*****************************************************************
07/18/06 ****     RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL)       **** VOL 14.169
*****************************************************************
   RADBULL IS PRODUCED BY THE ABALONE ALLIANCE CLEARINGHOUSE
*****************************************************************
Send News Stories to news@energy-net.org with title on subject
line and first line of body

                         NUCLEAR POLICY
 
1 Guardian Unlimited: The climate-change deniers have now gone nuclear
2 AFP: Key UN powers meet informally on Iran 
3 IRNA: Iran to hold talks with Europeans on nuclear case - President 
4 AFP: Lebanon crisis delays UN focus on Iran nuclear issue -- diploma
5 AFP: Saudi wary of Iran actions in Arab world
6 AFP: Top Iranian MP issues nuclear treaty warning 
7 IRNA: MP: Majlis ready to consider withdrawal from NPT 
8 Korea Herald: Seoul, Washington agree on 5-party talks as alternativ
9 AFP: Japan prepares more NKorea sanctions -
10 US: [shundahaialert] Help Us Defeat PFS and Divine Strake
11 US: TomPaine.com: Bush Does It In The Dark
12 Sydney Morning Herald: PM says US influenced uranium inquiry - 
13 Czech Citizens Unsure About U.S." Missile Defense" Base
14 AFP: India, US discuss terrorism, nuclear deal 
15 IAEA: G8 Leaders Voice Support for IAEA Work
16 Australian: Joining nuclear club will be a test of trust | 
17 Australian: Howard's nuke challenge to Bush 
 
                         NUCLEAR REACTORS
 
18 RIA Novosti: Gazprombank's JV to buy nuclear energy assets
19 BBC: Nuclear plant warned after
20 Platts: Bush, Putin plan agreement on civilian nuclear energy
21 US: Rutland Herald: NRC audit results to be released July 20
22 US: NRC: Sunshine Act; Notice of Meeting
23 US: NRC: PSEG Nuclear LLC; Notice of Consideration of Issuance of 
24 US: NRC: R.E. Ginna Nuclear Power Plant, LLC; R.E. Ginna Nuclear Pow
25 US: Hudson Valley News: Indian Point: A search for common ground   
26 US: The Plank: YES NEW NUKES?: 
27 SNA: Power Plant Bidders Disappoint Bulgaria
 
                          NUCLEAR SECURITY
 
 
                          NUCLEAR SAFETY
 
28 US: Rad Workshop Wed + TVC Mtg Thurs
29 US: APP.COM: Filter takes radium from water | 
30 US: WWUB: State has no choice but to defend flawed Initiative 297 
31 Chilliwack Times: Nuclear fallout victims find health here 
32 Madison courier: Depleted uranium at JPG on meeting agenda for tonig
 
                         NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE
 
33 Kennebec Journal: Can we trust the feds on nuclear waste?
34 Nevada Observer: Nevada Could Be World Leader In Alternative Power G
35 US: Boston Globe: Baldacci opposes possible storage of more radwaste
36 Nevada Observer: Reid Calls For GAO Audit Of DOE Spending At Yucca  
37 BreakingNews.ie: Latest Sellafield leak proves safety failings, says
38 US: UPI: Museum to display old nuke train cars
39 Las Vegas SUN: New opening date for Yucca Mountain waste dump is 201
 
                           PEACE
 
 
                        US DEPT. OF ENERGY
 
40 DOE: Secretary Bodman Visits Iraq
41 Tri-City Herald: Estimated cost of Hanford's vitrification plant may
42 Paducah Sun: Plant-retirees-not-optimistic-about-pension 
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
                         FULL NEWS STORIES
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
 1 Guardian Unlimited: The climate-change deniers have now gone nuclear

Comment | 

When the rightwing tradition of bad science comes onside, it's
time to look seriously at other energy technologies 

                 
Polly Toynbee

Tuesday July 18, 2006 The Guardian             

Murderous mayhem in the Middle East sends oil prices through the
roof - $78 a barrel and climbing. Electricity prices are up 35%
in two years, gas prices up 53%. So the government launched its
energy review last week in a turbulent market. With no certainty
on price, all estimates of the costs of various energy
technologies are equally back-of-the-envelope guesses.

So political predilection guides this whole debate: the
pro-business right is instinctively pro-nuclear, the left is
anti. Without verifiable forecasts, one expert's envelope flap
vies with another's. That allows political passions on all sides
to masquerade as pure science or economics.
 			 		 			 			Article continues
The old right has been on an arduous journey, with most
finally converted to the truth universally acknowledged, except
by flat-earthers: the world is warming at life-on-earth
threatening speed. When the climate-deniers' case collapsed,
they retreated to an ideological redoubt claiming global warming
was a natural phenomenon, not amenable to man-made remedy. But
that fortress crumbled too, and even George Bush, last of the
deniers, conceded.

For some reason the old deniers, barely batting an eyelid,
shifted over to nuclear as the only salvation, though those who
have been so wrong owe a little humility when it comes to next
steps. Many hail from a bizarre tradition of rightwing bad
science: remember Andrew Neill as Sunday Times editor running a
dangerous campaign that denied HIV caused Aids, branding the
latter as a disease only of gays and the wildly promiscuous.
Consider the continuing claim of the Mail and Melanie Phillips
that the MMR vaccine causes autism, panicking mothers into
failing to immunise babies. Posing as hard-headed realists,
those on the right are more prone to pit their ideology against
the weight of science. Seat belts? Motorbike helmets?

Chlorofluorocarbons and the ozone layer? Smoking bans?

Advertising junk food to children? The science-based realos tend
to be on the left, conviction fundis on the right.

Climate change leaves no doubt that nuclear power is infinitely
better than roasting to death. New stations are likely to be
safer and better built, but will still produce a lot of
radioactive waste, if less than before. The energy review still
has no idea what to do with it. Even so, nuclear is better than
baking.

But why are nuclear enthusiasts so sure there is no better
alternative? A ring of off-shore wind turbines round these
blustery islands would give permanent energy. Tony Blair chose a
picturesque boat ride to one to launch his review. It's
expensive - but compared with what? So far the cost of nuclear,
clean coal and all other untested options is guesswork.

Here's the conundrum: the kind of people now supporting nuclear
are the same ones appalled by vast state-sponsored groundnut
schemes in the making: look at ID cards, gigantic IT pipedreams,
Concorde, the Dome or other balloons swelling up from
politicians' airy rhetoric. The history of nuclear power is the
most grotesque example of a state programme founded on dreams
mushrooming out of control because no one dared say "Stop!". In
the 50s people were promised energy so cheap there would be no
bills, so no party dared stop pouring good money after bad.

Construction was always wildly over cost and late, delivering
far less energy than promised. So why are they falling for the
same snake oil again?

The wise will keep a hawk's eye on the money. Nuclear is not and
never was feasible without heavy subsidy. When the government
swears there will be no price guarantee or subsidy, none of the
experts believes it - though the industry naturally pretends.

Investors will only build on a worldly-wise understanding that
the state will step in, one way or another. Always has, always
will.

Even the CEO of the US nuclear power company Dominion said that,
despite US government wishes for new nuclear power stations, he
would not build, to avoid giving credit raters Standard &Poor's
and his own chief financial officer "a heart attack". Standard
&Poor's say that not even government help with construction
costs changes this reality: "an electric utility with a nuclear
exposure has weaker credit than one without and can expect to
pay more ... for credit".

The Treasury has just said it will sell a chunk of its British
Energy interest. Who wants it? Probably EDF, the French
government-subsidised company bidding to build new nuclear on BE
land. (Watch for favours or subsidies in return.) BE already had
a £5.1bn liability written off by the taxpayer as one lot of
shareholders saw their investment go bust. Yet somehow fresh
"value" has been added. The Treasury hopes to raise £2bn of its
paper £6bn BE holding.

Why now? Because sky-high gas prices turn BE profitable: the
unwary might buy shares, not realising new pipelines and gas
from other sources may soon lower prices. But most buyers will
be canny investors who know if nuclear building begins, all
future governments must back it. Think leaky Thames Water, the
railways and all hybrid state-private essential services: even
if tax money flows in one end, shareholders can still take it
out the other. Despite £70bn in unpaid nuclear clean-up costs,
somehow BE still makes "profits". A rum business.

The eyes of would-be nuclear builders, meanwhile, are on Areva,
the French government- subsidised company building in Finland
the first new nuclear station anywhere in decades. It has just
admitted it is already one year behind, after its first year of
construction. Beset with design problems and skill shortages,
this is no market tester but a loss-leader financed by Finish
local and central government and the French, borrowing at a
subsidised 2.6% from a bank that owns the company building the
turbines. Even then, its says it will generate electricity at
twice the cost the UK government uses to guesstimate the price
of new nuclear power here.

For Britain, nuclear stations are South Sea bubbles in concrete.
Once embarked on, they drain political enthusiasm for any other
energy finance. Governments hide the true cost from voters, and
even from themselves. State insurance against disaster isn't
even counted in. Watching the small print will not reveal all:
hidden taxpayer backing will be watermarked into every clause of
new nuclear contracts. If not, if Labour genuinely means no
subsidy, there will be no new stations and all this nuclear
posturing may be fantasy politics.

· Polly Toynbee has been named columnist of choice for opinion
leaders in a survey commissioned for Editorial Intelligence
polly.toynbee@guardian.co.uk 

Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
 2 AFP: Key UN powers meet informally on Iran 

 Tue Jul 18, 3:44 PM ET 
		 	 
UNITED NATIONS (AFP) - The five permanent members of the UN 
Security Council plus Germany held informal talks on the Iranian 
nuclear crisis, but reached no decision on a text mandating 
Tehran halt sensitive nuclear fuel work. 

 French Ambassador Jean-Marc de La Sabliere, the council
president for July, made no comment after the 20-minute
closed-door consultations with his colleagues from Britain,
China, Russia, the United States and Germany.
 
A "robust" draft resolution demanding a freeze on Iranian
uranium enrichment was circulated at the meeting but the Russian
and Chinese envoys said they had no instructions from their
governments on how to proceed, Western diplomats said.
 
Another round of informal consultations involving the six
nations was scheduled for Wednesday, Rick Grenell, a spokesman
for the US mission to the United Nations
" /> United Nations, said. But there was no word on when the
full 15-member council might take up the issue.
 
Another diplomat said the six envoys who met Tuesday were keen
to show that even though the Lebanese crisis moved to the top of
the council's agenda Monday, the Iran
" /> Iranissue remained a priority.
 
The United States last week announced that a draft resolution
demanding a mandatory halt to Iran's uranium enrichment
activities would be put forward in the 15-member council early
this week.
 
The move followed a meeting of the six major powers -- Britain,
China, France, Germany, Russia and the United States -- in
Paris, where it was decided to send the Iran nuclear dossier
back to the council after Tehran failed to respond to the demand
for a uranium enrichment freeze.
 
G8 countries -- Britain, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan,
Russia and the United States -- on Monday issued a statement at
their Saint Petersburg summit calling on Iran to accept the
proposal from the five permanent UN Security Council members and
Germany for resolving concern over its nuclear program.
 
That proposal calls on Iran to drop plans to enrich uranium
itself in exchange for a package of trade, technology,
diplomatic and other incentives, as well as multilateral talks
-- also involving the United States.
 
But Iran argues that it wants to enrich uranium only to make
reactor fuel and that this is a right under the nuclear
Non-Proliferation Treaty, though the process can be extended to
build nuclear weapons.
 
Western powers believe Iran is trying to build a nuclear bomb
under the cover of a peaceful atomic energy program. Tehran
denies the charge.
 
Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
 3 IRNA: Iran to hold talks with Europeans on nuclear case - President -

Tehran, July 18, IRNA

Iran-President-Nuclear 

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said here Tuesday that Iran would
hold talks with the Europeans to achieve progress in efforts to
settle its nuclear case.

 The president made the remarks in his closing address to the
third meeting of the Iranian Students' Parliament.

 "The United States should strive not to add to current problems
for no reason at all. If a problem arises, it is affects all,"
he said.

 "Access to nuclear fuel cycle is the inalienable right and
demand of the Iranian nation," he added.





*****************************************************************
 4 AFP: Lebanon crisis delays UN focus on Iran nuclear issue -- diplomats 

 Tuesday July 18, 01:08 AM 

  [The United Nations headquarters in New York]   

UNITED NATIONS (AFP) - The deadly fighting between Israel and
Hezbollah in Lebanon has postponed Security Council
consideration of a draft resolution that would demand a halt to
Iran's sensitive nuclear fuel work, diplomats said.

The United States last week announced that a draft resolution
demanding a halt to Iran's uranium enrichment activities would
be put forward in the 15-member council early this week.

The move followed a meeting of six major powers -- Britain,
China, France, Germany, Advertisement
 [ src=] Russia and the United States -- in Paris where it was
decided to send the Iran nuclear dossier back to the council
after Tehran failed to respond to the demand for a uranium
enrichment freeze.

But instead of discussing Iran, the council on Monday met behind
closed doors to take up the dangerous Middle East crisis, which
Washington has blamed on militants of Lebanon's Hezbollah and
the Palestinian Hamas radical groups with their abduction of
three Israeli soldiers.

"I would have expected that as of this morning, we would have
been working on the Iran resolution, but Iran's proxies in the
Middle East, Hamas and Hezbollah, obviously have other work in
mind," US Ambassador John Bolton said.

Several diplomats said Iran would not come up for discussion
Tuesday while UN officials said no formal Security Council
meeting on the issue was planned.

"If Iran wanted to contribute positively to peace and security
in the Middle East, it would have Hamas and Hezbollah release
the captive Israeli soldiers," Bolton said.

In its drive against Israel, Hezbollah retains financial,
military and ideological support from Syria and Iran. Tehran
also is a key backer of Hamas.

G8 countries -- Britain, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan,
Russia and the United States -- meanwhile Monday issued a
statement at their Saint Petersburg summit calling on Iran to
accept the proposal from the five permanent UN Security Council
members and Germany for resolving concern over its nuclear
program.

That proposal calls on Iran to drop plans to enrich uranium
itself in exchange for a package of trade, technology,
diplomatic and other incentives as well as multilateral talks --
also involving the United States.

But Iran argues that it wants to enrich uranium only to make
reactor fuel and that this is a right under the
Non-Proliferation Treaty, though the process can be extended to
build nuclear weapons.

Western powers believe Iran is trying to build a nuclear bomb
under the cover of a peaceful atomic energy programme. Tehran
denies the charge.
 
AFP
*****************************************************************
 5 AFP: Saudi wary of Iran actions in Arab world

 by Lydia Georgi Tue Jul 18, 5:32 AM ET 
		 	 
RIYADH (AFP) - Saudi Arabia, which has indirectly blamed the 
Iranian-backed Hezbollah for Israel " /> Israel's onslaught 
against Lebanon, is wary of Tehran using Arab states to pursue 
its own agenda, experts have said. 

 The oil-rich kingdom last week accused the Shiite militant
movement, without naming it, of "adventurism" that put all Arab
countries at risk by capturing two Israeli soldiers and
triggering Israel's offensive.
 
"It is necessary to make a distinction between legitimate
resistance and uncalculated adventurism by certain elements," an
official source said on Monday.
 
"The kingdom is not concerned by the extension of Iran
" /> Iran's influence per se but by the fact that it uses Arab
countries such as Syria
" /> Syria, Lebanon and Iraq
" /> Iraqto pursue its political interests," commentator Qenan
al-Ghamdi told AFP.
 
"When these countries land in trouble, it is Saudi Arabia that
bears the consequences, as happened in Lebanon in the past and
will happen again now" after the devastation caused by Israel's
attacks, he said.
 
Saudi Arabia sponsored and hosted the Taef accord which ended
Lebanon's 15-year civil war in 1990 and has since helped fund
its reconstruction. In the current crisis, it has offered 50
million dollars in immediate aid.
 
Even if Syria, which is an ally of Shiite Iran and likewise a
supporter of Hezbollah, is attacked by Israel, Saudi Arabia
would also end up footing the bill, Ghamdi said.
 
A member of the appointed Shura (consultative) Council, who
asked not to be named, said Saudi Arabia could not sit back and
watch Lebanon being used "as an arena for settling scores or
waging proxy wars".
 
He was referring to the host of disputes pitting Iran and Syria
against the United States and Israel.
 
All efforts by Saudi Arabia and the Lebanese to put the country
back on its feet are going down the drain as Israel pounds
Lebanon over an action in which neither the Beirut government
nor other Arab states had a hand, he said.
 
"Lebanon has been turned into an arena for easing Western
pressure on Iran and Syria," the former over its controversial
nuclear program and the latter over its continued role in its
smaller neighbour, the Shura member added.
 
On Monday, the Saudi cabinet said Riyadh was undertaking a
series of contacts to halt "Israel's war on Lebanon" and
implicitly criticized the United States for blocking UN action
on the crisis.
 
Saudi King Abdullah met in Jeddah on Saturday with Iran's top
national security official, Ali Larijani, who delivered a
message from the Islamic republic's President Mahmud Ahmadinejad.
 
