal Register
Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr13jn06-16]
AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
SUMMARY: The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is proposing to
amend its regulations to establish a National Source Tracking
System for certain sealed sources. The NRC is proposing to change
the basis for the rule from the NRC's authority to promote the
common defense and security to protection of the public health
and safety and is seeking public comment on this issue.
DATES: Submit comments on the basis change by July 3, 2006.
Comments received after the above date will be considered if it
is practical to do so, but assurance of consideration cannot be
given to comments received after these dates.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by any one of the following
methods. Please include the following number (RIN 3150-AH48) in
the subject line of your comments. Comments on rulemakings
submitted in writing or in electronic form will be made available
to the public in their entirety on the NRC rulemaking Web site.
Personal information will not be removed from your comments.
Mail comments to: Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC 20555-0001, ATTN: Rulemakings and Adjudications
Staff.
E-mail comments to: . If you do not receive a reply e- mail
confirming that we have received your comments, contact us
directly at (301) 415-1966. You may also submit comments via the
NRC's rulemaking Web site at . Address questions about our
rulemaking Web site to Carol Gallagher (301) 415-5905; email .
Comments can also be submitted via the Federal Rulemaking Portal
.
Hand deliver comments to: 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville,
Maryland 20852, between 7:30 am and 4:15 pm Federal workdays.
(Telephone (301) 415-1966).
Fax comments to: Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission at
(301) 415-1101.
You may submit comments on the information collections by the
methods indicated in the Paperwork Reduction Act Statement.
Publicly available documents related to this rulemaking may be
examined and copied for a fee at the NRC's Public Document Room
(PDR), Public File Area O1 F21, One White Flint North, 11555
Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland. Selected documents,
including comments, can be viewed and downloaded electronically
via the NRC rulemaking Web site at .
Publicly available documents created or received at the NRC after
November 1, 1999, are available electronically at the NRC's
Electronic Reading Room at . From this site, the public can gain
entry into the NRC's Agencywide Document Access and Management
System (ADAMS), which provides text and image files of NRC's
public documents. If you do not have access to ADAMS or if there
are problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS, contact
the NRC Public Document Room (PDR) Reference staff at 1-800-
397-4209, 301-415-4737 or by e-mail to .
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Merri Horn, Office of Nuclear
Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, telephone (301) 415-8126,
e-mail, .
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background The proposed rule on
national source tracking was published in the Federal Register on
July 28, 2005 (70 FR 43646) for public comment. The comment
period closed October 11, 2005. The proposed rule was issued
under the NRC's statutory authority to promote common defense and
security. After publication of the proposed rule, the NRC issued
Orders requiring increased controls for the remainder of the
licensees possessing risk-significant quantities of radioactive
material under the NRC's statutory authority to protect the
public health and safety. Agreement States issued legally binding
requirements for the increased controls for their licensees. The
NRC has reevaluated the underlying basis for the National Source
Tracking rule and is now proposing that the rule be issued under
its statutory authority to protect the public health and safety.
The change in basis is consistent with the framework established
for the increased controls that were issued by December 2005. The
basis change will allow the Agreement States to issue legally
binding requirements for their licensees and to conduct the
national source tracking inspections of their licensees. The
proposed changes to 10 CFR part 150 would not be included in the
final rule as these were to cover the Agreement State licensees.
The database for the National Source Tracking System would still
be maintained by the NRC. Both NRC and Agreement State licensees
would report their transactions to the National Source Tracking
System.
The NRC is specifically inviting comment on the issue of the
change in the basis for issuing the rule to protection of the
public health and safety. Because the issue on which comment is
sought is limited to a change in the basis under which the rule
is to be issued, NRC is providing a limited comment period. With
the change in basis, the final rule would be an immediate
mandatory matter of compatibility and be classified as
Compatibility Category ``B.'' The Agreement State Compatibility
section of the Statement of Considerations would be revised and
is provided below.
II. Agreement State Compatibility Under the ``Policy Statement on
Adequacy and Compatibility of Agreement State Programs'' approved
by the Commission on June 30, 1997, and published in the Federal
Register on September 3, 1997 (62 FR 46517), Sec. 20.2207, the
final rule would be classified as Compatibility Category ``B.''
The NRC program elements in this category are those that apply to
[[Page 34025]] activities that have direct and significant
transboundary implications. An Agreement State should adopt
program elements essentially identical to those of NRC. Agreement
State and NRC licensees would report their transactions to the
National Source Tracking System. The database would be maintained
by NRC.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 7th day of June, 2006.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Annette L. Vietti-Cook, Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. E6-9179 Filed 6-12-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
*****************************************************************
46 Bush and Howard plan Australian nuclear dump - Green Left
Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2006 20:12:40 -0500 (CDT)
Green Left Weekly
RSS feed
Green Left Weekly #671, June 14, 2006
Bush and Howard plan Australian nuclear dump
US President George Bush has proposed that Australia and Canada -- the
world's major uranium exporting countries -- join with the US to form a
marketing cartel, the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership. They would
enrich the uranium, then `rent' their nuclear fuel rods out to user
countries and take back the waste. Under the Bush plan, Maralinga would
become the world's principal site for dumping used nuclear fuel rods.
[Full article]
* All the way with the USA: Howard's dream of a nuclear future
* Martin Ferguson and the nuclear debate
* Labor, Greens, socialists debate uranium mining
******************************************************************************
John Pilger: 'Support GLW!'
We can't do it on our own! Green Left Weekly $250,000 Fighting Fund 2006
Enjoy reading Green Left Weekly? Want to help support our work? Why not
make an online donation .
****************************************************************************
New law treats trade unionists like terrorists
Rob Stary is a leading criminal defence lawyer in Victoria and an
outspoken defender of civil liberties. He has defended many victims of
the federal and state governments' anti-worker and `anti-terror' laws.
On the basis of his wide experience, Stary argues that the new
`anti-terrorism' and industrial relations laws are strongly interlinked
in their criminalisation of political and industrial dissent. [Full
article]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
International News
# NEW ZEALAND: Pro-business IR regime meets militant union revival
# EAST TIMOR: Ethnic violence or 'breakdown in social solidarity'?
# EAST TIMOR: Bungled bullying in East Timor?
# UNITED STATES: New Orleans 2006: music, hope and love in the ruins
# BOLIVIA: Cultural and democratic revolution: Not one step backwards!
# PALESTINE: Israel kills government official
# AFGHANISTAN: US killings spark riots
# IRAQ: US troops regularly kill civilians, says PM
# IRAQ: Zarqawi killed
# SUDAN: Sudanese Communist Party: Darfur problem is political
# VENEZUELA: Deepening Latin American integration
# VENEZUELA: Students march for education access, against violence
# BOLIVIA: Morales's 'agrarian revolution'
# CHILE: Students continue to pressure Bachelet
# VENEZUELA: 10,000 march for the homeless
# URUGUAY: 'We are not going to sign the FTA with the US'
# Celia Hart: 'Venezuela means a new life for Cuba'
# PERU: Scaremongering dominates elections
# PAKISTAN: Peasant movement defies repression
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Click here to join the GLW discussion list
Visit the Socialist Alliance website
Resistance Books for all your radical literature
------------------------------------------------------------------------
In Brief
# ISRAEL: Joint rallies against occupation
# AFGHANISTAN: 750 US air strikes in May
# UNITED STATES: Iraq war voters' top concern
# Report details suppression of union rights
# BRITAIN/CANADA: Unions vote for Israel boycott
# IRAN: Tehran to join Russo-Chinese security alliance
Regular Features
# Loose Cannons
# Write On: Letters to the Editor
# Our Common Cause: Terrorists in tutorials?
Comment and Analysis
# Howard pushes for uranium enrichment
# Martin Ferguson and the nuclear debate
# All the way with the USA: Howard's dream of a nuclear future
# New law treats unionists like terrorists
# Students: 'We're coming out again on June 28'
# 'Unfuck the world' conference planned
# New rules: low wage or no wage
# Researcher points to deep social problems in Indigenous communities
# Australia in the world economy: shock-proof or just plain lucky?
# Green Left Weekly's $250,000 Fighting Fund 2006: What if they tired of
marching?
