*****************************************************************
07/20/06 ****     RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL)       **** VOL 14.171
*****************************************************************
   RADBULL IS PRODUCED BY THE ABALONE ALLIANCE CLEARINGHOUSE
*****************************************************************
Send News Stories to news@energy-net.org with title on subject
line and first line of body

                         NUCLEAR POLICY
 
1 Guardian Unlimited: Iran Vows Response to Nuke Package Aug. 22
2 Guardian Unlimited: Iran Promises Aug. 22 Reply to Nuke Plan
3 Guardian Unlimited: Russia Says No Rush on Iran Resolution
4 IRNA: Iran to work out a reply for EU package by August 22 (Updates)
5 IRNA: UK may recall parliament over Middle East crisis
6 Xinhua: Iran vows to keep on nuke program   
7 IRIB PERSIAN NEWS: IRI issues statement on N-program 
8 IRNA: New draft resolution on Iran's N-case presented to Russia, Chi
9 AFP: Russia could accept sanctions against Iran: foreign minister -
10 AFP: Iran rejects demands to freeze nuclear work, warns UN 
11 AFP: France circulates revised draft on Iran nuclear issue - 
12 NEWS.com.au: Iranians 'saw N Korea missile test' - 
13 Guardian Unlimited: U.S. Stands by 6-Nation North Korea Talks
14 Guardian Unlimited: U.S. Lawmakers Examine North Korea
15 AFP: US still open to talks on North Korea weapons 
16 Guardian Unlimited: U.S. Seeks Consultation on N. Korea Talks
17 Economist.com: America's nuclear deal with India | From bad to worse
18 US: UPI: Energy official: U.S. supply needs boost
19 Guardian Unlimited: Japan, U.S. to Deploy Missile Interceptors
20 Guardian Unlimited: MPs will get nuclear deterrent vote
21 Guardian Unlimited: MPs to get final say on renewal of Britain's nuc
22 RIA Novosti: No plans to commission Belgorod nuclear submarine - min
23 BBC: MPs get 'veto' over new Trident
24 AFP: MPs will vote on whether to renew nuclear deterrent 
25 ITAR-TASS: Russian Navy will deploy nuclear missile carriers of "Bor
26 SNP: Government Concedes Vote on Trident Replacement
27 Whitehaven News: Darling fails to answer nuclear unionâ€™s pensions 
 
                         NUCLEAR REACTORS
 
28 US: [NukeNet] More Inconvenient Truth
29 Times of India: Mole in PMO passed on N-secrets to US - Jaswant
30 HindustanTimes.com: 'US had a mole in Rao's PMO' 
31 MDN: Jellyfish force nuclear reactor to reduce output - 
32 RIA Novosti: Armenia approves sale of electricity network to 
33 RIA Novosti: Russia to join international nuclear group
34 BBC: Nuclear plant struck by jellyfish
35 BBC: Wylfa definitely closing in 2010
36 US: Rutland Herald: The truth about wind power
37 US: NRC: Agency Information Collection Activities: Submission for th
38 People's Daily: Peru, Russia sign nuclear cooperation agreement
39 FN Arena News: The Nuclear Age Has Been Cancelled Due To Rain
40 AFP: French nuclear giant Areva says will make India a top priority 
41 Telegraph: Profile: cool customer who enjoys heat in the nuclear kit
42 US: [theday.com: Union Bid At Millstone Postponed A Year 
43 UPI: German energy summit to determine future
44 US: Whitehaven News: US nuclear firm brings jobs hopes
 
                          NUCLEAR SECURITY
 
45 Guardian Unlimited: Clarke to set personal agenda with nuclear chall
 
                          NUCLEAR SAFETY
 
46 US: Daily Press: Fallout sign stands sentry
 
                         NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE
 
47 ENS: Timetable for Yucca Mountain Has Nuclear Waste Arriving in 2017
48 US: Las Vegas SUN: Editorial: Let nuke waste stay put 
49 Platts: DOE plans to reach 2008 target for repository license applic
50 Platts: Nuclear waste chief asks Congress to remove repository roadb
51 US: Technology Review: The Best Nuclear Option
52 US: PE.com: Cleanup of former rocket test site in Simi Valley delaye
53 US: NRC: Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste; Renewal Notice
54 OpinionJournal: A Waste of Energy: Yucca Mountain hangs in nuclear l
55 Berkley: Bush White House, GOP Declare 2017 New "Mission Accomplishe
56 Ensign: ENSIGN: DOE'S YUCCA TIMELINE NOT BASED IN SCIENCE OR REALITY
57 Reid: REID STATEMENT REGARDING REVISED SCHEDULE FOR PROPOSED YUCCA M
58 US: News & Star: It's too hot to handle
59 Whitehaven News: Leading councillor gets job with BNG 
 
                           PEACE
 
 
                        US DEPT. OF ENERGY
 
60 Guardian Unlimited: Official Reprimanded in DOE Hacker Case
61 Tri-City Herald: Council files natural resource suit 
62 FCW: DOE: No privacy on agency computers
63 lamonitor.com: Projects in defense bill 
64 Daily Californian: Regents Consider Third Lab Contract - 
65 KnoxNews: OR retirees to use voting influence
66 KnoxNews: Uranium from Argentina arrives at Y-12
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
                         FULL NEWS STORIES
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
 1 Guardian Unlimited: Iran Vows Response to Nuke Package Aug. 22
 
From the Associated Press        

[UP] 

Thursday July 20, 2006 12:16 PM

By ALI AKBAR DAREINI 

Associated Press Writer 

TEHRAN, Iran (AP) - Iran on Thursday promised to formally
respond on Aug. 22 to a Western package of incentives aimed at
resolving the standoff over its suspect nuclear program. 

The Supreme National Security Council, Iran's top security
decision-making body, also threatened that the country will
reconsider its nuclear policies if sanctions are imposed. 

The council didn't elaborate, but Iranian officials repeatedly
have suggested that Tehran may withdraw from the Nuclear
Nonproliferation Treaty and stop cooperation with the U.N.
inspectors. 

``The package of incentives requires a logical time to study it
... August 22 has been set for declaring (our) views,'' the
council said in a statement read on state-run television. 

``In case the path of confrontation is chosen instead of the
path of dialogue ... and Iran's definite rights are threatened,
then there will be no option for Iran but to reconsider its
nuclear policies,'' it added. 

The statement came a day after Russia said the U.N. Security
Council is in no rush to pressure Iran over its nuclear program,
striking a more conciliatory tone than the United States as
diplomats began discussing a resolution to put legal muscle
behind demands that Tehran suspend uranium enrichment. 

The United States and some of its allies accuse Iran of seeking
to produce highly enriched uranium and plutonium for nuclear
weapons. Tehran says its nuclear program is peaceful and aimed
at generating electricity. 

The Western nations offered Iran a package of incentives on June
6 - including advanced technology and possibly even nuclear
research reactors - if Tehran suspended enrichment. 

But the frustrated powers agreed last week to send Tehran back
to the U.N. Security Council for possible punishment, saying it
had given no sign it would bargain in earnest over its nuclear
ambitions. 

Iran has said the incentives package was an ``acceptable basis''
for negotiations. 

The council said special committees in key state agencies were
still studying the offer by the United States, Britain, China,
France, Russia and Germany, and invited the U.S. and its allies
to return to the negotiating table. 

It said it was ``surprising'' that the U.S. was creating
obstacles in the way of a negotiated settlement while Iran was
seriously studying the offer. 

``Iran is not after tension, but if others push things toward
tension and create problems, then all will face problems. Iran
believes dialogue is the most logical solution. It is serious in
this path. We want the other side to return to the negotiating
table,'' the statement said. 

A senior Iranian lawmaker said Tuesday that the country's
parliament was preparing to debate withdrawal from the
nonproliferation treaty if the U.N. Security Council adopts a
resolution that would force Tehran to suspend uranium
enrichment. 

Withdrawal from the treaty could end all international oversight
of Iran's nuclear program. 

In February, Iran for the first time produced its first batch of
low-enriched uranium, using a cascade of 164 centrifuges. The
process of uranium enrichment can be used to generate
electricity or in building a bomb, depending on the level of
enrichment. 

Iran has said it will never give up its right under the treaty
to enrich uranium and produce nuclear fuel but has indicated it
may temporarily suspend large-scale activities to ease tensions. 

Russian Ambassador Vitaly Churkin said the council wants an
answer sometime soon to the incentives package, but he stressed
the council is not trying to push Tehran.	 
		 	 	   
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
 2 Guardian Unlimited: Iran Promises Aug. 22 Reply to Nuke Plan
 
From the Associated Press        

[UP] 

Thursday July 20, 2006 8:46 PM

AP Photo PAR108 

By ALI AKBAR DAREINI 

Associated Press Writer 

TEHRAN, Iran (AP) - Iran said Thursday it would reply Aug. 22 to
the Western incentive package to stop enriching uranium, but it
also issued a veiled threat, indicating Tehran will not accept
any deal that dilutes its nuclear program. 

The statement by the Supreme National Security Council was
Iran's first mention of a precise date after weeks of being
accused of stalling. 

It said Iran ``has made plans to produce part of its nuclear
fuel needs inside the country and is making efforts to meet its
required fuel'' - a process that entails enriching uranium for
use in nuclear reactors. 

The council also warned that Iran would retaliate if the world
tried to punish it. 

``In case the path of confrontation is chosen instead of the
path of dialogue ... and Iran's definite rights are threatened,
then there will be no option for Iran but to reconsider its
nuclear policies,'' the council said. 

The statement did not spell out what Tehran would do, but
Iranian officials have repeatedly threatened to withdraw from
the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and stop cooperating with
U.N. nuclear inspectors. 

The permanent members of U.N. Security Council plus Germany
offered Iran a package of incentives June 6 to persuade it to
suspend enrichment - a process that can produce material for
atomic weapons as well as fuel for reactors. The incentives
include advanced technology and the easing of U.S. sanctions on
the sale of aircraft and aircraft parts. 

Last week, the world powers decided to refer Iran to the U.N.
Security Council, saying it had taken too long to reply and had
given no sign of wanting to negotiate in earnest over its
nuclear ambitions. 

The Supreme National Security Council insisted Iran wants to
avoid a showdown. 

``Iran is not after tension, but if others push things toward
tension and create problems, then all will face problems,'' it
said. ``Iran believes dialogue is the most logical solution. It
is serious in this path. We want the other side to return to the
negotiating table.'' 

It accused the United States of hindering a solution, blaming it
for the decision to refer Iran to the Security Council, which
has the power to impose sanctions. 

``The United States, by changing the path of talks toward
Security Council, is trying to create obstacles,'' the statement
said. 

Political analyst Saeed Leilaz said the United States and its
allies would find it difficult to pass a Security Council
resolution supported by Russia and China while Iran was making
clear that it would reply to the incentives. 

``It will not be worth creating global tension simply because
Iran will give a response a few weeks later than the U.S. has
demanded,'' Leilaz said. 

The Iranian council said special committees in key state
agencies were studying the offer. 

``The package of incentives requires a logical time to study it.
... Aug. 22 has been set for declaring (our) views,'' the
council said in the statement that was read on state-run
television. 

The United States and some of its allies accuse Iran of seeking
to produce highly enriched uranium and plutonium for nuclear
weapons. 

Tehran says its nuclear program is aimed at generating
electricity. Thursday's statement referred to a national plan to
``to meet 20,000 megawatts of electricity through nuclear energy
in the next 20 years.'' 

Tehran has insisted on exercising its right to produce nuclear
fuel as a signatory to the nonproliferation treaty, but Western
powers are suspicious of its intentions because it concealed
parts of its nuclear development from U.N. inspectors for years. 

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad initially said Iran would respond
to the package in mid-August, but Tehran later pushed it back to
late August. 

On Wednesday, Russia said the U.N. Security Council is in no
rush to pressure Iran, striking a more conciliatory tone than
Washington as diplomats began discussing a resolution demanding
Tehran suspend enrichment or face the prospect of economic and
diplomatic sanctions. 
		 	 	   
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
 3 Guardian Unlimited: Russia Says No Rush on Iran Resolution
 
From the Associated Press        

[UP] 

Thursday July 20, 2006 2:16 AM

AP Photo SUM197 

By NICK WADHAMS 

Associated Press Writer 

UNITED NATIONS (AP) - The U.N. Security Council is in no rush to
pressure Iran over its suspect nuclear program, Russia said
Wednesday, striking a more conciliatory tone than the United
States as diplomats began discussing a resolution to put legal
muscle behind demands that Tehran suspend uranium enrichment. 

Ambassador Vitaly Churkin said the council wants an answer
sometime soon to a June 5 package of incentives that six world
powers offered to Iran if it stopped enrichment. But he stressed
the council is not trying to push Tehran. 

``We are not in a rush at all,'' Churkin said. ``We do not want
to ambush Iran in any way. We're very much in a negotiating
political mode. We do not want to dictate things to Iran.'' 

``Nobody's pushing Iran anywhere,'' he said. 

Churkin's remarks seemed distinctly more relaxed than the
message that was sent on July 12, when foreign ministers of
Britain, China, France, Germany, Russia and the U.S. met and
expressed disappointment that Iran had failed to respond
positively to the package. 

They referred the issue back to the Security Council and asked
that members adopt a resolution making Iran's suspension of
enrichment activities mandatory. 

The Russian tone contrasted with Washington's. The U.S. has been
vocal in its frustration with the Iranian response so far. 

U.S. Ambassador John Bolton said Washington had instructed him
to get a resolution on Iran passed by the end of the week. But
with the council so busy on Lebanon, and negotiations on Iran
likely to take several days, other diplomats said that seemed
unlikely. 

The five permanent members of the council met Wednesday to trade
ideas about the language of a new resolution. The dynamic
appeared to be the same as it was when the council haggled over
a statement confronting Iran's nuclear ambitions in March: China
and Russia looking for weaker action, with Britain, France and
the U.S. seeking a tough response. 

While an outline for a draft exists, the negotiations are now
focused on the complex diplomatic language of Security Council
resolutions - for example, which article of the U.N. Charter to
cite as authority. 

Bolton said the council diplomats agreed that the resolution
must be legally binding, as their foreign ministers had said
earlier in July. But beyond that, they were still working. 

``What we have not reached agreement on is the precise
formulation of the words that will do that,'' he said. 

A draft circulated by the United States calls for the
International Atomic Energy Agency, the U.N. nuclear watchdog,
and other international experts to verify Iran's suspension of
uranium enrichment. Enriched uranium can be used to produce both
nuclear power or weapons. Iran has said its nuclear program is
for peaceful purposes only. 

The draft did not set a deadline for Iran to comply. 

Russia offered an amended resolution on Wednesday that would
weaken the document significantly, but would ask the IAEA to
report back on Iran's compliance by August 31. 

In remarks to reporters, Churkin did urge Iran to respond as
soon as possible to the incentives package. If it does so, he
said, the whole process of a council resolution could be
avoided. 

``We keep hearing from Iran that their attitude is supposed to
be constructive, so if this is the case we hope ... a possible
response will come because the offer is so generous,'' he said. 

Iran said Sunday that the incentives package was an ``acceptable
basis'' for talks, and invited world powers to enter detailed
negotiations over its disputed nuclear program. 

But that was not the direct, formal response that the council
wanted, and diplomats are still going ahead with a resolution.	 
		 	 	   
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
 4 IRNA: Iran to work out a reply for EU package by August 22 (Updates) -
      
Tehran, July 20, IRNA

Iran-Nuclear-Statement
 
Iran said on Thursday the special panels studying package of the
European Union (EU) for national nuclear program will work out a
reply until August 22.

 "The Islamic Republic of Iran welcomes the EU package as a new
initiative from the European partners and is considering context
of the package with positive attitude. It is normal that it
takes time to examine the offer and it is logical to accomplish
the job by August 22. The specialized panels studying the EU
package are seriously working on the project," Secretary of the
Supreme National Security Council (SNSC) Ali Larijani said in a
statement.

 Iran has preferred the path of negotiations and understanding
as the most logical solution to Iran's nuclear case, he said.

 "The Islamic Republic of Iran has decided to generate 20,000 MW
electricity from nuclear energy for the next 20 years and has
made a planning to produce fuel for the nuclear power plants
inside the country.

 "The Islamic Republic of Iran honors its obligations to
Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), Safeguards of International
Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and and implemented Additional
Protocol to NPT for the past three years."
 "Over 2,000 persons/days inspections to Iranian nuclear sites
have been carried out by the UN nuclear agency in the past three
years in the context of 52 periods of inspections by the
Safeguards officers of IAEA," said Larijani.

 "If the path of confrontation is selected instead of
negotiations and in case of adoption of any measure which
jeopardizes inalienable right of the Iranian nation, there will
remain no other option but a revision of national nuclear
policy," Larijani said in his statement.

 "Iran demands nothing beyond the rights predicted in the NPT
which all countries possess.

 "The Islamic Republic of Iran has exercised satisfactory
cooperation with IAEA during the past three years within
frameworks of the comprehensive nuclear Safeguards and voluntary
implementation of the Additional Protocol to NPT.

 Based on the IAEA reports, no cases of unannounced nuclear
materials were founded in Iran. All nuclear materials of the
country were reported to the UN agency and supervised by that
body.

 "Meanwhile, the IAEA has explicitly announced no diversion from
civilian purpose in national nuclear program and that there is
no weapons program.

 "As the IAEA director-general said, the agency's approval of
lack of unannounced nuclear activities and materials in any
country is a time-consuming process and is not limited to Iran.
Rather, it is a situation which includes 46 states such as 14
European sates.

 "Issues raised on concerns of the international community over
Iran's nuclear activities belong to several member states of the
United Nations.

 "Statement of foreign ministers of 116 member states of the
Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) in Malaysia, statement from foreign
ministers of 57-nation the Organization of the Islamic
Conference (OIC) in Azerbaijan Republic and statement of D-8
Group Eight Developing Nations in support for Iran's peaceful
nuclear activities are indications proving opposition of major
part of the international community with discriminatory trend
and concerns over establishment of an illegal approach to
deprive most countries of access to peaceful nuclear energy,"
said the statement.

 "It is surprising for Iran that after the first round of talks
held with the European Union foreign policy chief Javier Solana
in Brussels and under circumstances that no specific event took
place since then, there are indications that certain parties,
the United States in particular, intend to create obstacle in
the way of diplomacy and talks through shifting the path of
negotiations to the path of the Security Council.

 Iran calls on the EU partners to come to the negotiation
table.		 				 		 			
*****************************************************************
 5 IRNA: UK may recall parliament over Middle East crisis

London, July 20, IRNA

UK Parliament-Israeli Invasions 

The British government is keeping open the option of recalling
parliament during its summer recess amid reports of fears that
the Zionist regime's continuing bombardment of Lebanon may
backfire.

 Senior British officials fear that Israel's aggression is
failing to cripple the Hezbollah resistance group and that
continued bombardment will bring huge civilian casualties in
Lebanon for little military gain, according to the Times
newspaper on Thursday.

 "Our concern is that Israeli military action is not having the
desired effect. We're not seeing the level of impact [which
Israel and its allies would want]," one official was quoted
saying.

 The paper suggested that Britain was striking a "much more
urgent tone" than the American position.

 It said the first sign of frustration came at last weekend's G8
summit Prime Minister Tony Blair "revealed his anxiety about the
need for urgent intervention" during the unknown recorded
conversation he had with US George W. Bush.

 Questioned in parliament about the timing of the crisis in the
Middle East and the possibility of involving British troop ahead
of next week's recess, Leader of the House of Commons Jack Straw
did not rule out the possibility of MPs being recalled.

 "The question of the recall of Parliament is kept under active
review by my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister and by senior
Ministers throughout the recess," he said.

 He added that the House of Commons had been recalled three
times in recent years, in 1998, 2001 and 2002 and said he could
assure that if it is necessary MPs will be recalled again.

*****************************************************************
 6 Xinhua: Iran vows to keep on nuke program   
    
  www.chinaview.cn 2006-07-20 19:14:30   

  [Iran 's top nuclear negotiator, Ali Larijani (L) speaks
during a press conference at the Irani Embassy in Brussels,
Tuesday July 11, 2006. Iran's top nuclear negotiator Ali
Larijani on Tuesday said talks on his country's atomic program
will be a 'long process' and warned the international community
to be patient. ] 

Iran 's top nuclear negotiator, Ali Larijani (L) speaks during a 
press conference at the Irani Embassy in Brussels, Tuesday July 
11, 2006. Iran's top nuclear negotiator Ali Larijani on Tuesday 
said talks on his country's atomic program will be a 'long 
process' and warned the international community to be patient. 
(File photo/Xinhua)  

  [Foreign ministers of China, France, Great Britain, Russia,
the United States and Germany hold meeting in Paris on
Wednesday. The meeting agreed to return Iran's nuclear issue to
the UN Security Council. (Photo: Xinhua/AFP)] 

Foreign ministers of China, France, Great Britain, Russia, the
United States and Germany hold meeting in Paris on Wednesday,
July 12, 2006. The meeting agreed to return Iran's nuclear issue
to the UN Security Council. (File photo/Xinhua/AFP)  

    TEHRAN, July 20 (Xinhua) -- Iran's top nuclear negotiator
Ali Larijani said on Thursday that the country would continue
its disputed nuclear activities, promising to respond to the
six-nation package aimed at resolving the current standoff on
Aug. 22. 