Crown Prince Sultan bin Abdul Aziz is also expected to discuss
the Lebanon conflict when he meets French President Jacques
Chirac
" /> President Jacques Chiracduring a visit to Paris this week.
 
Saudi Arabia's decrying of "adventurism" -- a stand in which it
was joined by US allies Egypt and Jordan -- came a few months
after it accused Shiite and non-Arab Iran of meddling in Iraq's
affairs.
 
But according to Ghamdi, Sunni Arab-ruled Saudi Arabia is not
worried about the expansion of Iranian influence only because
Iran is predominantly Shiite.
 
"The kingdom does not mind if Iraq's Shiites become stronger on
the basis of an understanding with others. The problem would be
if one element grows stronger on a sectarian basis," Ghamdi said.
 
But if fighting between Iraq's ruling Shiite majority and the
once-dominant Sunnis turns into full-fledged sectarian war,
Saudi Arabia, which has a Shiite minority, "would be harmed
politically, economically and socially". 

The Shura Council member, meanwhile, said that Iran's growing
clout in Iraq had already led to sectarian conflict, and Riyadh
did not want the same to happen in Lebanon.
 	 		 			
Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
 6 AFP: Top Iranian MP issues nuclear treaty warning 

 Tuesday July 18, 12:40 PM 

  [Parliament Speaker Gholam Ali Haddad-Adel (3rd R) visits the
Bushehr nuclear power plant]   
    
TEHRAN (AFP) - Iran's hardline parliament may push though a law
on suspending membership of the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty
if the Security Council pressures Tehran to freeze sensitive
atomic work, a top MP has warned.

"If the Security Council wants to pass a resolution obliging a
halt of uranium enrichment, parliament will undoubtedly bring up
the issue of suspending Iran's NPT membership," Alaeddin
Borujerdi was quoted as saying by students news agency ISNA on
Tuesday.

"We hope that the Security Council does not make an unreasonable
decision that changes Iran's current attitude," said the MP, who
heads parliament's influential national security and foreign
policy commission.

Up to now, he insisted, Iran has been "respecting the NPT and
the regulations of the International Atomic Energy Agency."

Last week Britain, China, France, Germany, Russia and the United
States decided to send Iran's case back to the Security Council
after Tehran failed to respond to demands it freeze uranium
enrichment.

Iran says it only wants to enrich to levels needed to make
reactor fuel and that this is a right under the NPT. But the
technology can be extended to make weapons, hence demands for a
suspension while an IAEA probe is still in progress.

Diplomats say the Council could vote as early as next week on a
draft resolution that would make a freeze legally binding.

Iran resumed enrichment in January, and has already ignored a
non-binding Security Council demand for the work to stop.
 
AFP
*****************************************************************
 7 IRNA: MP: Majlis ready to consider withdrawal from NPT 

, July 18, IRNA

-- 

Head of Majlis National Security and Foreign Policy Commission
Alaeddin Boroujerdi said here Tuesday that if the UN Security
Council wants to issue a resolution making suspension of uranium
enrichment mandatory, Majlis under current conditions might
consider suspending Iran's NPT membership.

 Speaking to reporters on the sidelines of today's Majlis open
session, he said Iran has adopted a positive approach towards EU
proposals from the beginning but the recent statement issued by
G8 seems to be totally unacceptable and illogical.

 The western countries have already experienced the decisive
decisions made by Majlis on suspension of voluntary
implementation of additional protocol to the NPT, he said.

 He expressed the hope that the UN Security Council would not
create a situation under which Iran which abides by rules and
regulations of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and
NPT would have to change its course.

 In case the UN Security Council issues such a resolution, it
would be against NPT and in total contradiction with clause four
of the same treaty.

 If Iran is deprived of such legitimate rights, there would be
no reasons for the country to continue its cooperation, he
pointed out.

 He described the recent statement issued by the Group-8 as
repetition of the statement issued by 5+1.

*****************************************************************
 8 Korea Herald: Seoul, Washington agree on 5-party talks as alternative   
        
South Korea and the United States yesterday agreed that five-way
talks without North Korea would be the best alternative to the
six-way talks, boycotted by the North and clouded by its recent
missile tests.

 South Korea's chief delegate to the nuclear negotiations, Chun
Yung-woo, told reporters in Washington, "We will not be
discussing (at the five-way talks) how to pressure the North,
but will discuss how to offer North Korea the incentives pledged
in the Joint Statement."

 Song's comments appear aimed at easing concerns by China that
the talks excluding Pyongyang would further push the reclusive
regime away from the negotiations.

 Chun's U.S. counterpart, Christopher Hill, was also quoted as
saying that the five-way talks were to be in line with the
six-party talks. The official nuclear talks involve the two
Koreas, the United States, China, Japan and Russia. 

The concept of five-way talks first emerged last year, during
another hiatus in the nuclear negotiations caused by North
Korea's boycott since 2004.

 The United States had suggested that the five other countries
gather first to discuss how to bring North Korea back to the
table. The proposal was quickly shelved when the North decided
to return to the talks in June last year.

 At the fourth round of talks in Sept. 2005, the parties managed
to draw out an agreement on the principles of denuclearizing the
North in return for compensation packages including economic
aid. But the negotiations once again hit a snag in November when
the North protested Washington's financial measures against its
alleged counterfeiting activities, and began another boycott.

 China, which has been enjoying its position as the presiding
country of the six-party talks, has recently turned more
positive towards holding the five-way talks, officials said.

 "Russia does not appear to have a problem (with opening
five-nation talks) and China seems to be showing more
flexibility. We need to discuss it a little further," Chun said.

 Chun flew to Washington last Sunday to meet top U.S. officials. 

At the talks, Chun and Hill agreed that North Korea should
calmly recognize the message from the international community
relayed through the latest U.N. Security Council resolution and
refrain from taking any more aggravating measures, and restore
the moratorium of its missile launches, U.S. sources here said.

 Neither Chun nor Hill specified a deadline for North Korea's
return to the six-party talks.

 They said that time should be given for the North to
contemplate and understand the U.N. resolution.

 Over the weekend, the U.N. council voted to impose limited
sanctions on North Korea and demanded that Pyongyang suspend its
ballistic missile program. 

Seoul officials, desperately seeking a breakthrough in the North
Korean crisis, emphasized that the five-way talks will be a
negotiation that leaves the door open for the North to return,
rather than a gathering that has the door closed on North Korea.

 Observers said developments are likely to take shape when U.S.
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice visits Japan, China and
South Korea on the occasion of her attending the Asia Regional
Forum in Malaysia next week.

 The North Korean issue is likely to empower the ARF talks with
foreign minister-level and vice foreign minister-level officials
from all six parties having been invited.

 Hill of the United States, Vice Foreign Minister Wu Dawei of
China and Director General of the Asia-Oceania Bureau, Kenichiro
Sasae of Japan are all participating members of the senior
official meeting of the ARF. All three head their respective
nuclear negotiating teams.

 If Chun from the South, Vice Foreign Minister Alexander
Alexeyev of Russia, and Vice Foreign Minister Kim Kye-gwan of
the North also attend, all chief negotiators of the six-party
talks will be gathering in one place.

 If North Korea's Kim turns up, a meeting between Rice and Kim
could also be arranged. If he doesn't, it is most likely for the
head delegates of the five parties to gather for discussion.

 China is reportedly urging North Korea to send its delegate to
the ARF, they said. (angiely@heraldm.com)

By Lee Joo-hee

2006.07.19
 
*****************************************************************
 9 AFP: Japan prepares more NKorea sanctions -

Tuesday July 18, 03:28 PM 
 

TOKYO (AFP) - Japan says it will target North Korea's financial
assets in fresh sanctions against Pyongyang after a UN
resolution demanded the suspension of its missile program.
 
As South Korea voiced misgivings about tightening the pressure
on the North, Japanese Finance Minister Sadakazu Tanigaki said
Japan was eyeing limiting transfers of the impoverished state's
financial assets.
 
"We will work hard so that we can start it as soon as possible,"
Tanigaki said of the new sanctions.
 
"We have started the work to specify what would become the
targets of rules to limit transfer of financial assets," he told
a news conference.
 
The new sanctions would be imposed after groundwork by Japanese
officials, said Chief Cabinet Secretary Shinzo Abe.
 
"We have ordered ministries and agencies concerned to start work
so that we can take necessary measures related to regulating
transfer of financial assets at an appropriate time," he said.
 
"We will continue the (existing) strict measures related to
export control over North Korea's missile programs and
non-proliferation of nuclear weapons," said Abe, a frontrunner
to succeed Junichiro Koizumi as premier this year.
 
Japan has already banned a major ferry link, visits by diplomats
and charter flights from North Korea following the communist
state's test-firing of seven missiles on July 5.
 
It lobbied for the UN resolution passed Saturday which bans the
buying and selling of material and technology that could boost
North Korea's missile program.
 
But Japanese measures are seen as having limited effects on
North Korea, as the vast majority of its commerce is with its
main ally China and South Korea.
 
South Korean Unification Minister Lee Jong-Seok said the UN
resolution included targeted sanctions and did not mean imposing
general restrictions on the North's economy.
 
"If we interpret the resolution beyond its limits, there would
be no way out in this issue," Lee said in an interview with
South Korea's state-run KBS Radio 1.
 
All UN members "should comply with the resolution but at the
same time, the resolution must be applied precisely," said Lee,
a key figure in the South's drive to reconcile with its
communist neighbor.
 
Japan said it would coordinate with other countries to ensure
its sanctions are effective.
 
"Economic sanctions are not effective if only done by one
country," Justice Minister Seiken Sugiura said. "If we were to
do it, it is most effective when executed through international
cooperation."
 
Japan is one of the strongest critics of North Korea. It is
particularly sensitive as Pyongyang's previous test of a
long-range missile, the Taepodong-1, flew over Japan into the
Pacific Ocean in 1998.
 
North Korea is also widely reviled here for its past kidnappings
of Japanese civilians to train its spies, a row that has
prevented the two countries from establishing diplomatic
relations.
 
   Copyright © 2006 AFP. All rights reserved. All information
*****************************************************************
 10 [shundahaialert] Help Us Defeat PFS and Divine Strake
 
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2006 15:08:25 -0700

X-Nohoney: yes white-hard - relay H=adsl-63-203-231-61.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net (borg.energy-net.org) [63.203.231.61]
X-Spam-Class: HAM-VERY-WHITELIST

<x-flowed>
Dear friends,

Wow. What an INTENSE year it's been!

The nuclear industry, military contractors, and the government agencies 
that serve them, never let up in Indian country. And we're never short of 
the consequent problems to deal with

 >From struggling to stop a planned "super-bomb" test at the Nevada Test 
Site, to resisting the fast-moving, post-licensing process for the 
high-level nuclear waste dump on the Skull Valley Goshute reservation in 
Utah, the personnel at Shundahai Network have plenty to do.

In many ways, we are actually required to work harder than in recent memory 
to resist very urgent problems. And as we proceed, we are in serious need 
of funds.

If there is any time to help Shundahai Network, it is now- two major reasons:

1. "Super-bomb" test planned at the Nevada Test Site.

The U.S. Government has, once again, shocked the world by its recent 
intention to detonate a 700-ton explosive at the Nevada Test Site. This 
test, dubbed "Divine Strake" is linked to its much-opposed "bunker-buster" 
nuclear weapons program.

Though this explosion itself is not nuclear, it is expected to kick up 
radioactive debris from previous nuclear tests into a mushroom cloud rising 
upwards of 10,000 feet. It is alleged that it will release other hazardous, 
if not lethal, gasses, and has been described by authorities as being 
visible from as far away as Las Vegas.

To stop this test, our Executive Director, Pete Litster, is involved in a 
recently filed lawsuit, along with other plaintiffs from the Western 
Shoshone Nation and Downwinders from Utah. This suit has helped delay this 
weapons test "indefinitely", but the feds expect to resume progress on it 
by September.

In addition to this lawsuit, we continue to apply our critical capacity on 
other fronts, and are central to organizing a substantial and diverse 
coalition keeping up opposition this test until we accomplish complete 
cancellation.  We have also conducted non-violent action at the Test Site 
to stop this test.

For news and information on this test, the coalition, the lawsuit, action 
news,  information on the opposition to it and how you can help, please 
check on the web at http://www.shundahai.org/divine_strake.htm.

We urgently need funds to secure our logistical capacity and the ability 
for personnel to continue to organize and participate in these and related 
events.

2. Resistance continues against the unprecedented high-level nuclear waste 
dump on the Skull Valley Goshute Reservation in Utah

Shundahai Network continues to resist the establishment of the 
unprecedented Private Fuel Storage (PFS) high-level nuclear waste dump on 
the Skull Valley Goshute Reservation in Utah.

As you are aware, after eight years, PFS was awarded a contentious license 
from the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission to establish this nuclear dump.

Shundahai Network has been engaged in this issue since the beginning of the 
PFS debacle, over 8 years ago, and continues to fight it. This includes 
providing direct support to Goshutes who struggle to resist this project, 
as well by keeping news and action information flowing to you on the web 
page http://www.shundahai.org/skull_valley_info.htm and through action 
alerts as this issue progresses.

We also intend, and are capable of mounting direct non-violent civil 
resistance to this project if required. We have the capacity and the 
personnel to meet the nuclear industry head-on on this front, and we need 
your help to guarantee that.

Shundahai Network serves you. Please help us with a financial donation. Be 
as generous as you can.

You may donate money a variety of ways.

Shundahai Network is a tax-deductible educational organization under the 
fiscal sponsorship of Center for Energy Research. To receive a tax 
deduction, checks must be made out to Center for Energy Research, with the 
words "Shundahai Network" written in the memo line, and sent to PO Box 1115 
Salt Lake City, UT 84110.

You may also donate by credit card via our website by linking to the "make 
a donation" button at the top left-hand corner of http://www.shundahai.org. 
Currently, web-based donations are not tax-deductible, but they do have the 
advantage of being available for use immediately.

You may also purchase quality Shundahai Network logo merchandise at 
http://www.cafepress.com/shundahainet, or may join the iGive shopping 
network, which donates a portion of your regular online purchases to the 
cause of your choice.  We have detailed instructions at 
http://www.shundahai.org/donate.htm  option 4.

Please help. There is too much at stake for anything less than success.

Sincerely,
Pete Litster
Executive Director
Shundahai Network
Shundahai Network
www.shundahai.org
P.O. Box 1115
Salt Lake City, UT 84110
Phone- 801.533.0128
Fax- 801.533.0129
shundahai@shundahai.org

Online Fundraising Store- www.cafepress.com/shundahainet
If you are a Myspace user, you can now add us! www.Myspace.com/shundahai

Shundahai is a Newe (Western Shoshone) word meaning "Peace and Harmony with 
all Creation"

</x-flowed>
*****************************************************************
 11 TomPaine.com: Bush Does It In The Dark
              
David C. Vladeck

July 18, 2006

David C. Vladeck is a professor of law and director of the
Institute for Public Representation at Georgetown University Law
School. Professor Vladeck is an expert in open government law
and has extensive experience litigating cases under the federal
open record laws, including the Freedom of Information Act. 

A government of and for the people should be at all times open
to public view. That was the wisdom nearly a century ago of
populist Williams Jennings Bryan. Justice Louis D. Brandeis made
the same point later, when he made his famous remark that
sunlight is said to be the best of disinfectants. 

But it wasnt until 40 years ago, with the July 4, 1966, signing
of the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) by President Lyndon B.
Johnson, that ordinary citizens finally gained the right to see
their government at work. 

FOIA has had an illustrious history, but it has fallen on hard
times of late. When the complicated legacy of President George
W. Bush is written, one thing is certain: He will be remembered
as the secrecy president. Bush and his advisors are obsessed
with secrecy, and this obsession began well before the nightmare
of 9/11. 

Before that date, Attorney General John Ashcroft instructed
agencies to withhold records if there were any plausible grounds
to do so, reversing a prior memo by his predecessor, Janet Reno.
Bush also issued an Executive Order severely limiting access to
the records of former presidentsa measure still being
challenged in courtplacing many of the records of his father
off limits to the public. 

Historian Stanley Kutler remarked that, if Bushs action stands,
he will have substantially shut down historical research of
recent presidents. With this order, we would have no studies of
recent events such as we have for the Vietnam War, using Lyndon
Johnsons and Richard Nixons records to reveal their own doubts
about the war. 

After 9/11, the administrations mantra became secrecy makes
America safe, and it embarked on an unprecedented effort to
halt the flow of government information to the public. At the
administrations urging, Congress enacted the USA PATRIOT Act,
carving out exemptions from FOIA for critical infrastructure
data and information relating to energy facilities and
transportation, among other things. Millions of records, more
than at any other time in our nations history, were classified.
The White House directed agencies to withhold any record that
could be considered sensitive, even if it was not classified.
And agencies were pushed to divert resources from processing
FOIA requests, causing enormous delays in responding to FOIA
requests. Some agencies simply stopped responding to FOIA
requests at all. 