# Can you help?
# Editorial: Snowy privatisation failure a blow to neoliberalism
# Education funding and the skills crisis
# We paid $73,223 for Packer's funeral
# An open letter to Amanda Vanstone
Cultural Dissent
# Literature, Art and The Russian Revolution
Australian News
# Finlay AWAs aim to cut redundancy
# Rat attack in cat town
# Ruddock to overturn ACT civil unions
# Save the old-growth forests!
# Spotlight targeted
# Tamil self-determination
# Crisis in the Asia Pacific
# Save Australia Post jobs!
# Protesters 'dam' Beattie
# Climate change campaigning
# Anti-coal protest
# Work Choices or justice at work?
# ACT schools hit in budget massacre
# Iemma government sees red
# Unity for peace
# Labor, Greens, socialists debate uranium mining
Activist Calendar
# Check out the Activist Calendar here
.
Click here for Green Left Weekly's copyleft details.
About Green Left Weekly
Authorised by K. Miller, 23 Abercrombie St, Chippendale, NSW
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Back issues
Distribution details
Links to other sites
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************************
47 Pueblo Chieftain: Senate panel approves bill to fund chem demil
Online - Pueblo, Colorado U.S.A
Tuesday June 13, 2006
Provision is included that offers contractors a financial
incentive to finish their work early.
By JOHN NORTON
THE PUEBLO CHIEFTAIN
The Senate Armed Services Committee has approved the Pentagons
full funding request for chemical weapons destruction work here
next year and provisions to offer contractors financial
incentives to finish projects ahead of schedule.
The incentive program was requested by Sen. Wayne Allard,
R-Colo., and is expected now to be part of the fiscal 2007
defense authorization bill.
The House version of the bill, cuts more than $40 million out of
the programs aimed at destroying weapons here and at the Blue
Grass Army Depot in Kentucky.
Allard said he was glad to see the incentive provision pass.
I believe it plays an important part in getting the work at the
Pueblo depot completed in a timely manner, he said.
The provision gives the U.S. Department of Defense the authority
to include incentive clauses in any contract for the destruction
of the U.S. chemical weapons. Such contracts would have to be
jointly agreed upon by the contracting officer and contractor
concerned.
We know this kind of contract speeds up critical projects,
Allard said. We have seen the benefits of these contracts at
Rocky Flats where we were able to save hundreds of millions of
the taxpayers dollars, while protecting the environment and
ensuring the safety of the local community. Rocky Flats was good
practice, and I told the Armed Services Committee that it will
be good for the Pueblo Depot project as well.
The defense authorization legislation also includes $41.8
million for military construction at Pueblo Depot, and an
additional $219 million for research and development at the
Pueblo Depot and Blue Grass, Kentucky demilitarization projects
that Allard had requested.
Getting this provision included in the DOD authorization bill
in a huge victory for those of us who have been working hard for
several years to move the Pueblo Depot project forward, added
Allard.
The overall bill also includes a number of other projects in
Colorado.
Sen. Ken Salazar, D-Colo., said, As introduced, this bill
contains funding that will solidify Colorado as Americas crown
jewel for national defense and homeland security. After working
with base commanders in Colorado and officials at the Pentagon
in Washington, I am extremely pleased with the initial contents
of the bill.
The $517.7 billion bill includes raises in military salaries,
increased troop levels, funding for military aircraft, missile
defense and many other provisions. Colorados share will mean
$130.7 million for military construction, which includes $26
million for a combat services support complex for Special
Operating Forces and $24 million for the next phase of
construction of the airfield arrival-depart complex, all at Fort
Carson.
Buckley Air Force Base will see $10.7 million for construction
of the consolidated fuels facility and $7 million for a new Air
National Guard squadron operations facility.
Schriever Air Force Base will receive $21 million for
construction of the space test and evaluation facility.
Also included was $10 million to purchase interoperable
communications equipment for NORTHCOM.
Salazar said, I added an amendment to the budget resolution to
provide for $10 million for NORTHCOM interoperable
communications and am pleased the authorizers have included this
funding in the bill.
Fort Carson also will receive $202 million in base realignment
and closure funds for the construction of a brigade combat team
complex and $84 million for the construction of a division
headquarters for the 4th Infantry Division, which is relocating
from Fort Hood, Texas.
©1996-2006 www.chieftain.com Star-Journal Publishing Corp.
Pueblo, Colorado U.S.A.
*****************************************************************
48 Brattleboro Reformer: Dry cask storage plan at VY inches ahead
By ANDY ROSEN, Reformer Staff
Tuesday, June 13 VERNON -- Vermont Yankee has cleared another
regulatory hurdle in its efforts to build a dry cask waste
storage facility on its grounds.
Last Friday, the Vermont Public Service Board decided it was
satisfied with Entergy Nuclear's financial ability to maintain
the storage site after it stops operating the plant.
When the board approved the dry casks, it required Entergy to
submit "adequate financial assurance" that the plant could
manage the storage site after it stops running, and before it
gets funding to decommission the plant.
More than $300 million has been put aside to decommission
Vermont Yankee, said spokesman Rob Williams, but the money may
not be immediately released when the plant goes off line, since
the federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission has requirements that
the plant must meet before it gets the money.
The Public Service Board wanted to make sure the plant would
have money available in case of a delay of up to six months, he
said. The plant's license runs through 2012, and its management
is seeking a 20-year extension. The board's approval only holds
for waste generated up to 2012.
In May, Entergy gave the Public Service Board a six-page
document detailing its ability to manage the spent fuel after it
stops generating power, and therefore revenue.
In that statement, Entergy said it could guarantee the
availability of $60 million to pay the cost of operations
following the plant's shutdown. The Public Service Board had
asked for a third-party arrangement to back up that money in
case something goes wrong with the company and it isn't
available.
If the corporation's debt is listed below investment grade,
Entergy said it would have Entergy Nuclear, a subsidiary company
that runs Vermont Yankee, obtain a "third-party letter of
credit" for the amount it would cost to manage spent fuel for
six months.
That could take effect even while the plant is still operating.
Entergy said those "additional financial assurances" would
remain in place until the date on which Vermont Yankee gets 20
percent of its decommissioning fund, or the date when its
license expires.
The Public Service Board, in its decision issued Friday, took
issue with that one aspect. Board members said the plant should
still be required to have that assurance in place, even after
the license expires.
"The financial assurances are designed to ensure that Entergy VY
will have sufficient funds to get it from its current
operational condition to the time where it can access 20 percent
of its decomissioning-trust funds," the decision reads. "The
period following license expiration, when revenue from sales
will no longer exist, is one such period."
Williams said plant officials are still reviewing the decision,
as they recently received it, but said the Public Service Board
clearly recognizes the importance of building a dry cask
facility at Vermont Yankee.
Last week, the board refused to reconsider its approval of the
facility, based on a challenge by the nuclear watchdog group New
England Coalition. The coalition had argued that the board
ignored evidence that it would be safer to build the concrete
and steel casks inside of earthen mounds.
Vermont Yankee has already begun construction on the casks,
Williams said, moving underground utilities and removing
asphalt. The plant could move spent fuel into them by early
2008.
Andy Rosen can be reached at arosen@reformer.comor (802)
254-2311, ext. 275.