    "We have adopted a scheme to generate 20,000 megawatts of
atomic energy over the next 20 years, Iran determined to depend
on itself to make some nuclear fuel inside the country,"
Larijani said in a statement read by the state-run television. 

    Meanwhile, the top official warned the United Nations
Security Council (UNSC) against taking compulsive measures to
force Iran to suspend nuclear works. 

    "We are ready to find a diplomatic solution for the two
sides, and we are serious in this path, they (the UNSC) should
choose a track of dialogue, but if they choose confrontation and
want to restrict and threaten the legal right of the Iranian
people, Iran will have no choice but to revise its current
policy," said Larijani in the statement. 

    "Iran is not after tension, but if others push things toward
tension and create problems, then all will face problems," he
added. 

    Larijani also promised Iran would formally respond
six-nation package on Aug. 22. 

    "Iran welcome the package of proposals, but it demands a
logical time to be examined, we have determined to declare (our)
views on Aug. 22," he said. 

    Echoing with Larijani's comments of "revising policy", a top
Iranian lawmaker also said on Thursday that the Majlis (Iran's
parliament) was ready to debate withdrawal from the
Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) if the Security Council adopts a
resolution demanding a suspension of Iran's nuclear activities. 

    On June 6, EU foreign policy chief Javier Solana presented
Iran with a package agreed on by the five permanent members of
the UN Security Council plus Germany concerning the Iranian
nuclear issue. 

    The proposal includes both incentives aimed at persuading
Iran to suspend uranium enrichment and possible sanctions if
Iran does not comply. 

    Western countries have been pressing Tehran to respond to
the six-nation package before Saturday, but Iran has rejected
the request. 

    The six countries agreed on last Wednesday to return Iran's
nuclear issue to the UN Security Council. 
                                
  Editor: Zhu Jin   
*****************************************************************
 7 IRIB PERSIAN NEWS: IRI issues statement on N-program 

2006/07/20   
  
The Islamic Republic of Iran announced in an official statement
on thursday that it is determined to produce nuclear fuel on its
territory.
 
"Based on law, Iran has planned to produce 20,000 mw of nuclear
electricity in the next 20 years and needs to produce nuclear
fuel inside the country for those reactors," said the statement
released by the Supreme National Securioty Council (SNSC).
 
It said "Iran was still reviewing the western countries' new
proposals and wanted talks to solve the issue. But America has
been trying to create obstacles in the way of talks and a
diplomatic solution to this issue"."Iran has no other way than
to review its nuclear policies if confrontation is chosen,
instead of talks."
 
  
  Copyright 2004, All Rights Reserved By Islamic Republic of Iran 
Broadcasting News Network Sponsored By IRIB News Computer Center. 
E-Mail: <font color="#ff0000" face>Webmaster@IRIBNEWS.ir</font> 
*****************************************************************
 8 IRNA: New draft resolution on Iran's N-case presented to Russia, China
      
United Nations, New York, July 20, IRNA
		 
Iran-UNSC-Nuclear 

A new draft resolution on Iran's nuclear case was presented to
Russia and China -- two of the five veto-wielding members of the
Security Council, France's Ambassador to the UN and UNSC
president for July Jean-Marc de la Sabliere said.

 The five permanent Security Council members plus Germany held
their first official session held behind closed doors here to
discuss Iran's nuclear case on Wednesday.

 Earlier, on Tuesday, the European countries had presented China
and Russia with a text that would require Iran to suspend
uranium enrichment, but their envoys said they had to consult
their home governments for instructions.

 The new draft resolution, like the one presented on July 12,
has been prepared by the European Union's Big 3 -- Germany,
France and Britain -- and is strongly backed by the United
States.

 In both resolutions, the six powers disagree on the matter of
invoking Chapter 7 of the UN Charter to justify imposition of
sanctions on Iran if Tehran rejected the package of incentives
it was offered last month.

 US Ambassador to the United Nations John Bolton said the envoys
had agreed that suspension of uranium enrichment should be
mandatory on Iran but "what we have not reached agreement on is
the right formulation of the words," obviously referring to the
issue of invoking Chapter 7 of the UN Charter in the resolution.

 He added that all members of the Security Council had
directives on behalf of their countries on Iran's nuclear
dossier and that his instruction was "to get this resolution
passed as soon as possible, this week if possible."
 Iran, on June 6, was offered a package of incentives by the UN
Security Council's five permanent members -- Russia China, US,
UK and France -- plus Germany through EU foreign policy chief
Javier Solana in exchange for suspension of uranium enrichment
and multilateral talks to settle the dispute over its nuclear
program.

 The five UNSC permanent members -- Russia, China, Britain,
France and the United States -- are eager to obtain a speedy
reply from Iran to the offer and referred Iran's dossier back to
the UNSC on July in order to force it to give an earlier reply.

 Iran, however, has insisted it will not be pressured to give a
reply before the end of the Iranian month of Mordad (Aug 21).

 Russian Ambassador to the United Nations Vitaly Churkin told
reporters here Wednesday the international community was serious
about Iran's nuclear case and expected Tehran to give its
response at the earliest.

 "If a response was to come tomorrow, that would make our task
very easy as it would be unnecessary for us to continue this
activity in the Security Council," said the Russian ambassador.

*****************************************************************
 9 AFP: Russia could accept sanctions against Iran: foreign minister -
    
 Thu Jul 20, 4:30 AM ET 		 	 

MOSCOW (AFP) - Russia could agree to sanctions against Iran" /> 
if the Islamic Republic fails to answer proposals for resolving 
the current nuclear crisis, Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said, 
in an apparent hardening of his country's position. 

 "If the first resolution calling on Iran to respond to the
demands of the IAEA doesn't work, we have agreed that after a
period it will be necessary to discuss additional measures,
including measures of an economic character," Lavrov told Echo
Moscow radio in an interview on Wednesday. 

"This period should be a reasonable one so that Iran can realise
the attractiveness of the proposals. 

"The resolution currently being discussed... says that the (UN)
Security Council, while expecting an answer from Iran, intends
to look at additional measures if there isn't an answer. It
clearly states that these measures do not include the use of
force," Lavrov said. 

"If after a certain period we don't hear an answer from Iran and
discussions aren't renewed, we will look in the Security Council
at additional measures," he said. 

The proposals put to Iran were presented by the five permanent
members of the United Nations" /> Security Council plus Germany
in June. They offer trade, political and economic incentives. 

The lack of response from Iran has led to renewed discussion of
the issue in the Security Council. 

The United States has led calls for Iran to suspend sensitive
nuclear fuel cycle work, suspecting that Tehran's stated desire
for peaceful nuclear energy is a cover for a weapons programme. 

Russia is a close ally of Iran and is building the Islamic
Republic's first nuclear power station at Bushehr, a project the
US has said should be halted. 

Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
 10 AFP: Iran rejects demands to freeze nuclear work, warns UN 

 by Siavosh Ghazi Thu Jul 20, 8:39 AM ET 		 	 

TEHRAN (AFP) - Iran" /> Iranhas again rejected international 
demands it freeze its controversial nuclear programme and warned 
the UN Security Council against choosing a "path of 
confrontation". 

 In a statement read on state television Thursday, nuclear
negotiator Ali Larijani also said Iran would take until August
22 to reply to an international offer of incentives in exchange
for a halt of uranium enrichment. 

But he also accused the United States, which has lumped Iran
into an "axis of evil", of trying to derail diplomatic efforts
to resolve the crisis. 

"According to the adopted plan to generate 20,000 megawatts of
atomic energy over the next 20 years, the Islamic republic has
decided to make some of its own nuclear fuel inside Iran," said
the statement from Larijani, the head of Iran's Supreme National
Security Council. 

He said Tehran was "ready to find a diplomatic solution with a
suitable calendar for both parties" but issued a warning to the
Security Council -- currently discussing ways to pressure Iran
into freezing enrichment. 

"If the path of confrontation is chosen instead of the path of
dialogue, and if there is any action to limit the absolute
rights of the Iranian people, the Islamic republic will have no
choice but to revise its policy," the statement warned. 

Iran says it only wants to enrich to the low levels needed to
make reactor fuel and that this is a right under the nuclear
Non-Proliferation Treaty. 

The technology can, however, be extended to make weapons. Iran's
failure to disclose its programme for nearly two decades aroused
suspicions that it wants weapons and thus brought demands for a
suspension. 

Several top officials have already threatened to prevent
International Atomic Energy Agency" /> International Atomic
Energy Agencyinspections and even quit the NPT if the pressure
mounts. 

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 their offer, billed as a way
to guarantee Iranian access to civilian nuclear technology while
preventing it from getting the bomb. 

Tehran has repeatedly insisted that it is ready to negotiate,
but at the same time has rejected any "preconditions" being
imposed. 

"Iran has welcomed the offer from the big powers, and the
examination of it is continuing. This takes time, and the reply
will be given on August 22," said the statement, billed by state
television as an "important announcement". 

The Security Council members, Larijani said, should "return to
the negotiating table". 

"Certain parties, notably the United States, have steered a path
towards the Security Council by putting obstacles in the way of
negotiations," Larijani said. 

Larijani's statement in effect repeated Tehran's oft-stated
unwillingness to stop enriching uranium. 

It also came after the UN Security Council's five permanent
members plus Germany have begun consultations -- so far
inconclusive -- on a resolution that would make a suspension
legally binding under international law. 

Western countries have presented Russia and China with a text
that would require Iran to suspend uranium enrichment and
plutonium reprocessing activities. 

"My instructions remain to get this resolution passed as soon as
possible, this week if possible," the US ambassador to the UN,
John Bolton, said on Wednesday. 

Russia has also hardened its tone against Iran, with Foreign
Minister Sergei Lavrov signalling on Wednesday that Russia may
agree to sanctions if Iran refuses to budge. 

"If the first resolution... doesn't work, we have agreed that
after a period it will be necessary to discuss additional
measures, including measures of an economic character," Lavrov
told Echo Moscow radio. 	 		 			

Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
 11 AFP: France circulates revised draft on Iran nuclear issue - 

 by Gerard Aziakou Thu Jul 20, 7:34 PM ET 		 	 

UNITED NATIONS (AFP) - France circulated a revised draft 
resolution in the UN Security Council that legally requires Iran" 
/> to suspend all uranium enrichment and reprocessing activities. 

 The draft was presented by France during informal consultations
on behalf of the three European powers -- Britain, France and
Germany -- that have been spearheading nuclear talks with
Tehran. 

The text is an amended version of a draft that has been under
discussion this week by the council's five permanent members --
Britain, China, France, Russia and the United States -- plus
Germany. 

It "decides that Iran shall suspend all enrichment-related and
reprocessing activities, including research and development, to
be verified by the IAEA (the UN nuclear watchdog), and suspend
the construction of a reactor moderated by heavy water." 

The text, which was made available to reporters, invokes
articles 39 and 40 of Chapter Seven of the UN charter that
stipulate "provisional measures" to be taken ahead of imposing
tougher steps such as sanctions. 

But it also expresses the council's intention in the event of
Iran's non-compliance with the enrichment freeze demand "to
adopt such further measures under Article 41 of Chapter Seven as
may be necessary to ensure compliance." 

Article 41 provides for a broad range of economic sanctions but
does not authorize the use of force. 

The new text also calls on all states "immediately to take steps
to prevent the transfer of any items, materials, goods and
technology that could contribute to Iran's enrichment-related
and reprocessing activities and ballistic missile programs." 

It gives Iran up to an as yet undecided date in August to comply
with the UN demands. 

Iranian nuclear negotiator Ali Larijani on Thursday stressed
that Tehran would take until August 22 to reply to a Western
offer of incentives in exchange for freezing its uranium
enrichment program. 

The draft, similar to one discussed by the council in May, urges
Iran "without further delay to take the steps required" by the
International Atomic Energy Agency" /> to build confidence in
the peaceful nature of the Iranian nuclear program. 

The document was discussed in informal consultations early
Thursday by the six ambassadors, after which US Ambassador John
Bolton reported some headway and said a new private session
would be held Friday. 

And a Western diplomat reported further progress during a
meeting of nuclear experts of the six nations Thursday
afternoon, but said an agreement on the draft this week, hoped
for by Bolton, was not in the cards. 

Western powers believe Iran is trying to build a nuclear bomb
under the cover of a peaceful atomic energy program. Tehran
denies the charge. 

Iran says it only wants to enrich to the low levels needed to
make reactor fuel and that this is a right under the nuclear
Non-Proliferation Treaty. 

Last week, ministers of the six nations agreed at a meeting in
Paris to send the Iran nuclear dossier back to the council after
Tehran failed to respond to the demand for a uranium enrichment
freeze. 

And Monday, G8 countries -- Britain, Canada, France, Germany,
Italy, Japan, Russia and the United States -- issued a statement
at their Saint Petersburg summit calling on Iran to accept a
deal for resolving concern over its nuclear program. 

The proposed deal 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 Thursday, Iran again rejected the enrichment freeze demand
and warned the Security Council against choosing a "path of
confrontation". 

In a statement read on state television, Larijani said: "If the
path of confrontation is chosen instead of the path of dialogue,
and if there is any action to limit the absolute rights of the
Iranian people, the Islamic republic will have no choice but to
revise its policy." 

He accused Washington of trying to derail diplomatic efforts to
resolve the crisis. 

Russia has meanwhile hardened its stance toward Iran, with
Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov signaling Wednesday that Moscow
might agree to sanctions if Iran refuses to budge. 

"If the first resolution... doesn't work, we have agreed that
after a period it will be necessary to discuss additional
measures, including measures of an economic character," Lavrov
told Echo Moscow radio. 	 		 			

Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
 12 NEWS.com.au: Iranians 'saw N Korea missile test' - 

From: Reuters                   

From correspondents in Washington

 July 21, 2006

ONE or more Iranians witnessed North Korea's recent missile
tests, deepening US concerns about growing ties between two
countries with troubling nuclear capabilities, a top US official
said. Asked at a US Senate hearing about reports that Iranians
witnessed the July 4 tests, Assistant Secretary of State Chris
Hill, the chief US negotiator with Pyongyang, replied: "Yes,
that is my understanding" and it is "absolutely correct" that
the relationship is worrisome. 

Mr Hill's comments are believed to be the first public US
confirmation that Iranian representatives observed the seven
tests, which involved one launch of a long-range ballistic
missile, which failed soon after being fired, and six tests of
short and medium-range missiles. Mr Hill said the six succeeded
in hitting their target range. 

But US officials have long said that Iran and North Korea have
been collaborating and have expressed serious concerns that
cash-strapped Pyongyang was keen to sell missiles and possibly
also nuclear material. 

"Our understanding is that North Korea has had a number of 
commercial relations in the Middle East with respect to 
missiles," Mr Hill said.                                                                                           
                        
*****************************************************************
 13 Guardian Unlimited: U.S. Stands by 6-Nation North Korea Talks
 
From the Associated Press        

[UP] 

Thursday July 20, 2006 4:16 PM

By FOSTER KLUG 

Associated Press Writer 

WASHINGTON (AP) - The top U.S. envoy in stalled North Korean
disarmament talks told Congress Thursday that the United States
has no problem with one-on-one contact with Pyongyang on the
sidelines of six-nation negotiations. 

But, Assistant Secretary of State Chris Hill said, the Bush
administration is not prepared to ``torpedo'' multinational
talks in order to meet separately with the North to discuss its
self-announced nuclear weapons production program and recent
missile launches. 

Hill said the administration has resisted ``a situation where
the U.S. tries to handle this'' one-on-one with Pyongyang,
leaving out North Korea's neighbors: South Korea, China, Russia
and Japan - the other members of the six-nation talks. The North
wants direct negotiations with Washington, something U.S.
officials have consistently refused outside of the formal
six-party process. 

``The problem is not a lack of communication; the problem is
that they don't want to'' return to the negotiations, Hill told
the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. 

Two weeks ago, North Korea test-fired seven missiles, an act of
defiance seen as an attempt to put itself on top of the world's
agenda. But the reclusive, communist-led country has been
largely brushed aside by recent violence in the Middle East, as
Israel and Hezbollah guerrillas continue to clash. 

Since the missile launches, which included one missile that
could potentially reach parts of the United States, little
headway has been made toward getting the North to return to the
nuclear talks. North Korea has boycotted the negotiations since
November, angry at U.S. sanctions for alleged counterfeiting and
money laundering. 

On Saturday, the U.N. Security Council passed a resolution
criticizing the North's missile tests and banning all U.N.
member states from trading with Pyongyang in missile-related
technology. The North rejected the resolution, warning of
further repercussions. 

Hill said the United States must now use the resolution as ``a
very strong sign of international resolve'' and work with the
other nations to press North Korea to return to talks. 

He acknowledged, however, a level of frustration at the
deadlock. 

``What I need is for the North Koreans to show they're
serious,'' Hill said. ``My problem is the North Koreans have
given me nothing to work with.'' 

Sen. Richard Lugar, the committee's chairman, said he hoped the
launches could spur China toward taking a stronger position
against North Korea that could bolster efforts to lure the North
back to the talks. 

Lugar, R-Ind., said that continuing North Korean provocation
could lead to Japan, the United States and other nations
strengthening their militaries in East Asia, which China would
consider a major impediment to continuing its booming trade in
the region. 

China is North Korea's major ally, supplying energy and food to
its neighbor. Beijing has been seen by some as tentative on
confronting Pyongyang because of worries that a collapsed North
Korea would lead to a flood of refugees streaming into more
prosperous China. 

Hill said China, which had pressed the North not to test fire,
was ``not at all happy at how the North Koreans had defied
them.'' 

Senators pressed Hill on why the North launched the missiles in
defiance of international warnings. 

The North Koreans ``pride themselves on being opaque,'' Hill
said. ``Often what goes on in North Korea stays in North
Korea.'' 

He said, however, that the missile tests may have been a
demonstration of strength to wring more concessions from nuclear
negotiators - a ``misplaced sense of how to enhance their
position at the bargaining table.'' 

On Wednesday, six North Korean refugees visited Washington. The
refugees, who arrived in the United States in May, were the
first since President Bush signed a 2004 law meant to make it
easier for North Koreans to apply for refugee status. 

Republican Sen. Sam Brownback of Kansas urged the world to pay
as much attention to North Korean leader Kim Jong Il's human
rights violations as to his government's missile launches. 

``If security is the only topic of conversation, we hold
ourselves hostage to a brutal dictator's periodic demands for
attention. Instead, we should set our eyes on the goal of
democratic reform,'' Brownback told reporters as the refugees
stood at his side wearing baseball hats and dark glasses to
conceal their identities. 
		 	 	   
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
 14 Guardian Unlimited: U.S. Lawmakers Examine North Korea
 
From the Associated Press        

[UP] 

Thursday July 20, 2006 10:01 AM

By FOSTER KLUG 

Associated Press Writer 

WASHINGTON (AP) - Two weeks ago, North Korea test-fired seven
missiles, an act of defiance seen as an attempt to put itself on
top of the world's agenda. 

As a U.S. official prepared for a Senate hearing examining North
Korea on Thursday, the reclusive, communist-led country has been
largely brushed aside by violence in the Middle East. 

The testimony by Assistant Secretary of State Christopher Hill,
the lead U.S. envoy at stalled six-nation North Korean
disarmament talks, comes as Israel and Hezbollah guerrillas
continue to clash. 

Since the missile launches, which included one that could reach
parts of the United States, little headway has been made toward
getting the North to return to the talks on its self-announced
nuclear weapons production program. North Korea has boycotted
the negotiations since November, angry at U.S. sanctions for
alleged counterfeiting and money laundering. 

On Saturday, the U.N. Security Council passed a resolution
criticizing the North's missile tests and banning all U.N.
member states from trading with Pyongyang in missile-related
technology. The North has since rejected the resolution, warning
of further repercussions. 

Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Richard Lugar,
R-Ind., is hoping the launches could spur China toward taking a
stronger position against North Korea that could bolster efforts
to lure the North back to the talks involving the Koreas, China,
the United States, Russia and Japan. 

Lugar said in prepared remarks that continuing North Korean
provocation could lead to Japan, the United States and other
nations strengthening their armed forces in East Asia, which
China would consider a major impediment to continuing its
booming trade in the region. 

China is North Korea's major ally, supplying energy and food to
its neighbor. Beijing has been seen by some as tentative on
confronting Pyongyang because of worries that a collapsed North
Korea would lead to a flood of refugees streaming into more
prosperous China. 

``The missile launches underscored that North Korea has its own
agenda, distinct from Beijing's long-term interests,'' Lugar
said. ``China wants to avoid instability on its borders, but few
acts could have been more destabilizing than the missile
tests.'' 

On Wednesday, six North Korean refugees visited Washington.
Republican Sen. Sam Brownback of Kansas urged the world to pay
as much attention to North Korean leader Kim Jong Il's human
rights violations as to his government's missile launches. 

``If we focus only on containing weapons programs, we will not
solve the root of the problem, which is the regime itself,''
Brownback told reporters as the refugees stood at his side
wearing baseball hats and dark glasses to conceal their
identities. 

``If security is the only topic of conversation, we hold
ourselves hostage to a brutal dictator's periodic demands for
attention. Instead, we should set our eyes on the goal of
democratic reform,'' he said. 

The refugees, who arrived in May, were the first since President
Bush signed a 2004 law meant to make it easier for North Koreans
to apply for refugee status. 

Joseph, a 31-year-old who looks years older, described his
torture in North Korean prisons: His fingers were broken with
pliers, his back whipped with leather strips. 