The administrations obsession with secrecy has not been limited
to its assault on FOIA. The administration has tried to mute the
press by threatening prosecutions and issuing an avalanche of
subpoenas to reporters. The administration has refused to
cooperate with Congress by providing information on hundreds of
occasionseven when the requests came from Republicans. And the
administration has even taken its secrecy campaign to the
courts, routinely asking the courts to dismiss cases outright
because they involve state secretssuch as cases challenging
the governments domestic spying operations. 

Although we pride ourselves on being an open society, nothing in
the Constitution guarantees Americans a right to know what our
government is up to. Prior to FOIA, if an individual could prove
a unique entitlement to government records, the records might be
provided. But courts had rejected the notion that citizens had a
right to government records simply because they wanted to hold
government officials accountable. 

All that changed when President Johnson signed FOIA into law,
but it was a long time in the making. Beginning in the
mid-1950s, John Moss, a California congressman, began to hold
hearings to document excessive government secrecy. Newspaper
editors took up the cause. Finally, when Lyndon Johnson became
president, Moss was able to attract Republican co-sponsors,
including, ironically, Donald Rumsfeld, then a junior
congressman from Illinois. Although President Johnson was no fan
of the bill, he signed it on July 4, 1966. 

As initially enacted, FOIA was more a blueprint for disclosure
than an enforceable mandate. Requests often went unanswered for
months or even years, and the Supreme Court interpreted the Act
grudgingly, requiring courts to rubber-stamp agency claims that
records were exempt for law enforcement or national security
reasons. 

Congress overhauled FOIA in 1974. Agencies were required to
respond to FOIA requests within strict time limits, to disclose
discrete portions of exempt records and to pay attorneys fees
to requesters who won in court. Congress also directed federal
judges to review national security and law enforcement claims
without bending over backwards for the government. An embattled
President Nixon initially signaled that he supported these
reforms. But his advisors strongly opposed the measure and urged
a veto. The cast of characters leading the opposition are eerily
familiarDonald Rumsfeld, who was Nixons chief of staff,
Richard Cheney, then Rumsfelds deputy, and Antonin Scalia, at
the time a senior Justice Department official. After Nixon
resigned, Rumsfeld, Cheney and Scalia urged President Ford to
veto the bill, which he didonly to be soundly overridden by
Congress. 

The 1974 amendments to FOIA were the high water mark of openness
in America. Millions of Americans sought and were given the
governments files on them. Reporters regularly used FOIA. It
was also used to write, and in some cases, to rewrite, American
history. FOIA gave us the details of the tax evasion charges
against Vice President Spiro Agnew, which led to his
resignation; the Justice Departments report on then-Austrian
presidentand former U.N. Secretary GeneralKurt Waldheims
collaboration with the Nazis during World War II; the sordid
facts of the FBIs massive COINTEL program, which involved
illegal surveillance and infiltration of the civil rights
movement; and the raw material for Taylor Branchs Pulitzer
Prize winning book, Parting the Waters , which traced the early
days of the civil rights movement. 

The 40th anniversary of FOIA is a good time to take stock of
whether our nation is living up to basic ideals of open
government that have had such an illustrious history. Clearly we
are not. The time has come for us to renew our commitment to
openness and reaffirm the basic principle that secrecy is an
anathema to democratic government.
                                      
TomPaine.com.]    										  [ /]    									 									
 										  [ /]    									 									
*****************************************************************
 12 Sydney Morning Herald: PM says US influenced uranium inquiry - 

www.smh.com.au

July 19, 2006 - 6:04AM
 	 	
Prime Minister John Howard says the Bush administration's new
global nuclear policy influenced his decision to conduct an
Australian inquiry into uranium enrichment.
 
In an interview with The Australian newspaper, Mr Howard said he
would be "keeping an eye" on US President George W Bush's energy
plans.
 
"I'm not suspicious of it. But I'm keen to keep an eye on it and
keen to ensure it doesn't damage Australia's position," Mr
Howard told the paper.
 
"The fact that this is being developed is a reason why we should
look more closely at whether we should process uranium."
 
Mr Howard also gave his strongest sign yet that he wants a
domestic uranium enrichment industry.
 
"It does seem odd that you wouldn't enrich uranium, doesn't it,"
he said, adding that although Australia was yet to test US
sentiment on the idea he was confident it would be well received.
 
"I think any administration would accept it. Certainly the
present one would accept it ... we would be seen as a totally
reliable and trustworthy country."
 
However, Mr Howard's desire to join the uranium enrichment club
risks a conflict with the US president's global nuclear energy
partnership which seeks to prevent nations moving into
reprocessing.
 	
© 2006 	AAP
 
Copyright © 2006. The Sydney Morning Herald. <img
*****************************************************************
 13 Czech Citizens Unsure About U.S." Missile Defense" Base
 
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2006 12:17:00 -0500 (CDT)

X-Sender-Host-Name: chumbly.math.missouri.edu
X-Spam-Class: HAM-VERY

http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0718/p04s01-woeu.html

U.S. Mission: Missile Defense Base in Europe

A team of missile experts from the Department of
Defense arrives in the Czech Republic Tuesday to scout
out possible sites.

By Jeffrey White
Christian Science Monitor
July 18, 2006

JINCE, CZECH REPUBLIC -- At the heart of a 64,268-acre
military zone here bordering this small town, Vladimir
stops his car and points to a ridgeline of fir and
pine.

>From there, says the retired army officer who would
give only his first name, the Czech Army fires rounds
of tank shells during military exercises. He traces
the arc of those volleys that meet imaginary targets
somewhere in the distant scruff.

But the scope of projectiles launched from these
lowland woods could greatly increase if a US
delegation of missile experts arriving Tuesday likes
what they see here in Jince (pronounced YIN-tseh), a
small town just southwest of the Czech Republic's
capital, Prague.

This military zone is one of at least three that the
team from the US Department of Defense will scout when
they arrive in the country Tuesday for a week-long
visit to identify potential sites for a US missile
defense base.

"I don't wish for the base to be here," says Petr
Smola, a military police officer stationed at the edge
of the zone. "First we had the Russians here, and now
the Americans will be here."

Mr. Smola echoes the concerns of many Czechs, for whom
the idea of a missile base brings back troubling
memories of the Soviet occupation, when missile silos
were a common fixture in the countryside and troops
carried out military exercises in zones like Jince.

Czech politicians, struggling to overcome a
parliamentary deadlock after a general election last
month, are split on the issue. But defense experts
agree that a missile defense base somewhere in Central
Europe makes good strategic sense for the United
States and Europe amid growing tensions between
Western governments and Iran and North Korea.

"Because of Iran and North Korea, the United States
was bound to start exploring its options in Poland,
the Czech Republic, in Britain even," says Daniel
Keohane, a defense expert at the Center for European
Reform in London.

The Americans are reportedly considering sites in the
Czech Republic, Poland, and Hungary, and are expected
to approach one of these governments with a proposal
by the fall.

Such a base, which would be the first foreign site in
the US missile defense program, would be equipped to
track and, if necessary, defend against
intercontinental missiles launched from countries to
the east such as Iran.

In Europe, regional missile defense has not been a
major agenda topic since Sept. 11, 2001, when
counterterrorism became a higher priority. That's
going to change, say experts like Mr. Keohane: NATO is
expected to release a new report on trans-Atlantic
missile defense during its summit in Riga, Latvia in
November.

European governments, Keohane says, "will want
convincing that [a missile defense base] can work, but
they will want to be involved. They'll want to explore
their options as much as possible. This is an
exploratory time for this issue."

Currently two bases - one in Alaska, one in California
- make up the US missile defense shield. The shield
has been controversial for years, with detractors
saying its technologies remain unproven and that the
end of the cold war made such a defense weapon
unnecessary. But missile defense has resurfaced under
President Bush, who earmarked $9.3 billion for missile
defense in the government's 2007 budget - $118 million
of which is slated for a base in Central Europe,
according to recent Czech press reports that sourced
the Missile Defense Agency.

Washington and the Czech government have been talking
for at least two years, according to the Czech Defense
Ministry, which is hosting the US visit.

It has said that the American team will include about
20 experts from the Department of Defense and will
visit sites in Jince, Boletice, and Libava, to study
geographical, hydrological, and weather conditions at
the sites. A team made a similar visit to Poland last
month and is expected to visit Hungary at a later
date.

"They want to see the terrain for themselves ... They
also want to find out if there is enough of an
available labor force in the area," says Jan Pejsek, a
spokesman for the Defense Ministry.

An official with the Missile Defense Agency could not
be reached for comment. Jan Krc, a spokesman for the
US Embassy in Prague, confirmed the visit and said
that an American decision on the base is expected in
the next two months.

If the US requests to build a base in the Czech
Republic, the government will decide whether to accept
the proposal. Prime Minister Jiri Paroubek, who may
soon be forced out by a new coalition government, has
called for a nationwide referendum before any
government decision is taken, a position not held by
other leaders struggling to reshape parliament.

But calls for a referendum are loud here in Jince, a
rural community mainly inhabited by people old enough
to remember the Soviet era.

Those years made Czechs particularly leery of a
military presence from any outsider, and that history
could be a major obstacle for the US, if it ends up
asking to build a base here. "A referendum is very
important," says local pensioner Miroslav Rajtl.
"Russia used to be the police state. But now it seems
that the Americans can be the ones, and I don't like
that."

Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space
PO Box 652
Brunswick, ME 04011
(207) 729-0517
http://www.space4peace.org
globalnet@mindspring.com
http://space4peace.blogspot.com (our blog)
*****************************************************************
 14 AFP: India, US discuss terrorism, nuclear deal 

 by Olivier Knox Mon Jul 17, 11:40 AM ET 
		 	 
SAINT PETERSBURG (AFP) - US President George W. Bush " /> passed 
a personal message of sympathy to Indian Prime Minister Manmohan 
Singh as they discussed train bombings in India and efforts to 
ratify a controversial nuclear deal. 

 Bush, who called Singh "one of the really true gentlemen" on the 
world stage, told him: "I know you've been through difficult 
times, and America mourns the loss of innocent life as a result 
of the terrorist attacks."
 
The prime minister thanked the president for US offers of
support after the July 11 bombings that tore through Mumbai's
commuter railway, leaving 182 dead and nearly 900 wounded in the
worst such attack in India in 13 years.
 
"I'm grateful to you. You gave me help from Germany, and I
deeply appreciate your generosity. Your kindness, your sympathy
and support mean a great deal to me," Singh said as they met on
the sidelines of the Group of Eight summit.
 
The two leaders did not publicly discuss sharp exchanges between
Pakistan and India in the blasts' wake. New Delhi has suggested
the bombers had support from across the border, a claim denied
by Islamabad.
 
But they did address efforts to win approval from lawmakers in
their respective countries for the hotly debated nuclear
cooperation pact they agreed to in July last year.
 
"Our congress is working on that important piece of legislation
that will encourage and allow India and US cooperation, and I'm
optimistic that we will get that passed," said Bush, who called
the accord "that wonderful deal."
 
Singh thanked Bush for his efforts to get the necessary
legislation "moving through the Congress" and explained that
there were concerns among Indian lawmakers too, saying: "We have
a parliament which is very jealous of what we do and what we
don't do."
 
The two leaders met on the sidelines of the Group of Eight
summit of industrialized nations.
 
The G8 and and five key emerging economies, including India,
later issued a statement condemning the Mumbai attacks as
"barbaric terrorist acts" and calling for those responsible to be 
brought to justice.
 
The nuclear pact won quick approval from the US Senate Foreign 
Relations Committee " /> and the House International Relations 
Committee last month, boosting its chances of garnering floor 
votes in the full chambers.
 
Officials have been tinkering with the final bill, however, with
opponents arguing that it does not include sufficient safeguards
to prevent India from applying nuclear technology and material
to military use.
 
Under the deal, the United States will aid the development of
civilian nuclear power in India in return for New Delhi placing
some of its nuclear facilities under International Atomic Energy
Agency
" /> inspections.
 
The US Atomic Energy Act of 1954 currently prevents the United
States from trading nuclear technology with nations that have
not signed up to the nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty. The law
has to be amended for the India deal to be effective.
 
India tested nuclear weapons in 1974 and 1998 and, as a result,
is currently banned by the United States and other major powers
from buying fuel for atomic reactors and other related equipment.
 
On another front, Bush said that a G8 statement on the crisis in
the Middle East would help bring "calm" to the region by
tackling the "root causes" of violence.
 
Although the statement by the Group of Eight industrialized
nations on the crisis does not explicitly blame Iran
" /> or Syria
" /> for the latest escalation, Bush accused them of helping
Lebanon's Hezbollah Shiite militia group attack Israel
" /> .
 
"Hezbollah, that's housed and encouraged by Syria, financed by
Iran, are making these moves to stop the progress of peace,"
Bush said. "We would hope that by addressing the conditions of
this violence we could get to a situation where there was calm."
 	 		 			
Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
 15 IAEA: G8 Leaders Voice Support for IAEA Work
 
 [IAEA.ORG :: Atoms for Peace] 
 
Summit Endorses Agency Initiatives in Key Areas
 
Staff Report

 18 July 2006 [G8 Summit 2006] 
Mohamed ElBaradei, IAEA Director General, and Koichiro Matsuura,
UNESCO Director General (left to right foreground), arrive in
St. Petersburg to attend the G8 summit. (Photo:
http://en.g8russia.ru/) 

  + Story Resources 
  + Official 2006 G8 Summit Site
  + IAEA & Nuclear Security 
  + Multilateral Approaches to the Nuclear Fuel Cycle 
  + Safeguards & Additional Protocol 
  + IAEA & NPT 
  + IAEA Deptartment of Nuclear Energy 
Leaders of the Group of 8 countries backed the IAEA´s work at
their annual summit held 15-17 July 2006 in St. Petersburg,
Russia. A concluding summary statement endorsed IAEA programmes
and initiatives in areas of nuclear safety, security, and
safeguards.
 
Global energy security was a major focus of the summit, with G8
leaders agreeing that dynamic and sustainable development of our
civilization depends on reliable access to energy. "It is best
assured by strengthened partnership between energy producing and
consuming countries, including enhanced dialogue on growing
energy interdependence, security of supply and demand issues",
the statement said.
 
The G8 nations adopted a St. Petersburg Plan of Action to
increase transparency, predictability and stability of the
global energy markets, improve the investment climate in the
energy sector, promote energy efficiency and energy saving,
diversify energy mix, ensure physical safety of critical energy
infrastructure, reduce energy poverty and address climate change
and sustainable development. Under this plan, G8 nations
undertake to reduce barriers to energy investment and trade,
making it possible for companies from energy producing and
consuming countries to invest in and acquire assets
internationally.
 
G8 countries include Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the
Russian Federation, United Kingdom, and the United States. The
European Union also participates in the summit. At the St.
Petersburg Summit, leaders of Brazil, China, India, Mexico and
South Africa and heads of the African Union, the Commonwealth of
Independent States, the International Energy Agency, the IAEA,
the United Nations, UNESCO, the World Bank, the World Health
Organization, and the World Trade Organization were invited to
participate in the discussions.
 
In a statement on global energy security, the G8 said countries
who have or are considering plans for nuclear energy believe it
will contribute to global energy security while reducing air
pollution and addressing climate change. The G8 said it
acknowledged the efforts made in development by the Generation
IV International Forum (GIF) and the IAEA´s International
Project on Innovative Nuclear Reactors and Fuel Cycles (INPRO).
GIF and INPRO both bring together countries to develop next
generation nuclear energy systems, including small reactors,
very high temperature reactors and supercritical water-cooled
reactors.
 
Recognizing that proliferation of weapons of mass destruction,
along with international terrorism, remains the central threat
to international peace and security, the G8 nations reaffirmed
their determination and commitment to act in concert and
together with other States and organizations to fight
proliferation of weapons of mass destruction (WMD), including
with a view to preventing WMD falling into the hands of
terrorists.
 
The G8 Summit adopted a special statement on non-proliferation,
which included:
 
The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT)
 
The G8 reaffirmed its full commitment to all three pillars of
the NPT and called on all States to comply with their NPT
obligations, including IAEA safeguards as well as developing
effective measures aimed at preventing trafficking in nuclear
equipment, technology and materials.
 
The G8 is seeking universal adherence to IAEA comprehensive
safeguards agreements and is actively engaged in efforts to make
comprehensive safeguards agreements together with an Additional
Protocol the universally accepted verification standard. "We
will also work together vigorously to establish the Additional
Protocol as an essential new standard in the field of nuclear
supply arrangements."
 
Peaceful Use of Nuclear Energy
 
The G8 noted that an expansion of the peaceful use of nuclear
energy must be carried forward in a manner consistent with
nuclear non-proliferation commitments and standards. It
discussed concrete proposals on multinational centres to provide
nuclear fuel cycle services and recent initiative regarding a
concept for a multilateral mechanism for reliable access to
enrichment services for nuclear fuel.
 
G8 nations will continue to discuss these issues jointly with
the IAEA to ensure that all States that conscientiously fulfil
their non-proliferation obligations have guaranteed access to
the benefits of the peaceful use of nuclear energy.
 
Nuclear Safety and Security
 
The G8 supported the Global Initiative to Combat Nuclear
Terrorism, announced by Russian Federation President Vladimir
Putin and U.S. President George Bush. "We look forward to
working together with other like-minded nations and the IAEA to
expand and accelerate efforts that develop partnership capacity
to combat nuclear terrorism on a determined and systematic
basis."
 