» (802) 254-2311 » 62 Black Mountain Road » Brattleboro, VT
05301-9242
*****************************************************************
49 NRC: In the Matter of EnergySolutions, LLC (formerly Envirocare of
FR Doc E6-9247
[Federal Register: June 13, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 113)]
[Notices] [Page 34168-34170] From the Federal Register Online via
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr13jn06-104] [[Page
34168]]
Utah, LLC) Order Modifying Exemption from 10 CFR Part 70 AGENCY:
Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Issuance of Order Modifying Exemption from Requirements
of 10 CFR part 70.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: James Park, Environmental and
Performance Assessment Directorate, Division of Waste Management
and Environmental Protection, Office of Nuclear Material Safety
and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington,
DC 20555- 0001. Telephone: (301) 415-5835, fax number: (301)
415-5397, e-mail: .
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Introduction The Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC) is issuing an Order pursuant to section 274f of
the Atomic Energy Act to EnergySolutions, LLC (formerly
Envirocare of Utah, LLC) concerning EnergySolutions' exemption
from certain NRC licensing requirements for special nuclear
material. This Order reflects the change in company name from
Envirocare of Utah, LLC to EnergySolutions, LLC.
II. Further Information EnergySolutions, LLC (EnergySolutions)
operates a low-level waste (LLW) disposal facility in Clive,
Utah. This facility is licensed by the State of Utah, an
Agreement State. EnergySolutions also is licensed by Utah to
dispose of mixed waste, hazardous waste, and 11e.(2) byproduct
material (as defined under section 11e.(2) of the Atomic Energy
Act of 1954, as amended). By letter dated March 3, 2006,
EnergySolutions notified the NRC that the company had changed its
name from Envirocare of Utah, LLC and requested that the NRC
reflect this name change in identified NRC staff documents.
Section 70.3 of 10 CFR part 70 requires persons who own, acquire,
deliver, receive, possess, use, or transfer special nuclear
material (SNM) to obtain a license pursuant to the requirements
in 10 CFR part 70. The licensing requirements in 10 CFR part 70
apply to persons in Agreement States possessing greater than
critical mass quantities as defined in 10 CFR 150.11. Pursuant to
10 CFR 70.17(a), ``the Commission may * * * grant such exemptions
from the requirements of the regulations in this part as it
determines are authorized by law and will not endanger life or
property or the common defense and security and are otherwise in
the public interest.'' By previous Orders, Envirocare of Utah,
LLC was exempted from certain NRC regulations and was permitted,
under specified conditions, to possess waste containing SNM in
greater quantities than specified in 10 CFR part 150, at its LLW
disposal facility located in Clive, Utah, without obtaining an
NRC license pursuant to 10 CFR part 70. The first such Order was
published in the Federal Register on May 21, 1999 (64 FR 27826).
The most recent revision to this Order was published in the
Federal Register on August 1, 2005 (70 FR 44123).
The modified Order set forth below reflects the change in company
name from Envirocare of Utah, LLC to EnergySolutions, LLC. No
other substantive changes to the August 1, 2005 Order have been
made.
The exemption conditions would be revised as follows.
III. Modified Order 1. For waste with no more than 20 weight
percent of materials listed in Condition 2, concentrations of SNM
in individual waste containers must not exceed the following
values at time of receipt: Table A
-----------------------------------------------------------------
------- Maximum SNM concentration in waste containing the
described materials (g SNM/g waste)
---------------------------------------- Maximum of 20 SNM
Nuclide weight percent of
materials listed No materials listed in Condition 2 and in
Condition 2 no more than 1 weight percent of
beryllium
-----------------------------------------------------------------
------- U-235 (>50%) \a\............... 6.2E-4.............
5.4E-4 U-235 (=50%)................... 6.9E-4.............
6.1E-4 U-235 (=20%)................... 8.3E-4.............
7.4E-4 U-235 (=10%)................... 9.9E-4.............
8.8E-4 U-235 (=5%).................... 1.0E-3.............
9.6E-4 U-235 (=3%).................... 1.3E-3.............
1.1E-3 U-235 (=2%).................... 1.7E-3.............
1.5E-3 U-235 (=1.5%).................. 2.3E-3.............
2.1E-3 U-235 (=1.35%)................. 2.8E-3.............
2.5E-3 U-235 (=1.2%).................. 3.5E-3.............
3.2E-3 U-235 (=1.1%).................. 4.5E-3.............
4.2E-3 U-235 (=1.05%)................. 5.0E-3.............
4.8E-3 U-233.......................... 4.7E-4.............
4.3E-4 Pu-239......................... 2.8E-4.............
2.6E-4 Pu-241......................... 2.2E-4.............
1.9E-4
-----------------------------------------------------------------
------- \a\ Percentage value refers to weight percent enrichment
in U-235. For enrichments that fall between identified values in
the table, the higher value is the applicable value (e.g., for an
enrichment of 14 weight percent U-235, the applicable
concentration limit is that for 20 weight percent U-235).
For waste with more than 20 weight percent of materials listed in
Condition 2, concentrations of SNM in individual waste containers
must not exceed the following values at time of receipt: Table B
-----------------------------------------------------------------
------- Maximum SNM concentration in waste containing the
described materials (g SNM/g waste)
---------------------------------------- Radionuclide Unlimited
Unlimited quantities of quantities of materials listed
materials listed in in Conditions 2 Condition 2
and 3
-----------------------------------------------------------------
------- U-235 (>50%)................... 3.4E-4.............
1.2E-5 U-235.......................... N/A................
3.1E-4 \a\ U-233.......................... 2.9E-4.............
1.1E-5 Pu-239......................... 1.7E-4.............
7.5E-6 Pu-241......................... 1.3E-4.............
5.3E-6
-----------------------------------------------------------------
------- \a\ For uranium at any enrichment with sum of materials
listed in Condition 2 and beryllium not exceeding 45 percent of
the weight of the waste.
Plutonium isotopes other than Pu-239 and Pu-241 do not need to be
considered in demonstrating compliance with this condition. When
mixtures of these SNM isotopes are present in the waste, the
sum-of- the-fractions rule, as illustrated below, should be used.
[[Page 34169]] [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN13JN06.021 The
concentration values in Condition 1 are operational values to
ensure criticality safety. Where the values in Condition 1 exceed
concentration values in the corresponding conditions of the State
of Utah Radioactive Material License (RML), the concentration
values in the RML, which are averaged over the container, may not
be exceeded. Higher concentration values are included in
Condition 1 to be used in establishing the maximum mass of SNM
for non-homogeneous solid waste and liquid waste.
The measurement uncertainty values should be no more than 15
percent of the concentration limit, and represent the maximum
one-sigma uncertainty associated with the measurement of the
concentration of the particular radionuclide. When determining
the applicable U-235 concentration limit for a specific
enrichment percentage, the analytical uncertainty shall be added
to the result (e.g., for a measurement value of U-235 enrichment
percentage of 1.1+/-0.2, the U- 235 concentration limit
corresponding to an enrichment percent of 1.35 shall be used).
This shall be applied to analytical methods employed by the
generator prior to receipt and by EnergySolutions upon receipt.
The SNM must be homogeneously distributed throughout the waste.
If the SNM is not homogeneously distributed, then the limiting
concentrations must not be exceeded on average in any contiguous
mass of 600 kilograms of waste.
Liquid waste may be stabilized provided the SNM concentration
does not exceed the SNM concentration limits in Condition 1. For
containers of liquid waste with more than 600 kilograms of waste,
the total mass of SNM shall not exceed the SNM concentration in
Condition 1 times 600 kilograms of waste. Waste containing free
liquids and solids shall be mixed prior to treatment. Any solids
shall be maintained in a suspended state during transfer and
treatment.