``This is one of the normally occurring events,'' he said
through an interpreter. ``There are many atrocities in North
Korea that you cannot even imagine under the heavens.'' 
		 	 	   
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
 15 AFP: US still open to talks on North Korea weapons 

 by Stephanie Griffith Thu Jul 20, 1:29 PM ET 		 	 

WASHINGTON (AFP) - Washington remains committed to multiparty 
talks with North Korea" /> North Koreaover its nuclear weapons, 
despite Pyongyang's defiant ballistic missile test launch earlier 
this month, the US pointman on North Korea has said. 

 "We are not seeking regime change. We are seeking a change in
this regime's behavior," said Assistant Secretary of State
Christopher Hill Thursday. 

"We have the regime that we have, and we have to deal with
them," Hill said in testimony before the US Senate's Foreign
Relations Committee. 

"We don't have the option of walking away from this problem," he
said. 

But he restated Washington's long-held stance that talks could
only occur in the six-party forum, and not one-on-one. 

"We are not prepared to improve our relations with North Korea
or to have this direct dialogue while they are boycotting the
six-party talks. 

"At the end of the day, if this problem of nuclear weapons --
weapons of mass destruction -- is going to be resolved, it's
going to have to be resolved in the six-party process." 

"If they are prepared to do that, we are prepared to sit down
informally, bilaterally, and work through our bilateral issues,
which include human rights concerns and other issues as well,"
Hill said. 

The diplomat added however that "the United States, one way or
the other, is not going to accept a North Korea with weapons of
mass destruction." 

But congressional critics at the hearing accused the George W.
Bush administration or being too "passive" in its dealings with
Pyongyang. 

"Our policy toward North Korea has been dormant for too long,"
said Democratic Senator Russ Feingold. 

"We have been waiting on the sidelines hoping almost passively
that conditions will turn our way. We have been distracted by
Iraq" /> Iraq-- so much so, that it took North Korea's launch of
seven missiles before we got fully engaged again," said
Feingold. 

"North Korea should be at or near the top of the foreign policy
agenda," the senator said. 

North Korea has shunned the six-way talks since November to
protest US financial sanctions on a Macau bank accused of money
laundering on its behalf. 

Pyongyang fired seven missiles, including a long-distance
ballistic missile, in an exercise on July 5, saying it was
boosting its defenses against a potential US attack. 

Meanwhile, the chief delegates of Japan and South Korea" />
South Korea, which has been reconciling with its communist
neighbor, said Thursday they would push North Korea to return to
talks during a regional forum in Kuala Lumpur next week. 

Japan and South Korea have said they will use next week's ASEAN
regional security forum in Malaysia to push for North Korea's
return to six-nation talks aimed at dismantling its nuclear
arms. 

The UN Security Council last week unanimously adopted a
resolution condemning North Korea's missile tests and applying
limited sanctions, but the move was rejected by Pyongyang, which
vowed to carry out further launches. 

The compromise resolution demanded the immediate suspension of
Pyongyang's ballistic missile program and imposed sanctions
preventing the Stalinist country from buying and selling missile
technology. 	 		 			

Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
 16 Guardian Unlimited: U.S. Seeks Consultation on N. Korea Talks
 
From the Associated Press        

[UP] 

Thursday July 20, 2006 11:46 PM

AP Photo WCAP102 

By FOSTER KLUG 

Associated Press Writer 

WASHINGTON (AP) - The top U.S. envoy at stalled North Korean
disarmament talks said Thursday the United States wants to meet
with South Korea, Japan, Russia and China next week to figure
out a way to persuade North Korea to return to negotiations. 

``The purpose is to chart the way forward,'' Assistant Secretary
of State Chris Hill said after a Senate Foreign Relations
Committee hearing. ``We'd like to be ready and move ahead.'' 

The North since last November has boycotted the six-nation talks
on its self-announced nuclear weapons production program. Two
weeks ago, Pyongyang test-fired seven missiles, an act of
defiance seen as an attempt to put itself on top of the world's
agenda. But the reclusive, communist-led country has been
largely brushed aside by recent violence in the Middle East, as
Israel and Hezbollah guerrillas continue to clash. 

Hill told reporters that the goal was to include North Korea at
the five-nation gathering on the sidelines of the Association of
Southeast Asian Nations' annual meeting of foreign ministers in
Malaysia. But, he added, ``The North Koreans don't seem to want
to go to six-party meetings right now.'' 

The five-party talks, Hill said, could also include other
nations in the region and could focus on additional security
arrangements in Northeast Asia. 

Hill also told reporters he could not confirm reports that
Iranian officials had witnessed the July 4 launches. He said he
misspoke when he told lawmakers earlier that he could confirm
such reports. 

Later, State Department spokesman Sean McCormack also said he
could not confirm the reports. When asked if North Korea was
trying to market its weapons, he said, ``With respect to
weapons, anything that isn't bolted down, they're ready to
sell.'' 

During the hearing, Hill testified that the United States would
have no problem with one-on-one contact with Pyongyang on the
sidelines of six-nation negotiations. 

But, he said, the Bush administration is not prepared to
``torpedo'' multinational talks to meet separately with the
North. 

Hill resisted ``a situation where the U.S. tries to handle
this'' one-on-one with Pyongyang, leaving out North Korea's
neighbors. North Korea wants direct negotiations with
Washington, something U.S. officials have consistently refused
outside of the formal six-party process. 

``The problem is not a lack of communication; the problem is
that they don't want to'' return to the negotiations, Hill said. 

Since the missile launches, which included one missile that
could potentially reach parts of the U.S., little headway has
been made toward getting the North to return to the talks. North
Korea has refused to do so because of U.S. sanctions for alleged
counterfeiting and money laundering. 

On Saturday, the U.N. Security Council passed a resolution
criticizing the North's missile tests and banning all U.N.
member states from trading with Pyongyang in missile-related
technology. North Korea rejected the resolution, warning of
further repercussions. 

Hill said the United States must now use the resolution as ``a
very strong sign of international resolve'' and work with the
other nations to press North Korea to return to talks. 

``What I need is for the North Koreans to show they're
serious,'' Hill said. ``My problem is the North Koreans have
given me nothing to work with.'' 

Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Richard Lugar, R-Ind., said
he hoped the missile launches would spur China toward taking a
stronger position against North Korea that could bolster efforts
to lure the North back to the talks. 

China is North Korea's major ally, supplying energy and food to
its neighbor. 

Hill said China, which had pressed the North not to test fire
the missiles, was ``not at all happy at how the North Koreans
had defied them.'' 

Senators pressed Hill on why the North defied international
warnings to launch the missiles. 

The North Koreans ``pride themselves on being opaque,'' Hill
said. ``Often what goes on in North Korea stays in North
Korea.'' 

Hill said he believed North Korean leader Kim Jong Il's decision
had backfired. 

``He has really galvanized unity against him,'' Hill said. 
		 	 	   
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
 17 Economist.com: America's nuclear deal with India | From bad to worse |

Jul 20th 2006

From The Economist print edition

America's Congress is preparing to say yes. Others should say no
 
THE damage done by George Bush's proposed nuclear deal with
India gets worse and worse. Already weakened by the nuclear
antics of Iran and North Korea, the web of treaties and controls
that seeks to halt the bomb's spread is starting to unravel.
Congress, hitherto a staunch defender of the Nuclear
Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and all it stands for, is poised
to allow America's laws to be amended to accommodate civilian
nuclear trade with India, despite that country's bomb-building.
There will then be pressure on the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG)
to carve an India-shaped hole in its global nuclear export
restrictions, and on the board of the International Atomic
Energy Agency (IAEA) to agree to India-specific safeguards on
any nuclear materials or technology sold. 

The Bush administration defends its India deal as good for
combating global warming, good for friendship with the world's
biggest democracy and good for jobs in America. All that is
debatable (see article). But its claim that the nuclear deal
will be a net gain in the fight against proliferation is pure
nonsense. The controversial deal is already undermining
confidence in the world's anti-nuclear rules. The NPT, which has
helped prevent a number of other capable states from going
nuclear, and encouraged some which tried (Argentina and Brazil)
and others which had succeeded (South Africa) to turn back,
rests on a promise: that only those that renounce nuclear
weapons qualify for civilian nuclear assistance. India
deliberately stayed outside the treaty to build its bombs;
America is now offering it nuclear help anyway. That won't
encourage others to keep their non-nuclear promises. 	 	 	 	
[Click Here!] 

Nor has India taken on any meaningful new non-proliferation
obligations to lighten the blow to the treaty. The recognised
nuclear powersAmerica, Russia, Britain, France and Chinaare
committed under the NPT to curb their arsenals (four are
shrinking, only China's bomb-pile is still growing) on the way
to eventual disarmament; the deal with America lets India build
as many bombs as it chooses. The five have at least all signed
the treaty banning further nuclear tests and have stopped
producing more highly enriched uranium and plutonium for
weapons; India flatly refuses to do either. 
The wrong sort of helping hand
 

By lifting restrictions on India's ability to buy nuclear
technology and fuel from abroad, America will be helping it out
of a uranium squeeze: its usable stocks of the enriched stuff
(lower enriched for power generation, higher for weapons) have
been dwindling fast. If the NSG goes along, and makes an
exception to its rule that nuclear exports can go only to
countries with all their nuclear facilities under safeguards,
India will no longer have to eke out its nuclear materials. It
will be able to accelerate its bomb-building while using foreign
uranium for power generation. Russia has already jumped the gun,
recently supplying fuel to two Indian reactors, citing safety
concerns. That is disingenuous. A reactor running short of fuel
can simply be shut down; Russia wanted to get to the front of
the queue for future contracts. China, unhappy at America's
India deal, could do the same for Pakistan. 

India has agreed to separate its civilian nuclear reactors from
its military ones, with IAEA safeguards on the civilian sort.
But when the intent is bomb-building (and India has every
intention of expanding its arsenal), technologies and skills
imported for running civilian reactors can just as easily be
put to military use. India used just such technologies and
materials for its first nuclear explosion in 1974. Its civilian
and military programmes are closely intertwinedwhich is why
none of its uranium-enrichment or plutonium-reprocessing plants,
or its planned plutonium-producing fast-breeder reactors, is on
its civilian list. It is even pushing for minimal safeguards on
reactors designated as civilian, with inspections only when
foreign fuel is present. 

Aiding India's nuclear weapons programme, as this deal
inevitably will, offends the NPT, which bans such help, direct
or indirect, to any country not recognised as a nuclear power by
the treaty (and India isn't). Congress is anxious about this
too, but uses weasel words that are likely to allow the deal to
go forward. That leaves the NSG and the board of the IAEA to
decide whether to uphold clear anti-nuclear rules, or be
complicit in their further unravelling. Plenty of governments
involved are unhappy at America's proposed nuclear agreement
with India, but wary of offending either party. It is time they
found the courage of their anti-proliferation convictions and
blocked the deal, before even more damage is done. 

Copyright © The Economist Newspaper Limited 2006. All rights
*****************************************************************
 18 UPI: Energy official: U.S. supply needs boost
     
United Press International - Energy - 

7/20/2006 8:23:00 AM -0400

WASHINGTON, July 20 (UPI) -- A top U.S. Energy Department
official has said that diversifying energy supplies and
developing more domestic sources is the key to a sustainable
energy policy. 

Deputy Energy Secretary Clay Sell said Wednesday his energy
policy wish list includes drilling on the outer continental
shelf and the Alaskan National Wildlife Refuge, finding a safe
location for nuclear waste and a new oil refinery bill. 

Sell was speaking at an energy conference at the U.S. Chamber of
Commerce in Washington. 

Sell said the United States must expand and diversify its energy
supply, become more efficient and enhance its energy
infrastructure. He said the Energy Department is doing that by
focusing on renewable and biofuel energy, as well as emission
reduction programs. 

As President Bush and members of Congress push for more nuclear
plants, which he said will happen soon, Sell urged Congress to
shore up plans to open Yucca Mountain in Nevada, inside which
his department wants to store the nation's nuclear waste. 

A loan program to fund new energy technologies will begin taking
applications within the next few weeks on a limited basis and
then open fully next year, Sell said. 

That was one item in the Energy Policy Act of 2005, signed Aug.
8 last year by Bush. 

Sell mentioned upcoming initiatives, but told attendees at the
conference that in the midst of a surge in oil and natural gas
prices consumers need to be patient. 

"The nature of energy policy is it takes years for the benefits
of sound energy policy to manifest," he said.

© Copyright 2006 United Press International, Inc. All Rights
Reserved
*****************************************************************
 19 Guardian Unlimited: Japan, U.S. to Deploy Missile Interceptors

From the Associated Press        

[UP] 

Thursday July 20, 2006 9:31 PM

AP Photo TOK104 

By HIROKO TABUCHI 

Associated Press Writer 

TOKYO (AP) - Japan and the U.S. on Thursday announced a plan to
deploy advanced Patriot interceptor missiles at American bases
on southern Okinawa island, and a top government spokesman
called for more pressure on North Korea to stop its missile
tests. 

The U.S. government will have Patriot Advanced Capability-3
missiles operational by the end of the year and post 600 more
troops on Okinawa, the Foreign Ministry said. Officials on the
island 1,000 miles southwest of Tokyo questioned the need for
the missiles. 

Japan stressed the deployment would be purely for defense
purposes. 

``In view of the development, deployment and proliferation of
ballistic missiles in the region, and the clear and present
threats such as the recent missile launches by North Korea ...
Japan will continue to do its utmost to build its ballistic
missile defense capabilities in close cooperation with the
U.S.,'' the statement said. 

Protesters angered by the announcement stormed a local
government building in Okinawa, where residents have expressed a
strong desire for a large reduction in U.S. forces. The U.S.
already has about 50,000 troops in Japan under a mutual security
pact. 

Defense Facilities Administration Agency chief Iwao Kitahara
called on Okinawa Gov. Keiichi Inamine to support the plan, but
the governor denounced it, saying no threat required the move. 

``The planned deployment is extremely regrettable, when there is
no activity that requires one,'' Inamine said. 

The PAC-3 are designed to intercept ballistic missiles, cruise
missiles or aircraft. 

The U.S. also has Patriots in South Korea. The U.S. military in
2004 completed deployment of PAC-3 missile batteries at Gwangju
Air Base, about 150 miles south of Seoul. PAC-3 missiles have
also been deployed in Taiwan. 

Details on the location and timetable of the deployment
announced last month came as Japan's top government spokesman
said North Korea must be pressed so it has no choice but to stop
its missile tests and return to nuclear talks. 

``North Korea must be made to understand that if it does not
alter its stance, there will be bad consequences,'' Chief
Cabinet Secretary Shinzo Abe said at a privately sponsored
speech in Tokyo. 

North Korea drew international condemnation when it test-fired
seven missiles July 5, including a Taepodong-2 believed capable
of hitting parts of the U.S. The missiles fell harmlessly into
the sea. 

Assistant Secretary of State Chris Hill, the top U.S. envoy to
the stalled disarmament talks, said the United States wants to
meet with South Korea, Japan, Russia and China next week to
figure out a way to persuade North Korea to return to
negotiations. 

Hill said in Washington the goal was to include North Korea in
talks on the sidelines of next week's annual meeting of
Association of Southeast Asian Nations foreign ministers in
Malaysia. But, he added, ``the North Koreans don't seem to want
to go to six-party meetings right now.'' 

The Japanese government spokesman said Tokyo was open to
informal six-country talks in Malaysia next week. 

Pyongyang has refused to return to the six-country nuclear
negotiations to protest U.S.-imposed financial restrictions over
alleged counterfeiting and money laundering activities. 

The U.N. Security Council has passed a resolution criticizing
North Korea's missile tests and banning all U.N. member states
from trading with Pyongyang in technology related to missiles or
weapons of mass destruction. 

Japan had pushed for a resolution backed by the threat of
military force, but backed down when China threatened a veto
amid Beijing's and Seoul's accusations that Tokyo was
overreacting. 
		 	 	   
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
 20 Guardian Unlimited: MPs will get nuclear deterrent vote
 
From Press Association   

[UP] 

Thursday July 20, 2006 5:43 PM

MPs will have the final say on whether Britain replaces its
ageing Trident nuclear deterrent, Commons leader Jack Straw has
said. 

He said any decision to commission a new generation of nuclear
missiles would be "blocked" if the House of Commons voted
against it. 

And he promised a "substantive vote" on the issue, which Prime
Minister Tony Blair has said will be decided before the end of
the year. 

Mr Straw told reporters at Westminster: "We would anticipate
that the majority of members would support this but were they
not to, that would be blocked. There will be a vote and
everybody understands the consequences of it." 

Both Mr Blair and Chancellor Gordon Brown have made clear they
want to replace the Trident submarine weapons system. 

Mr Straw made clear he thought the majority of Labour MPs, as
well as Conservatives, would support the move. He said: "I think
there is significant support on our side as well as on the other
side." 

In 1983 Labour fought the general election on a manifesto
committed to unilateral nuclear disarmament, a document
described as the "longest suicide note in history". 

No Labour leader since has committed himself to getting rid of
the UK's nuclear weapons. Earlier, Mr Straw told MPs in the
Commons: "The position of this was set up by the Prime Minister
two weeks ago when he did point out that we were the first
Government to give the House a vote over decisions to go to war. 

"Of course we should involve the House fully in a decision as
important as the renewal of our nuclear deterrent and in
practical terms it is inevitable that there will therefore be a
chance for the House to express its view on this important
matter in a vote." 

The Government would be likely to win any such vote thanks to
the almost certain support of the Conservatives. 

© Copyright Press Association Ltd 2006, All Rights Reserved. 
		 	 	   
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
 21 Guardian Unlimited: MPs to get final say on renewal of Britain's nuclear deterrent
 
Tania Branigan, political correspondent

Friday July 21, 2006

The government has promised MPs the final say on whether Britain 
renews its ageing Trident nuclear deterrent, despite divisions 
within Labour over the issue.

Jack Straw, the leader of the house, announced yesterday that the 
Commons would vote on maintaining nuclear missiles, expected to 
cost between £15bn and £25bn. The prime minister has promised a 
decision before the end of the year.

"Of course we should involve the House fully in a decision as 
important as the renewal of our nuclear deterrent. It is 
inevitable that there will therefore be a chance for the House to 
express its view on this important matter in a vote," Mr Straw 
told MPs.

The debate has become pressing because Britain's four Trident 
missile submarines are expected to reach the end of their 
operational life within 20 years.

It received fresh impetus last month when Gordon Brown made it
clear that he backed replacement, to the anger of leftwingers
who bitterly oppose the nuclear deterrent. There is also wider
scepticism about whether it retains its value in the wake of the
cold war.

The outcome of the vote will depend on the government's choice
of the many options for retaining a nuclear deterrent, but it
should win despite the opposition of Liberal Democrats.

The government can almost certainly rely on Conservative
backing, but would prefer to win without. Tory MPs relish the
prospect of exposing divisions within Labour. Mr Straw told
reporters he believed most backbenchers would back the
government and added that the vote would be a three-line whip -
meaning MPs are expected to vote with the party rather than with
their conscience.

"We would anticipate that the majority of [all] members would
support this, but were they not to [replacement] would be
blocked," Mr Straw said. "There will be a vote and everybody
understands the consequences of it."

"It's not as simplistic as replacing it or not; it's about the
shape that should take. There's some resistance on the cost
basis, as well," said Kevan Jones, a Labour member of the
defence select committee. He added that the government should be
given credit for being the first to offer parliament a say over
the nuclear deterrent.

Two weeks ago Tony Blair hinted to MPs: "We are not at all
averse to votes of this House on extremely sensitive issues."

The Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament welcomed the commitment to
a vote, but warned that it should be preceded by a full public
and parliamentary debate and a green paper outlining all the
options. Nick Harvey, the Liberal Democrat defence spokesman,
said it would be vital to have a proper public consultation.

Last month the Commons defence committee warned that the
government had failed to explain the purpose of a British
nuclear deterrent. Its report said the government should explain
whether Britain faced a current or impending threat from any
established nuclear weapons state and whether possessing nuclear
weapons affected its international influence. The Ministry of
Defence refused to give evidence to the inquiry.
 
[UP] 

Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
 22 RIA Novosti: No plans to commission Belgorod nuclear submarine - minister
 
20/ 07/ 2006                                  

SEVERODVINSK, July 20 (RIA Novosti) - Russia's defense minister
said Thursday the ministry would not allocate funds to finish
building a nuclear submarine in the same class as the doomed
Kursk submarine and hinted it could be sold.

 "The Defense Ministry does not need the Belgorod nuclear
submarine," Sergei Ivanov said. "Therefore it will not finance
its further construction."

 The Oscar-II class Belgorod was laid in July 1992. Its
construction, frozen in 1990s, was resumed after the K-141 Kursk
nuclear submarine of the same class sank about 100 miles from
the Russian northern port of Murmansk. 

Ivanov, currently on a tour of military and nuclear test
facilities in northern Russia, said several options were being
considered for the submarine to be commissioned by another
country.

 "We are considering options to finish the submarine's
construction, but not for the Defense Ministry," he said.

 The submarine is reported to be 80% complete and requires $100m
to finish the construction.

 Ivanov, who is a deputy prime minister, also said the ministry
intended to finance overhauling of the Admiral Nakhimov heavy
missile nuclear cruiser.