The G8 addressed the proliferation implications of Iran´s
advanced nuclear programme and confirmed its commitment to see
those implications resolved.
 
G8 leaders also addressed nuclear and other security concerns as
well as humanitarian issues regarding North Korea. They
expressed support for UN Security Council resolution 1695,
condemning North Korea´s launches of ballistic missiles and
urged the country to re-establish its pre-existing commitment to
a moratorium on missile launching and to respond to other
security and humanitarian concerns of the international
community.
 
The G8 called upon all States to become parties, as soon as
practicable, to the two most recent universal instruments to
combat nuclear terrorism; namely, the International Convention
for the Suppression of Act of Nuclear Terrorism, and the
Amendment to the Convention on the Physical Protection of
Nuclear Material.
 
They noted the results of the IAEA International Conference
"Effective Nuclear Regulatory Systems" held in Moscow in early
March. An effective, efficient nuclear regulatory system is
essential for our safety and security, they said, re-affirming
the importance for national regulators to have sufficient
authority, independence, and competence.
 
Safety & Security of Radioactive Sources
 
The G8 nations noted progress made to improve controls on
radioactive sources and to prevent their unauthorized use. They
reaffirmed commitment to fulfil the IAEA Code of Conduct on the
Safety and Security of Radioactive Sources provisions, working
to put into place the controls over the import/export of
radioactive sources at the earliest possible date.
 
They welcomed the fact that more than 83 countries have
committed to implement the IAEA Code of Conduct on the Safety
and Security of Radioactive Sources and urge all other states to
adopt the Code. The G8 said it will continue to support
international efforts to enhance regulatory controls on
radioactive sources, in particular the Regional Model Projects,
the IAEA program to help establish effective and sustainable
regulatory infrastructures.

 Copyright 2003-2005, International Atomic Energy Agency, P.O.
Box 100, Wagramer Strasse 5, A-1400 Vienna, Austria 
Telephone (+431) 2600-0; Facsimilie (+431) 2600-7; E-mail:
Official.Mail@iaea.org
*****************************************************************
 16 Australian: Joining nuclear club will be a test of trust | 

Paul Kelly 

  + July 19, 2006 
 
 Howard's energy ambitions may conflict with Bush's bid to curb
proliferation, writes Editor-at-large Paul Kelly July 19, 2006 
JOHN Howard's aim to join the uranium enrichment game faces a
serious foreign policy challenge: how to avoid conflict with the
Bush administration, which is determined to restrict nations
from entering into enrichment and reprocessing.

 This new energy and anti-proliferation policy lies at the heart
of George W. Bush's second term. Bush is promoting what his
officials call "a nuclear renaissance" with three aims: to
promote energy security, curb greenhouse gas emissions and limit
nuclear weapons proliferation. These policies are emerging as a
defining aspect of Bush's presidency. They were given further
expression this week before the St Petersburg G8 meeting when
Bush and Russia's Vladimir Putin reached a historic new
agreement to work together "to allow all nations to enjoy the
benefits of nuclear energy without pursuing uranium enrichment
and fuel cycle technologies". 

Bush and Putin made a joint appeal to "other nations to join us"
in this global project. It follows Bush's earlier historic deal
with India on civil nuclear co-operation that is also designed
to bring India closer to the non-proliferation mainstream. 

In an interview with The Australian, Howard said that Bush's
nuclear policy was a factor in his decision to establish an
inquiry into Australia's role in the nuclear fuel cycle. Howard
agreed that any Australian decision will have important
consequences in the emerging global debate. 

Bush's policy comes under the title of the Global Nuclear Energy
Partnership, announced in February 2006. It is a truly radical
initiative. Its vision is that nuclear fuel supplier nations
(America, Russia, Britain, France, China and Japan) would
undertake to provide "user nations" with reactors and nuclear
fuel on a "cradle-to-grave" basis with provision for spent fuel
takeback. This is best understood as a global bargain to
guarantee a reliable nuclear fuel supply to nations in exchange
for their agreement not to enter into enrichment and
reprocessing. 

GNEP's significance was outlined to the House of Representatives 
Committee on Industry and Resources on June 1 in a submission by 
the head of the Australian Safeguards and Non-Proliferation 
Office, John Carlson, who said: "GNEP would benefit 
non-proliferation objectives by limiting the spread of enrichment 
and reprocessing, that is, the technologies essential to 
producing fissile material for nuclear weapons." 

Asked directly last month in Washington what would be the Bush
administration's attitude towards an Australian decision to
become an enrichment nation, a senior US official replied: "I am
not able to say." 

This non-answer is not just because the question is
hypothetical. It is because any Australian decision creates a
conflict for the US between its global nuclear strategy and its
alliance obligations. If GNEP has any meaning, it is that an
Australian enrichment decision would be seen as a bad precedent,
yet this conclusion would be offset by trust in Australia as a
reliable ally and responsible player in the nuclear fuel cycle. 

During Howard's US visit last month he was briefed on GNEP by
Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman. Interviewed 12 days ago, Howard
said while his US meetings were not the "catalyst" for his
inquiry they were "part of the process". Howard agreed the US
wanted to identify and limit nations that enriched uranium in
order to create a global bargain to contain proliferation. 

During the interview, Howard made clear his personal preference.
"It does seem odd that you wouldn't enrich uranium, doesn't it?"
he said of Australia. "One of the great historical anomalies of
the Australian economy which most Australians could never
understand is that we had the best wool in the world and we sent
it overseas to be processed and we bought it back at a much
higher price. That always struck people as rather odd. Now there
are a lot of reasons why it happened. But I would be keen to
avoid that occurring." 

Asked about GNEP, Howard said: "I'm not suspicious of it. But
I'm keen to keep an eye on it and keen to ensure it doesn't
damage Australia's position. And part of the process was that I
felt we need to be better informed about all of this. 

"I think it (GNEP) further focuses our attention, concentrates
our mind. If we were to decide in the not too distant future
that it would be a good idea to process uranium or to keep open
that possibility, that would obviously have relevance to GNEP.
The fact this is being developed is a reason why we should look
more closely at whether we should process uranium. 

"We are probably the largest single holder of uranium reserves
in the world, we have the largest uranium mine, so we are going
to have a strong view and I think the Americans will understand
that. I got the impression that GNEP is still embryonic and
precisely because it is embryonic, it would be a very good idea
for Australia to have a view from the beginning so we can
influence it. One of the advantages of making noises about this,
about our position and possible plans, is that of itself it
alerts the Americans and others to our position." 

For Howard, it is inconceivable that the US would not endorse
any Australia enrichment decision. "I think any American
administration would accept it," he said. "Certainly, the
present one would accept it. I can't imagine a future
administration would have a different view. We would be seen as
a totally reliable and trustworthy country." 

Howard would want to tie any Australian decision into the US
global strategy. The issues are vast. At stake for Australia is
whether we develop the nuclear technology to become a player in
the fuel cycle and, also, obtain more leverage over the
non-proliferation regime. On Monday, Howard revealed his
conviction that Australia has a "massive opportunity" to boost
its share of the global energy trade. 

It is now beyond question that nuclear power around the globe is
undergoing a major resurgence. The issue for Australia, however,
remains theoretical until a commercial operator comes forward
prepared to invest in enrichment, and that may need a US partner.

 
Privacy Terms © The Australian
*****************************************************************
 17 Australian: Howard's nuke challenge to Bush 

 Paul Kelly, Editor-at-Large July 19, 2006 

JOHN Howard has given his strongest sign he wants a domestic
uranium enrichment industry, and he agrees that the Bush
administration's new global nuclear policy influenced his
decision to conduct an inquiry into Australia's policy.

 The Prime Minister's desire to join the uranium enrichment club
risks a conflict with President George W. Bush's global nuclear
energy partnership, a radical US initiative to prevent nations
moving into enrichment reprocessing. 
In a historic joint concord before the G8 summit this week, Mr
Bush and Russian President Vladimir Putin agreed to work
together "to allow all nations to enjoy the benefits of nuclear
energy without pursuing uranium enrichment and spent fuel
reprocessing capabilities". 

Asked directly in Washington last month what the Bush
administration's attitude would be towards an Australian
decision to become an enrichment nation, a senior US official
replied: "I'm not able to say." 

Asked about Mr Bush's GNEP in an interview with The Australian,
Mr Howard said: "I'm not suspicious of it. But I'm keen to keep
an eye on it and keen to ensure it doesn't damage Australia's
position. 

"The fact that this (GNEP) isbeing developed is a reason why we
should look more closely at whether we should process uranium." 

In political terms, Mr Bush seeks a new global nuclear bargain.
Nuclear supplier nations such as the US, Russia, Britain,
France, China and Japan would provide user nations with reactors
and nuclear fuel on a "cradle to grave" basis in exchange for a
guarantee they would not enter into enrichment, reprocessing and
technologies necessary to produce weapons. 

Mr Howard left no doubt about his personal preference. "It does
seem odd that you wouldn't enrich uranium, doesn't it?" he said. 

"One of the great historical anomalies of the Australian economy
which most Australians could never understand is that we had the
best wool in the world and we sent it overseas to be processed
and we bought it back at a much higher price. 

"That always struck people as rather odd. I would be keen to
avoid that occurring." 

Any Australian decision to enrich uranium creates a potential
conflict for the US between its global policy and its alliance
obligations. Under GNEP, an Australian enrichment decision would
be seen as a bad precedent, but this conclusion would be offset
by trust in Australia as a close US ally and responsible nuclear
player. 

Mr Howard said he had not tested US sentiment on Australia's
enrichment option. "I think any administration would accept it,"
he said. 

"Certainly, the present one would accept it. I can't imagine a
future administration would have a different view. We would be
seen as a totally reliable and trustworthy country." 

After launching his vision on Monday for Australia to become an
energy superpower based on its huge reserves of coal, gas and
uranium, Mr Howard said he was working closely with Canada to
ensure that the world's two biggest uranium producers were not
locked out of the nuclear fuelcycle. 

"Each of us has a very direct interest in the nuclear fuel
cycle, and there is a body which is still embryonic being put
together by the United States and the other nuclear powers which
we will have to watch very carefully," Mr Howard said. 

"We have to watch that it doesn't impact negatively on Australia
and Canada. 

"I am not suggesting there is any malevolence on the part of
these other countries, but we will have to watch for any
unintended consequences." 

 
Terms © The Australian
*****************************************************************
 18 RIA Novosti: Gazprombank's JV to buy nuclear energy assets
 
18/ 07/ 2006                                  

MOSCOW, July 18 (RIA Novosti) - Gazprombank, a subsidiary of
Russian energy giant Gazprom [GAZP], said Tuesday it had signed
an agreement with the government's nuclear power corporation on
setting up a joint venture. 

On July 14, Gazprombank and Atomenergomash signed an agreement
on establishing a government-controlled joint venture to buy
nuclear power engineering assets, in particular, Izhora Plants
and a blocking interest in OMZ-Spetsstal, Gazprombank said. 

Sergei Kiriyenko, the head of the Federal Agency for Nuclear
Power, said his agency was interested in controlling only those
atomic power engineering enterprises that were monopolies in
production. 

Kiriyenko said only Izhora Plants produced reactor and
steam-generator shells and some other products, adding that the
agency could not build nuclear power plants inside the country
and overseas without guaranteed deliveries of this equipment. 

Kiriyenko said Izhora Plants needed modernization to keep
production growth at a sufficient rate. He said credits for
modernization could be raised on the terms of project financing
under the agreement between Gazprombank and Atomenergomash.

 
© 2005 RIA Novosti   
*****************************************************************
 19 BBC: Nuclear plant warned after
 
Last Updated: Tuesday, 18 July 2006
 
[Sellafield]                            
The water leaked during routine tests at Sellafield                                                             

The operator of the Sellafield nuclear plant in Cumbria has been 
rapped over a leak of radioactive water. 

The incident happened in February 2006, during routine tests, 
which required levels of contaminated water in storage pools to 
be raised temporarily. 

But levels remained high for too long and radioactive water 
leaked from a gap in a pool wall. 

Although water was contained within the plant the Environment 
Agency criticised failings by British Nuclear Group. 

The company said a full investigation was carried out and 
measures taken to prevent a similar incident. 

We want to see lessons lear from this event lead to improvements 
in the management of storage ponds across the site Andy Mayall, 
Environment Agency         

The Environment Agency said the volume of water lost was minute, 
but that the incident showed a "disappointing" lack of controls 
at the reprocessing facility. 

The agency issued an enforcement notice, which demands action be 
taken to prevent a similar occurrence. Failure to comply with the 
notice is an offence. 

Andy Mayall, leader of the agency's Sellafield Team said: 
"Although there was no environmental harm and the response and 
investigation were effective, we are extremely disappointed about 
the control, maintenance and other failings that led up to this 
event. 

"We want to see lessons learnt from this event lead to 
improvements in the management of storage ponds across the site." 

A British Nuclear Group spokesman said: "The pond was overfilled 
as a result of some statutory test work that was being carried 
out on the pond. 

"Although the water didn't actually overflow from the top of the 
pond, it did escape from an expansion joint in the pond wall. We 
acknowledge that this should not have happened. 

"We can confirm that improvement measures have been taken to 
prevent a re-occurrence." 

*****************************************************************
 20 Platts: Bush, Putin plan agreement on civilian nuclear energy

Washington (Platts)--17Jul2006
 
The US and Russia agreed at the G8 summit in St. Petersburg to 
prepare an agreement promoting peaceful use of nuclear energy. In 
a joint statement Monday, President Bush and President Putin said 
the agreement would reflect the Bush administration's Global 
Nuclear Energy Partnership, which aims to develop innovative 
nuclear reactor and fuel cycle technologies, and a previous 
Russian proposal to establish a system of international centers 
to provide uranium enrichment and other nuclear fuel services. 

     "Following up on these initiatives, the United States and 
the Russian Federation intend to work together, actively 
involving the [International Atomic Energy Agency], to allow all 
nations to enjoy the benefits of nuclear energy without pursuing 
uranium enrichment and spent fuel reprocessing capabilities," 
Bush and Putin said. 

     The presidents' statement, as well as broader summit 
statements on global energy security and nuclear 
nonproliferation, reiterate prior commitments to guard against 
nuclear terrorism. 

     "This particular statement focuses on the dangers of nuclear 
terrorism," Anthony Wier, a research associate with the John F 
Kennedy School of Government's Project on Managing the Atom, said 
in praising the presidents' declaration. "If nuclear energy is 
going to play a critical role in the future, it's essential to 
have the security to prevent nuclear terrorism." 

     Bush and Putin's statement also praised India for its 
"important nonproliferation commitments" and said they are 
"especially concerned" by Iran's efforts to develop a nuclear 
program.

Copyright © 2006 - Platts, All Rights Reserved [The McGraw-Hill 
Companies]       
*****************************************************************
 21 Rutland Herald: NRC audit results to be released July 20

Rutland Vermont News & Information
 	 	 	 	 	 
July 18, 2006 

Herald Staff   
  
BRATTLEBORO — Details of a Nuclear Regulatory Commission audit
into Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant's proposal to extend its
operating license will be outlined during a meeting here
Thursday.

NRC staff will discuss the details of the audit with staff from
Entergy Nuclear Vermont, the owners of the Vernon plant, at an
open meeting on July 20 at the Quality Inn and Suites on Putney
Road from 3 to 5 p.m.

The audits typically are performed at the start of the license
renewal process to determine whether the proposal is consistent
with federal guidelines, according to the NRC. More reviews and
inspections will continue over the next year.

Following the business portion of the meeting Thursday, NRC
staff will answer questions from the public.

Vermont Yankee is seeking to expand its operating license by 20
years past the 2012 end time. The plant, which recently boosted
its power by 20 percent, currently has an operating license of
40 years.

*****************************************************************
 22 NRC: Sunshine Act; Notice of Meeting
 
                         FR Doc 06-6302 
[Federal Register: July 18, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 137)] 
[Notices] [Page 40742] From the Federal Register Online via GPO 
Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr18jy06-85]                         
 
Dates: Weeks of July 17, 24, 31, August 7, 14, 21, 2006.
 
Place: Commissioners' Conference Room, 11555 Rockville Pike, 
Rockville, Maryland.
 
Status: Public and closed.
 
Matters to be Considered: Week of July 17, 2006 There are no 
meetings scheduled for the Week of July 17, 2006.
 
Week of July 24, 2006--Tentative Wednesday, July 26, 2006 1:50 
p.m. Affirmation Session (Public Meeting) (Tentative). a. Pa'ina 
Hawaii, LLC, unpublished April 27, 2006 Memorandum and Order 
(accepting the intervenor's and NRC Staff's Joint Stipulation 
regarding two admitted environmental contentions) (Tentative).
 
b. David Geisen, LBP-06-13 (May 19, 2006) (Tentative). c. Exelon 
Generation Company, LLC (Early Site Permit for Clinton ESP), 
System Energy Resources, Inc. (Early Site Permit for Grand Gulf 
ESP) (Tentative).
 
d. Florida Power & Light Co., et al., Docket Nos. 50-250-LT, et 
al., International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers' ``Petition 
to File Motion to Intervene and Protest Out-of-Time'' and 
``Motion for Hearing and Right to Intervene and Protest'' 
(Tentative).
 