2. Except as allowed by Tables A and B in Condition 1, waste must
not contain ``pure forms'' of chemicals containing carbon,
fluorine, magnesium, or bismuth in bulk quantities (e.g., a
pallet of drums, a B- 25 box). By ``pure forms,'' it is meant
that mixtures of the above elements, such as magnesium oxide,
magnesium carbonate, magnesium fluoride, bismuth oxide, etc., do
not contain other elements. These chemicals would be added to the
waste stream during processing, such as at fuel facilities or
treatment such as at mixed waste treatment facilities. The
presence of the above materials will be determined by the
generator, based on process knowledge or testing.
3. Except as allowed by Tables A and B in Condition 1, waste
accepted must not contain total quantities of beryllium,
hydrogenous material enriched in deuterium, or graphite above one
tenth of one percent of the total weight of the waste. The
presence of the above materials will be determined by the
generator, based on process knowledge, physical observations, or
testing.
4. Waste packages must not contain highly water soluble forms of
uranium greater than 350 grams of uranium-235 or 200 grams of
uranium- 233. The sum of the fractions rule will apply for
mixtures of U-233 and U-235. Highly soluble forms of uranium
include, but are not limited to: uranium sulfate, uranyl acetate,
uranyl chloride, uranyl formate, uranyl fluoride, uranyl nitrate,
uranyl potassium carbonate, and uranyl sulfate. The presence of
the above materials will be determined by the generator, based on
process knowledge or testing.
5. Waste processing of waste containing SNM will be limited to
stabilization (mixing waste with reagents), micro-encapsulation
and macro-encapsulation using low-density and high-density
polyethylene, macro-encapsulation with cement grout,
spray-washing, organic destruction (CerOx process and Solvent
Electron Technology process), and thermal desorption.
EnergySolutions shall confirm that the SNM concentration in the
rinse water does not exceed the limits in Condition 1 following
spray- washing, prior to further treatment. If the rinse water is
evaporated, the evaporated product shall comply with the
requirements in Condition 1. EnergySolutions shall perform
sampling and analysis of the liquid effluent collection system at
a frequency of one sample per 300 gallons or when the system
reaches capacity, whichever is less.
EnergySolutions shall track the SNM mass of waste treated using
the CerOx process. When the total concentration of SNM is 85
percent of the sum of the fraction rule in Condition 1,
EnergySolutions shall confirm the SNM concentration in the phase
reactor tank and replace the solutions. The 10 percent enriched
limit shall be used for uranium-235. The contents of the phase
reactor tank should be solidified prior to disposal.
When waste is processed using the thermal desorption process and
the Solvent Electron Technology process, EnergySolutions shall
confirm the SNM concentration following processing and prior to
returning the waste to temporary storage.
6. EnergySolutions shall require generators to provide the
following information for each waste stream: Pre-shipment Waste
Description. The description must detail how the waste was
generated, list the physical forms in the waste, and identify
uranium chemical composition.
Waste Characterization Summary. The data must include a general
description of how the waste was characterized (including the
volumetric extent of the waste, and the number, location, type,
and results of any analytical testing), the range of SNM
concentrations, and the analytical results with error values used
to develop the concentration ranges.
Uniformity Description. A description of the process by which the
waste was generated showing that the spatial distribution of SNM
must be uniform, or other information supporting spatial
distribution.
Manifest Concentration. The generator must describe the methods
to be used to determine the concentrations on the manifests.
These methods could include direct measurement and the use of
scaling factors.
The generator must describe the uncertainty associated with
sampling and testing used to obtain the manifest concentrations.
EnergySolutions shall review the above information and, if
adequate, approve in writing this pre-shipment waste
characterization and assurance plan before permitting the
shipment of a waste stream. This will include statements that
EnergySolutions has a written copy of all the information
required above, that the characterization information is adequate
and consistent with the waste description, and that the
information is sufficient to demonstrate compliance with
Conditions 1 through 4. Where generator process knowledge is used
to demonstrate compliance with Conditions 1, 2, 3, or 4,
EnergySolutions
[[Page 34170]] shall review this information and determine when
testing is required to provide additional information in assuring
compliance with the Conditions. EnergySolutions shall retain this
information as required by the State of Utah to permit
independent review.
At Receipt EnergySolutions shall require generators of SNM waste
to provide a written certification with each waste manifest that
states that the SNM concentrations reported on the manifest do
not exceed the limits in Condition 1, that the measurement
uncertainty does not exceed the uncertainty value in Condition 1,
and that the waste meets Conditions 2 through 4.
7. Sampling and radiological testing of waste containing SNM must
be performed in accordance with the following: One sample for
each of the first ten shipments of a waste stream; or one sample
for each of the first 100 cubic yards of waste up to 1,000 cubic
yards of a waste stream, and one sample for each additional 500
cubic yards of waste following the first ten shipments or
following the first 1,000 cubic yards of a waste stream. Sampling
and radiological testing of debris waste containing SNM (that is
exempted from sampling by the State of Utah) can be eliminated if
the SNM concentration is lower than one tenth of the limits in
Condition 1. EnergySolutions shall verify the percent enrichment
by appropriate analytical methods. The percent enrichment
determination shall be made by taking into account the most
conservative values based on the measurement uncertainties for
the analytical methods chosen.
8. EnergySolutions shall notify the NRC, Region IV office within
24 hours if any of the above conditions are not met, including if
a batch during a treatment process exceeds the SNM concentrations
of Condition 1. A written notification of the event must be
provided within 7 days.
9. EnergySolutions shall obtain NRC approval prior to changing
any activities associated with the above conditions.
Based on the staff's evaluation, the Commission has determined,
pursuant to 10 CFR 70.17(a), that the exemption of above
activities at the EnergySolutions disposal facility is authorized
by law, and will not endanger life or property or the common
defense and security and is otherwise in the public interest.
Accordingly, by this Order, the Commission grants an exemption
subject to the stated conditions.
The exemption will become effective after the State of Utah has
incorporated the above conditions into EnergySolutions'
radioactive materials license. In addition, at that time, the
Order published on August 1, 2005 will no longer be effective.
Pursuant to the requirements in 10 CFR part 51, the Commission
has determined that an Environmental Assessment is not required
as the proposed action (change in company name) is administrative
and therefore falls within the categorical exclusion provisions
of 10 CFR 51.22(c)(11). IV. Availability of Documents Documents
related to this action, including the application for amendment
and supporting documentation, will be available electronically at
the NRC's Electronic Reading Room at .
From this site, you can access the NRC's Agencywide Document
Access and Management System (ADAMS), which provides text and
image files of NRC's public documents. The ADAMS accession number
for the document related to this notice is: EnergySolutions'
March 3, 2006 request (ML060740549).
If you do not have access to ADAMS or if there are problems in
accessing the documents located in ADAMS, contact the NRC's
Public Document Room (PDR) Reference staff at 1-800-397-4209,
301-415-4737, or by e-mail to .
These documents may also be viewed electronically on the public
computers located at the NRC's PDR, O 1 F21, One White Flint
North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852. The PDR
reproduction contractor will copy documents for a fee.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland this 30th day of May, 2006.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Jack R. Strosnider, Director, Office of Nuclear Material Safety
and Safeguards.
[FR Doc. E6-9247 Filed 6-12-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
*****************************************************************
50 Daily Herald: Large turnout for river cleanup
Curiosity — and anxiety — about the massive, $74 million thorium
cleanup of the DuPage River and Kress Creek were on full display
Monday.
More than 40 homeowners gathered in West Chicago city hall to
hear the latest from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
DuPage County Forest Preserve District and engineers on how the
7.7-mile project was proceeding.