 Commissioned in 1988, the Kirov-class Admiral Nakhimov is
capable of engaging large surface ships and to defend the fleet
against air and submarine attack. Four cruisers were built but
only the Admiral Nakhimov and Pyotr Veliky (Peter the Great),
commissioned in 1995, remain on duty.

© 2005 RIA Novosti   
*****************************************************************
 23 BBC: MPs get 'veto' over new Trident
 
Last Updated: Thursday, 20 July 2006
 
[Trident nuclear submarine]                             

MPs are to be a given a say on replacing Trident                                                                

MPs will be given the chance to veto replacing the Trident 
nuclear weapons system, says Commons Leader Jack Straw. 

Tony Blair has previously promised a full debate on the issue but 
stopped short of pledging a vote. 

But Mr Straw said it was "important" MPs had a say and said they 
would get a substantive yes or no vote - meaning they could in 
theory reject the plan. 

It would be "inconceivable" ministers could press ahead with 
renewing Trident if MPs rejected it, Mr Straw argued. 

Questioned by reporters, Mr Straw declined to say when the vote 
would take place. 

But he said he was confident there was majority backing on the 
Labour benches for renewing Trident. 

This is something there h been a great demand for across the 
Labour party, indeed across all parties Kate Hudson, CND        

The Conservatives are also likely to back such a move - meaning 
the government would win any vote. 

Shadow defence secretary Liam Fox tried to reassure US defence 
chiefs of his commitment to replacing Trident in a visit to 
Washington earlier this year. 

A timetable for renewing the missile system is to be drawn up by 
the end of the year. 

Debate call 

Earlier in the Commons, Mr Straw told MPs: "The position of this 
was set up by the prime minister two weeks ago when he did point 
out that we were the first government to give the House a vote 
over decisions to go to war. 

"Of course we should involve the House fully in a decision as 
important as the renewal of our nuclear deterrent and in 
practical terms it is inevitable that there will therefore be a 
chance for the House to express its view on this important matter 
in a vote." 

Mr Straw's announcement was welcomed by the Campaign for Nuclear 
Disarmament (CND) - but it called for a full public debate on the 
issue before MPs vote on it - as promised last year by then 
defence secretary John Reid. 

CND chairman Kate Hudson said there had been great demand for a 
full vote across Labour and other parties. 

"We would now like to see the commitment to the publication of a 
Green Paper outlining all options, including non-replacement, 
prior that vote taking place," she said.                                                         
*****************************************************************
 24 AFP: MPs will vote on whether to renew nuclear deterrent 

 Thu Jul 20, 9:36 AM ET 		 	 

LONDON (AFP) - Members of the House of Commons will be given a 
vote on whether Britain should renew its nuclear deterrent force, 
a cabinet minister has said. 

 Prime Minister Tony Blair" /> paved the way "two weeks ago when
he did point out that we were the first government to give the
house a vote over decisions to go to war," House leader Jack
Straw said. 

"Of course we should involve the house fully in a decision as
important as the renewal of our nuclear deterrent," Straw said. 

"And in practical terms it is inevitable that there will
therefore be a chance for the house to express its view on this
important matter in a vote," Straw added. 

Straw did not say whether members of parliament from the
governing Labour Party would be given a free vote on replacing
the Trident nuclear missile system. 

Britain's current nuclear deterrent was set up in the 1980s by
then prime minister Margaret Thatcher, when the Soviet Union --
not global terrorist groups such as Al-Qaeda -- was seen as the
primary threat. 

It is based on four Royal Navy submarines fitted with US-built
Trident missiles which are due to become obsolete in the 2020s.
One of the submarines is always on patrol, but the missiles are
no longer pre-targeted. 

Replacing the deterrent is likely to cost anywhere from 10
billion to 25 billion pounds (14.6 billion to 36.4 billion
euros, 18.6 billion to 46.1 billion dollars), observers say. 

Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
 25 ITAR-TASS: Russian Navy will deploy nuclear missile carriers of "Borei"
class in 2007

20.07.2006, 16.24

 SEVERODVINSK, July 20 (Itar-Tass) -- The Russian Navy will
deploy submarine nuclear missile-carriers of "Borei" class since
2007, Vice-premier, Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov told
journalists on Thursday after he had visited the Northern
Machine Building Enterprise in Severodvinsk. 

The Russian Navy will deploy strategic submarine missile-
carriers of Borei class since next year, Ivanov declared. 

© ITAR-TASS. All rights reserved. You undertake not to copy,









*****************************************************************
 26 SNP: Government Concedes Vote on Trident Replacement

Scottish National Party 

(http://www.snp.org

 westminster Responding to today's (Thursday) announcement by
Jack Straw at Business Questions in the House of Commons
confirming that the Government will allow MPs a vote on whether
the UK will replace the Trident nuclear missile system, the
SNP's Chief Whip, Pete Wishart MP, welcomed the concession. 

He said the campaign would now move on to the stage to convince
a majority of MPs that Trident was immoral, wasteful and should
be abandoned under the UK's commitment to reduce and liquidate
their stockpiles of nuclear weapons. 

Speaking after Business Questions, Mr Wishart said: 

"This is a major concession by the Government as ensuring the
House of Commons had the final say over any expenditure on a new
nuclear system on the Clyde was a major plank of our platform
for this session. 

"However a question mark remains as to whether the Government
will allow its backbenchers a free vote. With the SNP
highlighting the social costs that Trident would lay on
Scotland, he would be best advised to allow them a free vote. 

"With the 2007 election neck and neck between the SNP and
Labour, the SNP will be ensuring this issue is at the top of the
political agenda. Trident is an immoral waste of money. Money
better spent on changing Scotland for good. 

"Over Â£2 billion is a heavy price for Scotland to pay for the
vanity of certain politicians' personal ambition and arrogance.
The SNP are determined that Scotland will not be drawn into
these vanity games and will be campaigning strongly to show how
much Trident will cost in social terms." 

ENDS 

Notes: 

1. Social Costs of Trident: 

With costs of Trident estimated at Â£25 billion Scotland's
pro-rata share would be Â£2.125 billion. Â£2.125 billion could
pay for a package of: 
  + 10 new Secondary Schools 
  + 5 new Hospitals  
  + 30 new Community Sports Centres  
  + 100 new Dentists  
  + 100 new Doctors  
  + 200 new Teachers  
  + Dualling the A96 from Aberdeen to Inverness or the A9 from
Inverness to Perth  
  + Hosting the Commonwealth Games in Glasgow 

2. Government's obligation to nuclear disarmament 

Article VI of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty states: 

"Each of the Parties to the Treaty undertakes to pursue
negotiations in good faith on effective measures relating to
cessation of the nuclear arms race at an early date and to
nuclear disarmament, and on a Treaty on general and complete
disarmament under strict and effective international control."
Created by bob bob 
Contributors : Mary 

--> Published 20/07/2006 05:00 PM     [ title=] More News 

  ©Copyright 2006 Scottish National Party. All Rights Reserved.
*****************************************************************
 27 Whitehaven News: Darling fails to answer nuclear unionâ€™s pensions misgivings

Published on 20/07/2006                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      
                                                                                
AT WESTLAKES: Secretary of State for Trade and Industry, Alistair 
Darling, during his visit to the Nuclear Decommissioning 
Authority, at Westlakes Science Park, last week.                                                                                                                                                                                                              
							 						
TRADE and industry secretary Alistair Darling did a political 
balancing act when he visited West Cumbria on Friday. 

He managed to incorporate both a photo opportunity at a wind farm 
in the Irish Sea alongside hinting at new investment in nuclear 
research in the area.
 
Thus he included two big elements of his recent energy review... 
support for more renewable energy projects such as windfarms and 
support for the NDA, at Sellafield.
 
The minister was also put on the spot by the Prospect white 
collar union demanding answers to the fate of the nuclear 
industry pensions scheme.
 
Mike Graham, national secretary for Prospect, the union for 
nuclear scientists, engineers and managers, said: â€œWe need 
clear answers on a range of points within the next week.
 
â€œBritish Nuclear Fuels is about to be broken up, starting with 
the sale of Westinghouse at the end of September, followed by the 
British Nuclear Group itself.
 
â€œBut our members still do not know who will be covered by the 
new industry pension scheme; whether government will underwrite 
their pension rights; and why inferior terms are envisaged for 
new entrants, which will create a two-tier workforce,â€ said Mr 
Graham.
 
â€œIf the government does not meet our concerns, this is one 
issue on which industrial action across the board is a 
certainty.â€
 
All Mr Darling said later that day was : â€œI understand their 
concerns.â€
 
Mr Darling was watched by local MPs Jamie Reed and Tony 
Cunningham as he unveiled a plaque at the new Herdus House 
headquarters of the NDA at Westlakes.
 
The minister gave a strong hint that Westlakes could be the 
future home for a national nuclear laboratory investing in 
ground-breaking new research.
 
He addressed the West Cumbria Strategic Forum in private and 
afterwards said: â€œIt is encouraging to see such a broad range 
of partners from across the West Cumbria region gearing up to the 
social and economic changes ahead.
 
â€œThere are positive opportunities and Iâ€™ve been impressed to 
hear of progress on plans for the West Cumbria Strategic Spatial 
masterplan.
 
â€œI was also impressed by the progress being made on the 
establishment of the University of Cumbria which seems on track 
to open in August of next year.
 
â€œI have outlined today our work on the possibility of a 
national nuclear laboratory. 

â€œIn considering the UKâ€™s future requirements for nuclear R 
and D weâ€™ve recognised that much of what is needed will be 
provided by the private sector. 

â€œBut the government will need to act to safeguard certain 
capabilities, principally those services provided by Nexia 
Solutions and key facilities in the British Technology Centre, at 
Sellafield. 

â€œThere is more detailed work needed and I hope to make a firmer 
announcement in the autumn, but we wish to ensure these are 
preserved and developed, potentially as part of a National 
Nuclear Laboratory.â€
 
ON his visit Mr Darling also visited the union learning centre, 
at BNG Sellafield, accompanied by MP Jamie Reed.
 
Tony Cunningham has been backing Jamie Reed in his push for 
Sellafield to be promoted as a site for a new nuclear reactor. 

Mr Cunningham said: â€œThereâ€™s been a nuclear power station at 
Sellafield for the past 50 years and I see no reason why there 
should not be one in the future.â€
 
*****************************************************************
 28 [NukeNet] More Inconvenient Truth
 
Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2006 14:58:56 -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>
NukeNet Anti-Nuclear Network (nukenet@energyjustice.net)



Coalition for Peace and Justice; UNPLUG Salem Campaign, 321 Barr Ave,
Linwood; NJ08221; 609-601-8583
________________________________________
From: JerseyShoreNuclearWatch@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:JerseyShoreNuclearWatch@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Larry Furman
Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2006 11:26 PM
To: JerseyShoreNuclearWatch@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [JerseyShoreNuclearWatch] More Inconvenient Truth


How high above sea level are the nuclear power plants at Oyster Creek and
Salem?

What will happen to the nuclear plants if sea level rises 20 feet as
projected by various global warming scenarios?

Oyster Creek, Salem and Global Warming

Global Warming, Hurricanes, Floods, Gore, Flooding, Nuclear Power, Clean
Energy, Solar Power, WInd Power, Katrina

I don't know if Solar panels  will work when submerged - but they are
usually mounted on the roof - and they work even when the basement is
flooded. And a solar electric system is composed of a bunch of discrete
components which weigh about 8 pounds - as much as a baby - and can easily
be moved.  According to the guys who sell them, they 'should' last 40 years
- they are guaranteed for 25.

Offshore Wind Turbines are mounted on pillars that rise up 3 or 4 miles from
the ocean floor to a majestic 400 feet above the surf. A 20 foot rise in sea
level won't make a difference. It'll  spoil the view - make them harder to
see, but they'll hum along generating power with no greenhouse gases, no
radioactive wastes, no mercury, no pollution.

Coal plants can be shut down and flooded like Davey Jones Locker or the
mythical Atlantis. It will cost a bundle but they won't explode or melt
down.

But Nuclear plants? Those bad boys are hot - radioactive. What will happen
if they flood? Will they crack? Melt-Down? Will Avon By The Sea become
Chernobyl by the Sea? What will happen if they crack and release all that
radioactive stuff into the ocean?

  I posted this on http://www.'BlueJersey.com.
__._,_.___
Messages in this topic (2) Reply (via web post) | Start a new topic
Messages | Files | Photos | Links | Database | Polls | Members | Calendar
JERSEY SHORE NUCLEAR WATCH
P.O. Box 3085
Toms River, NJ 08756-3085
732-240-5107 www.jerseyshorenuclearwatch.org
gbur1@comcast.net

</x-flowed>
*****************************************************************
 29 Times of India: Mole in PMO passed on N-secrets to US - Jaswant

[ 21 Jul, 2006 0047hrs ISTTIMES NEWS NETWORK ]

NEW DELHI: In his counter offensive at the ruling Congress which
has been attacking him on the Kandahar hijack issue, former
foreign minister Jaswant Singh has alleged that someone in the
PMO during the P V Narasimha Rao-led Congress government had
been leaking nuclear secrets to the US and "we are still being
snooped". 

The Leader of Opposition in Rajya Sabha said he had come to know
about it a decade ago but remained quiet so far as he did not
want to sensationalise the issue. 

"Yes, there was a person in the PMO. I have evidence, a letter
which gives graphic details," Singh told a national weekly, when
asked to elaborate on his contention in his book 'Call to
honour: In service of Emergent India', that there was a mole in
the PMO of the previous Congress government. 

Without taking any names, the BJP leader claimed: "Somebody in
the PMO was giving information about India's nuclear programme
to the US. It was during the previous Congress regime..." 

He said, "The honour of the Prime Minister's Office, to an
extent, was at stake. We were snooped, we are still being
snooped." 

Singh is facing renewed attack over the 1999 Kandahar hijack
crisis when he went with three terrorists to Afghanistan to
exchange passengers of the Indian Airlines plane IC-814 who were
held hostage there. 

He said the letter (which talked about the PMO mole) came to him
a decade ago. 

"I did not use it when in government, I did not bring it up with
the US government to tell them look here, this is what you were
doing. All governments do try to find what is happening in which
country. Diplomacy requires information."       
    
Copyright ©2006Times Internet Limited. All rights reserved. For
*****************************************************************
 30 HindustanTimes.com: 'US had a mole in Rao's PMO' 

  Friday, July 21, 2006|02:43 IST   

Vinod Sharma

New Delhi, July 19, 2006
   
Former External Affairs Minister Jaswant Singh's forthcoming book 
is bound to spark a controversy for his version on the Kandahar 
hijack and the claim that PV Narasimha Rao's PMO had an American 
mole who compromised India's nuclear secrets.

"Yes, there was a person in the PMO. I have evidence, a letter 
which gives graphic details," news agency PTI quoted Singh as 
having told India Today magazine when probed on his contention in 
the book.

He received the letter a decade ago, he claimed. "I did not want 
to sensationalize it (so) I did not use it then. Somebody in the 
PMO was giving information about India's nuclear programme to the 
US. It was during the previous Congress regime."

Singh explained his decision to go public with it now by
levelling another serious charge, "If you read the full text of
the letter, you will find echoes of the continuation of the US
policy in the July 18 Indo-US agreement (on nuclear cooperation)
and what the US expects of India." He alleged that the honour of
the PMO was at stake, "We were snooped and are still being
snooped."

The BJP leader did not name the mole but sources claimed the
allusion was to a bureaucrat who has passed away.

A minister of state in Rao's PMO, Bhuvanesh Chaturvedi,
rubbished Singh's charge. "It's baseless, imaginary. As former
external affairs minister, he ought to have behaved more
responsibly. He has tarnished the country's image to promote his
book," he said.

The book, A Call To Honour: In Service of Emergent India,
scheduled for release later this week, is also likely to stir a
hot debate on some other issues: Kargil, Vajpayee's failed Agra
Summit with Pervez Musharraf and the talks Singh had with the
then US deputy secretary of state Strobe Talbott to end India's
political isolation in the aftermath of Pokhran II.

A source claiming pre-release access to Singh's account of his
talks with Talbott said it does not match with that of the US
official's in his much-discussed work, Engaging India:
Democracy, Diplomacy and the Bomb. A case in point: Singh's
alleged promise to Talbott to deliver on India's accession to
the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty that never materialised.

Eyebrows have also gone up in the diplomatic circles over
reports that Singh had recapitulated in the book his
conversations on Pokhran II with Vajpayee, Narasimha Rao and
former President R Venkataraman.

"You don't disclose such information," a source said. He claimed
Singh has quoted Rao to the effect that he wanted to carry out
the nuclear tests but could not and that it was "now up to you
to do it".

On the Agra Summit, Singh is understood to have revealed little.
But he concedes that he should have kept the then joint
secretary (external publicity) Nirupama Rao and I&B Minister
Sushma Swaraj informed on the progress of the talks.

Swaraj's televised version of the discussions (without any
mention of the exchange on the Kashmir issue) became a critical
factor in the summit's failure.   
    
*****************************************************************
 31 MDN: Jellyfish force nuclear reactor to reduce output - 

MSN-Mainichi Daily News

A swarm of jellyfish shut down a coolant system at a Japanese
nuclear plant, forcing the power company to temporarily lower
the output of two reactors, a news report said.

Chubu Electric Power Co. lowered output at two reactors at its
Hamaoka nuclear power plant in central Japan after jellyfish
interfered with the filters of a tank used to take water from
the sea, Kyodo News agency reported.

The two reactors ran at about 60-70 percent of capacity for
three hours on Wednesday while workers removed the jellyfish,
Kyodo said, citing company officials.

No radiation leaked outside the compound, according to the
report.

Chubu Electric officials couldn't be reached late Wednesday to
confirm. (AP)

July 20, 2006 	 

      Copyright 2005-2006 THE MAINICHI NEWSPAPERS. All rights
reserved.
*****************************************************************
 32 RIA Novosti: Armenia approves sale of electricity network to 
Russia's Interenergo B.V.

20/ 07/ 2006                                  

MOSCOW, July 20 (RIA Novosti) - Armenia's authorities have
authorized U.K.-based Midland Resources Holding Ltd. to sell its
100% stake in Armenian Electricity Networks (AEN) to a
subsidiary of Russia's Inter UES, the Russian company said.

 Interenergo is a joint venture of Inter UES (60%), a subsidiary
of Russia's electricity monopoly Unified Energy System, and
state-owned Rosenergoatom (40%), the world's largest nuclear
energy company.

 The deal was approved by the Public Services Regulatory
Commission of Armenia Wednesday, the company said. Under
Armenian energy legislation, the company was not entitled to
sell its shares in the AEN without obtaining permission from the
Armenian government and the committee.

 Midland Resources, which acquired 100% of AEN shares for $40
million, lent the shares to Interenergo for a 99-year term in
June last year at an estimated cost of $73 million, while
retaining ownership of the stock. 

Inter UES, an import-export electricity operator, has
electricity supply contracts with Armenia, Belarus, Georgia,
Kazakhstan, China, Moldova, Mongolia, Lithuania, Latvia, Norway,
Russia, Ukraine, and Finland. The company also manages energy
facilities in Armenia, Georgia, Moldova, and Russia.

© 2005 RIA Novosti   
*****************************************************************
 33 RIA Novosti: Russia to join international nuclear group

Opinion &analysis - 

20/ 07/ 2006                                  

MOSCOW. (RIA Novosti commentator Tatyana Sinitsyna) 

At first, no one was eager to invite Russia to join a global
nuclear energy partnership initiated by the Americans and aimed
to promote joint research in six key areas of nuclear energy.
But now there seems to have been a change of heart. Washington
has at last extended an invitation to Moscow to join the United
States, the European Union and ten other member nations of the
Generation IV International Forum. Perhaps it was the effect of
the St. Petersburg G8 summit. 

There are, however, other explanations. First, the
"tongue-in-cheek political games" that have been going on since
the days of a bipolar world are still going on. No small role is
also played by fears of the advantages enjoyed by a powerful
rival, which Russia is. But all intrigues, ambitions and fears
are pushed aside by the reality that physicists keep telling
politicians about: "The end of nuclear energy is not far off."
What will we do when the lights suddenly go out? 

Nuclear experts, of course, know how this scenario can be pushed
back. The main solution was aptly described by Yevgeny Velikhov,
full member of the Russian Academy of Sciences and president of
the Kurchatov Institute Research Center: "Nuclear energy has no
future unless it uses fast breeder reactors." His message is
that without them, nuclear energy will be no more than a short
episode in history whose only consequence will be the need to
find ways of getting rid of all the nuclear materials produced
by humankind. 

The fast reactor idea is not new: it has simply been on the
shelf since the 1930s and has now been dusted off. Its author
was the outstanding Hungarian physicist Leo Szilard, who knew
the value of the idea and patented it after World War II in
1946. At the very beginning of the nuclear era, physicists
already saw the most practicable road for the world's nuclear
development. A fast neutron reactor can operate in a closed
cycle and be self-sustaining in terms of fuel. This is very
important, both for saving uranium resources and for disposing
of radioactive waste, since its volume is drastically reduced. 

But as nuclear energy advanced, it emerged that water-moderated,
water-cooled reactors were more economical and safer for mass
construction; and they were given priority. As a result, all
countries are now building and operating mainly water-based
nuclear facilities. 

Russia, however, did not overlook Szilard's idea. First it
designed and built a small reactor in Kazakhstan, and in 1980
the Beloyarskaya Nuclear Power Plant in the Urals launched Block
No. 3 - the BN-600 sodium-cooled fast reactor - which is in
service to this day. 