Thursday, July 27, 2006 9:30 a.m. Briefing on Office of 
International Programs (OIP) Programs, Performance, and Plans 
(Public Meeting) (Contact: Karen Henderson, 301- 415-0202).
 
This meeting will be webcast live at the Web 
address--http://www.nrc.gov .
 
1:30 p.m. Briefing on Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) 
Programs. (Public Meeting) (Contact: Barbara Williams, 
301-415-7388).
 
This meeting will be webcast live at the Web 
address--http://www.nrc.gov .
 
Week of July 31, 2006--Tentative There are no meetings scheduled 
for the Week of July 31, 2006.
 
Week of August 7, 2006--Tentative There are no meetings scheduled 
for the Week of August 7, 2006.
 
Week of August 14, 2006--Tentative There are no meetings 
scheduled for the Week of August 14, 2006.
 
Week of August 21, 2006--Tentative There are no meetings 
scheduled for the Week of August 21, 2006.
 
* * * * * The schedule for Commission meetings is subject to 
change on short notice. To verify the status of meetings call 
(recording)--(301) 415- 1292. Contact person for more 
information: Michelle Schroll, (301) 415- 1662.
 
* * * * * The NRC Commission Meeting Schedule can be found on the 
Internet at: 
http://www.nrc.gov/what-we-do/policy-making/schedule.html. * * * 
* * The NRC provides reasonable accommodation to individuals with 
disabilities where appropriate. If you need a reasonable 
accommodation to participate in these public meetings, or need 
this meeting notice or the transcript or other information from 
the public meetings in another format (e.g. braille, large 
print), please notify the NRC's Disability Program Coordinator, 
Deborah Chan, at 301-415-7041, TDD: 301-415-2100, or by e-mail at 
DLC@nrc.gov. Determinations on requests for reasonable 
accommodation will be made on a case-by-case basis.
 
* * * * * This notice is distributed by mail to several hundred 
subscribers; if you no longer wish to receive it, or would like 
to be added to the distribution, please contact the Office of the 
Secretary, Washington, DC 20555 (301-415-1969). In addition, 
distribution of this meeting notice over the Internet system is 
available. If you are interested in receiving this Commission 
meeting schedule electronically, please send an electronic 
message to dkw@nrc.gov. Dated: July 13, 2006.
 
R. Michelle Schroll, Office of the Secretary.
 
[FR Doc. 06-6302 Filed 7-14-06; 9:59 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-M

 
*****************************************************************
 23 NRC: PSEG Nuclear LLC; Notice of Consideration of Issuance of 
 
                        FR Doc E6-11319 
[Federal Register: July 18, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 137)] 
[Notices] [Page 40739-40741] From the Federal Register Online via 
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr18jy06-83]                         
 
Amendments to Facility Operating Licenses, Proposed No 
Significant Hazards Consideration Determination, and Opportunity 
for a Hearing The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or the 
Commission) is considering issuance of amendments to Facility 
Operating License Nos. DPR-70 and DPR-75 issued to PSEG Nuclear 
LLC (the licensee) for operation of the Salem Nuclear Generating 
Station (Salem), Unit Nos. 1 and 2, located in Salem County, New 
Jersey.
 
 
[[Page 40740]] The proposed amendments would revise the Salem 
Technical Specifications (TSs) to eliminate certain Surveillance 
Requirements (SRs) for containment isolation valves. The proposed 
changes are to delete SR 4.6.3.1.1 and SR 4.6.3.1 for Salem Unit 
Nos. 1 and 2, respectively. These SRs require a complete valve 
stroke and stroke time measurement when a valve is returned to 
service after maintenance, repair, or replacement work. The 
proposed changes are intended to minimize unnecessary testing and 
plant transients. Other Salem TS containment isolation valve SRs 
will ensure that the valves remain operable.
 
Before issuance of the proposed license amendments, the 
Commission will have made findings required by the Atomic Energy 
Act of 1954, as amended (the Act), and the Commission's 
regulations.
 
The Commission has made a proposed determination that the 
amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration. 
Under the Commission's regulations in Title 10 of the Code of 
Federal Regulations (10 CFR), section 50.92, this means that 
operation of the facility in accordance with the proposed 
amendment would not (1) involve a significant increase in the 
probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated; 
(2) create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident 
from any accident previously evaluated; or (3) involve a 
significant reduction in a margin of safety. As required by 10 
CFR 50.91(a), the licensee has provided its analysis of the issue 
of no significant hazards consideration, which is presented 
below: 1. Does the proposed change involve a significant increase 
in the probability or consequences of an accident previously 
evaluated? Response: No.
 
The proposed amendment would revise the Technical Specification 
(TS) Surveillance Requirements (SRs) for containment isolation 
valves, consistent with NUREG-1431, ``Standard Technical 
Specifications, Westinghouse Plants.'' SRs are not initiators to 
any accident previously evaluated. Consequently, the probability 
of an accident previously evaluated is not significantly 
increased.
 
The equipment specified in the Limiting Conditions for Operation 
is still required to be operable and capable of performing the 
accident mitigation functions assumed in the accident analysis. 
By performing the analysis, valve operability is maintained. This 
equipment will continue to be tested in a manner and at a 
frequency to give confidence that the equipment can perform its 
intended safety function. As a result, the proposed SR changes do 
not significantly affect the consequences of any accident 
previously evaluated.
 
Therefore, the proposed changes do not involve a significant 
increase in the probability or radiological consequences of an 
accident previously evaluated.
 
2. Does the proposed change create the possibility of a new or 
different kind of accident from any accident previously 
evaluated? Response: No.
 
The proposed change does not create the possibility of a new or 
different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated 
in the Updated Final Safety Analysis Report. No new accident 
scenarios, failure mechanisms, or limiting single failures are 
introduced as a result of the proposed changes. Specifically, no 
new hardware is being added to the plant as part of the proposed 
change, no existing equipment is being modified, and no 
significant changes in operations are being introduced (only 
certain post-maintenance testing is eliminated leaving operation 
functions unchanged).
 
Therefore, the proposed changes do not create the possibility of 
a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously 
evaluated.
 
3. Does the proposed change involve a significant reduction in a 
margin of safety? Response: No.
 
The proposed changes will not alter any assumptions, initial 
conditions, or results of any accident analyses. The proposed 
changes do not affect the operational limits or the physical 
design of the containment isolation valves. The containment 
isolation valves will remain capable of performing their design 
function. Unnecessary testing and associated plant transients 
will be minimized by the proposed changes. Therefore, the 
proposed change does not involve a significant reduction in a 
margin of safety.
 
The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis and, based on 
this review, it appears that the three standards of 10 CFR 
50.92(c) are satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to 
determine that the amendment request involves no significant 
hazards consideration.
 
The Commission is seeking public comments on this proposed 
determination. Any comments received within 30 days after the 
date of publication of this notice will be considered in making 
any final determination.
 
Normally, the Commission will not issue the amendment until the 
expiration of 60 days after the date of publication of this 
notice. The Commission may issue the license amendment before 
expiration of the 60- day period provided that its final 
determination is that the amendment involves no significant 
hazards consideration. In addition, the Commission may issue the 
amendment prior to the expiration of the 30- day comment period 
should circumstances change during the 30-day comment period such 
that failure to act in a timely way would result, for example, in 
derating or shutdown of the facility. Should the Commission take 
action prior to the expiration of either the comment period or 
the notice period, it will publish in the Federal Register a 
notice of issuance. Should the Commission make a final no 
significant hazards consideration determination, any hearing will 
take place after issuance. The Commission expects that the need 
to take this action will occur very infrequently.
 
Written comments may be submitted by mail to the Chief, Rules and 
Directives Branch, Division of Administrative Services, Office of 
Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, 
DC 20555-0001, and should cite the publication date and page 
number of this Federal Register notice. Written comments may also 
be delivered to Room 6D59, Two White Flint North, 11545 Rockville 
Pike, Rockville, Maryland, from 7:30 a.m. to 4:15 p.m. Federal 
workdays. Documents may be examined, and/or copied for a fee, at 
the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR), located at One White Flint 
North, Public File Area O1F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first 
floor), Rockville, Maryland.
 
The filing of requests for a hearing and petitions for leave to 
intervene is discussed below. Within 60 days after the date of 
publication of this notice, the licensee may file a request for a 
hearing with respect to issuance of the amendment to the subject 
facility operating license and any person whose interest may be 
affected by this proceeding and who wishes to participate as a 
party in the proceeding must file a written request for a hearing 
and a petition for leave to intervene. Requests for a hearing and 
a petition for leave to intervene shall be filed in accordance 
with the Commission's ``Rules of Practice for Domestic Licensing 
Proceedings'' in 10 CFR part 2. Interested persons should consult 
a current copy of 10 CFR 2.309, which is available at the 
Commission's PDR, located at One White Flint North, Public File 
Area O1F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, 
Maryland. Publicly-available records will be accessible from the 
Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) Public 
Electronic Reading Room on the Internet at the NRC Web site, 
http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/cfr/. If a request 
for a hearing or petition for leave to intervene is filed by the 
above date, the Commission or a presiding officer designated by 
the Commission or by the Chief Administrative Judge of the Atomic 
Safety and Licensing Board
 
[[Page 40741]] Panel, will rule on the request and/or petition; 
and the Secretary or the Chief Administrative Judge of the Atomic 
Safety and Licensing Board will issue a notice of a hearing or an 
appropriate order.
 
As required by 10 CFR 2.309, a petition for leave to intervene 
shall set forth with particularity the interest of the petitioner 
in the proceeding, and how that interest may be affected by the 
results of the proceeding. The petition should specifically 
explain the reasons why intervention should be permitted with 
particular reference to the following general requirements: (1) 
The name, address and telephone number of the requestor or 
petitioner; (2) the nature of the requestor's/petitioner's right 
under the Act to be made a party to the proceeding; (3) the 
nature and extent of the requestor's/petitioner's property, 
financial, or other interest in the proceeding; and (4) the 
possible effect of any decision or order which may be entered in 
the proceeding on the requestor's/petitioner's interest. The 
petition must also identify the specific contentions which the 
petitioner/requestor seeks to have litigated at the proceeding.
 
Each contention must consist of a specific statement of the issue 
of law or fact to be raised or controverted. In addition, the 
petitioner/requestor shall provide a brief explanation of the 
bases for the contention and a concise statement of the alleged 
facts or expert opinion which support the contention and on which 
the petitioner intends to rely in proving the contention at the 
hearing. The petitioner/requestor must also provide references to 
those specific sources and documents of which the petitioner is 
aware and on which the petitioner intends to rely to establish 
those facts or expert opinion. The petition must include 
sufficient information to show that a genuine dispute exists with 
the applicant on a material issue of law or fact. Contentions 
shall be limited to matters within the scope of the amendment 
under consideration. The contention must be one which, if proven, 
would entitle the petitioner to relief. A petitioner/requestor 
who fails to satisfy these requirements with respect to at least 
one contention will not be permitted to participate as a party.
 
Those permitted to intervene become parties to the proceeding, 
subject to any limitations in the order granting leave to 
intervene, and have the opportunity to participate fully in the 
conduct of the hearing.
 
If a hearing is requested, the Commission will make a final 
determination on the issue of no significant hazards 
consideration. The final determination will serve to decide when 
the hearing is held. If the final determination is that the 
amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration, 
the Commission may issue the amendment and make it immediately 
effective, notwithstanding the request for a hearing. Any hearing 
held would take place after issuance of the amendment. If the 
final determination is that the amendment request involves a 
significant hazards consideration, any hearing held would take 
place before the issuance of any amendment.
 
Nontimely requests and/or petitions and contentions will not be 
entertained absent a determination by the Commission or the 
presiding officer of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board that 
the petition, request and/or the contentions should be granted 
based on a balancing of the factors specified in 10 CFR 
2.309(c)(1)(i)-(viii). A request for a hearing or a petition for 
leave to intervene must be filed by: (1) First class mail 
addressed to the Office of the Secretary of the Commission, U.S. 
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, 
Attention: Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff; (2) courier, 
express mail, and expedited delivery services: Office of the 
Secretary, Sixteenth Floor, One White Flint North, 11555 
Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852, Attention: Rulemaking 
and Adjudications Staff; (3) e-mail addressed to the Office of 
the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 
HEARINGDOCKET@NRC.GOV; or (4) facsimile transmission addressed to 
the Office of the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 
Washington, DC, Attention: Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff at 
(301) 415-1101, verification number is (301) 415-1966. A copy of 
the request for hearing and petition for leave to intervene 
should also be sent to the Office of the General Counsel, U.S. 
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, and it 
is requested that copies be transmitted either by means of 
facsimile transmission to 301-415-3725 or by e-mail to

 
OGCMailCenter@nrc.gov. A copy of the request for hearing and 
petition for leave to intervene should also be sent to Jeffrie J. 
Keenan, Esquire, Nuclear Business Unit--N21, P.O. Box 236, 
Hancocks Bridge, NJ 08038, attorney for the licensee.
 
For further details with respect to this action, see the 
application for amendment dated September 26, 2005, which is 
available for public inspection at the Commission's PDR, located 
at One White Flint North, File Public Area O1F21, 11555 Rockville 
Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. Publicly available 
records will be accessible from the ADAMS Public Electronic 
Reading Room on the Internet at the NRC Web site, 
http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. Persons who do not have 
access to ADAMS or who encounter problems in accessing the 
documents located in ADAMS, should contact the NRC PDR reference 
staff by telephone at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by e- mail 
to pdr@nrc.gov. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 12th day of 
July 2006.
 
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
 
Stewart N. Bailey, Senior Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch 
I-2, Division of Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear 
Reactor Regulation.
 
[FR Doc. E6-11319 Filed 7-17-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P

 
*****************************************************************
 24 NRC: R.E. Ginna Nuclear Power Plant, LLC; R.E. Ginna Nuclear Power 
 
                        FR Doc E6-11320 
[Federal Register: July 18, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 137)] 
[Notices] [Page 40741-40742] From the Federal Register Online via 
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr18jy06-84]                         
 
Plant; Notice of Issuance of Amendment to Facility Operating 
License The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (Commission) has 
issued Amendment No. 97 to Renewed Facility Operating License No. 
DPR-18, issued to R.E. Ginna Nuclear Power Plant, LLC (the 
licensee), which revised the License and Technical Specifications 
for operation of the R.E. Ginna Nuclear Power Plant located in 
Wayne County, New York. The amendment is effective as of the date 
of issuance.
 
The amendment modified the License and Technical Specifications 
to authorize an increase in the licensed rated thermal power by 
16.8 percent from 1520 megawatts thermal (MWt) to 1775 MWt. This 
level of power increase is considered an extended power uprate.
 
The application for the amendment complies with the standards and 
requirements of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the 
Act), and the Commission's rules and regulations. The Commission 
has made appropriate findings as required by the Act and the 
Commission's rules and regulations in 10 CFR Chapter I, which are 
set forth in the license amendment.
 
Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amendment to Facility 
Operating License and Opportunity for a Hearing in connection 
with this action was published in the Federal Register on 
September 22, 2005 (70 FR 55633). No
 
[[Page 40742]] request for a hearing or petition for leave to 
intervene was filed following this notice.
 
The Commission has prepared an Environmental Assessment related 
to the action and has determined not to prepare an environmental 
impact statement. Based upon the environmental assessment, the 
Commission has concluded that the issuance of the amendment will 
not have a significant effect on the quality of the human 
environment (71 FR 37614).
 
For further details with respect to the action, see (1) the 
application for amendment dated July 7, 2005, as supplemented by 
letters dated August 15, September 30, and December 6, 9, and 22, 
2005, and January 11 and 25, February 16, March 3 and 24, and May 
9 and 19, 2006, (2) Amendment No. 97 to License No. DPR-18, (3) 
the Commission's related Safety Evaluation, and (4) the 
Commission's Environmental Assessment. Documents may be examined, 
and/or copied for a fee, at the NRC's Public Document Room, 
located at One White Flint North, Public File Area O1 F21,11555 
Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. Publicly 
available records will be accessible electronically from the 
Agencywide Documents Access and Management Systems (ADAMS) Public 
Electronic Reading Room on the Internet at the NRC Web site, 
http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. Persons who do not have 
access to ADAMS or who encounter problems in accessing the 
documents located in ADAMS should contact the NRC Public Document 
Room Reference staff by telephone at 1-800-397-4209, or 
301-415-4737, or by e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov. Dated at Rockville, 
Maryland, this 11th day of July 2006.
 
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
 
Patrick D. Milano, Senior Project Manager,Plant Licensing Branch 
I-1, Division of Operating Reactor Licensing,Office of Nuclear 
Reactor Regulation.
 