By the end of the year, the 1.5-mile stretch of Kress Creek in
West Chicago should be completed, along with a five-mile stretch
of the DuPage River in West Chicago headed south to Mack Road.
In coming years, work will proceed south to remove the
radioactive deposits to the McDowell Dam near Naperville. In a
nutshell, crews drain sections of the river, excavate, refill and
replant areas with native bushes, trees and foliage.
It was the best attended “open house” for EPA officials.
Homeowners had both complaints and praise.
Some homeowners complained about noise from bypass pumps and the
lack of signs near construction truck entrances and canoe
launching spots warning people of radioactive material. Some had
fears their property values would plummet.
Other homeowners said wildlife did return following the
remediation and restoration of affected areas, and crews from
the New York-based BB & L Engineering Services, hired to oversee
the project, were working with them on what foliage to replant.
“It didn’t kill the animals, the fish. That was an important
thing for us,” said Debra Pande, who has lived with her husband,
Dave, outside West Chicago since 1978.
But larger, mature trees must be removed if they are in a
polluted area, officials said.
“The long-term health and safety issues have to override a tree,
even if it’s a 30-inch (thick) oak,” said John Wills, president
of Christopher Burke Engineering West, which was hired to
represent the forest preserve and nearby towns.
Years ago, thorium waste from Kerr-McGee, now called Tronox, was
discharged in the river or used as fill for landscape projects
by residents. More than 1.1 million cubic yards of thorium have
been removed from 676 homes and the river and sent by railcar to
Utah.
For more information about future meetings or to be added to the
notification list, call Stuart Hill, EPA community involvement
coordinator, at (312) 886-0689.
© 2006 Daily Herald, Paddock Publications, Inc. | |
*****************************************************************
51 Guardian Unlimited: Energy Dept. Tells Workers of Data Theft
From the Associated Press
[UP]
Tuesday June 13, 2006 3:31 AM
By H. JOSEF HEBERT Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON (AP) - Energy Department officials have informed
nearly 1,500 individuals that their Social Security numbers and
other information may have been compromised when a hacker gained
entry to a department computer system eight months ago, a
spokesman said Monday.
The workers, mostly contract employees, worked for the National
Nuclear Security Administration, a semiautonomous agency within
the department that deals with the government's nuclear weapons
programs.
The computer theft occurred last September, but Energy Secretary
Samuel Bodman and his deputy, Clay Sell, were not informed of it
until last week. It was first publicly disclosed at a
congressional hearing on Friday.
Bryan Wilkes, a spokesman for the NNSA, said about 800 workers
were reached over the weekend and by late Monday all but a small
number had been contacted. ``We will keep calling until we get
all of them,'' said Wilkes, adding that notifications also were
being sent by mail.
The security breach occurred in a computer system at a service
center in Albuquerque, N.M. The file that was compromised
contained the names, Social Security numbers, security clearance
levels and place of employment of 1,502 people working
throughout the government nuclear weapons complex.
The system contained sensitive, but not classified material,
department officials said. The NNSA also has a more secure
computer system that includes nuclear weapons data and other
classified material.
NNSA Administrator Linton Brooks told a House hearing on Friday
that he learned of the security breach late last September, but
did not inform either the two men to whom he reports - Bodman or
Sell.
Bodman learned of the incident last week.
Brooks blamed a misunderstanding for the communications failure.
Rep. Joe Barton, R-Texas., chairman of the House Energy and
Commerce Committee, on Friday said Brooks, a former ambassador
and nuclear arms control negotiator, should resign over the
incident.
Craig Stevens, a spokesman for Bodman, declined Monday to
speculate on Brooks' future. Bodman wants the department's
inspector general's office to investigate the communications
failure.
---
On the Net:
Energy Department: http://www.energy.gov
National Nuclear Security Administration: http://www.nnsa.gov
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
52 CONTRA COSTA TIMES: Appeals court considers Livermore 'hot lab'
Posted on Tue, Jun. 13, 2006
By Chris Metinko
Watchdog groups want the federal government to further
investigate the impacts of possible terrorist attacks before it
proceeds with its plan to open a laboratory to study anthrax,
plague and other deadly pathogens at Lawrence Livermore
Laboratory.
At a hearing Tuesday in the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in
San Francisco, the Livermore-based Tri-Valley Communities
Against a Radioactive Environment and Nuclear Watch New Mexico
groups argued the Department of Energy did not do an adequate
assessment of the potential environmental impacts of locating a
"hot lab" in Livermore.
The groups' main concern is what it sees as a failing by the DOE
to consider possible terrorist attacks against the lab and what
that could mean to residents of the Bay Area if a deadly
pathogen is released. The groups argued such a study is crucial
because combining nuclear materials and bio-warfare agents in
the same facility would make the lab an even more attractive
target for terrorists.
DOE lawyer Todd Aagaard said the department looked at a variety
of catastrophic events -- including earthquakes -- to see what
the impacts could be on the area. He told the panel of federal
judges the lab's environmental assessment report studied
disasters that could be considered even worse than a terrorist
attack. He added the DOE could not study every type of disaster
in great detail for its assessment, but did study what it
thought to be most critical.
Steve Volker, Tri-Valley CAREs' attorney, questioned why the DOE
did not investigate possible alternative sites for such a lab,
instead choosing to put it in the densely populated Bay Area.
That question seemed to strike a chord with at least one of the
three judges on the panel.
"What I find to be the most troublesome thing is this is being
built in a very highly populated area," said Circuit Chief Judge
Mary Schroeder.
Volker said he hopes the appeals court will have a decision
sometime before August, which is when the lab is expected to
open. He would like the court to order a new environmental
assessment or for the DOE to do a full-blown environmental
impact statement.
Tri-Valley CAREs originally sued the Energy Department over
proposed hot labs at Livermore and Los Alamos national
laboratories in August 2003. The following December, a federal
judge barred shipments of biological agents including botulism,
anthrax, plague, valley fever and Q fever until a final decision
on the lawsuit was made. In September 2004, the judge gave
Livermore's biosafety lab the go-ahead.
The watchdog groups appealed the decision to the 9th Circuit
Court in November 2004, which prompted Tuesday's hearing.
In November 2005, the DOE announced it would do a full
environmental report for the proposed hot lab at Los Alamos.
Reach Chris Metinko at 510-763-5418 or cmetinko@cctimes.com.
*****************************************************************
53 Seattle Times: Hanford workers warned of security breach
Tuesday, June 13, 2006 - Page updated at 12:00 AM
By SHANNON DININNY
The Associated Press
The U.S. Department of Energy has warned about 4,000 present and
former workers at the Hanford nuclear reservation that their
personal information may have been compromised, after police
found a 1996 list with workers' names and other information in a
home during an unrelated investigation.
The discovery marks the second time in less than a week that the
Energy Department has warned employees and its contractors'
employees that their personal information may have been
compromised.
Police in Yakima discovered the list while investigating an
unrelated criminal matter, the Energy Department said, adding
the list included the names of people who worked for a former
Hanford contractor, Westinghouse Hanford, who were transferring
to Fluor Hanford or companies under contract to Fluor Hanford in
1996.
The Energy Department awarded Fluor Hanford the contract to
clean up the highly contaminated nuclear site in December 1996.
The list also included workers' Social Security numbers and
birth dates, as well as work titles, assignments and telephone
numbers.
The department began notifying workers about the discovery
Sunday. Employees at seven companies were warned to monitor
their financial accounts and billing statements for any
suspicious activity.
There was no indication that Hanford's computer network was
compromised. The Energy Department and Fluor Hanford were
working with law-enforcement officials to determine how the list
was obtained and why it was in the home, the Energy Department
said in a statement Monday.