Russia has done the most with this technology. "We have no
equals now, we are absolutely competitive," Sergei Kiriyenko,
head of the Federal Agency for Nuclear Power, said recently. The
Beloyarskaya Nuclear Power Plant is still the world's only
commercial nuclear plant with a fast breeder reactor. Drawing on
their unique and invaluable experience, Russian designers have
developed a more high-powered and advanced reactor, the BN-800,
which is being built next to its cousin at Beloyarskaya.
Designers are also working on the BN-1800 reactor. 

Developing fast-reactor technology has been made a national
project, but there are problems that are now in the spotlight of
experts' attention. "For the time being the investment component
and costs per kWh are higher with these reactors," said the
academic supervisor of the TVEL Center for Technologies and
Innovation, Mikhail Solonin, member of the Russian Academy of
Sciences. "Since we are trying to produce competitive reactors,
we should find a trade-off between two key factors: safety and
economy. It is also necessary to master the recycling of nuclear
material on a pilot scale." 

Economical and environmentally safe technologies, such as those
used by fast reactors, are the goal of the Generation IV
International Forum. Russia has accepted the invitation and
agreed to join it as a member. All that remains is for it to
sign the Charter, and it will have the right to take part in all
political, systemic and project activities. A framework
agreement, which has the status of an international treaty and
defines the legal force and types of cooperation, will take one
more year. 

The world, as it becomes increasingly more conscious of the
global energy threat, is well aware that it is more worthwhile
both materially and intellectually to concentrate its efforts on
really vital issues. With a full nuclear cycle and unique
experience under its belt, Russia can doubtless become a global
partner. 

© 2005 RIA Novosti   
*****************************************************************
 34 BBC: Nuclear plant struck by jellyfish
 
Last Updated: Thursday, 20 July 2006
 
[A jelly fish (file photo)]                             

A mass of jellyfish clogged a pipe in a seawater cooling system                                                             

A nuclear power plant in Japan was forced to lower the output of 
its reactors after jellyfish blocked a filter in a seawater 
cooling system. 

Power from two reactors at Chubu Electric Power Co's plant in 
Hamaoka had to be reduced after the water intake system shut down 
automatically. 

Workers removed the jellyfish mass and output later returned to 
normal. 

"It's the first time we have had to lower power output because of 
jellyfish," a company spokesman said. 

Output for the two reactors was reduced to between 60 and 70% of 
capacity for about three hours, the company said. 

"We sometimes do the same thing when debris from typhoons sticks 
to the filter," the spokesman told Reuters news agency. 

The Hamaoka plant is in Shizuoka prefecture on Japan's Pacific 
coast. 

Recently, giant jellyfish have been a problem for fishing and 
coastal communities on Japan's west coast. 

The government has been looking at measures to deal with the 
creatures, worried about their potential impact on local 
economies.                                                       



*****************************************************************
 35 BBC: Wylfa definitely closing in 2010
 
Last Updated: Thursday, 20 July 2006
 
[Wylfa]                                 

Wylfa will be 39 years old when it closes in 2010                                                          

Wylfa nuclear power station will not have its operating life 
extended beyond 2010, the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA) 
has announced. 

The station is one of the major employers on Anglesey, along with 
the metal smelting plant Anglesey Aluminium in Holyhead which it 
powers. 

There are fears for 1,500 jobs if both close but council leaders 
hope a new nuclear plant will be built. 

The assembly government said it was "disappointed" by the NDA's 
decision. 

The NDA estimated it would cost up to £250m for Wylfa to continue 
operating. 

Earlier on Thursday, MPs on the Welsh affairs select committee 
added their voices to calls for a new plant to be built on the 
island. 

They said in a report if any new nuclear power stations were to 
be built - as has been mooted by the UK government in its recent 
energy review - Anglesey would be an obvious location. 

The NDA said in a statement that major improvements would be 
needed on the reactors at Wylfa and the safety cases would need 
to be revised, at a cost between £70m-£100m, for it to continue 
operating. 

It would make a multi-milli pound loss to the Exchequer and 
ultimately that would be to the taxpayer Bill Hamilton           

It also estimated losses of around £250m when all costs including 
reprocessing were set against revenue from extending its life. 

Bill Hamilton, from the NDA, told BBC Wales it was "simply 
totally uneconomic" to extend the plant's life for a further two 
or four years as had been proposed. 

"It would make a multi-million pound loss to the exchequer and 
ultimately that would be to the taxpayer," he said. 

"We recognise that we have a socio-economic responsibility to 
look at the implications of any decisions that we make about the 
nuclear plants on the communities which they currently live in. 

"We have been talking a lot with Anglesey Aluminium and the 
company management have recognised that sheer hard facts for us 
as the Nuclear Decommissioning Agency." 

However, he said they were still looking to prolong the station's 
life from March 2010 until December 2010, and said 
decommissioning did not mean the end of jobs at the plant on day 
one. 

"The decision may well lead to some more job opportunities 
[through decommissioning]," he added. 

[Albert Owen MP]                                

Albert Owen thinks big decisions on energy need to be made                                                             

Ynys Mon MP Albert Owen said his reaction was one of 
"disappointment". 

"This was one of the opportunities of getting a steady, 
economical supply of electricity to Anglesey Aluminium for the 
future past 2010," he told BBC Wales. 

"What's changed since the first announcement to shut Wylfa was 
made in 2000 is the price of alternative electricity generation. 

"We have been looking at whether to go for gas or biomass on the 
island so everybody's working together. 

"These are difficult times, that's why we have had an energy 
review. Costs have gone up recently - oil had doubled in price, 
gas has gone up. We have got to look at these and make some 
massive decisions on the future." 

He welcomed the decision by the select committee to support 
Anglesey as a potentially ideal site for a new nuclear power 
station, calling it a "major step forward". 

The assembly government said it was disappointed that no way 
could be found to extend the plant's life beyond 2010. 

"We have worked very hard to ensure all available avenues were 
explored in attempting to extend Wylfa's operating life, which 
included asking the NDA to look into a number of alternative 
businesses cases," a spokesman added. 

*****************************************************************
 36 Rutland Herald: The truth about wind power

Rutland Vermont News & Information
 	 	 	 	 	 
July 20, 2006 

By ANDREW PERCHLIK   

John McClaughry's recent commentary, printed in this paper July
12, pretended to answer the question of "how to make a bundle in
the electric energy business in the little state of Vermont." He
answers the question by listing several financial incentives
offered to wind power and implies that these incentives are
unfair and unwarranted.

However, he fails to point out the massive subsidies given to
the nuclear and fossil fuel industries in comparison. Thus, I
think an important follow up question to McClaughry's is:
Suppose you were an apologist for the nuclear and fossil fuel
industries and wanted to stop wind power from competing with
these polluting energy sources, how would go about it?

Well, you might write an op-ed that misleads the public by
describing ways the state and federal governments have worked to
promote renewables, without mentioning how meager these efforts
are compared to the huge financial subsidies that have been
heaped upon the nuclear and fossil fuel industries for decades

You most definitely would not want to bring up the fact that the
vast majority of federal energy subsidies have gone, and
continue to go, to the nuclear and fossil fuel industries. You
would bring up the fact that wind farms can take advantage of an
accelerated depreciation, but you would forget to mention that
the gas and oil industries have a more generous depreciation
allowance in addition to many other tax credits and subsidies
that the wind farms don't.

You would be careful not mention the there is nothing the
renewable energy industry would want more than a level playing
field when it comes to direct and indirect subsidies. Nothing
should be said about the environmental and health costs that
nuclear and fossil fuel power forces upon the taxpayers.

How about asthma? Mining pollution? Acid rain? Smog? Global
warming? Exportation of dollars to import energy? Energy
security? No, no, no, all of these topics would be off limits,
as they do not shine kindly on nuclear and fossil fuels.

You would suggest that the modest steps being taken in Vermont
and the Northeast to address the threat of climate change are
really an effort to subsidize wind or solar. Of course, do not
even raise the subject of the threat of climate change and the
contribution burning fossil fuels are making to this problem.

And when pointing out popular programs that support renewables,
you would leave out important information. Like the fact that
the 1.9-cent federal tax credit for wind power also applies to
refined coal facilities (for more time than wind power) and
certain coal plants. And you certainly would not point to the
new production tax credit for nuclear power facilities or to the
20 percent tax credit offered to "clean coal" plants.

You would also be careful not to bring up how your friends in
Congress showered the electricity, coal, nuclear, natural gas
and oil industries with $8.5 billion in tax breaks and billions
more in loan guarantees and other subsidies in the 2005 Energy
Act.. You would want to keep quiet about the $1.5 billion
appropriated for oil and natural gas drilling research that aid
such companies as Halliburton, despite the fact that such
companies are raking in record-breaking profits.

You would continue by making false claims that Vermont's Act 61
requires utilities to buy wind power regardless of its costs
(which it doesn't), and you would avoid any mention that Vermont
utilities are now eager to purchase wind power because it is
being sold at rates below market and can be purchased at a fixed
rate for 20 years.

Even after all that biased rhetoric you would continue with your
attack by ignoring the numerous polls showing that the vast
majority of Vermonters desire increased levels of renewable
energy, including wind turbines on ridgelines.

You see, what McClaughry and the polluting power industries
don't want you to know is that unsubsidized clean renewable
energy will compete any day with an unsubsidized fossil fuel and
nuclear energy. Until then, don't let them distort the few
crumbs of governmental incentives given to wind power as the
nuclear and fossil fuels industries devour billions in subsidies
and rig market rules to their advantage.

Andrew Perchlik is executive director Renewable Energy Vermont.
   
*****************************************************************
 37 NRC: Agency Information Collection Activities: Submission for the 
 
                        FR Doc E6-11515 
[Federal Register: July 20, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 139)] 
[Notices] [Page 41263] From the Federal Register Online via GPO 
Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr20jy06-84]                         
 
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Review; Comment Request 
AGENCY: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). ACTION: Notice 
of the OMB review of information collection and solicitation of 
public comment.
 
SUMMARY: The NRC has recently submitted to OMB for review the 
following proposal for the collection of information under the 
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 
Chapter 35). The NRC hereby informs potential respondents that an 
agency may not conduct or sponsor, and that a person is not 
required to respond to, a collection of information unless it 
displays a currently valid OMB control number.
 
1. Type of submission, new, revision, or extension: Extension.
 
2. The title of the information collection: NRC Form 590, 
Application/Permit for Use of the Two White Flint (TWFN) 
Auditorium.
 
3. The form number if applicable: NRC Form 590. 4. How often the 
collection is required: Each time public use of the auditorium is 
requested.
 
5. Who will be required or asked to report: Members of the public 
requesting use of the NRC Auditorium.
 
6. An estimate of the number of annual responses: 5. 7. The 
estimated number of annual respondents: 5. 8. An estimate of the 
total number of hours needed annually to complete the requirement 
or request: 1.25 hours (15 minutes per request).
 
9. An indication of whether section 3507(d), Public Law 104-13 
applies: N/A.
 
10. Abstract: In accordance with the Public Buildings Act of 
1959, an agreement was reached between the Maryland-National 
Capital Park and Planning Commission (MPPC), the General Services 
Administration (GSA), and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission that 
the NRC auditorium will be made available for public use. Public 
users of the auditorium will be required to complete NRC Form 
590, Application/Permit for Use of Two White Flint North (TWFN) 
Auditorium. The information is needed to allow for administrative 
and security review and scheduling, and to make a determination 
that there are no anticipated problems with the requester prior 
to utilization of the facility.
 
A copy of the final supporting statement may be viewed free of 
charge at the NRC Public Document Room, One White Flint North, 
11555 Rockville Pike, Room O-1 F21, Rockville, MD 20852. OMB 
clearance requests are available at the NRC worldwide Web site: 
http://www.nrc.gov/public-involve/doc-comment/omb/index.html. The 
document will be available on the NRC home page site for 60 days 
after the signature date of this notice.
 
Comments and questions should be directed to the OMB reviewer 
listed below by August 21, 2006. Comments received after this 
date will be considered if it is practical to do so, but 
assurance of consideration cannot be given to comments received 
after this date.
 
John A. Asalone, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs 
(3150-0181), NEOB-10202, Office of Management and Budget, 
Washington, DC 20503.
 
Comments can also be e-mailed to John_A._Asalone@omb.eop.gov or 
submitted by telephone at (202) 395-4650.
 
The NRC Clearance Officer is Brenda Jo. Shelton, 301-415-7233.
 
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 13th day of July, 2006.
 
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
 
Brenda Jo. Shelton, NRC Clearance Officer, Office of Information 
Services.
 
[FR Doc. E6-11515 Filed 7-19-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P

 
*****************************************************************
 38 People's Daily: Peru, Russia sign nuclear cooperation agreement
 
UPDATED: 10:29, July 20, 2006   

Peru and Russiahave signed an agreement to develop nuclear
technology in the field of energy cooperation, Peru's Foreign
Minister Oscar Maurtua said on Wednesday.

 This agreement will contribute to Peru's socio-economic
development via energy resources that have a smaller impact on
the environment, Maurtua said at a ceremony where he signed the
agreement with Serguey Kirienko, the head of Russia's Federal
Atomic Energy Agency.

 He added that the agreement complies with the guidelines of the
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and avoids violation
of the nuclear non-proliferation treaty.

 The agreement includes joint nuclear research projects, an
expert exchange program and a technician training program.

 Russia has signed similar agreements with the
United&nbsp;States, Britain, Germany, France, Italy, Canada,
South Korea, Brazil, Argentina, Chileand Cuba. 

Source: Xinhua

  Copyright by People's Daily Online, all rights reserved   
*****************************************************************
 39 FN Arena News: The Nuclear Age Has Been Cancelled Due To Rain

By Greg Peel

One of the biggest drawbacks to clean, safe, renewable (or more
correctly, inexhaustible) energy source, solar power, is that it
doesn't work well when it rains. It seems the same can be said
of clean, not all that safe, abundant but finite energy source,
nuclear power.

Energy Resources Australia (ERA), Australia's closest thing to a
pure-play and world standard uranium producer, has just posted
its worst quarterly production report in over ten years. Some of
the shortfall can be attributed to problems with the acid plant,
but the big problem has simply been rain â€“ lots of it.

Various mines across Australia's tropical belt were hammered by
cyclonic rains in one of the worst wet seasons ever recorded,
severely hampering second quarter production levels. As anyone
who has ever built a swimming pool knows, big holes in the
ground tend to fill with water.

Cyclone Monica was Huey's piece de resistance. Although not
quite passing over the Ranger mine, it passed close enough.
Result â€“ one bloody big mine filled to the brim. Just to cap
things off the acid plant had been shut down for maintenance and
then they just couldn't get the damned thing started again. My
car does that in the rain sometimes too.

ERA's June quarter production of uranium oxide was down 52% on
the June quarter last year and 68% on the March quarter. This
has materially affected analysts' earnings forecasts. The FN
Arena database includes three brokers covering the stock.

ABN Amro has lopped earnings by 17%, now expecting $58.9m in
2006. UBS was more severe, slashing 30% to $40.1m. And JP Morgan
obviously went out without an umbrella, needing to bring its
forecast down by 40% to match UBS at $40m.

This did not encourage ABN to reduce its $12.20 price target
however, nor Morgans its $11.43. UBS, on the other hand, had to
rein in from a brave $18.70 to a slightly less brave $16.60,
still a significant premium to the peloton. This drops FN
Arena's average target from $15.28 to $13.57.

No recommendation changes were made, however. This despite the
fact it is unlikely ERA could make up such a production
shortfall within the year. Apart from exploration upside, the
main reason for the stay-put is the uranium price. The market is
tight, and the spot price is strong. When ERA renews long term
contracts it will be shifting from prices around US$16/lb to
US$45/lb.

Hence ABN and Morgans are sticking to Hold, and bullish UBS to
Buy.

The irony is that increased cyclonic activity may be due to
global warming, and global warming may be alleviated â€“
slightly â€“ by nuclear energy. If Huey could just hold off
until the stuff can be pulled out of the ground, it might help.

In the meantime, perhaps analysts now need to add a weather risk
weighting to the other variables that make up the guess and
giggle game called "value the miner".

Oh, and if you're wondering who Huey is, ask an Aussie surfer. 


-----------------------------------------------------------------
FN Arena is building the future of financial news reporting at .
Our daily news reports can be trialed at no cost and with no
obligations. Simply sign up and get a feel for what we are
trying to achieve. 

Subscribers and trialists should read our terms and conditions,
available on the website. 

All material published by FN Arena is the copyright of the
publisher, unless otherwise stated. Reproduction in whole or in
part is not permitted without written permission of the
publisher. 

						 				   			 		

 	 	 				   			 		

   	 	

	 	 	 	
 	

 	
 		  

 			
 				   	 	 	The content of this information does in no way
reflect the opinions of FN Arena, 	or of its journalists. In
fact we don't have any opinion about the stock market, 	its
value, future direction or individual shares. FN Arena solely
reports about 	what the main experts in the market note, believe
and comment on. By doing so 	we believe we provide intelligent
investors with a valuable tool that helps 	them in making up
their own minds, reading market trends and getting a feel for
	what is happening beneath the surface. This document is
provided for informational 	purposes only. It does not
constitute an offer to sell or a solicitation to buy 	any
security or other financial instrument. FN Arena employs very
experienced 	journalists who base their work on information
believed to be reliable and 	accurate, though no guarantee is
given that the daily report is accurate or 	complete. Investors
should contact their personal adviser before making any
	investment decision. 	
-----------------------------------------------------------------
 	© News Network 2006. All Rights Reserved. 	No portion of this
website may be reproduced, copied or in any way re-used 	without
written permission from News Network. All subscribers should
read our 	terms and conditions. 	 				   			 		

   	 	

	 	 	 


	     	   	
 	Copyright © 2006 News Network. All rights reserved. 	No
portion of this website may 	be reproduced, copied, or in anyway
reused without 	written permission from News Network.All
subscribers should read our terms and conditions. 	
 	
 	   








*****************************************************************
 40 AFP: French nuclear giant Areva says will make India a top priority -
     
 Thu Jul 20, 7:18 AM ET 		 	 

NEW DELHI (AFP) - France's Areva SA, the world's biggest 
manufacturer of nuclear reactors said it would make energy-hungry 
India one of its "first priorities" once the Indo-US nuclear deal 
is finalised. 

 "As soon as the international framework will allow it, the
Indian market will be one of our first priorities," Anne
Lauvergeon, chairwoman of the executive board of Paris-based
Areva, told a business audience in New Delhi Thursday. 

Her statement comes in the wake of an accord on
technology-sharing to develop civil nuclear energy signed
between India and France during a visit here in February by
French President Jacques Chirac" /> President Jacques Chirac. 

Areva and General Electric of the United States are among firms
vying to enter India's lucrative nuclear market once the
US-Indian deal to allow New Delhi access to civilian nuclear
technology is concluded. 

India, which imports some 70 percent of its oil requirements,
urgently needs new sources of power to keep its burgeoning
economy growing, especially with oil prices hitting record
highs. 

As part of Areva's pitch to India which wishes to promote its
home-grown technical expertise, Lauvergeon said Areva's strategy
toward India involves "fully recognising the existing competence
and know-how of Indian industry." 

"We expect that a significant share of an 'EPR reactor' will be
manufactured here. And there is a potential to source in India
some components to other international markets," she said,
referring to Areva's next-generation European Pressurised
Reactor. 

Lauvergeon denied to reporters that any deals had already been
sewn up before the conclusion of the India-US agreement. 

"We have no agreement in the nuclear (field) with India or
Indian companies ... because we are not allowed to do it so we
are waiting for the international green light," she said. 

The US government said Monday it expects lawmakers to take up
the landmark nuclear power deal with India within weeks,
allowing the pact to win full congressional approval in
September. 

The controversial pact that critics say would weaken
non-proliferation efforts would end three decades of
international sanctions on nuclear trade with India. 

Nuclear power currently supplies just three percent of India's
energy needs. 

Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
 41 Telegraph: Profile: cool customer who enjoys heat in the nuclear kitchen
 
  [telegraph.co.uk]

(Filed: 20/07/2006)

The chief of BNFL tells Martin Baker a little patience goes a 
long way over doing deals in the public sector When writing about 
someone in a top job, it's all too easy to reach for the nearest 
available cliché, and talk about "hot seats". But in the case of 
Mike Parker, the chief executive of British Nuclear Fuels, the 
temptation is irresistible. 

[Mike Parker] 
  
  
Mike Parker has reduced staffing levels at corporate headquarters 
by 90 per cent
  
Consider the challenges facing this affable Liverpudlian as he
was being offered the position in 2003. Parker had spent nearly
four decades in the private sector where he had risen to the top
of Dow Chemicals, a massive corporation with a market
capitalisation of more than $40bn. 

Pressures come with being chief executive of a large, quoted US
company, but they are very different from the problems posed by
having the UK Government as your only shareholder and an army of
lobby groups and industry and ecological campaigners watching
your every move. 

Moreover, the policies underpinning the job were changing as
Parker accepted the position, and one of his first tasks has
been to reduce the manning levels at the corporate headquarters
of BNFL by some 90 per cent - hardly the kind of mandate that
wins you popularity contests. 

Finally, you have the Homer Simpson factor - the satirist's view
that the nuclear industry is dangerous, laxly regulated and run
by careless idiots. Jokes about nuclear meltdown aside, it seems
fair to say that as chief executives' chairs go, Mike Parker's
must be one of the warmest. 