[FR Doc. E6-11320 Filed 7-17-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P

 
*****************************************************************
 25 Hudson Valley News: Indian Point: A search for common ground   

Tuesday, July 18, 2006 

The Garrison Institute will present a different kind of dialogue
on the issue of the Indian Point nuclear power plants on
Thursday, July 20, 6:30 p.m. at the Mariandale Retreat Center,
299 North Highland Avenue, Ossining, New York. 

The institute will be bringing to the table the plant's owner
Entergy, leading plant opponent Riverkeeper, together with
internationally known conflict resolution experts, interfaith
leaders, and the public, conducting a search for common ground
based on shared ethical principles and/or spiritual beliefs.   

Part of the Garrison Institute's "Hudson River Project" on the
Hudson ecosystem and the sacred, it features Dr. Andrea Bartoli
of the Center for International Conflict Resolution at Columbia
University,  Sister Patricia Daly, OP of TRI-State Coalition for
Responsible Investment, Deacon John Kelly, St. Gregory Barbarigo
Parish, Garnerville who is also a theoretical physicist, 
Ibrahim Abdil-Muid Ramey of Climate Crisis Coalition and Muslim
Peace Fellowship, Rabbi Arthur Waskow of The Shalom Center,
James Steets of Entergy Nuclear Northeast Corp., Lisa Rainwater
of Riverkeeper, a poetry performance by Ian Koebner of Sacred
Slam and music by Uncle Wade.   

, the Hudson Valley's only Internet radio news report. 
*****************************************************************
 26 The Plank: YES NEW NUKES?: 

07.18.06
 
I was glad to see Sunday's New York Times Magazine feature a
long (and long-overdue) look at and whether it can save us from
global warming, soaring energy costs, foreign wars, and just
about everything nasty that afflicts us. It turns out the answer
is probably no--but also that fission is one of several
approaches which, taken together, might solve our worst energy
and environmental woes.

 Still, the piece makes the the industry's economic future look
dicier than I would have guessed. (Simply contructing a nuclear
plant, for instance, apparently still costs a staggering $2
billion or so. You don't make that money back in a year.) And
perhaps more important, though the piece sort of glosses over
this point, the industry doesn't seem to have any bright new
ideas about the supreme dilemma of radioactive waste. Harry
Reid, not to mention various Energy Department incompetents, are
steadily killing off the prospects for a national waste
repository at Nevada's Yucca Mountain, where the latest target
date for waste storage is now . (To help conceptualize how long
that is, imagine two White House terms for Hillary and then a
couple years of Jeb.) But without some better solution to the
waste problem, it's hard to see public opinion embracing a new
nuclear boom. Global warming, after all, is a speculative and
fairly distant threat--even if it's the more serious one. A huge
spent fuel depot 15 miles from your child's playground is
somewhat harder to shrug off.

 P.S. Perhaps public opinion would be swayed if some prominent
Democrat took up the nuclear cause. But so far that's not
happening. Here's Hillary in her "major" from May:

 Nuclear is now very much in the news as a potential power
source because of its lack of contribution to global warming. If
you look at nuclear energy, which currently provides 20 percent
of our energy with virtually no emission of greenhouse gases, we
do have to take a serious look, but there remain very serious
questions about nuclear power and our ability to manage it in a
world with suicidal terrorists.

 So I have real concerns, specifically about a plant in my state
near where I live, Indian Point, which has had a number of
problems, and more generally with the capacity and quality of
the oversight provided by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

 So we need to resolve problems with the NRC, as well as
questions of cost, safety, proliferation and waste, before we go
forward with nuclear power.
 Will anyone in the 2008 Democratic primaries disagree with her?

 --Michael Crowley
 posted 4:05 p.m.
 
Copyright 2006, The New Republic 
*****************************************************************
 27 SNA: Power Plant Bidders Disappoint Bulgaria
 	 	 	 	 	
www.novinite.com Sofia News Agency

Sofia Morning News

Top news: 18 July 2006, Tuesday.

Financial parameters offered by the two bidders to build
Bulgaria's Belene nuclear plant have emerged as unacceptable.
 
Timelines and technical parameters suggested by Czech company
Skoda Alliance and Russia's Atomstroiexport aren't satisfactory
either, Bulgaria's economy and energy minister said Tuesday.
 
Rumen Ovcharov said negotiations would continue for at least a
month, to try iron out the unfavourable aspects.
 
That means that the deadline for naming the winner in the
tender, August 1, would have to be put off.
 
The EUR 2 B project was first launched in 1986, but was
suspended in 1991, due to financial problems and pressure from
environmental groups.
 
After Bulgaria closes its Kozloduy plant under pressure from the
EU, Belene will be the country's sole nuclear power producer.
 
Its first reactor should become operational over 2013-2015.
Until 2018, the second reactor should be switched on.

novinite.com    

 All Rights Reserved © Novinite Ltd., 2001-2006 - Copyright
&Disclaimer - Privacy Policy
 
Bulgaria news Novinite.com (Sofia News Agency -
www.sofianewsagency.com) is unique with being a real time news
provider in English that informs its readers about the latest
Bulgarian news. The editorial staff also publishes a daily
*****************************************************************
 28 Rad Workshop Wed + TVC Mtg Thurs
 
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2006 15:09:29 -0700

X-Nohoney: yes white-hard - relay H=adsl-63-203-231-61.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net (borg.energy-net.org) [63.203.231.61]
X-Spam-Class: HAM-VERY-WHITELIST

<x-flowed>
Greetings. Here are two wonderful opportunities to learn new things, meet
new people -- and make a positive difference in the world!

On Wednesday, July 19, state toxicologist Abel Russ will be the featured
presenter at what promises to be a great workshop on human health and
radiation.

Abel is affiliated with Clark University and is co-author of a
comprehensive analysis of radiation studies, published in March 2006.

The workshop starts at 7 PM, Livermore Library Community Room, 1188 So.
Livermore Ave.

There will also be new information presented on tritium and plutonium at
Livermore Lab.

On Thursday, July 20 is Tri-Valley CAREs' monthly meeting, open to all
interested community members.

The meetings starts at 7:30 PM, and is also held at the Livermore Library
Community Room, 1188 So. Livermore Ave.

Call (925) 443-7148 for details. I hope you can attend one or both.

I look forward to seeing you.

Peace,
Marylia

Marylia Kelley
Executive Director
Tri-Valley CAREs
(Communities Against a Radioactive Environment)
2582 Old First Street
Livermore, CA USA 94551

<http://www.trivalleycares.org> - is our web site address. Please visit us
there!

(925) 443-7148 - is our phone
(925) 443-0177 - is our fax

</x-flowed>
*****************************************************************
 29 APP.COM: Filter takes radium from water | 

Asbury Park Press Online

Resin used in system installed in 2 Dover wells

 Posted by the Asbury Park Presson 07/18/06 

BY JEAN MIKLE TOMS RIVER BUREAU
 		 		 		 
DOVER TOWNSHIP — A filtration system designed to remove radium
from ground water has been installed on two wells at United
Water Toms River's Parkway well field, where elevated radiation
levels were seen last year.

United Water General Manager Nadine Leslie said testing done at
the Parkway well field indicates that the filtration system is
working well, with no detection of radium in the water after it
has passed through the resin filter.

"We're pleased to be able to give our customers some reassurance
regarding the water quality at the Parkway well field," Leslie
said. "Our first priority is to ensure that our customers have a
safe and secure supply of water."

The radium is removed by a resin filter developed by the Dow
Chemical Co. Water is pumped from the well and sent through a
pressure filter vessel that is eight feet in diameter and
contains a bed of resin.

Soluble radium in the ground water from the well reacts with the
resin, forming a permanent, insoluble substance. When the resin
reaches capacity with radium, the resin is removed by a licensed
firm and taken out of state for disposal as low-level
radioactive waste.

New resin is then placed in the vessel and the system continues
in service.

United Water installed a similar treatment system on Well 31,
located off Whitesville Road near Route 70, earlier this year.

That well, which had been taken out of service in February after
elevated levels of naturally occurring radiation were found in
the well water, was turned back on in late May after the
treatment system was installed.

Leslie said United officials are still designing a treatment
system for the well field in Holiday City, Berkeley. Those wells
are in a residential area, and residents raised concerns about
the initial design of the treatment system.

Leslie said the company plans to work with Berkeley officials
and residents on a design that will be acceptable to those who
live nearby.

United was fined $64,000 by the state Department of
Environmental Protection in February for failing to disclose
seven instances of elevated radiation to the state and to its
customers in 2005.

United officials have said the company has changed its
procedures and internal controls since company officials learned
about the failure to report the elevated radiation levels
earlier this year.

2006 Asbury Park Press. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 30 WWUB: State has no choice but to defend flawed Initiative 297 

Walla Walla Union-Bulletin: [union-bulletin.com] - Walla Walla, WA   

Opinion     Updated: Tuesday, July 18, 2006 1:39 PM PDT   


Voters should consider whether the ballot proposal will stand up 
to a constitutional challenge. It could save taxpayers money.

By the Editorial Board of the Union-Bulletin                                            
                                                
Simply because voters approve an initiative - even by a wide 
margin - does not automatically make it law. The measure must be 
constitutional.
 						
 Those who believe a voter-approve initiative is unconstitutional 
have the right to present their challenge to a judge.

The state attorney general has a legal obligation, as the 
representative of the voters, to defend the constitutionality of 
that initiative in court.

And that has put Attorney General Rob McKenna in a tough spot as 
his office is appealing a federal judge's ruling declaring 
Initiative 297 unconstitutional. I-297 bars the transport of 
nuclear material to the Hanford Nuclear Reservation.

U.S. District Judge Alan McDonald of Yakima ruled that I-297 
violates the supremacy clause of the U.S. Constitution and its 
prohibition against state interference with interstate commerce.

``If other states start passing legislation similar to (this 
initiative), the simple fact is that (Department of Energy) will 
not be moving waste anywhere among its nationwide sites as it 
proposes to do as part of its nationwide cleanup program,'' the 
judge wrote. ``Decisions which need to be made at a national 
level addressing national concerns cannot be trumped by 
protectionist regulations enacted by individual states.''

McDonald's reasoning is sound. His concerns are exactly why we
urged voters to reject I-297. The taxpayers will be forced to
spend thousands of dollars defending a flawed initiative. 		 		

Frankly, it's something voters should consider when they cast
ballots on initiatives. It is important to look beyond the
obvious appeals of a proposal and consider whether it will stand
up to a constitutional challenge.

It seems prudent for elected officials - including the state's
attorney general - to offer their views on the constitutionality
of initiatives before voters cast ballots. The media also have
an obligation to seek a wide variety of comment on the issues in
an effort to help the public draw a clear picture.

Ultimately, however, it is the voters' responsibility to be
informed.

In this case, a great many voters ignored constitutional
concerns and approved I-297. Now those same voters - as well as
other taxpayers - will be footing the legal bills. 		 		
 
Copyright © 2006 Walla Walla Union-Bulletin
 112 S. 1st Ave. Walla Walla, WA 99362 - Phone (509) 525-3300 
*****************************************************************
 31 Chilliwack Times: Nuclear fallout victims find health here 

Site updated Tuesday, July 18, 2006 01:28 PM   
  
Robyn Chambers/TIMES

 Interpreter Galena Tatenkova helps Yana Moslakova make a
sandwich. The two Belarussians are taking part in the Canadian
Relief Fund for Chernobyl Victims in Belarus exchange.   
  
By Robyn Chambers 

Twenty years on the fall out from Chernobyl's nuclear explosion
is still being felt. 

Generations later, children of those who were themselves
children when the nuclear reactor blew, visit Canada as part of
a program to help the families and their offspring grow up
healthy. 

The children are from Belarus-an area that was affected by 70
per cent of all the radioactive fallout from the 1986 explosion. 

Yana Moslakova is a second generation survivor. The 11 year old
is taking part for the first time in an exchange by the Canadian
Relief Fund for Chernobyl Victims in Belarus, an organization
that provides a health respite for Belarussian children impacted
by Chernobyl. 

Yana is being billeted in several local homes from June 23 until
Aug. 6. She's come to the local area along with 14 others. 

If Yana were at home she would be spending time in the garden
helping her parents and watching television she says through
interpreter Galena Tatenkova. 

Along with receiving dental care-of which most of the materials
and time are donated by local dentists-Yana and her fellow
visitors are eating well and getting healthy: a goal of the
program. 

"The children come and their system starts to clear up and their
parents say they get home and they are healthy through the
winter for the first time in years," Andrea Stiller, the
children's program co-ordinator for the organization's western
chapter, president of the national board and a host family
member, said. 

Tatenkova, an English teacher at a business school in the
Belarussian capital of Minsk, is the group's interpreter. She
was 12 when the reactor blew and says her family and their
friends are still dealing with diseases like cancer which are
likely related to the explosion's fall out. 

Experts have said it could take up to 300 years for the area to
be contamination free. 

"There are kids being born with all kinds of health
deficiencies," Tatenkova said. Her daughter is often sick; she
attributes that to the disaster. 

"Kids have low immunity and there are more kids in the country
who are mentally challenged." 

Chernobyl heart is a medical condition that's been coined for
Chernobyl survivors and refers to children who are born with
holds in their hearts. 

"The worst thing about Chernobyl is people think because it
happened so long ago it's not an issue. But the genetic
alteration shows up generation after generation." 

Tatenkova made her first trip to Canada as part of the relief
fund in 1994. She's been back several times to other communities
across the country. 

"It's a great benefit for the kids and the families as well. The
families in Belarus get lots of assistance from host families in
Canada," she said. 

The Belarus government tries to help the survivors but because
it's managing an emerging economy there isn't a lot of money.
Soil contamination affects food production. 

"The government spends a lot of money in overcoming the bad
effects of Chernobyl but there is not a strong economic base,"
Stiller said. 

Stiller got involved with the organization years ago and since
then has visited Belarus several times. 

"When I went I realized the positive impact on people's lives
besides the children's health," she said. 

"To have a friend in another country who is so open and generous
and giving when they havw nothing." 

- Individuals interested in becoming involved in the Canadian
Relief Fund for Chernobyl Victims in Belarus can call Stiller at
604-858-7773. 
 
copyright Chilliwack Times
*****************************************************************
 32 Madison courier: Depleted uranium at JPG on meeting agenda for tonight

http://www.madisoncourier.com

7/18/2006 3:30:00 PM

Peggy Vlerebome Courier Staff Writer

Depleted uranium can cause genetic mutations by attaching itself
to the DNA in cells, which can lead to diseases such as cancer,
an Arizona biochemist reported in a study published in May. Her
study is of interest locally to Save the Valley because of the
tons of depleted uranium the Army left behind at Jefferson
Proving Ground after 10 years of testing munitions containing it.

“We’ve been saying that for years,” said Richard Hill, president
of Save the Valley and co-chairman of the JPG Restoration
Advisory Board, which for years devoted most of its quarterly
meetings to discussing depleted uranium and what the Army is
going to do about it.

The study findings probably are something concerned residents
will want to bring up tonight when the Atomic Safety and
Licensing Board Panel has a listening session in Madison. It
will be at 6:30 p.m. at the Madison-Jefferson County Public
Library.

The session was contemplated long before the new study was
published. The commission, which is made up of three
administrative judges, will be in the area for a prehearing
conference to set the final details for a public hearing on the
Army’s proposal for how to proceed with decommissioning JPG.
Save the Valley has been granted status to participate in the
public hearing, whose date and location have not been set.

The listening session is for anyone who is not a participant but
who has concerns about depleted uranium at JPG, Hill said.

The biochemist who published the study has said in interviews
that she doesn’t want the public to panic over the study
findings.

Nonetheless, Save the Valley’s experts are taking a close look
at the study, which was published in two scientific journals,
Hill said.

Depleted uranium is what is left over after uranium is processed
for such uses as nuclear power plants. Uranium is found
naturally in soil, and large deposits of it are mined for
commercial use. Depleted uranium is more concentrated but less
radioactive than what is taken out, Hill said.

Depleted uranium is a heavy metal and is toxic as well as
radioactive. Health problems caused by depleted uranium have
long been the topics of study, but the new study is the first to
say that regardless of DU’s toxicity or radioactivity, it can
cause serious health problems such as cancer by altering the DNA.

Depleted uranium stopped being a topic at the JPG Restoration
Advisory Board meetings when Hill and the other co-chairman,
Paul Cloud, agreed that depleted uranium had never been intended
to be a topic of discussion by restoration advisory boards. The
government set up local advisory boards when it embarked on
massive military base closures. Cloud is a civilian who is the
Army’s environmental coordinator for Jefferson Proving Ground.

Another new study might pertain to Jefferson Proving Ground as
well. It concludes that fires in forests where depleted uranium
is present can cause the DU to be carried in the air. The study
was done in another state after a wildfire.

The study concluded, however, that only small amounts of
depleted uranium are dispersed by fires.

The study said the dispersal of DU can happen whether a fire is
a wildfire or a controlled-burn conducted for forest management.
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service conducts controlled burns
each spring at JPG.