Also on Monday, Energy Department officials began contacting
1,502 individuals by phone to inform them that their Social
Security numbers and other information may have been compromised
when a hacker gained entry to a department computer system in
September.
The workers, mostly contract employees, worked for the National
Nuclear Security Administration, a semiautonomous agency within
the department that deals with the government's nuclear-weapons
programs.
Copyright © 2006 The Seattle Times Company
*****************************************************************
54 Seattle Times: Federal judge strikes down Hanford nuclear-waste initiative
Tuesday, June 13, 2006 - Page updated at 12:00 AM
By Eric Pryne
Seattle Times staff reporter
A federal judge Monday struck down a voter-approved initiative
that would have prohibited the federal government from shipping
nuclear waste to Hanford, ruling the law unconstitutionally
infringes on federal prerogatives.
The ruling isn't likely to change anything, at least anytime
soon. Initiative 297 hasn't been enforced while the case was
pending, and a different lawsuit has suspended waste shipments
to Hanford for now.
I-297, approved by Washington voters in 2004 with more votes
than any previous statewide measure, would have blocked a U.S.
Department of Energy (DOE) plan to make Hanford the permanent
disposal site for some low-level radioactive waste and low-level
"mixed" waste that is both radioactive and hazardous.
But U.S. District Judge Alan McDonald of Yakima agreed with the
federal government's lawsuit against I-297 that it has
pre-empted the field of nuclear-materials regulation. He said
the initiative violates the supremacy clause of the U.S.
Constitution, as well as its prohibition against state
interference with interstate commerce.
"If other states start passing legislation similar to [I-297],
the simple fact is that DOE will not be moving waste anywhere
among its nationwide sites as it proposes to do as part of its
nationwide cleanup program," McDonald wrote in a 62-page ruling.
"Decisions which need to be made at a national level addressing
national concerns cannot be trumped by protectionist regulations
enacted by individual states," the judge wrote.
Gerry Pollet of Heart of America Northwest, the Hanford watchdog
group that sponsored I-297, said he was disappointed but not
surprised. He acknowledged it's unlikely to result in any
immediate changes at Hanford, one of the world's most
contaminated sites.
The Department of Energy has agreed in a separate legal
proceeding involving the state and DOE to suspend shipments of
low-level radioactive and mixed wastes to Hanford until it
reconsiders the environmental impact of its waste-disposal plans
for the sprawling southeastern Washington nuclear reservation.
That work won't be done for at least two years, Pollet said.
Federal and state officials could not be reached for comment.
Washington Attorney General Rob McKenna, whose office defended
I-297, said in a prepared statement he "will be carefully
considering every option available to the state, including the
option of appealing."
Pollet said sponsors will seek to appeal if the state doesn't.
"We always believed the stakes were so high that this would be
decided by the 9th Circuit [Court of Appeals], or perhaps even
higher," he said.
"Judge McDonald is calling into question many of the
fundamentals of the state's authority to protect its groundwater
and its rivers."
As part of its plan for disposing of waste from its
nuclear-weapons production plants, the Department of Energy has
proposed that up to 199,000 cubic meters of radioactive and
mixed low-level waste up to 70 percent of it from outside
Washington be stored at Hanford.
High-level wastes at Hanford would be shipped to a repository in
Nevada. But Hanford would serve as a packaging center for some
highly radioactive "transuranic" waste plutonium-contaminated
rags, tools and other items destined for permanent disposal in
New Mexico.
Initiative 297, which passed by more than a 2-1 ratio, would
have blocked DOE from shipping out-of-state waste to Hanford
until existing contamination at the site is cleaned up.
The 586-square-mile Hanford Reservation was established in the
1940s as part of the top-secret Manhattan Project to build the
atomic bomb, then continued to produce plutonium for the
nation's nuclear arsenal for 40 years.
Information from The Associated Press is included in this report.
Eric Pryne: 206-464-2231 or
Copyright © 2006 The Seattle Times Company
*****************************************************************
55 Tri-City Herald: Fluor Hanford employee data found
Published Tuesday, June 13th, 2006
By John Trumbo, Herald staff writer
Four thousand people who worked for Fluor Hanford 10 years ago
are being told a list including their names and Social Security
numbers was found in a recent drug house raid in Yakima.
Officials said there's no indication the information was used
for identity theft, but are urging those affected to carefully
monitor their financial accounts.
Federal Drug Enforcement Administration agents found the printed
list in a June 1 raid at which several people were arrested,
said DEA spokesman Jeff Eig in Seattle. He would not say if any
of the people at the home were tied to the list by former
employment with Fluor.
"I'm sure the Department of Energy will aggressively
investigate," Eig said, noting DEA agents merely turned over the
list to DOE.
The document contains names, birth dates, work titles, work
telephone numbers and assignments of employees who were
transferred from DOE contractor Westinghouse Hanford to Fluor
Hanford in December 1996. Only a few copies of that employee
list were printed, said Karen Lutz, DOE spokeswoman in Richland.
The discovery is the second security breach of its kind within
the DOE system in two weeks. The first incident involved a
hacker who stole an electronic file containing names, Social
Security numbers, dates of birth and security clearance levels
of 1,500 DOE contractor employees working for the National
Nuclear Security Administration in September 2005.
Lutz said there is no apparent connection between the two
incidents.
Fluor Hanford and DOE in Richland sent an e-mail notification
about the incident to employees Sunday. Memos also were sent to
other Hanford contractor employees, including Pacific Northwest
National Laboratory staff.
Lutz said current and former employees of Fluor Hanford should
contact by e-mail phmclist@rl.gov to inquire if their names are
on the list.
Fluor President and CEO Ron Gallagher said in the memo that the
company was notified late Thursday by police in Yakima that a
raid had turned up a "hard-copy document titled Project Hanford
Management Contract," and it was labeled "sensitive information"
and was dated December 1996.
Gallagher said the list appears to be an original printout, and
"from its physical condition may have been abandoned for some
time."
His statement added, "We have no information that any identity
theft has occurred."
Gallagher said the incident is a theft and breach of security.
"Fluor takes this matter very seriously," he added, noting the
company has notified DOE and the Office of Inspector General.
Gallagher said Fluor Hanford will try to contact employees whose
names are on the list and try to determine if anyone was at risk
because of the security breach.
Fluor employees also are encouraged to monitor their financial
accounts and billing statements for any suspicious activity,
which should be reported to law enforcement.
Anyone who is concerned about identity theft can file a
complaint with the Federal Trade Commission and the U.S. Justice
Department at www.consumer.gov/idtheft.
Lutz said because many Fluor employees from the late 1990s have
moved out of the area or gone to work for other Hanford
companies, Fluor is asking several companies to monitor
financial accounts and billing statements. They are Fluor Daniel
Hanford, Lockheed Martin Hanford, Rust Federal Services of
Hanford, B Hanford, Numatec Hanford, DynCorp Tri-Cities Services
and Duke Engineering &Services Hanford.
Fluor Hanford spokeswoman Judy Connell said the company wanted
to announce the incident quickly even though the investigation
is in the early stage. The raid was June 1, but police realized
what the list was and turned it over to DOE on Thursday, she
said.
DOE and Fluor decided Saturday to notify all employees and
notice was sent out Sunday.
"We don't know when the list was printed, when it got there or
why it got there. We don't have enough information yet," Connell
said.
Fluor Hanford, with 3,500 employees, has been a prime contractor
at Hanford for DOE since 1996.
Hanford employees who have had a theft occur any time since
December 1996 that could be related to the discovery of the list
should contact Chris Jensen, Fluor Hanford's ethics officer, at
376-7067.