But he is clearly enjoying the heat in the nuclear kitchen. He
recently announced BNFL results recording substantial profits -
in excess of £100m - compared to losses of £144m the year
before. And last week, the Government's energy review produced a
positive result for the political side of an intensely political
job. 

The energy review was based on broadly the same premise as that
of the 2002 Energy White Paper - that carbon emissions in the UK
must be cut in an attempt to reduce climate change, and that by
2020 Britain would be 85 per cent dependent on imported gas -
but came up with diametrically opposed, pro-nuclear conclusions,
with plans to build state-of-the-art nuclear power generation
plants. 

Parker and his senior team have been arguing for such an outcome
for a considerable time. This is undoubtedly what they call in
the markets a "result" for Parker, as a desire to influence
policy was one of the key reasons for taking the BNFL job. 

"Energy is so important and it influences the policy of
governments," he says. "I'd formed the view [in 2003] that the
US and the UK were very important countries that for a variety
of reasons didn't have a fully defined energy policy. 

"I felt that nuclear was a difficult subject, especially in US
and UK, because the origins were weaponry. Eventually, both
embraced commercial nuclear power, but there was, perhaps
because of this, more difficulty for nuclear power in these
countries. I felt it would be a big issue again - something that
would have to be seriously considered." 

But despite his interest in the political side of his work, he
almost didn't take the BNFL position. Politics of the
private-sector variety nearly destroyed his appetite for work. 

"The chemicals industry went into the worst trough it's been in
in 30 years. The results became difficult and basically I got
shot at the end of 2002 and my predecessor [as chief executive
at Dow Chemcials] came back. 

"It was a crossroads, a big surprise in the industry. There were
some feelings that was it really even a good idea to work again,
given what had happened? I decided I would be open to working
again. I was a capable person, but not looking. I was still
adjusting to what had happened." 

But the headhunters persuaded him, dangling the carrot of
re-entering the private sector. "We thought we could move to at
least partial privatisation of the integrated whole that was
left of BNFL." 

However, government priorities changed, and BNFL became a
company focused on clean-up and decommissioning rather than
power generation, reactor maintenance and research. 

"From the BNFL point of view it was disappointing. But overall,
the Government did a good job. Still, it wasn't easy for the
executive here. We agreed that we needed to change the way we
were organised." 

The corporate centre had 500 people five years ago. Under
Parker, who wants to "do a professional job, and then turn the
lights out" as BNFL winds down, those numbers have been reduced
to 50. 

Parker understandably expected massive resistance to all this.
Trying to motivate and lead people to work themselves out of a
job (BNFL's mission is not only to tidy up the nuclear industry,
but to tidy itself away into a little cupboard marked
"oblivion") was a management challenge to say the least. But, he
says, "our people have demonstrated great flexibility and
appetite for change". 

His initial plan was to get rid of what he expected to be the
"dead wood" in the public sector, and bring in his own team -
standard practice in the corporate world he had known. But he
found he had to adapt his planning. 

"On the quality and motivation of BNFL's people I could not have
been more wrong. I found a highly skilled, committed and
qualified group of people who are among the best I have worked
with. 

"Perhaps unusually for a new CEO, I found excellent alignment
with my senior team when I arrived and made no changes at
executive level, preferring to work with the team I inherited.

This proved to be the right decision." 

One of the major differences between private and public has
definitely been the difficulty of getting plans and policies
executed. But Parker's experience at the top level at Dow and
his understanding of the highly complex world he was entering
have stood him in good stead. 

"Don't underestimate the quality and resilience of your people,"
he counsels anyone thinking of working in the public sector. 

"But do be prepared to use a little patience as you deal with
the checks and balances of public sector life, especially in a
highly politicised sector like the nuclear. 

"You need a lot of determination and the ability to take others
with you."

Biography
Born 1946 
196467 Educated: Waterloo Grammar School, Liverpool; University
of Manchester Institute of Science and Technology
 1968 Graduate trainee: Dow Chemicals, Houston 
1970-72 Manchester Business School: MBA
 1972 Manager, Dow Chemicals
 2002-02 Chief executive, Dow Chemicals
 2003 Chief executive, British Nuclear Fuels   


 © Copyright of Telegraph Group Limited 2006. | Terms &
*****************************************************************
 42 [theday.com: Union Bid At Millstone Postponed A Year 

Inherited Hurdles Complicate Latest Try To Organize Workers  
    
By Patricia Daddona Day Staff Writer\, 

E-mail: p.daddona@theday.com Phone No.: (860) 701 - 4324   
  
Published on 7/20/2006 in Region » Region News
       
The national union attempting to organize workers at the 
Millstone Power Station has agreed to delay the effort until next 
June so it can reach out to a bigger pool of employees who may be 
eligible to join.

In 36 years, workers at the nuclear complex in Waterford have 
never had a union. 

Four years ago, Millstone's owner, Virginia-based Dominion, spent 
$728,000 to hire a consultant, Labor Information Services of 
Bethesda, Md., to fight a union bid, according to federal 
Department of Labor records. In addition, a 1999 union drive was 
narrowly defeated under the plant's former owner, Northeast 
Utilities. 

The union currently seeking to organize Millstone workers, the 
Utility Workers' Union of America, and the workers they represent 
say Dominion watered down the pool of eligible voters in 2002 
to include workers with no interest in joining the union. Those 
workers' votes helped kill the unionizing effort, according to 
union organizer Bobby Mahoney and Clifford Marlow, a Dominion 
health physicist technician who has spearheaded each union bid.

Now, with many of Millstone's 429 core production and maintenance 
workers showing interest in a union and hundreds more eligible by 
virtue of the 2002 decision to enlarge the pool, Mahoney said he 
is eager to contact up to 670 employees at their homes by mail, 
visits or phone calls. With Dominion agreeing to provide access 
to the workers, the union has a better chance of winning a 
majority of supporters in a vote next year, according to Mahoney.

Nuclear plants are particularly difficult to unionize because 
their job categories are complex and interdependent, and there 
are few case histories to establish precedent regarding possible 
unionization, said John Cotter, assistant regional director for 
the regional National Labor Relations Board in Hartford. 

In the 2002 decision, the National Labor Relations Board said 
that 277 workers in addition to the original 426 could join a 
proposed union. The move mixed together white- and blue-collar 
employees based on whether their job duties extended across 
departments and were integral to the functioning of the power 
station.

One of the roles of the federal labor board is to help determine 
which jobs are eligible to be represented by a union.

Dominion spokesman Pete Hyde said the company stands by 
the 2002 decision and that Millstone's parent company has unions 
at its other nuclear, gas and coal facilities around the country 
and does not oppose unions.

But he said that Millstone, which employs 1,275 people, runs well 
without any unions.

 Employees twice in seven years have rejected a union, said 
Hyde. It's clear as a bell. The point is, we have a very 
flexible working environment right now. Workers should be able to 
interact with management without anything in between.

A traditional nuclear production and maintenance union would 
include health physicist technicians, plant equipment operators 
and other positions, according to documents provided by Marlow. 
The 2002 labor decision also allows many others to join, 
including engineering technicians responsible for equipment 
surveillance, for example.

One worker, Henry Ellal, a quality control inspector for 22 
years, would like to be in the union, but his position was deemed 
ineligible in 2002. It's really a convoluted mess, he said.

Marlow calls the recent pact to delay the push for a union a 
deliberate attempt at union busting by the company but said he 
agreed to it because the union's lawyers see no way to try to 
otherwise launch a union.

He said he fears the ballot cards that several hundred workers 
signed authorizing the union to explore organizing at the 
Millstone plant won't be valid next year and could force the 
union to start from scratch.

 I thought (the union) was going to go forward and hold their 
ground and take Dominion on, Marlow said.

"""""""""Workers say they are primarily concerned about benefits 
covering health-care costs and pensions. In addition, Marlow said 
workers are interested in instituting a grievance process that 
would supplement current company procedures.

Paul Lute of Waterford, a 19-year veteran plant equipment 
operator, said he believes employees would find a union-based 
grievance procedure less confrontational and intimidating than 
the current approaches, which include bringing concerns to 
supervisors, the labor board or the federal Nuclear Regulatory 
Commission.

Lute once complained to the Department of Labor about not being 
paid overtime for an unscheduled shift change, which is a 
violation of labor law, he said. It was the only way he and his 
peers received compensatory time for the oversight, he said.

 It worked, Lute recalled, but it was not a pleasant 
experience. A lot of people are afraid to go that route, because 
they feel there will be payback.

Sham Mehta, who worked in the employee concerns program fielding 
such complaints, is now fighting for his job. He alleged 
retaliation after raising security concerns and losing his job. 
Dominion denies retaliating against Mehta and said his job was 
eliminated in a department reorganization. 

Hyde would not comment on Lute's experience but said the company 
prizes flexibility in the manager-employee relationship.

 We just feel union rules can be very restrictive in the 
workplace, said Hyde.

With a union in place, supervisors in some instances can't work 
with individuals on some things such as days off or special 
vacation days. Or rules may prevent workers from working with 
management on (issues) like better business practices, he said.

p.daddona@theday.com   
    
1 (860) 442-2200  |  New London, CT  |  Â© 1998-2006 The Day 
Publishing Co.
*****************************************************************
 43 UPI: German energy summit to determine future
     
  United Press International - Energy - 

7/20/2006 12:19:00 PM -0400

KARLSRUHE, Germany, July 20 (UPI) -- Germany will hold an energy
summit within the next few months to determine where its future
energy sources will come from. 

Chancellor Angela Merkel told an audience Tuesday at the
Karlsruhe Research Center in Karlsruhe, Germany, the summit will
range from energy prices to climate change. 

She said the government will make good on a promise fund energy
research with 3 percent of the gross domestic product by 2010. 

"With the pact for research and innovation, we also want to
strengthen the cooperation of research institutions with small
and medium-sized enterprises," she said to the 5,000-strong
audience. 

Much of her audience worked at the research center, which she
lauded for work on synthetic fuels and neutrinos research. 

She called for diversifying energy resources, but gave no
comment on nuclear power aside from pointing to a government
position to phase-out such power in Germany.

© Copyright 2006 United Press International, Inc. All Rights
Reserved
*****************************************************************
 44 Whitehaven News: US nuclear firm brings jobs hopes

Published on 20/07/2006

By Alan Irving
 
A JOBS bonanza could be on the cards if one of Americaâ€™s 
nuclear giants pulls off lucrative contracts connected to 
Sellafield and Drigg.
 
Washington Group International â€“ Whitehaven rugby league 
clubâ€™s biggest sponsors, to the tune of Â£100,000 â€“ has 
created more than 3,000 jobs in communities around nuclear sites 
in the US and says it would be ready to invest in Copelandâ€™s 
future prosperity. 

In an exclusive interview with The Whitehaven News, one of 
Washingtonâ€™s top men said there was no reason why Copeland 
should not reap the same dividends. 

Preston Rahe, Washingtonâ€™s president for Energy and 
Environment, travelled from his South Carolina base to help back 
his groupâ€™s bid to take over the running of Britainâ€™s 
low-level radioactive waste site at Drigg.
 
Washington, which employs 24,000 people in 30 countries, 
specialises in clean-up and waste management. It hopes to win the 
contract to operate the Drigg site when the NDA puts it out to 
tender next year alongside Sellafield clean-up work.
 
â€œWe couldnâ€™t be as successful as we are in the States
without community support and we have a very strong commitment
to the economic development of the communities in which we
operate,â€ said Mr Rahe. â€œOne of our aims is to diversify the
economy through job creation spin-offs such as establishing
manufacturing and nuclear safety business as well as investing
in technology.
 
â€œWe have created somewhere in excess of 3,000 jobs in the
communities where our nuclear site operations have direct
similarities to both Sellafield and Drigg.â€
 
Asked whether Cope-land could see a similar jobs boost and other
benefits, he answered: â€œWhy not? This area is the largest
single contributor of nuclear capability in the UK. With the
proposed nuclear renaissance, Copeland has what I would call a
national strategic asset which can be capitalised on in the
national interest. This is the highest calling.
 
â€œOn top of this, if the doors open to the construction of a
new generation of nuclear plants then Copeland has the expertise
to expand on that asset and, as a company, Washington having
been involved in the building of 50 nuclear plants across the
world and will be keen to get involved.
 
â€œAt the same time I agree it is risky to have all your eggs in
one nuclear basket so you have to look at the way expertise and
technologies can be used in other areas to create new jobs.â€
 
Washington not only operates the US equivalent to Sellafield â€“
the 350-square mile Savannah River site â€“ but has also
designed, built and run Americaâ€™s deep geological repository
for nuclear waste.
 
Mr Rahe said this would be a prototype for any deep repository
in the UK but wouldnâ€™t be drawn over whether it should come to
Copeland, adding: â€œItâ€™s a national decision over where one
would be.â€ 

But he did say that if involved over here they would have
community discussions on the design and how the radioactivity
would be contained with the risk of any release being
extraordinarily low.
 
*****************************************************************
 45 Guardian Unlimited: Clarke to set personal agenda with nuclear challenge to Blair
 
Patrick Wintour, political editor

Friday July 21, 2006 The Guardian             

Charles Clarke, the former home secretary, is planning a series 
of speeches setting out a personal political agenda that will set 
him at odds with the prime minister and the chancellor over civil 
nuclear power and a replacement for the independent nuclear 
deterrent Trident.

He is said to be sceptical over the safety of civil nuclear power 
and doubtful over the value of spending as much as £20bn on an 
independent deterrent.

It is thought that Mr Clarke's scepticism over the independent 
deterrent contributed to his decision not to take up the prime 
minister's offer to become defence secretary at the time of the 
last reshuffle.

Mr Clarke has been described as the "first shareholder" in the
Labour renewal project since he acted as chief of staff to Neil
Kinnock, the first Labour leader to urge reform in the eighties.
There is little doubt that he wants to stay on the front line of
politics.

He is likely to make four speeches over the coming months and is
determined to act independently in setting out what he regards
as an urgent need to give shape to a fourth term Labour agenda.

He is resigned to accusations that the speeches might presage a
leadership challenge if Tony Blair stands down in the next year.
He has frequently said that he expects Gordon Brown, as it
stands, will succeed the prime minister, and deserves to do so.

The speeches are expected to cover an environmental agenda, the
need to improve social mobility and opportunity, the future of
democracy, including Lords reform, strengthening the role of
local government, and the role of the media, and finally
possibly a speech on security.

The former home secretary strongly believes the party needs to
go further on climate change issues, as well as coming up with
more radical proposals to control transport emissions. Mr Blair
recently announced in principle a new generation of nuclear
stations, but doubts remain over the cost and the waste.

Mr Clarke quit the government in May after Mr Blair told him he
would have to leave the home secretaryship over the failure to
monitor the release of foreign prisoners. Mr Blair had been
proposing to offer him the foreign secretaryship, but Mr Clarke
had made it clear earlier to Mr Blair that he wanted to stay at
the Home Office to carry out the delivery reform he regarded as
necessary to modernise the department.

He has been bound by collective ministerial responsibility since
he joined the government as a junior education minister in June
1998. He had a brief period when he was free to think aloud as
Labour party chairman.

He has now set himself a self-denying ordinance over the Home
Office, since he does not want to be seen to be stuck in the
groove of a quarrel with his successor, John Reid, over his
inheritance.

He has said Mr Blair has the capacity to stay in office for
longer than some expect, but believes the prime minister needs
to decide this summer if he has an agenda that can take the
party forwards.
 
Useful links
British Energy
Department of Trade and Industry
British Nuclear Fuels Ltd
Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament
Greenpeace
Come Clean WMD awareness programme
UK atomic energy authority
National Radiological Protection Board
Friends of the Earth
World Nuclear Association
World Nuclear Transport Institute

[UP] 
		 	 	   
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
 46 Daily Press: Fallout sign stands sentry

Hampton Roads, Virginia - July 21, 2006 2:57 AM     

Some uncertainty exists among officials as to who can give
permission to remove the sign.

BY SETH FREEDLAND

247-7840

July 20, 2006

NEWPORT NEWS -- It's a reminder of an era long since past, a 
remnant from a war fought years ago. Even though hundreds of 
people walk past it every week in the Federal Courthouse Building 
in downtown Newport News, few appear to notice it.
 
What is it? It's a fallout shelter sign in a building that
hasn't been used as a fallout shelter in... well, nobody knows
how long it's been. But the bigger question is this: Why has no
one taken it down?
 
The answer to that question isn't obvious.
 
First some background:
 
After the United States and the Soviet Union began stockpiling
nuclear weapons in the 1950s, the Department of Defense began
promoting fallout shelters and installing fallout shelter signs
nationwide. The Defense Department ran the shelter program until
1979, when the Federal Emergency Management Agency took it over.
As the Cold War ended in the late 1980s, FEMA stopped the
shelter program.
 
Most cities removed the signs long ago, even though they weren't
told to do so, said Niki Edwards, a FEMA spokeswoman.
 
Officials in local cities confirm that, but Newport News
officials said the lack of a direct request from the federal
government caused the city to leave it up.
 
The courthouse, on 25th Street, is in disrepair, and the public
mostly goes there to use the post office. City officials said
they've told post office officials to remove any signs there,
but Postmaster Darryl Myers and Postal Service spokeswoman Susan
West said they have yet to hear anything from the city or from
FEMA.
 
"The last word we got was that we needed word from a federal
agency," West said.
 
And so the sign remains where it has been for as long as anyone
can remember. 					
 			 			 			 			
Copyright &copy;2006 Daily Press                         
*****************************************************************
 47 ENS: Timetable for Yucca Mountain Has Nuclear Waste Arriving in 2017 
 
Environment News Service (ENS)
 
AmeriScan: July 19, 2006

WASHINGTON, DC, July 19, 2006 (ENS) - The U.S. Energy Department
now says the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste dump in Nevada could
be open to accept high-level radioactive waste at the end of
March 2017. If constructed, Yucca Mountain would be the first
high-level nuclear waste geologic repository in the United
States. 

Under the schedule, announced today by Ward Sproat, director of
the Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management, the
department would submit its license application to the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission on June 30, 2008 and get authorization to
begin construction on Sept. 30, 2011. 

Testifying before the House Energy and Commerce Committee's
energy and air quality subcommittee, Sproat said construction
could be completed on March 30, 2016 and Yucca Mountain could
begin accepting nuclear waste on March 31, 2017. 

Yucca Mountain, located at the edge of the Nevada Test site, is
90 miles northwest of Las Vegas. Approved by president George W.
Bush and Congress in 2002, the repository is intended to contain
at least 77,000 tons of spent nuclear fuel and waste from
Defense Department weapons factories for thousands of years. The
high-level waste is now sited at power plants and other
facilities in 31 states. 

The Energy Department is legally obligated to permanently
dispose of the waste and the federal government has been
collecting money from nuclear power plant operators for years to
fund permanent storage, but the repository has run into many
hurdles. 

Nevada Congresswoman Shelley Berkley, who opposes Yucca Mountain
as all Nevada elected officials do, says the proposed facility
lacks an approved radiation standard that will protect human
health and the environment. 

"The Bush administration and its Republican allies in Congress
will not rest until they turn Nevada into a nuclear garbage
dump," Berkley said today. "They have wasted billions of dollars
on this flawed flight of fancy that poses an unacceptable risk
to Nevada families and our environment. While the White House
may have ordered a ‘mission accomplished’ banner to go along
with this new timetable, nothing will erase the long list of
failures hanging over the Yucca Mountain Project.” 

She points to seismic and volcanic activity at the site, legal
challenges by the state of Nevada, and nationwide opposition to
waste shipments which could release radioactive contamination in
the event of an accident or terrorist attack. 

Rather than allow waste to be dumped in Nevada, the state
Congressional delegation supports legislation that would require
waste to be kept on-site at nuclear plants in dry cask storage,
where it can safely remain for the next 100 years. 

The Yucca Mountain Task Force (YMTF) calls the timetable, "a
sober step in the right direction toward meeting the Federal
Government’s longstanding commitment to U.S. electricity
consumers and utilities, who have invested $28 billion in this
program including interest." 

The Task Force includes the Nuclear Waste Strategy Coalition,
U.S. Transport Council, U.S. Chamber of Commerce, Prairie Island
Community Council, Decommissioning Plant Coalition, and other
organizations that collectively represent state regulatory
authorities, nuclear utilities, and businesses with principal
operations throughout the United States. 

The Task Force said today, "The DOE’s plan to centralize
management of spent fuel and high-level waste at one national
facility in less than 11 years clearly stands in stark contrast
to the Senate Appropriations plan to store this material at up
to 31 sites for 25 years at the expense of ratepayers in 41
states." 

The Task Force is urging rapid enactment of the pending Nuclear
Fuel Management and Disposal Act, particularly funding reform.
"We encourage a continued dialog and focus on this legislation -
and the tremendous costs and implications of inaction - in the
balance of this Congress." 

Sproat told the subcommittee that one of his basic objectives is
to "Address the impasse and growing government liability
associated with unmet contractual obligations to move spent fuel
from nuclear plant sites." 

Sproat said independent, external assessments will be conducted
on the draft license application, several key engineering
processes, and the quality assurance programs at DOE, the
primary Yucca Mountain contractor, and several national
laboratories. Requests for proposals will be issued within the
next few weeks seeking qualified experts to conduct these
assessments. 