Save the Valley wants the federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission
to require the Army to include air tests as part of its
data-gathering that will go into whatever plan is eventually
approved for decommissioning JPG. The Army had to have a Nuclear
Regulatory Commission license to possess radioactive material at
JPG, which was a munitions testing site. For the last 10 years
JPG was in operation, from 1984 to 1994, munitions containing DU
were tested there. As a heavy metal, depleted uranium is more
dense than lead, and so it has both offensive and defensive uses
for the U.S. military. Cladding a missile with DU can enable it
to bore right through an enemy’s tanks and reinforced bunkers.
Put on the outside of our own tanks can make them impenetrable
by enemy weapons.

There have been concern, however, around the world about
depleted uranium and the health of soldiers and civilians
exposed to DU in reinforced tanks that get hit by enemy fire or
exposed to the depleted uranium left behind.

Copyright 2006, The Madison Courier 310 Courier Square, Madison, 
IN 47250 (812) 265-3641 (800) 333-2885

*****************************************************************
 33 Kennebec Journal: Can we trust the feds on nuclear waste?

 Tuesday, July 18, 2006 

Editorial:

copyright © 2006 Blethen Maine Newspapers Inc.          

Since 1984, electricity ratepayers in Maine and across the
United States have been paying a portion of their electricity
bills to the federal government. The surcharge was meant to pay
for the construction of a permanent storage site for the
dangerous radioactive waste generated by nuclear power plants.
The government has collected $24 billion since that time, $279
million of it from Maine Yankee ratepayers. 

Yet, despite the fact that the feds were supposed to haul away
every state's nuclear waste by 1998 and ultimately put it into
permanent storage, that hasn't happened. That's because Yucca
Mountain in Nevada, where the waste was due to be stored, isn't
nearly ready to receive it. And because of political wrangling
in Washington, D.C., Yucca Mountain may never be ready.

So the federal government doesn't have a very good track record
of carrying out its commitments to states regarding nuclear
waste. In fact, lawsuits were filed against the Department of
Energy on behalf of ratepayers whose money has been collected,
but not used, to pay for long-term storage of the waste; courts
have found the Department of Energy in default on its
obligations. 

So with that sterling track record of payments made but services
never rendered -- Maine Yankee's 550 metric tons of waste are
still sitting at Maine Yankee -- the government is here to help
us once again. 

Now, there's a Bush administration plan making its way in a
spending bill through Congress with the support of Sen. Pete
Domenici, R-N.Mex., to have the feds gather up all the spent
fuel at various sites, reprocess it and then send it back to
not-yet-designated consolidation centers for the next 25 years,
or until Yucca Mountain is opened -- whichever comes first.
Perhaps we should also add "a cold day in purgatory" to that
list of timeframes?

The legislation would deprive states of any ability to say "yes"
or "no" to becoming consolidation centers, which we think is
just a fancy word for "dumps." The dumps would be built on
private land purchased by the government, or land in federal
hands already, and only in states that already have nuclear
power plants. 

But you can bet it's the states with already existing nuclear
waste storage areas -- including Maine -- that will be top on
the list of potential sites if the bill passes, which could very
well mean Maine might become an attractive alternative for
storage of the region's waste. After all, compared to states to
the south of us, we don't have too many voters, our population
is spread out, and our two very independent Republican senators
may need to be punished by the administration for not toeing the
party line as strongly as the faithful. Oh, and Maine voted for
Kerry in the last presidential election. 

There are other issues presented by the plan. Among them is the
fact that most of those extant storage sites are located on the
site of nuclear power plants, which means they're near the
water. And that means they're very close to sea level, which
raises the question: If sea level rise is a serious possibility,
how safe is it to use these sites?

Maine does have a strong history of fighting back against
proposed nuclear waste dumps in our backyard. The feds tried to
make Maine the site of a waste repository in the mid-1980s; the
Maine delegation, including then U.S. Rep. Olympia Snowe, joined
with Gov. Joe Brennan to successfully defeat that proposal. Both
Snowe and Sen. Susan Collins have stated publicly that they
would oppose any legislation to open up Maine to new waste from
out of state; Collins has said she will press to have the waste
that we currently have removed from the state in a safe manner.
That's the right position to take and we hope that other
senators join with our two in the understanding that making
empty new promises to Americans to replace the old ones that
were broken isn't the responsible way to deal with the dangerous
waste that we've generated. 

  [Morning Sentinel and Kennebec Journal] Home Delivery

Central Maine Newspapers  Augusta - (800) 537-5508  Waterville -
                         (800) 452-4666

 Copyright © 2006, Blethen Maine Newspapers, Inc.   
*****************************************************************
 34 Nevada Observer: Nevada Could Be World Leader In Alternative Power Generation


Vol. 3,  No. 18          July 15, 2006          
 Nevada's Online State News Journal 		
   

Solar And Geothermal Opportunities Lost On The Timid And 
Frightened

 

by Johnny Gunn

While great strides are being made in some areas of electrical 
power generation, in other areas the concept of modern technology 
simply doesn't exist.  Solargenix, one of the world leaders in 
developing solar generating plants, is building a 64-megawat 
solar generating plant near Boulder City in southern Nevada while 
Nevada Power is contemplating a large coal fired plant near Ely 
in eastern Nevada.  The one does not compliment the other in the 
world of power generation.

The Boulder City operation, known as Solar One, broke ground in 
February and according to published information from the U.S. 
Department of Energy (DOE) through the National Laboratories the 
technology being used is such that it can compete directly with 
plants relying on fossil fuels.  Go to http://www.solargenix.com.  
Called parabolic trough technology, a liquid that can withstand 
temperatures as high as 750 degrees Fahrenheit without boiling or 
turning to steam, is piped through troughs and super heated by 
the sun's rays directed onto the troughs by way of mirrors.

That liquid in turn heats water to steam to drive the turbines 
that generate electricity.  According to the Solargenix website, 
"The basis for our technologies is a science called non-imaging 
optics that was developed by Dr. Roland Winston at the University 
of Chicago."  Solar One will be the largest solar electric power 
plant to be built globally in the past 14-years and it will be 
the third largest solar plant in the world.  Nevada could rank 
among the largest producers of solar energy in the world.

Solar trough power plants have been in existence for some time 
according to the company.  The technology was developed by the 
Luz Company and is the basis for the 354-meagwatt plant in the 
Mojave Desert in California.  The use of parabolic mirrors 
concentrates the sun's rays to heat mineral oil to very high 
temperatures.  The fluid then is passed through a heat exchanger 
to vaporize a secondary working fluid, usually water that drives 
the turbines.  That fluid is then condensed back to liquid and is 
reused time and again.

According to reports issued by DOE there are large areas of 
Nevada suitable for solar generation using the solar trough 
technology, areas that combined could represent as much as 
600,000 megawatts of energy.  Currently Nevada's solar energy 
output is less than three percent of the total generated in the 
state.  Solargenix plans to sell the power generated by Solar One 
to Nevada Power, a division of Sierra Pacific Resources.  Nevada 
Power is the primary distributor of electricity in southern 
Nevada.

Renewable energy sources are plentiful in Nevada including 
geothermal and solar, and there is also interest in developing 
wind generating plants in the state.  It was the increased and 
volatile price of natural gas and other fossil fuels that created 
a demand for other sources of energy.  According to Solargenix 
officials solar energy produced by their technology is probably 
cheaper in the long run than natural gas and is competitive with 
coal.  The one thing about the solar trough and parabolic mirror 
technology they point out is how clean the operation is.  No air, 
water, or ground pollution exists with their technology.

Another clean energy source is geothermal power.  Unlike solar 
energy, geothermal is site specific in that the plant cannot 
simply be built near existing large transmission lines, but must 
be built over or very close to an active geothermal system.  
Nevada is one of the most active states as far as geothermal 
activity goes, and there are several active geothermal generating 
plants.  Because of the potential for large amounts of energy to 
be developed by solar and geothermal technology, the state has a 
Nevada Renewable Energy and Energy Conservation Task Force 
(http://www.nevadarenewables.org) that works to coordinate 
development of new energy sources.  The agency works with the 
Nevada State Office of Energy, The Bureau of Consumer Protection, 
and the Public Utilities Commission (PUC). 

The Task Force was created by the 2001 Legislature and is funded 
through the Trust Fund for Renewable Energy and Energy 
Conservation.  According to their own web site, the agency's 
reports have resulted in new renewable energy and energy 
conservation legislation and regulations.

One of the most successful renewable energy projects in the state 
is operated by Ormat Geothermal near Steamboat Springs south of 
Reno.  Ormat operates the Soda Lake plant near Fallon, the Brady 
Geothermal Plant, and just put Galena One near its Steamboat 
operation into use.  At Steamboat the power plant operates on a 
liquid dominated geothermal source and utilizes an air-cooler to 
condense the organic fluid, as no make-up water is available.  
Before Galena 1 was operating, Ormat was generating at least 
seven megawatts of energy at Steamboat.

The Soda Lake operation is a 12-megawatt plant that has been in 
operation since 1991.  Using Ormat technology the plant is owned 
by Constellation Developments, Inc., Chrysler Capital 
Corporation, and OESI Power Corporations and is operated by 
Nevada Operations, Inc.

The Brady Geothermal Plant is a 20-megawatt operation consisting 
of three condensing steam turbines and one air-cooled converter.  
The geothermal fluid is at a fairly constant 306 degrees 
Fahrenheit.  For more on Ormat, a Sparks, Nevada corporation, go 
to http://www.ormat.com.

As more and more renewable energy sources are brought on line, 
there are opportunities to learn about what's available.  The 
Western Area Power Administration runs a web site filled with 
information: http://www.wapa.gov/es/greennews.  The Environmental 
Working Group Action Fund can be found at http://www.ewg.org.

Despite what seems to be a strong effort to incorporate clean 
energy sources into Nevada's power grid, the most effort still is 
in the area of coal fired and natural gas fired power plants.  
The primary source of power for Nevadans comes from Sierra 
Pacific Resources which operates Sierra Pacific Power Company 
(SPPCo) in the northern counties, and Nevada Power in the south.  
At this time there is no integrated distribution system and the 
company's northern power stays in the north, and power generated 
in the south stays in the south.

That may change if the Frontier Line, a multiple state 
transmission line is completed through eastern Nevada.  The line 
would connect Wyoming, Utah, Nevada, and California and could 
carry as much as 6,000 megawatts of wind power along with 6,000 
megawatts of coal generated power.  The project is still in the 
discussion stage, but Nevada's power distributors and the 
governor have come out in favor of the plan.  There is one 
problem that hasn't been discussed openly and that is 
California's current law against the importation of power 
generated from coal.

In line with the potential transmission line, Sierra Pacific 
Resources is working to build a series of coal fired plants in 
White Pine County.  The plants would then tie to the transmission 
line and would feed energy to both the south and the north 
counties of the state.  It would be the first time SPPCo and 
Nevada Power would be able to share an energy source.

There is considerable opposition to the idea.  Coal fired power 
plants are simply not clean, and air pollution is a definite 
byproduct.  Carbon dioxide is one of the primary pollutants along 
with high amounts of mercury.  Power plants across the country 
are responsible for most of the man-made mercury found in air, 
ground, and water pollution.

Along with Sierra Pacific Resources another company is vying to 
build massive coal fired plants in White Pine County.  LS Power 
has been working for several years to get all the permits 
required to build plants near Ely.  It will be the state PUC that 
makes the decision on which company will build the plants, or if 
neither will be licensed.  Along with the opposition from 
conservation groups there is also opposition of a type from 
Consumer Advocate Eric Witkoski because of an ongoing court 
battle that dates back to the energy problems created by Enron 
and like sources.

Witkoski may yet challenge a decision that was made by Sierra 
Pacific Resources in which they settled a dispute with Enron and 
paid a hefty price for it.  The company may go to the PUC to get 
that money back by way of rate increases.  Other companies, in 
federal court have been told they did not need to pay the 
disputed Enron debt.  Enron claimed Sierra Pacific Resources owed 
them $330 million and the utility paid a part of that before a 
court hearing was held.

Witkoski says he believes Sierra Pacific will expect to recover 
that through higher rates.  The so-called western states energy 
crisis was created by the greed of several companies like Enron 
that offered their resources at extremely inflated rates.  The 
high cost of natural gas today is blamed on the hurricanes of 
last year, but some dispute that and believe it is price gouging 
at its worst.

In Nevada then, our primary source of electrical energy, despite 
limited inroads by solar and geothermal energy companies is coal 
and natural gas.  There are no rivers in Nevada from which 
hydroelectric power could be generated, barring of course the 
Colorado River and Hoover Dam.  The electricity generated by Lake 
Mead does not go into the Nevada power grid.

There is one other source of electrical energy that is rarely 
discussed in genteel company; nuclear power.  For most Nevadans 
the idea is repulsive, in particular because of the Yucca 
Mountain debacle.  Nuclear energy plants across the country 
cannot take care of their garbage today, and they are working 
overtime to build more plants.  The U.S. Government caved into 
nuclear industry demands during the cold war and said it would be 
the government's responsibility to take the high level waste 
rather than take a chance on it becoming part of some country's 
nuclear war arsenal.

Looked on today, that was more than short-sighted, and after more 
than 20-years, their is still no nuclear waste repository.  Yucca 
Mountain it was decided would be the only site considered for the 
repository, and more and more it's becoming obvious that the area 
simply is not scientifically a safe area for something as 
potentially dangerous as high level nuclear waste.

Even if it comes about that the waste will be maintained at or 
near the current energy plants, even if it becomes reality that 
high level waste can be reconstituted into fuel again, Bob Loux 
of the Nevada Nuclear Agency says the state would not be in favor 
of a nuclear energy producing plant in the Silver State.  "We 
would not support such an idea," he said recently. 

There is already sufficient waste from the production plants to 
more than fill the Yucca Mountain repository if it were open 
today.  Those plants continue to produce waste, and Yucca will 
never be able to store what will be available.  A strong move in 
Congress is underway to allow the waste to remain at the power 
plants or in several areas near power plants and develop a means 
of making the waste into a usable fuel again.  Some strong 
supporters of the original idea for Yucca Mountain have changed 
their minds on the issue, such as New Mexico Senator Pete 
Domenici.  He is working closely with Nevada Senator Harry Reid 
on legislation.

In the meantime this country is making plans to accept waste from 
other countries to be stored at Yucca, and countries around the 
world produce many hundreds of tons of waste.  Nuclear energy is 
widely produced in Europe, particularly in France, and the 
technology has moved dramatically to Asia recently.  Nuclear 
plants exist in China, India, South Korea, North Korea, Japan, 
and Taiwan.  The waste from these sites will remain on-site, but 
the U.S. is considering inviting the countries to send their 
waste here.  The argument is to stop the proliferation of nuclear 
weapons.  It may be a bit late for that kind of thinking.

From the view of those that pay the way, that is energy users in 
Nevada, it looks like we will be paying for coal fired plants for 
years to come.  There is no strong desire on the part of Sierra 
Pacific Resources to support a strong effort toward alternative 
energy sources.  In recent full-page newspaper advertisements, 
the company is strongly promoting the building of coal fired and 
natural gas fired power plants around the state.  The 
distribution of alternative power by the company remains a dismal 
five- percent or less.

*****************************************************************
 35 Boston Globe: Baldacci opposes possible storage of more radwaste at Wiscasset
             
Associated Press 

Gov. John Baldacci on Tuesday aired his objections to a proposal 
moving through the Senate that could create temporary radioactive 
waste storage areas. Critics fear the Maine Yankee site could be 
targeted. 

July 18, 2006 -->

[The Associated Press] 

AUGUSTA, Maine --Gov. John Baldacci on Tuesday aired his
objections to a proposal moving through the Senate that could
create temporary radioactive waste storage areas. Critics fear
the Maine Yankee site could be targeted.

The proposal addresses the growing volume of used reactor fuel
at power plants by calling for the government to store civilian
nuclear waste for up to 25 years at federal sites across the
country.

Sen. Pete Domenici, R-N.M., included the provision in a $30.7
billion spending bill that advanced out of his Appropriations
subcommittee.

In a letter to Domenici, Baldacci said Monday that creating
temporary storage sites could lead to further delays in a
proposed dump at Yucca Mountain in Nevada, the designated
federal storage site that was supposed to open in 1998.

As drafted, Domenici's proposal would put high-level radioactive
waste in storage facilities "never designed, intended or
evaluated for this purpose," Baldacci said. Instead, the
government should move forward with a national radwaste
repository in Yucca Mountain.

Furthermore, there are security issues, Baldacci noted.

"The security concerns of Americans are not well served by
having thousands of metric tons of nuclear waste left in
facilities in 31 states, including Maine," Baldacci wrote.

With completion of the Yucca Mountain storage site delayed,
Domenici's provision allows the U.S. energy secretary to take
title to closed plants such as Maine Yankee and take
responsibility for the storage of high-level nuclear waste until
it can be moved.

Another provision calls on the energy secretary to designate a
consolidation site for waste within any state with a reactor for
25 years.

Currently there are more than 50,000 tons of highly radioactive
nuclear waste in the form of spent reactor fuel rods at nuclear
power plants in 31 states.

The site of the former Maine Yankee atomic power plant in
Wiscasset holds 600 metric tons of nuclear waste sealed in 64
concrete and steel casks that are designed to last for decades.