The incident prompted U.S. Sen. Maria Cantwell, D-Wash., and a
member of the Senate Energy Committee, to call for hearings on
the DOE security breaches.
"Just last month, the Department of Veterans Affairs lost a file
with 26 million veterans' personal information. Last week, we
found out that the National Nuclear Security Administration kept
the theft of 1,500 workers' personal information secret for at
least eight months," said Cantwell in a statement issued Monday.
Cantwell wrote to DOE Secretary Samuel Bodman on Monday, asking
him to say what safeguards DOE has to protect employees'
personal information, and what he is doing to help current and
former employees whose personal information has been
compromised.
Cantwell said every American can request one free credit report
by going to www.annualcreditreport. com or by calling
1-877-322-8228.
© 2006 Tri-City Herald, Associated Press &Other Wire Services
*****************************************************************
56 Tri-City Herald: I-297 ruled unconstitutional
Published Tuesday, June 13th, 2006
By Annette Cary, Herald staff writer
A federal judge ruled the Hanford waste initiative
unconstitutional Monday.
U.S. District Court Judge Alan McDonald found that Initiative
297 violated the Supremacy, Commerce and Contract clauses of the
U.S. Constitution and struck down the entire initiative before
it could become law.
He made the ruling on summary judgment, finding a trial would be
unnecessary because the facts are clear.
Voters in every county of the state, except Benton and Franklin,
approved the initiative in November 2004 to prevent the
Department of Energy from sending more radioactive waste to
Hanford until waste already there is cleaned up.
However, the federal government remains barred from shipping
most types of radioactive waste to Hanford under an unrelated
settlement in another federal court case.
The Department of Energy agreed in January to stop waste
shipments at least until a new environmental study is finished,
likely in 2008, to replace a flawed study on solid waste
completed in 2004.
"The court does not intend in the slightest to diminish the
concerns of Washington voters regarding the present and future
management of nuclear waste at Hanford," McDonald wrote in his
opinion Monday. "These are very legitimate concerns in light of
the volume of waste already at Hanford and the existing
contamination problems."
However, Congress has said the federal government, not the
states, has authority over radioactive waste, he wrote. The
Supremacy Clause of the Constitution prevents the state from
overruling the federal government on matters the federal
government reserves the right to regulate.
The state attorney general's office was reviewing the 62-page
ruling Monday afternoon and had made no decision on whether to
appeal.
"However, we are mindful that Initiative 297 was enacted by
Washington voters by the widest margin of any initiative in
state history and we will be carefully considering every option
available to the state, including the option of appealing
today's decision," said Attorney General Rob McKenna in a
prepared statement.
Sponsors of the initiative have known that whatever the initial
ruling, there was bound to be an appeal to the 9th Circuit Court
of Appeals, according to a statement from Gerald Pollet, chief
sponsor of the initiative as executive director of the activist
group Heart of America Northwest.
The state argued in Federal District Court that the initiative
did not expand the state's power to regulate waste, but only
required it to regulate waste to the full extent of its
authority.
The state already has been given authority by Congress to
regulate hazardous chemical waste at Hanford, including the
chemical waste that is mixed with radioactive waste from the
past production of plutonium for the nation's nuclear weapons
program.
But Judge McDonald found that the language of the initiative
indicated that its real purpose was to regulate radioactive
materials.
He pointed out several passages from the initiative to support
that finding, including the statement that "use of Hanford as a
national waste dump for radioactive and/or hazardous or toxic
wastes will increase contamination and risks."
The initiative also violated the Commerce Clause of the
Constitution, which gives Congress the power to regulate
business and prohibits states from discriminating in matters of
interstate commerce, McDonald ruled.
While some waste from Hanford is being sent or is planned to be
sent to national repositories in other states, the initiative
would have banned DOE from carrying out plans to send waste to
Hanford.
The federal government plans to send low-level radioactive waste
mixed with chemicals to Hanford for permanent disposal to allow
other sites to be cleaned up and closed.
"The state and others are not pleased with the selection of
Hanford as a disposal facility for (mixed low-level waste)," the
judge wrote. "The fact is, however, that the federal government
is entitled to make the selection. ... Decisions which need to
be made at the national level addressing national concerns
cannot be trumped by protectionist regulations enacted by
individual states."
The Commerce Clause could end up helping Washington by
preventing other states from barring the acceptance of Hanford
waste for disposal, the judge wrote. DOE's plans call for
high-level radioactive waste to be buried at Yucca Mountain,
Nevada, once it is treated, and waste contaminated with
plutonium already is being sent to New Mexico for disposal.
The judge also agreed with arguments brought by the Tri-City
Industrial Development Council that the initiative would violate
the Contract Clause of the Constitution.
The court recognized "that the initiative was so broad that it
improperly interfered with important things outside of Hanford,
such as cancer research projects taking place at the Pacific
Northwest National Laboratory," Matthew Segal, the attorney
representing TRIDEC, said in a statement.
The initiative would prevent Battelle, which operates the
national laboratory, from importing radioactive materials needed
for its contracts, including a contract with IsoRay to research
cancer treatments, the judge wrote.
It also would prevent Areva NP of Richland from importing
radioactive materials it uses to manufacture fuel for nuclear
power reactors, he wrote.
Although the initiative was struck down, Washington continues to
regulate Hanford cleanup through the legally binding Tri-Party
Agreement.
"Although this initiative was sold to the people as a way to
improve cleanup at Hanford, the initiative would actually
dismantle the Tri-Party Agreement and delay cleanup
indefinitely," Segal said.
Cleanup contractor Fluor Hanford, which joined the U.S.
Department of Justice in the lawsuit, now will be able to focus
on cleaning up the site based on the Tri-Party Agreement, said
Judy Connell, spokeswoman for Fluor.
"The TPA has been a real driver in making progress on cleanup at
the site and reducing the risk from the legacy of nuclear
production," she said.
DOE remains committed to safely cleaning up Hanford, said Karen
Lutz, spokeswoman for DOE at Hanford.
While supporters of the initiative wait for the expected appeal,
they may be able to take other action.
Democratic State Sen. Adam Kline said the Legislature will
consider McDonald's opinion as it looks at proposals to amend
state law to carry out the wishes of the voters.
"The court said that the state has authority to regulate mixed
hazardous and radioactive waste, but the court found that the
initiative went too far," said attorney Michael Robinson-Dorn,
professor at the University of Washington Berman Environmental
Law Clinic, in a statement. He joined the state in arguing in
favor of the initiative on behalf of its supporters.
"We respectfully disagree, and will continue to carefully
analyze the decision, but we do not expect this will be the end
of the matter," he said.
This is the second time the U.S. District Court has found a
Hanford waste initiative unconstitutional. A 1980 initiative
that prohibited transportation and storage in Washington of
waste produced elsewhere also violated the Supremacy and
Commerce clauses, the court ruled. That decision was upheld by
the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.
© 2006 Tri-City Herald, Associated Press &Other Wire Services
*****************************************************************
57 DOE: International Energy Agency Meeting
FR Doc E6-9216
[Federal Register: June 13, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 113)]
[Notices] [Page 34081] From the Federal Register Online via GPO
Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr13jn06-47]
AGENCY: Department of Energy (DOE).
ACTION: Notice of meeting.