Copyright Environment News Service (ENS) 2006. All Rights
Reserved. 
*****************************************************************
 48 Las Vegas SUN: Editorial: Let nuke waste stay put 

Today: July 20, 2006 at 7:27:46 PDT 

Editorial: Let nuke waste stay put 

Transporting radioactive material across country is a misguided 
proposition

It was a joke when the government initially claimed that Yucca
Mountain would be accepting the nation's nuclear waste by 1998.
That year has long come and gone and this week the Energy
Department announced its new deadline for Yucca Mountain to
receive nuclear waste: March 31, 2017. The Energy Department
would like for everyone to believe it is being more realistic,
but the fact is that a 2017 opening is just as much a joke as
1998 was. 

With each passing year, additional evidence keeps accumulating
that shows how dangerous it is to ship nuclear waste thousands
of miles to Nevada and how unsafe it is to bury the waste in the
seismically active region where Yucca Mountain is located.
Nonetheless, the federal government, prodded along by the
nuclear power industry, has pushed for Yucca Mountain's opening.
The Energy Department says it will submit its Yucca Mountain
license application to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission in June
2008 - shortly before President Bush's term expires. 

The fact of the matter is that the nation's nuclear waste can be
safely stored for a century above ground, preferably where it is
generated, until a realistic way is found to render it harmless.
Indeed, a plan by Sens. Harry Reid, D-Nev., and Pete Domenici,
R-N.M., would allow for interim storage of nuclear waste at
federal sites around the country near where the waste is
generated. 

Although Domenici believes that Yucca Mountain is still needed,
we agree with Reid that once residents in those states with
nuclear power start having to wrestle with the transportation
risks of shipping waste to temporary sites, they'll be content
just to leave it where it is, let alone transporting the waste
to Yucca Mountain. That is yet one more reason it is so
disappointing to see President Bush fight so hard to approve
such a dangerous plan that would send man's deadliest waste to
Nevada. 

All contents copyright 2005 Las Vegas SUN, Inc.
*****************************************************************
 49 Platts: DOE plans to reach 2008 target for repository license application
 
Washington (Platts)--19Jul2006
 
DOE plans to "meet or beat" a June 30, 2008 target date for the 
submittal of a repository license application to NRC, DOE waste 
program director Edward Sproat said July 19 during a 
teleconference call with reporters.

Sproat was scheduled to present the department's new repository 
schedule at a House subcommittee later in the day. During the 
call, he said that DOE's ability to begin repository operations 
at Yucca Mountain, Nevada by March 31, 2017 was dependent on 
Congress passing the department's nuclear waste bill and on the 
absence of lawsuits and other stumbling blocks that could stall 
the program's momentum. 

Sproat said he also would work toward reining in the federal 
government's growing liability after DOE failed to begin 
disposing of utility spent fuel by a 1998 contract date. He cited 
settlement agreements with utilities and consensus building on 
Capitol Hill as two potential ways to reduce that liability. 

DOE has forecast the federal government's outstanding liability 
at $7 billion if a repository were to begin repository operations 
in 2017, he said.
 
Copyright © 2006 - Platts, All Rights Reserved
 [The McGraw-Hill Companies]       

*****************************************************************
 50 Platts: Nuclear waste chief asks Congress to remove repository roadblocks
 
Washington (Platts)--19Jul2006
 
If the US Energy Department is to meet its 2017 deadline to open 
the Yucca Mountain spent nuclear fuel repository, then it will 
need to be unfettered by lawsuits and assured of adequate 
funding, the agency's new top nuclear waste official said 
Wednesday.

     Congress must pass legislation removing obstacles to the 
facility's opening and annual spending bills that substantially 
meet administration requests, Ward Sproat, DOE's director of the 
Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management, said.

     On a conference call in advance of a House Energy and 
Commerce Committee hearing Wednesday on the Nevada repository, 
Sproat said: "The only people I can hold accountable are the 
Department of Energy people and organization...Congress can hold 
us accountable, but I can't reverse that."

     Meeting the deadline is "very much dependent on Congress 
enacting legislation," he added. 

     DOE has sent Congress a proposal that would set aside land 
for the repository, give DOE access to water at the site and 
direct revenues from the Nuclear Waste Fund to the Yucca Mountain 
Project.

     The energy committee's chairman, Joe Barton, 
Republican-Texas, said Tuesday there was "a reasonable chance" 
the House would pass a "fix Yucca" bill during a lame duck 
session later in 2006. The Senate, however, has no immediate 
plans to do so.

     Sproat said the department plans to "meet or beat" its June 
30, 2008, schedule for sending an application for a license to 
build the repository to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. But he 
said that factors beyond DOE's control could push back the 2017 
schedule, which he called the "best achievable."

     The project has been dogged by repeated lawsuits by the 
state of Nevada and environmental groups and Senate Minority 
Leader Harry Reid, Democrat-Nevada, who each year has prevented 
DOE from getting the money it says it needs to do its repository 
work. 

     Sproat said the US government would rack up $7 billion in 
liabilities to utilities--associated with the failure to meet 
contractual obligations to take the waste--if the repository is 
not opened up in 2017 and lawsuits are not settled before that. 
Plaintiffs in the lawsuits seeking damage have put DOE's 
potential liability at closer to $50 billion.

     Sproat also said a plan offered by Senator Pete Domenici, 
Republican-New Mexico, the Senate Energy Committee chairman and 
the chairman of the energy appropriations subcommittee, to open 
up several centralized interim storage sites would not be easy to 
carry out. Domenici proposed the plan as part of the fiscal 2007 
spending bill. 

     Sproat said licensing and building storage facilities at 
already licensed reactors takes about five years. "To go with a 
greenfield site, that isn't already licensed, the licensing 
process is going to be a lot longer and to do that at multiple 
sites, I'm not going to say that it can't be done, but its going 
to be a challenge," he added.

                    ---Dan Whitten, daniel_whitten@platts.com

     For more news, request a free trial to Platts Inside Energy 
at http://insideenergy.platts.com or subscribe now at 
http://www.platts.com/infostore/product_info.php?cPath=23_33&amp; 
products_id=61
 

Copyright © 2006 - Platts, All Rights Reserved [The McGraw-Hill 
Companies]       
*****************************************************************
 51 Technology Review: The Best Nuclear Option

Emerging Technologies and their Impact

Thursday, July 20, 2006 					
 					
By Matthew L. Wald                                                                                      

The U.S. Energy Department's fuel-recycling initiative could be
a distraction from a more achievable goal: reviving today's
nuclear industry and averting some carbon emissions in the short
term. 					

  The U.S. Energy Department is promoting far-out waste-recycling 
technologies requiring new reactor designs. But updated 
conventional designs like GE's "economic simplified boiling-water 
reactor" (shown here) are ready today. (Credit: Bryan Christie)  

Imagine a nuclear industry that can power America for decades
using its own radioactive garbage, burning up the parts of
today's reactor wastes that are the hardest to dispose of. Add
technology that takes nuclear chaff, uranium that was mined and
processed but was mostly unusable, and converts it to still more
fuel. Then add a global business model that makes it much less
likely that reactor by-products such as plutonium will find
their way into nuclear weapons in countries like Iran, even as
economical nuclear-power technology becomes available to the
whole world. 

That is the alluring triple play the Bush administration hopes
to turn with the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership (GNEP) it
unveiled earlier this year, a proposed long-term research and
development program almost as audacious as the Manhattan
Project. The basic fuel-reprocessing concepts at its heart have
been kicking around for the better part of a half-century. Now
they are being touted anew as a way to provide plentiful
carbon-free fuel for an energy-hungry world threatened by
human-induced climate change. 

Under the plan, for which the administration has requested $250
million for the fiscal year beginning October 1, the United
States and certain partner countries would process spent nuclear
fuel using new techniques that would turn some of it into more
fuel and minimize the amount requiring disposal. The United
States and its partners would also lease reactor fuel to other
countries, which would then return their spent fuel to be
reprocessed. 

The technology could exploit uranium far more efficiently:
Phillip J. Finck, associate director at Argonne National
Laboratory near Chicago, says it could extract up to 100 times
as much energy from uranium as is now possible. With the waste
now piled up at reactors around the United States, the theory
goes, GNEP could produce all the electricity the country will
need for decades, maybe even centuries -- assuming enough of the
necessary new reactors could be built. That would eliminate
about a third of all U.S. carbon dioxide emissions (roughly the
portion that today comes from fossil-fuel power plants). All
this while reducing waste and thwarting the diversion of fuel to
nuclear weapons. 

In practice, though, in the best scenario GNEP would take
decades to develop, and in the worst it might produce nothing;
it could turn out to be a nonstarter on technical grounds, or
the technology could be economically uncompetitive with other
carbon-free sources of electricity. And the program could
undermine a more modest and achievable goal: resuscitating a
nuclear industry that hasn't launched a successful reactor
project since 1974. 

Today, a public once wary of nuclear energy has opened up to it
as a possible answer to global warming. New reactor designs
similar to those used in today's commercial fleet -- but said to
be safer and more efficient -- are already approved or under
review by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Utilities are
in various stages of planning at least 16 such reactors (see
"Stirrings of Renewal" chart) and may file applications with the
NRC as early as the end of next year. 

Such reactors are the most promising near-term alternative to 
additional conventional coal plants that produce prodigious 
amounts of carbon dioxide. But it is uncertain when or if they 
will be built. If it is to happen, the industry must persuade 
investors to take a big plunge. That means convincing them that 
the plants will compete financially with other inherently 
low-carbon-emitting sources, like wind turbines, or with coal 
plants that sequester their carbon dioxide -- a technology that 
may be achievable but hasn't yet been demonstrated (see " The 
Dirty Secret ") . According to the Electric Power Research 
Institute (EPRI), a nonprofit utility research organization based 
in Palo Alto, CA, whose members include owners of coal and 
nuclear plants, the near-term reactor designs may barely be 
cheaper than the sequestration technology. And if the United 
States puts no constraints on carbon emissions, nuclear power 
will have to keep competing with conventional coal plants.

Meanwhile, the industry is still waiting for a solution to its 
chief near-term problem: what to do with waste piling up at 
existing nuclear plants. Skip Bowman, president and CEO of the 
Nuclear Energy Institute, the industry's trade group, says that 
without a speedy waste solution, today's tentative renaissance 
will "come to a screeching halt." A company cannot get a license 
for a new plant without a plan for the waste, and at this point, 
waiting for the Energy Department to open its long-delayed Yucca 
Mountain waste repository in Nevada does not constitute a plan. 
In this context, Bowman says, GNEP presents a "distraction 
factor."

Some academics agree, saying the Energy Department needs to forge 
a clear nuclear strategy and stick with it. Andrew Kadak, a 
nuclear engineer at MIT (see " DOE's Blurred Nuclear Vision ") , 
says the department has followed "zigzag policies." He counts 
GNEP as the fifth nuclear initiative in the last five years, 
citing the Nuclear Hydrogen Initiative; Nuclear Power 2010 (an 
effort to break ground on a new conventional reactor by that 
year); Generation IV (a new suite of reactor technologies, such 
as gas-cooled or lead-cooled plants); and the Advanced Fuel Cycle 
Initiative, which portions of GNEP resemble.

If the Energy Department wants to reduce carbon dioxide emissions 
by promoting the promised revival of nuclear energy, it will have 
to hurry before power companies fill the market with conventional 
coal plants that could last 50 years. GNEP may only weaken the 
department's focus, adding cost and complexity with new, untried 
technologies. 

Fast Reactors, Slow Progress

GNEP is a very long-term vision; most of the initial $250 million 
would be spent just to study how the new technologies might work 
and what they would cost. But its proponents' thinking is that we 
need a very long-term vision. The Energy Department predicts that 
1,000 nuclear power plants will be running worldwide by 
midcentury, up from 441 today. And the existing uranium supply, 
GNEP advocates argue, won't feed that many reactors.

The size of the uranium supply is in fact unknown, because 
uranium went through a long period of depressed prices, and not 
many people have been looking for it lately. According to 
industry sources, about 3 million tons are known to exist, but 
another 12 million tons or so may be out there. (An MIT study in 
2003 predicted that enough uranium was still available to build 
1,000 reactors and run them for 40 years.) To the extent that we 
may need to stretch this resource, however, GNEP offers a way -- 
at least on paper -- to recover vast amounts of additional energy 
from it.

Existing reactors generate energy through a chain reaction that 
begins when a free neutron hits an atom of U-235, an isotope of 
uranium, and splits its nucleus. The split atom throws off two or 
three neutrons; usually, one splits another U-235 atom, and 
others are absorbed by atoms of another uranium isotope, U-238, 
to form plutonium-239 and other transuranic elements (those 
beyond uranium in the periodic table). These transuranics, along 
with fission products such as cesium isotopes, are among the 
components of nuclear waste.

The trouble is, U-235 is a relatively rare isotope; natural 
uranium consists of about one part U-235 to 142 parts U-238, 
which is not as easily split. Uranium used for reactors is 
enriched so that U-235 occurs at a concentration of one part in 
20. GNEP would use uranium more efficiently by burning 
transuranics from spent fuel, after they are separated from the 
other by-products through reprocessing. It could also exploit 
some of the U-238. The key would be to develop a new generation 
of reactors, called "fast reactors."

Reactors that are cooled by water, as almost all reactors are 
today, slow the neutrons considerably after they're released by 
the chain reaction. But the reactors proposed by GNEP would not; 
they would use a different material, probably molten metal, to 
carry off the heat. (Unfortunately, the preferred metal for this 
purpose -- sodium -- burns on contact with water or air.) Like a 
billiard ball shot by a more powerful cue, the neutrons would 
pack a bigger punch -- enough to split some of the U-238 as well 
as the transuranic isotopes. 

The transuranics happen to be among the longest-lived materials 
in the waste stream, and thus some of the hardest to dispose of. 
That's what makes GNEP seem so appealing as not only a 
climate-change solution but a waste solution, too. Finck says it 
would theoretically cut the heat and toxicity of what is today 
considered waste enough to make Yucca Mountain last through this 
century, instead of being fully booked before the first fuel 
bundle is buried.

Nuclear-power pioneers in industry and government always assumed 
that fuel would be reprocessed to recover the plutonium for 
reuse. Such reprocessing is the way the Manhattan Project 
gathered plutonium for the bomb that destroyed Nagasaki. (The 
Hiroshima bomb used enriched uranium.) W. R. Grace opened a 
reprocessing center in West Valley, NY, in 1965 and later sold it 
to Getty Oil. The plant ran until 1972 and cost more than $1.6 
billion to clean up. General Electric tried, too, building a 
plant in Morris, IL, but it was deemed inoperable in 1974. Then 
President Carter banned the technology because of proliferation 
concerns.

GNEP would bring these ideas back from the grave in a much more 
ambitious form that raises such concerns once more. One worry is 
the way the bomb-usable material would be extracted from the used 
fuel. Backers say GNEP would reduce the risk of proliferation, 
because unlike the old reprocessing techniques, still used in 
some countries, the new ones would not yield pure plutonium. But 
today eight kilograms of plutonium -- the amount required to make 
a bomb -- is embedded in about a metric ton of highly radioactive 
waste; in the new system it would be diluted with only a small 
quantity of other materials. Governments or terrorists would find 
it far easier to steal the separated material and extract the 
plutonium, critics say, than they would to recover plutonium from 
today's spent nuclear fuel.

Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman, discussing GNEP, promised that it 
would "respond to the challenges of global terrorism." The idea 
is to baby-proof the fuel cycle: countries like Iran could lease 
fuel enriched to reactor levels -- 5 percent U-235 -- but not to 
bomb levels, typically greater than 90 percent U-235. They would 
send their spent fuel back to more-secure countries for 
reprocessing and a second go-round inside the advanced reactors. 
These reactors, which would burn many of the elements produced in 
the simpler reactors, would be located in stable places like 
Indiana or Florida -- or in countries that already have nuclear 
weapons.

The resulting "partnership" would make American policy on nuclear 
technology more similar to that of Russia and France, both of 
which already separate plutonium. Advocates cite this as an added 
bonus of a program that, says Finck, "will provide the United 
States with a long-term, affordable, carbon-free energy source 
with low environmental impact." 

The GNEP Mirage

But GNEP may be a mirage. For one thing, the sponsors have hardly 
any idea what it would cost; the $250 million proposed by the 
Bush administration is for a program that hopes to figure that 
out. GNEP backers say their technology will expand the supply of 
nuclear fuel enough to slash carbon emissions virtually forever 
and allow us to avoid the specter of choosing between global 
warming and very high-priced energy. It would appear, however, 
that saving money on nuclear fuel may be practical only if price 
is no object.

Richard L. Garwin, an IBM fellow emeritus and the coauthor of 
seven books on nuclear weapons and nuclear power, estimates that 
existing reprocessing plants like the one operating in France 
supply reactors with plutonium at a price of approximately $1,000 
per kilogram of uranium saved. But the market price of uranium, 
he points out, is around $100 per kilogram, and it might be at a 
temporary peak.

Fuel is only part of the cost of nuclear power, and Finck says 
reprocessing fuel and reusing it in fast reactors would add only 
about 10 percent to overall power costs. But where even that 
modest increment would come from is not clear. Frank N. von 
Hippel, a physicist and policy expert at Princeton University's 
Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs, notes 
that the United States set out to build a fast reactor in the 
1970s but dropped the effort in 1983 after France, Germany, and 
the United Kingdom built them and then abandoned them as too 
costly and difficult. And once the fast reactors were built, the 
system envisioned by GNEP might require as many as one of the 
expensive new reactors for every three ordinary ones, according 
to sponsors, depending on how effective the new reactors were. 
Garwin says of the fast reactors, "There is no conception of 
these things making their way economically."

"I hope that we'll have more reactors; I certainly hope the world 
will have more," Garwin says, referring to the types that are 
operating commercially today. "But that will only happen if it 
looks economically profitable for private industry to get into 
this area." And right now a lot of smart money -- some of it 
channeled through the Energy Department -- is going not only into 
that conventional nuclear power but also into other carbon-free 
energy sources, such as wind, solar, and coal with carbon dioxide 
sequestration.

EPRI recently analyzed the prices of zero-carbon electricity 
sources and found that if, as manufacturers claim, new reactors 
could be built for $1,700 per kilowatt of capacity (less than the 
cost in the 1980s, even before adjusting for inflation), they 
would produce electricity at about $49 per megawatt-hour. 
Although that's about two-thirds the price of biomass, and half 
the price of wind, other technologies on the drawing board may do 
the job for very little more. For about $55 per megawatt-hour, 
EPRI found, coal could be gasified and burned, and the carbon 
dioxide sequestered. Power plants running on gasified coal have 
not been commercialized yet, but conventional pulverized-coal 
plants could be built that would sequester their carbon dioxide, 
and they would produce power at about $65 per megawatt-hour. 
Those technologies are perceived by investors as lower risk, and 
the United States has hundreds of years' worth of coal.

In a few years, or a few decades, carbon taxes could be universal 
in the industrial world, a war in the Persian Gulf could make the 
price of oil double or triple, and electricity demand could surge 
-- particularly if somebody came up with a better battery that 
could be mass-produced for electric cars. But even if all those 
things pushed the world toward zero-carbon energy, we would still 
be looking for the zero-carbon energy that cost least. That could 
be nuclear energy, according to EPRI. But Steve Specker, the 
president of EPRI, expects a "horse race" between different 
zero-carbon coal technologies. 

  Playing with Proliferation

Beyond the cost issue, GNEP could reverse a successful strategy 
against proliferation, say a variety of scientists, including 
Princeton's von Hippel. He argues that reprocessing spent nuclear 
fuel creates too great a risk, even if the plutonium is mixed 
with small amounts of other materials that do not make good bomb 
fuel. Not only could plutonium from spent fuel fall into the 
wrong hands, opponents say, but reprocessing in the United States 
could encourage other countries to reprocess nuclear waste 
themselves, making their own by-products available for weapons.

Given that the United States gave up reprocessing in the 
mid-1970s for that very reason, von Hippel finds it ominous that 
now, with GNEP, the country could embrace it once more. "The 
United States has been extraordinarily successful for 30 years in 
opposing the spread of reprocessing to nonweapons states by 
making the argument 'We don't reprocess; you don't need to 
either,'" he says. That's part of the logic of the 2003 MIT 
study, "The Future of Nuclear Power," which concluded that 
reprocessing as pursued by France, Russia, and Japan did not 
provide sufficient safeguards against proliferation. It also 
concluded that the prospect of a uranium shortage wouldn't be a 
reason to move to reprocessing in the United States "for many 
years to come."

It's easy to see why the research community is delighted about 
GNEP. It represents a huge source of funds. It's a 
loaves-and-fishes trick for the industrializing world, especially 
for bureaucrats who would like to redeem the predictions, made by 
their 1950s predecessors, of power "too cheap to meter." But GNEP 
is not relevant to a revival of nuclear power. Utilities 
abandoned more than 100 reactor projects in the 1970s and '80s, 
and only now -- spurred by high fossil-fuel prices and a shift in 
public attitudes -- are they thinking of trying again. A fancy 
fuel cycle meant to support a burgeoning commercial industry is 
useless if there is no commercial industry. What nuclear power 
needs is to get up and running soon, supplanting 
carbon-dioxide-emitting sources in an economical and boring way. 
Without that, nothing will follow.

Matthew L. Wald, a reporter in the Washington bureau of the New 
York Times , has written about the nuclear industry for 27 years.