Once the national repository opens, the casks will be loaded
onto rail cars for shipment to the permanent storage location.[
/] 
 © Copyright 2006 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This

*****************************************************************
 36 Nevada Observer: Reid Calls For GAO Audit Of DOE Spending At Yucca  

Vol. 3,  No. 18          July 15, 2006 		
 Nevada's Online State News Journal 		

 Berkley Says Interim Plan For Waste Storage Is Stop-Gap

 

Nevada Senator Harry Reid (D) is calling for a Government 
Accounting Office (GAO) audit of the spending practices of the 
Department of Energy (DOE) at the proposed Yucca Mountain nuclear 
waste repository.  Reid says that a Clark County report on how 
DOE spends its resources indicates that the agency is spending 
its money in ways not authorized by congress.

According to Reid, the county report shows that DOE is spending 
money on things other than what should be high priority items.  
The county indicates that while DOE should be working toward 
getting licensed, money is spent on items that would indicate the 
license is already in hand.  Reid says that simply is wrong and 
wants a full audit.  The House is currently looking to not put 
any more money in a Yucca budget while the Senate is debating 
creating a budget of $50 million for this fiscal year.  In all it 
is believed that Yucca has already cost more than $8 billion and 
licensing is no closer today than it was 20 years ago.

Nevada Congresswoman Shelley Berkley (D) has said that a proposal 
in the senate for interim waste storage of high level nuclear 
waste would still send nuclear waste to Nevada for storage at 
Yucca Mountain.  Berkley is breaking from her democratic partner 
in the Senate, Harry Reid who is supporting the plan written by 
he and New Mexico Senator Pete Domenici.  "At the end of the 
day," she said in a prepared statement, "this plan still calls 
for nuclear waste to be dumped 90 minutes from Las Vegas, so 
nothing has really changed, except the timetable for sending 
radioactive garbage to Yucca Mountain."

Berkley has been one of the strong voices against the entire 
concept of Yucca Mountain, and said, "The fact that the 
supporters of this proposal say Yucca Mountain can wait 25 more 
years to open only proves that the dump is no longer needed."  
Domenici and Reid are proposing that high level waste be 
temporarily stored in areas near existing nuclear energy plants, 
and to continue research into reusing the waste in the future.

"As I have said over and over again," Berkley stated, "we should 
use the existing trust fund to pay plant operators to secure 
nuclear waste on-site.  That will keep nuclear waste off of 
America's roads and railways and out of Nevada."  Berkley says 
she sees no reason to move the waste from where it is right now.  
Moving the waste would be dangerous and be of no benefit to 
anyone.  "For years the nuclear industry has been falsely 
claiming that Yucca Mountain had to open right away, or else 
plants would shut down.  This obvious lie was meant to create 
pressure on lawmakers to force radioactive waste down the throats 
of Nevadans."

*****************************************************************
 37 BreakingNews.ie: Latest Sellafield leak proves safety failings, says Minister
 
18/07/2006 - 17:51:40 

The Minister for the Environment Dick Roche tonight claimed a
new enforcement action issued against British Nuclear Group
Sellafield Ltd was further evidence of fundamental safety
failures at the Cumbria plant.

Mr Roche said he would raise the safety record of the plant
across the Irish Sea with British Trade and Industry Minister
Alistair Darling in their forthcoming meeting.

The UK Environment Agency instigated the action today following
a leak at one of the storage ponds at the site in February 2006.

It occurred during a planned test of instrumentation, which
required the water level in the storage pond to be raised
temporarily.

However, the water level remained at a higher level than
planned, which caused water to leak from a gap in an expansion
joint of the pond wall.

A small amount (approx. 8 cubic metres) of radioactive water was
lost from the pond but was safely collected in the effluent
system designed for such incidents.
[''] 
Minister Roche said that while this incident involved no escape
of radioactivity to the environment and the amount of leaked
contamnated water was small, it was another example of the
ongoing safety failures at the plant.

“This incident which resulted in the enforcement action by the
UK Environment Agency might be considered minor when considered
in isolation, however it is the ongoing accumulation of a large
number of incidents over a long period of time that point to
fundamental failures in safety management and culture at the
plant,” he said.

“The evidence of a fundamental failure of safety management and
culture at the plant continues to mount.

“It requires a significant response from the UK authorities and
this is a matter which I shall raise in my forthcoming meeting
with the new UK Secretary of State for Trade and Industry,
Alistair Darling.” 

© Thomas Crosbie Media, 2006.   
*****************************************************************
 38 UPI: Museum to display old nuke train cars
 
United Press International - NewsTrack - 

7/18/2006 1:56:00 PM -0400                              

AMARILLO, Texas, July 18 (UPI) -- Several "White Train" railcars
that once transported nuclear warheads across the United States
are headed for public display in Amarillo, Texas. 

A Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad crew has hauled the cars
to the Amarillo Railroad Museum, where they will be restored to
their original white color, the Amarillo Globe reported Tuesday. 

The newspaper said the train, which was operated by the U.S.
Energy Department's Office of Secure Transportation, shipped
nuclear warheads assembled in Amarillo to military weapons
depots across the country. 

The cars were originally painted white to protect weapons
against the heat of the sun. The government, which shipped Navy
nuclear weapons by rail from 1951 to 1987, later used different
color schemes to thwart possible attacks and protests. 

The train was dubbed the "White Train" or the "Death Train" by
some, the newspaper said.

© Copyright 2006 United Press International, Inc. All Rights
Reserved
*****************************************************************
 39 Las Vegas SUN: New opening date for Yucca Mountain waste dump is 2017 

Today: July 18, 2006 at 14:36:27 PDT 

By ERICA WERNER ASSOCIATED PRESS 

WASHINGTON (AP) - The Energy Department has a new opening date
for the long-delayed Yucca Mountain nuclear waste dump in
Nevada: March 31, 2017. 

That's 19 years late. But it's the first concrete timeline the
department has produced in some time. 

The Energy Department planned to announce the schedule at a
congressional hearing Wednesday but shared it with congressional
offices Tuesday. A department spokesman didn't immediately
return a call for comment. 

According to a copy of the new schedule released by the office
of Rep. Shelley Berkley, D-Nev., the department would submit its
license application to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission on June
30, 2008, get authorization to begin construction on Sept. 30,
2011, complete construction on March 30, 2016 and begin
accepting nuclear waste on March 31, 2017. 

The dates correspond to general goals department officials have
shared recently with lawmakers. 

"This is an ambitious schedule, but it's nice to actually see a
schedule. This is the most detailed schedule on Yucca Mountain
that I have seen in recent memory," said Senate Energy Committee
Chairman Pete Domenici, R-N.M. 

But Domenici, who last month released a proposal for interim
nuclear waste storage at federal sites across the country, said
his plan still would be needed because the government is years
past its 1998 deadline to begin accepting spent fuel from
nuclear reactors. 

Yucca Mountain is planned as the first national repository for
nuclear waste and is meant to hold at least 77,000 tons of the
material for thousands of years. The dump site is in the desert
90 miles northwest of Las Vegas. 

The project has been delayed repeatedly by lawsuits, funding
shortfalls, evidence that government scientists flouted quality
control standards - requiring their work to be redone - and
other problems. 

Currently there are more than 50,000 tons of highly radioactive
nuclear waste waiting at nuclear power plants in 31 states. The
government is obligated by contract to take the waste off the
utilities' hands but has not done so because it has no place to
put it. 

"This timetable is a rosy scenario painted to please those
desperate to see Yucca Mountain open for business," said
Berkley, who along with the rest of Nevada's congressional
delegation strongly opposes the dump. "The proposed nuclear
garbage dump at Yucca Mountain still faces serious obstacles
before it can be licensed, including additional legal challenges
from the state of Nevada." 

Jon Summers, a spokesman for Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid,
D-Nev., said the new schedule was "nothing more than a wish list
by the people who want to turn Nevada into the nation's nuclear
dumping ground." 

All contents copyright 2005 Las Vegas SUN, Inc.
*****************************************************************
 40 DOE: Secretary Bodman Visits Iraq
 
  July 18, 2006
 
Meets with Iraqi Ministers of Oil, Electricity, and Science and
Technology 

BAGHDAD, IRAQ  U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Secretary Samuel
W. Bodman today visited Iraq to talk first hand with his
counterparts, the Ministers of Oil, Electricity, and Science and
Technology, and to discuss ways the Department can help them
build the energy infrastructure of their nation. 

The Iraqi people are showing tremendous fortitude as they move
forward in building their new democracy and we, the United
States, will stand with them, Secretary Bodman said.  The U.S.
Department of Energy is prepared to support their efforts
related to all elements of the energy sector here in Iraq, in
whatever capacity they see fit. 

President Bush asked Secretary Bodman and other cabinet members
to go to Iraq to meet with their counterparts face-to-face. 
This dialogue has opened the channels of communications between
the two nations in the program areas where the Department has a
wide-range of expertise including in electricity generation and
transmission, and crude oil development and regulation.  

While in Iraq, Secretary Bodman met with Iraqi Prime Minister
Nuri Al-Malaki, Deputy Prime Minister Barham Salih, Minister of
Oil Husayn al-Shahristani, Minister of Electricity Karim Wahid
al-Hasan, Minister of Science and Technology Raid Fahmi Jahid,
and U.S. Ambassador to Iraq Zalmay Khalilzad. 

During his discussions, Secretary Bodman announced a number of
commitments from the U.S. Department of Energy.  First, the
department has invited officials from each of the ministries to
come to the United States to tour DOE facilities and ask
questions of the departments professionals in the national
laboratories and in the areas of electricity generation,
transmission and distribution.  

The Secretary also announced an intent to enter into a
Memorandum of Understanding between the U.S. Department of
Energy and the Iraqi Ministry of Electricity. This MOU will
promote increased cooperation between the two nations in the
areas of energy analysis, science, technology, and energy
awareness and education. 

In addition, Secretary Bodman committed the relevant agencies
within the DOE to a continued dialogue with the Ministries of
Oil, Electricity, and Science and Technology. 

Today is just the beginning of our relationship between the
Department of Energy and the Ministries of Oil, Electricity, and
Science and Technology.  And I look forward to working with them
and seeing the successes of a free Iraq, Secretary Bodman said. 

Media contact(s): Craig Stevens, (202) 586-4940     [ ]   

  U.S. Department of Energy | 1000 Independence Ave., SW | 
Washington, DC 20585 1-800-dial-DOE | f/202-586-4403 | e/General 
Contact
*****************************************************************
 41 Tri-City Herald: Estimated cost of Hanford's vitrification plant may increase 

Published Tuesday, July 18th, 2006
 
By Annette Cary, Herald staff writer 

The estimated price of Hanford's vitrification plant could
increase to $13.2 billion after the Army Corps of Engineers
completes a study of the project, according to a Washington,
D.C., trade publication. 

Weapons Complex Monitor relied on an anonymous source for the
information. 

"We have not received any formal transmission from anyone with
that information," said Carrie Meyer, spokeswoman for Bechtel
National, the Department of Energy contractor building the
plant. 

The Corps is working on a draft report commissioned to validate
cost and schedule estimates prepared by Bechtel National.
 
"We have not received the final report," said Megan Barnett,
spokeswoman for the Department of Energy in Washington, D.C. 

Rep. Doc Hastings, R-Wash., also still is expecting the report,
said spokeswoman Jessica Gleason. 

The final report from the Corps was expected by the end of July,
according to a Bechtel report in June on the plant's cost and
schedule. 

Now DOE is saying the Corps report is expected to be issued in
late summer. 

In June, Bechtel finished a detailed cost and schedule estimate
for the plant that estimated the cost at $11.55 billion and the
start of operations in 2019. DOE gave that report to the Army
Corps to validate. 

At the start of 2005, the plant was estimated to cost about $5.8
billion and was supposed to be ready to begin operating by a
2011 deadline. 

As problems have been revealed since then, Energy Secretary
Samuel Bodman has called for a valid and defensible cost and
schedule estimate. 

Problems have included technical challenges and an earthquake
study that showed key parts of the plant may not withstand a
severe earthquake. Congress believes the project should have
been better managed, and an independent expert review panel said
the cost and schedule estimates needed a greater contingency.
Budget cuts also are adding to the cost increases. 

The plant is intended to turn millions of gallons of radioactive
waste held in aging underground tanks into a stable glass form
for disposal. The waste is left from the past production of
plutonium for the nation's nuclear weapons program.
 

© 2006 Tri-City Herald, Associated Press &Other Wire Services
*****************************************************************
 42 Paducah Sun: Plant-retirees-not-optimistic-about-pension 

Paducah, Kentucky 

July 17, 2006 Monday 

Plant retirees not optimistic about pension: The former nuclear
workers will meet with Whitfield on July 29. 

Joe Walker The Paducah Sun, Ky 


Jul. 17--Retired Paducah area nuclear workers don't think Rep.
Ed Whitfield will have good news when he updates them July 29 on
their ongoing battle to improve their pension. 

"If there was anything positive in that information it would
appear to me he would have already announced something was going
to be done," said group spokesman Harry Colbert of Paducah. 

A meeting is set for 3 p.m. at the United Steelworkers Local
5-550 meeting hall on Old Cairo Road. 

Frustrated by rising medical costs and inflation, the roughly
780 retirees argue that $100 million should be added to the
nearly $580 million in their pension account allocated to USEC
Inc. in 1999 when federal law was passed to privatize the
Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant. Most of the retirees left long
before then and wanted their pensions to remain with the
Department of Energy because they worked for DOE contractors
Union Carbide and/or Lockheed Martin. There are also are 233
surviving spouses. 

Whitfield met Feb. 4 with more than 200 retirees and survivors,
promising to ask "for a line-item explanation" from DOE on the
allocation to USEC for the pension fund. He then wrote Energy
Secretary Samuel Bodman criticizing DOE for not having a
representative knowledgeable in retiree issues at the meeting. 

According to Whitfield field representative David Mast, the
congressman received a response that "was close to an inch-thick
stack of papers," Colbert said. 

Colbert expressed disappointment at not getting a preview of
Bodman's response prior to the new meeting. Brent Dolen,
Whitfield's press secretary, declined comment. 

While the nearly $580 million was moved to USEC to cover
retirees from the plants in Paducah and Portsmouth, Ohio, about
$2.5 billion stayed in the Oak Ridge fund with DOE. Oak Ridge
retirees have received several cost-of-living raises, the latest
in 2001, but those from the Paducah and Portsmouth plants have
not. 

"Our people are passing away almost on a weekly basis," Colbert
said, "and they need the money." 

Aside from seeking the $100 million, Paducah retirees want to
know the logic in separating the pension plans when people in
all three communities did the same work. 

In February, Whitfield said privatization legislation noted that
changes in plant operators had occurred and that the plant
operator -- USEC for Paducah and Portsmouth -- would control the
pension funds. A sister uranium enrichment plant in Oak Ridge
was run by a government contractor before it closed. 

In June 2004, Colbert and 10 other retirees filed suit in U.S.
District Court trying to force the government to supplement the
Paducah pension fund by $100 million. The action was dismissed
on defense arguments that retirees missed the filing deadline by
about a month, based on when the pension fund was separated.

Retiree attorney Rick Walter maintained that the deadline had
not passed. 

The case remains with the U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals in
Cincinnati. 

Retirees are fighting an uphill battle because the Energy
Department wants to do away with pensions because they are too
expensive, Colbert said. "Apparently they've taken a hard line
stance against any new increases in pensions." 

Last month, Bodman issued a one-year suspension of a new policy
restricting cleanup worker pensions. DOE had adopted a policy in
April stating that it would not fund new entries into the
pension plan because of soaring expenses, but would continue
matching 401(k) plans. 

Bodman wrote U.S. Sen. Pete Domenici, chairman of the Committee
on Energy and Natural Resources, saying he was suspending the
policy until 2007. He said DOE would consult with Congress and
others over the next year regarding the implications. 

"DOE has seen escalating and volatile growth" in costs for
pension and other retirement benefits, notably an increase of
nearly 200 percent since fiscal year 2000 to an estimated $784
million this year, Bodman wrote. Unfunded debt for the benefits
rose to $11.6 billion in fiscal 2005, up 63 percent since 2000. 

"I am concerned that this spiraling cost growth will result in
fewer dollars available to DOE for meeting our scientific,
environmental cleanup and national security missions," Bodman
wrote. 

DOE officials told Oak Ridge pensioners during a June 22 meeting
that they would not get a pay raise, which drew heated response
suggesting that retirees would seek political help to the
contrary. The group is counting on Republicans Domenici and Rep.
Zack Wamp of Tennessee. 

Copyright (c) 2006, The Paducah Sun, Ky. Distributed by
McClatchy-Tribune Business News. For reprints, email
tmsreprints@permissionsgroup.com, call 800-374-7985 or
847-635-6550, send a fax to 847-635-6968, or write to The
Permissions Group Inc., 1247 Milwaukee Ave., Suite 303,
Glenview, IL 60025, USA. 

    
*****************************************************************

NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 this 
material is distributed without profit or payment to those who 
have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for 
non-profit research and educational purposes only. For more 
information go to: 
<http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml> 
    
*****************************************************************