SUMMARY: The Industry Advisory Board (IAB) to the International
Energy Agency (IEA) will meet on June 20, 2006, at the
headquarters of the IEA in Paris, France, in connection with a
meeting of the IEA's Standing Group on Emergency Questions.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Samuel M. Bradley, Assistant
General Counsel for International and National Security Programs,
Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington,
DC 20585, 202-586- 6738.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In accordance with section
252(c)(1)(A)(i) of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (42
U.S.C. 6272(c)(1)(A)(i)) (EPCA), the following notice of meeting
is provided: A meeting of the Industry Advisory Board (IAB) to
the International Energy Agency (IEA) will be held at the
headquarters of the IEA, 9, rue de la F[eacute]d[eacute]ration,
Paris, France, on June 20, 2006, beginning at 8:30 a.m. The
purpose of this notice is to permit attendance by representatives
of U.S. company members of the IAB at a meeting of the IEA's
Standing Group on Emergency Questions (SEQ), which is scheduled
to be held at the IEA on June 20 beginning at 9:30 a.m.,
including a preparatory encounter among company representatives
from approximately 8:30 a.m. to 9 a.m. The agenda for the
preparatory encounter is a review of the agenda for the SEQ
meeting.
The agenda for the SEQ meeting is under the control of the SEQ.
It is expected that the SEQ will adopt the following agenda: 1.
Adoption of the Agenda 2. Approval of the Summary Record of the
116th Meeting 3. Status of Compliance with IEP Stockholding
Commitments --Reports by Non-Complying Member Countries 4.
Program of Work --The SEQ Program of Work for 2007-2008 5. The
Current Oil Market Situation, including Geopolitical Risks in the
Oil Market --Near-Term Risks to the Oil Market 6. Emergency
Response Review Program --Emergency Response Review (ERR) of
Spain --ERR of the United States --ERR of Canada --Preliminary
Results of ERR of Turkey --Preliminary Results of ERR of the
Czech Republic 7. Report on Current Activities of the IAB 8. The
IEA Collective Action Agreed on September 2, 2005, in Response to
Disrupted Oil Supplies --Roundtable on Follow-Up Measures in
Administrations 9. Demand Restraint Measures --Review of Policies
and Analytical Requirements to Assess Oil Demand Restraint for
Heavy Goods Vehicles 10. Policy and Other Developments in Member
Countries --Belgium --Japan --United States 11. Other Emergency
Response Activities --Report on SEQ Working Group on IEA
Emergency Reserve Calculation Methodology --Reports on IEA
Workshops on Gas Security and Gas Statistics 12. Activities with
Non-Member Countries and International Organizations --Voluntary
Contribution of the United Kingdom --Update on Situation of
Applicant Countries --NMC Activities Related to Emergency
Preparedness --International Energy Forum --G8 --Workshops on Oil
Security in China, Thailand, and India 13. Documents for
Information --Emergency Reserve Situation of IEA Member Countries
on April 1, 2006 --Emergency Reserve Situation of IEA Candidate
Countries on April 1, 2006 --Base Period Final Consumption:
2Q2005-1Q2006 --Monthly Oil Statistics: March 2006 --Update of
Emergency Contacts List 14. Other Business --Dates of Next SEQ
Meetings (tentative) --November 16-17, 2006 --March 20-22, 2007
--June 18-19, 2007 --November 13-15, 2007 As provided in section
252(c)(1)(A)(ii) of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (42
U.S.C. 6272(c)(1)(A)(ii)), the meetings of the IAB are open to
representatives of members of the IAB and their counsel;
representatives of members of the IEA's Standing Group on
Emergency Questions; representatives of the Departments of
Energy, Justice, and State, the Federal Trade Commission, the
General Accounting Office, Committees of Congress, the IEA, and
the European Commission; and invitees of the IAB, the SEQ, or the
IEA.
Issued in Washington, DC, June 2, 2006.
Samuel M. Bradley, Assistant General Counsel for International
and National Security Programs.
[FR Doc. E6-9216 Filed 6-12-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
*****************************************************************
58 DOE: Office of International Regimes and Agreements; Proposed
FR Doc E6-9217
[Federal Register: June 13, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 113)]
[Notices] [Page 34080-34081] From the Federal Register Online via
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr13jn06-46]
Subsequent Arrangement AGENCY: Department of Energy (DOE).
ACTION: Notice of proposed subsequent arrangement.
SUMMARY: This notice is being issued under the authority of
Section 131 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (42
U.S.C. 2160). The Department is providing notice of a proposed
``subsequent arrangement'' under the Agreement for Cooperation in
the Peaceful Uses of Nuclear Energy between the United States and
the European Atomic Energy Community (EURATOM) and the Agreement
for Cooperation Concerning Civil Uses of Atomic Energy between
the United States and Norway.
This subsequent arrangement involves the provision of
programmatic consent to the Euratom Supply Agency and the
Government of Norway for the retransfer
[[Page 34081]] of irradiated fuel rods containing a maximum of
30,000 grams of U.S.- origin uranium, containing a maximum of 400
grams U-235, and a up to 400 grams of U.S.-origin plutonium, from
the Euratom Supply Agency to the Government of Norway for neutron
radiography examination.
The specified material, which is now located at Studsvik Nuclear
AB, Nykoping, Sweden, will, upon approval, be transferred to the
Institut for Energiteknikk (IFE), Halden, Norway between March
2006 and March 2007. IFE Halden is a research institute within
the fields of nuclear technology, man-machine communication, and
energy technology.
The material will be transferred in several shipments, with the
plutonium weight per transport remaining below 100 grams. After
neutron radiography examination in Norway, the Government of
Norway will rely on this programmatic consent to have IFE Halden
will return the material to Studsvik Nuclear for final disposal,
subject to the same shipping limit of not more than 100 grams of
plutonium per transport when the material is returned from Norway
to Sweden.
In accordance with Section 131 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954,
as amended, we have determined that this subsequent arrangement
will not be inimical to the common defense and security.
This subsequent arrangement will take effect no sooner than
fifteen days after the date of publication of this notice.
For the Department of Energy.
Richard Goorevich, Director, Office of International Regimes and
Agreements.
[FR Doc. E6-9217 Filed 6-12-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
*****************************************************************
59 Knox News: Hacker could have OR workers' data
Nov. security breach at NNSA may impact 100 Y-12 employees
By FRANK MUNGER, munger@knews.com
June 13, 2006
OAK RIDGE - About 100 Oak Ridge workers may have had their Social
Security numbers and other information compromised by a hacker
who gained entry to a government computer system last fall, a
spokesman at the National Nuclear Security Administration
confirmed Monday. All of the Oak Ridge workers are employed at
the Y-12 nuclear weapons plant, Bryan Wilkes of the NNSA said in
a telephone interview from Washington, D.C.
Overall, 1,502 individuals may have been impacted by a breach in
the computer system at the NNSA's service operations at
Albuquerque, N.M.
The computer theft occurred eight months ago but didn't become
public until Friday during a congressional hearing in
Washington, creating a furor among some congressmen and a
controversy within the U.S. Department of Energy.
The NNSA is a semi-independent part of DOE that oversees the
nation's nuclear weapons complex, including the Y-12 warhead
plant in Oak Ridge. Part of the furor stems from the fact that
Linton Brooks, the administrator of the NNSA, testified that he
knew of the breach last September but did not inform his boss,
Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman, until last week or pass along
the warning to affected employees.
U.S. Rep. Joe Barton, R-Texas, chairman of the House Energy and
Commerce Committee, called for Brooks to resign.
Wilkes said senior managers within NNSA began calling affected
workers over the weekend to "sort of explain what happened."
Those calls were completed Monday, he said.
"They were told what information was taken illegally by this
hacker and the steps they can take (to protect themselves),"
Wilkes said.
Wilkes said Brooks was concerned about the breach in the
unclassified computer system and "sorry for any problem this may
have caused any employee."
Steven Wyatt, a federal spokesman at Y-12, said he could not
comment on the situation.
Senior writer Frank Munger may be reached at 865-342-6329.
© 2006 - Knoxville News Sentinel
*****************************************************************
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:
*****************************************************************