*****************************************************************
 52 PE.com: Cleanup of former rocket test site in Simi Valley delayed

Inland Southern California 

Tips and tools 	 	 	 	 	     
 
The Associated Press SIMI VALLEY 

Removal of up to 400 truckloads of contaminated dirt from the 
Santa Susana Field Laboratory will be postponed until fall so a 
public hearing can be held. 

The Boeing Co., which owns the site, was told Wednesday to put 
off removal of up to 6,500 cubic yards of soil contaminated by 
chromium and dioxin at the former rocket and nuclear energy test 
site in the western San Fernando Valley. 

The state's Department of Toxic Substances notified neighbors 
earlier this month that it had ordered the cleanup and gave the 
public until July 26 to comment. 

On Tuesday, however, state Sen. Sheila Kuehl, D-Santa Monica, and 
Assemblywoman Fran Pavley, D-Agoura Hills, requested a public 
hearing and an extension of the comment period. 

Previous dirt removal prompted local concern about the scope of
the cleanup and possible dust and contamination from the trucks
hauling it to landfills. 

A public hearing probably will be held within two months,
followed by a 30-day comment period, said Jeanne Garcia, a
spokeswoman for the Department of Toxic Substances Control. 

Authorities hope to get the cleanup under way by fall. 

"We would like the soil removed before the rainy season because
we don't want any further runoff," Garcia said. 

The Santa Susana Field Lab is a 2,800-acre facility in the Simi
Hills. From the 1940s to 1988, the U.S. Department of Energy
experimented with 10 nuclear reactors, one of which experienced
a partial meltdown. There was also an open-air pit where workers
burned radioactive and chemical waste. 

Published: Thursday, July 20, 2006 10:49 PDT This text is
invisible on the page, but this text is affected by the
invisible item's flow. This text is invisible on the page, but
this text is affected by the invisible item's flow. This text is
invisible on the page, but this text is affected by the
invisible item's flow.     

 Press Enterprise
*****************************************************************
 53 NRC: Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste; Renewal Notice
 
                        FR Doc E6-11514 
[Federal Register: July 20, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 139)] 
[Notices] [Page 41263-41264] From the Federal Register Online via 
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr20jy06-85]                         
 
AGENCY: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. ACTION: This notice 
is to announce the renewal of the Advisory Committee on Nuclear 
Waste (ACNW) for a period of two years.
 
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 
(NRC) has determined that the renewal of the charter for the 
Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste for the two year period 
commencing on July 14, 2006, is in the public interest, in 
connection with duties imposed on the Commission by law. This 
action is being taken in accordance with the Federal Advisory 
Committee Act, after consultation with the Committee Management 
Secretariat, General Services Administration.
 
The purpose of the Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste is to 
report to and advise the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) on 
nuclear waste management. The bases of ACNW reviews include 10 
CFR parts 20, 40, 50, 60, 61, 63, 70, 71 and 72, and other 
applicable regulations and legislative mandates. In performing 
its work, the Committee will examine and report on those areas of 
concern referred to it by the Commission and may undertake 
studies and activities on its own initiative, as appropriate. 
Emphasis will be on protecting the public health and safety in 
the disposal of nuclear waste and the handling and processing of
 
[[Page 41264]] nuclear materials. The Committee will undertake 
studies and activities related to nuclear materials and waste 
management such as transportation, waste determinations, 
reprocessing, storage and disposal facilities, in situ leaching 
mining, mill tailings, enrichment facilities, health effects, 
decommissioning, materials safety, application of risk-informed, 
performance-based regulations, and evaluation of licensing 
documents, rules and regulatory guidance. The Committee will 
interact with representatives of the public, NRC, Advisory 
Committee on Reactor Safeguards, other Federal agencies, State 
and local agencies, Indian Tribes, and private, international, 
and other organizations as appropriate to fulfill its 
responsibilities.
 
For Further Information Contact: John T. Larkins, Executive 
Director of the Committee, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 
Washington, DC 20555, telephone (301) 415-7360.
 
Dated: July 14, 2006.
 
Andrew L. Bates, Federal Advisory Committee, Management Officer.
 
[FR Doc. E6-11514 Filed 7-19-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P

 
*****************************************************************
 54 OpinionJournal: A Waste of Energy: Yucca Mountain hangs in nuclear limbo. 

Cross Country
 
July 21, 2006

The Federalist Patriot 

Charles Colson says: "The Patriot is a refreshing antidote to
the mainstream media establishment. 

American Spectator Editor in Chief R. Emmett Tyrrell, Jr. says,
"The Patriot is a great source for sound conservative opinion."
 
The voice of the true conservative -- Ben Stein, the Washington
Prowler and R. Emmett Tyrrell, Jr. 


BY WILLIAM TUCKER 
Thursday, July 20, 2006 12:01 a.m. EDT 

NYE COUNTY, Nev.--"As you can see, Yucca Mountain isn't really a
mountain," says our guide as we near the end of an hour-long bus
ride, about 100 miles north from Las Vegas. "Those of you who
know geology will recognize it's only a ridge." 

The Department of Energy gives monthly tours these days, anxious
to prove--after almost 25 years--it still intends to open its
Nuclear Waste Repository at Yucca Mountain someday. The trip,
however, feels like an expedition into hostile territory. The
whole state of Nevada is on the warpath over the project. 

"See those buildings off on the left there," says our guide as
we pass through the sagebrush. "They're brothels. As you may
know, prostitution is legal in certain Nevada counties. The
state has no trouble supplying them with water, but for almost a
year they wouldn't give us any. We used port-o-potties for quite
a long time." As it turns out, though, the brothels have their
upside. Anticipating a surge in business from the construction
project, they are among the few locals supporting the project. 


Right now the Yucca Mountain Repository consists of one
five-mile long tunnel dug into the side of the mountain/ridge.
In 1994, a locomotive-like device with a 25-foot drill face
started burrowing about 185 feet a day. After a mile into the
mountain it turned left for three miles, then left again,
re-emerging only five feet from its target. A video at the
visitors' gallery shows the whirling snout breaking through the
cliff face like a diver returning to the surface, as staff
members in hardhats stood and cheered. That was 1997. Nothing
much has happened since.

 The whole project is now tied down in environmental impact
statements. The Environmental Protection Agency set a standard
that radiation from the site should not exceed 15 millirems a
year (about one chest x-ray) for 10,000 years. Environmentalists
screamed that wasn't enough. They wanted a million years. A
federal court, of course, agreed. So the EPA set a standard of
350 millirems for the next million years (about two-thirds of
what people in Denver get from natural sources) and
environmentalists are screaming that isn't good enough either.
Nobody has suggested how these standards are to be monitored. 

Naturally, in trying to make such preposterous forecasts,
somebody winged some numbers somewhere and that's what made it
into the papers. Now the press and politicians are playing "the
government lied to us."

 So the bad news is that it's going to be a long, long time--if
ever--before Yucca Mountain is completed. If a license is
issued, there are seven more years of construction ahead, then
another round of federal permits. Meanwhile, Entergy, the
country's second-leading operator of nuclear plants, has
collected a multimillion-dollar settlement against DOE for
failing to take the spent fuel off its hands by 1998, as
promised by the Energy Policy Act of 1982. Others will surely
follow.

 The good news is that all this probably doesn't make much
difference. Nuclear power is about to undergo a resurgence in
this country--with or without Yucca Mountain.

 In the first place, the whole idea that there is such a thing
as "nuclear waste" is a bit of a misconception. More than 98% of
the material in a spent nuclear fuel rod is being recycled in
other parts of the world. About 97% of spent fuel is uranium: 2%
is fissionable U-235 isotope, the fuel that powers the reactor
and the other 95% is good old U-238, the same non-fissionable
isotope that comes out of the ground. It can't be used for
bombs. Sure, it has a half-life of four billion years (that's
why environmentalists think they have to sit and watch it for a
million years) but this is the same stuff that's in granite. 

No, the isotope everybody really worries about is plutonium-239,
which is formed when small amounts of U-238 absorb neutrons
during the three-year cycle. It makes up 1% of spent fuel.
Separating it and putting it back in a reactor as "mixed oxide
fuel" (uranium plus plutonium) is no problem. 

Unfortunately, back in 1976, Jimmy Carter decided that if we
extracted the plutonium, somebody might run off with it and make
a bomb. Therefore he cancelled fuel recycling. That created the
problem of "nuclear waste." France recycles all its fuel rods
and has never had any plutonium stolen. As for the remaining 2%
of the fuel rod--the highly radioactive transuranic elements and
fission byproducts--it is all stored in a single room in Le
Havre. 

The real waste problem in this country is the 10 million tons of
carbon dioxide we throw into the atmosphere every day from
coal-fired electric boilers. That constitutes almost 15% of the
world's carbon dioxide garbage, which environmentalists warn us
is causing global warming. It's ironic that these same people
are also opposing the only technology that could conceivably
replace those coal plants. 

No, it's more than ironic--it's dishonest. In "An Inconvenient
Truth," Al Gore lifts the "seven-wedge" approach to global
warming from Robert Socolow, director of the Carbon Mitigation
Initiative at Princeton. Mr. Socolow's main "wedges" are
efficiency, conservation, fuel switching, renewables, carbon
sequestration, reforestation--and "nuclear fission." Mr. Gore
conveniently leaves nuclear out. 

Even as Yucca submerges slowly beneath a raft of environmental
impact statements, alternatives are emerging. Some utilities are
using "dry cask storage," simple upright concrete containers
surrounded by a barbed-wire fence. "Dry storage is safe on the
order of 50 to 100 years," says Allison Macfarlane, co-editor of
"Uncertainty Underground," an anthology on the Yucca situation.
"Geological repositories are the ultimate solution but there's
no need to rush into one right now." The 221-member Goshute
Tribe has signed a $1 million contract to accept nuclear
material on its reservation in Utah. A group of Wyoming
businessmen want to do the same thing at Owl Creek. 

As half a dozen utilities prepare to submit applications for new
reactors to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, perhaps the best
role for DOE's effort will be to serve as a distraction. While
environmentalists continue their war dance around Yucca
Mountain, a revived nuclear industry will be solving their
global warming problem for them. 


Mr. Tucker has just completed a book on the nuclear revival.
				 	
*****************************************************************
 55 Berkley: Bush White House, GOP Declare 2017 New "Mission Accomplished"
Date for Turning Nevada into a Nuclear Garbage Dump 
 
Congresswoman Shelley Berkley - Legislation: Press Releases 2005

(Washington, DC -- July 19, 2006) Despite a new rosy scenario
from the Bush White House that envisions nuclear waste being
buried at Yucca Mountain by next decade, Congresswoman Shelley
Berkley says the proposed radioactive garbage dump 90 minutes
outside Las Vegas continues to be plagued by lingering
scientific uncertainties and a record of fraud and mismanagement
that will doom its chances of ever opening. The new timeline for
opening Yucca Mountain by 2017 is being presented to a
Congressional panel today. 

"The Bush Administration and its Republican allies in Congress
will not rest until they turn Nevada into a nuclear garbage
dump. They have wasted billions of dollars on this flawed flight
of fancy that poses an unacceptable risk to Nevada families and
our environment. While the White House may have ordered a
mission accomplished banner to go along with this new timetable,
nothing will erase the long list of failures hanging over the
Yucca Mountain Project, said Congresswoman Shelley Berkley
(D-NV), who is leading the fight in the House to stop the
proposed repository. 

"Strong scientific evidence has clearly demonstrated that Yucca
Mountain will not protect Nevadans from deadly radioactive
waste. But that has not stopped the relentless drive by the
White House to force the dump on Nevada families, regardless of
the threat. In order to make this a reality, Republican House
leaders and their Senate counterparts are supporting legislation
authored by the Bush Administration that strips away existing
safety protections and limits public opposition. The Bush Yucca
Mountain bill will nearly double the amount of nuclear waste
that will be dumped in Nevada, resulting in thousands of
additional waste shipments through Las Vegas and other cities
across the United States, Berkley said. 

"As for Yucca Mountains staggering price tag, I am amazed that
at a time when we face an $8 trillion debt, there is apparently
an endless supply of money to be spent by the Republican
Congress on President Bushs pet plan to bury Nevada in nuclear
waste, said Berkley. 

As for hurdles standing in the way of Yucca Mountain, Berkley
points to the lack of an approved radiation standard for the
proposed dump, seismic and volcanic activity at the site, legal
challenges by the State of Nevada, and nationwide opposition to
waste shipments which threaten to release radioactive
contamination in the event of an accident or terrorist attack.
Rather than allow waste to be dumped in Nevada, Berkley supports
legislation that would require waste to be kept on-site at
nuclear plants in dry cask storage, where it can safely remain
for the next 100 years. 
# # #   

        
  439 Cannon HOB Washington, DC 20515 Phone - (202) 225-5965 Fax 
- (202) 225-3119     2340 Paseo Del Prado, Suite D-106 Las Vegas, 
NV 89102 Phone - (702) 220-9823 Fax - (702) 220-9841   

*****************************************************************
 56 Ensign: ENSIGN: DOE'S YUCCA TIMELINE NOT BASED IN SCIENCE OR REALITY

07/18/2006

United States Senator John Ensign
 
Ensign released the following statement today in reaction to the
latest proposed timeline for the Yucca Mountain project by the
Department of Energy: 

â€œOnce again, DOE has set forth a timeline with no basis in
science or reality. The efforts of the entire Nevada delegation
combined with DOEâ€™s scientific defense of the Yucca Mountain
project, which has ranged from incomplete to fraudulent, have
resulted in a consensus that alternatives to Yucca Mountain need
to be considered. Senator Reid and I intend to move forward with
our legislation to force DOE to take possession of nuclear waste
where it is produced. Now is the time to be talking about such
alternatives, not an unrealistic timeline that will never
materialize.â€ 

--Senator John Ensign 

*****************************************************************
 57 Reid: REID STATEMENT REGARDING REVISED SCHEDULE FOR PROPOSED YUCCA MOUNTAIN 
NUCLEAR WASTE DUMP: 07/19/2006

US Senator Harry Reid for Nevada
 
Reid (D-Nev.) issued the following statement regarding the
official announcement of the Energy Departmentâ€™s revised
schedule for the proposed nuclear waste dump at Yucca Mountain: 

â€œI want to make sure that every Nevadan knows that the Yucca
Mountain nuclear waste dump is not even close to being built,
and I am working with my colleagues in Nevadaâ€™s congressional
delegation to make sure it never will be. The Energy
Departmentâ€™s new timeline is neither based on political nor
scientific reality, and amounts to little more than a wish list
by those hoping to turn Nevada into the nationâ€™s nuclear
dumping ground. 

â€œStoring nuclear waste is a security concern for our nation
but there is absolutely no justification for endangering the
public by rushing to build this repository that is fraught with
scientific, technical and geological problems. Thatâ€™s why we
introduced a bill that requires commercial nuclear waste to be
secured and licensed using on-site dry cask storage facilities. 

â€œWe are talking about the most dangerous substance known to
man. For the millions of dollars the Energy Department has spent
studying Yucca Mountain, all we have learned is that the site is
not safe to store nuclear waste and there is no way to safely
and securely ship 77,000 tons of it across the country. This
project is clearly unsafe and the dump at Yucca Mountain will
never open.â€ 


### 

Reno Bruce R. Thompson Courthouse & Federal Bldg 400 S. Virginia 
St, Site 902 Reno, NV 89501 Phone: 775-686-5750 Fax: 775-686-5757                         

Las Vegas Lloyd D. George Building 333 Las Vegas Boulevard South, 
Suite 8016 Las Vegas, NV 89101 Phone: 702-388-5020 Fax: 
702-388-5030                         [ /]                          

Carson City 600 East William St, #302 Carson City, NV 89701 
Phone: 775-882-REID (7343) Fax: 775-883-1980                         

Washington, DC 528 Hart Senate Office Bldg Washington, DC 20510 
Phone: 202-224-3542 Fax: 202-224-7327 Toll Free for Nevadans: 
1-866-SEN-REID (736-7343) [ /]            [ /] [ /] [ /]    
*****************************************************************
 58 News & Star: It's too hot to handle

Published on 20/07/2006
                                                                        

[Hot enough to fry an egg: Eurest cateringâ€™s Tik Downie tests 
out the old saying yesterday at the height of the heatwave in 
Carlisle]                                                                   

By Kelly Eve 

EMERGENCY calls to the ambulance service shot up by 50 per cent
yesterday as Cumbrians struggled to cope in the heatwave. 

Ambulance control received 152,999 calls yesterday â€“ compared
to only 101 exactly a week before â€“ as temperatures reached
31.4C (88F).
 
In particular, there were noticeable increases in breathing
problems, falls, heat exposure and unconsciousness.
 
Ambulance spokesman Mike Devereux said: â€œWe would urge people
to remain vigilant, sensible and remember that the ambulance
service is needed to provide emergency aid for individuals
suffering from life-threatening and serious conditions.
 
â€œWe would also advise people to be cautious about drinking too
much alcohol in the hot weather as it can be dangerous. Advice
to the public would be to take on plenty of water and eat
sensibly.
 
â€œIn addition, entering areas such as rivers, lakes or canals
may seem fun and the ideal way to cool down, but bathing in
water that you are not familiar with can put your own life at
risk as well as that of others.â€
 
Despite the added pressure on the ambulance service, bosses at
north Cumbriaâ€™s two main hospitals â€“ the Cumberland
Infirmary in Carlisle and the West Cumberland Hospital in
Whitehaven â€“ say there has been no increase in admissions.
 
But free standing air conditioning units have been installed in
all wards at the Cumberland Infirmary to help patients keep cool.
 
Extra stocks of bottled water are available to staff and water
coolers have been brought in for patients and visitors at the
city hospital and the West Cumberland Hospital in Whitehaven.
 
Headteachers were given advice on caring for pupils in the
playground. Youngsters were encouraged to take water bottles to
school.
 
Many employers were circulating official heatwave guidelines
from the Department of Health to their staff.
 
Official heatwave advice is issued by the Department of Health
once temperatures hit 30C.
 
Experts said that the temperature in Carlisle â€“ 31.4C â€“ was
equal to the previous hottest day on record, August 9, 2003.
 
But News &Star readers said they had recorded temperatures
higher than 40C in their gardens. One Workington reader said
that the temperature reached 41C in the sun, and 35C in the
shade.
 
In Keswick, the official highest temperature was 30.7C
yesterday, and even on Shap Fell it reached 27.9C.
 
Thousands of workers at Cumbriaâ€™s biggest employer â€“ the
British Nuclear Group at Sellafield â€“ were encouraged to take
more drinks breaks than normal.
 
Some pieces of machinery not vital to operations were also
shutdown in a bid to make temperatures inside more bearable for
staff.
 
In Maryport, engineers were brought in to Brookside Products to
ensure struggling machines were able to continue in the heat.
 
Resources director Richard Hodgson said that fans and the
evaporation system struggled with the extra pressure.
 
But inside the food factory, 90 per cent of the workers were
able to enjoy controlled cool temperatures of only 12C. Fans
were given to office staff.
 
Carlisle city councilâ€™s outdoor workers, such as gardeners,
were given suncream and water as well as advice on how to be
safe in the sun.
 
Animals were receiving extra care from staff at the Animals
Refuge in Wetheral near Carlisle.
 
Frosty the donkey, a 34-year-old mare, was kept cool by getting
clipped. Birds in the avaries were sprayed with sprinklers too.
 
Elsewhere, business is booming for pubs across north and west
Cumbria as people soak up the sun in beer gardens.
 
The Met Office says most of Cumbria is at â€˜high riskâ€™ of a
blaze. Camp fires are being discouraged.
 
Gritters continued to work on Cumbriaâ€™s roads to prevent tyres
getting stuck to melting surfaces.
 
For advice on how to survive the heatwave log on to
www.dh.gov.uk â€“ the Department of Health site.
 
KEve@cngroup.co.uk
 
						 						 				 				 					
*****************************************************************
 59 Whitehaven News: Leading councillor gets job with BNG 

Published on 20/07/2006

Cath Giel 

by Dave Siddall
 
COPELAND Councilâ€™s business growth portfolio holder,
councillor Cath Giel, has been given a paid-for post with
British Nuclear Group, to handle â€˜stakeholder relationsâ€™ for
the Drigg nuclear waste facility.
 
The new post was not advertised publicly.
 
Coun Giel declined to give her salary figure but said the new
post was â€œ at officer grade, not senior management level.â€
It draws on Coun Gielâ€™s eight years in public relations for
Westlakes Science Park.
 
She told the News: â€œI would declare an interest if there were
any issues regarding the low-level waste repository at Drigg.
But [council leader] Elaine Woodburn has charge of nuclear
issues. My portfolio on the executive is business growth, job
creation, training and the market towns initiatives.â€
 
Asked about whether Coun Giel would have to declare an interest,
Copeland communications officer Ian Curwen, said: â€œAll
Copeland councillors have been made aware of the need to declare
any personal or prejudicial interest in any issue that the
council is formally discussing or that is being discussed at a
meeting that the councillor is attending in an official
capacity. 

â€œA number of Copeland councillors and Executive members are
employed at, or connected to, Sellafield or British Nuclear
Group. This is no surprise because the plant is the number one
employer in Copeland.â€
 
Coun Woodburn defended Coun Gielâ€™s role. She said: â€œI
thought it needed pointing out that the business growth
portfolio is responsible for a lot of regeneration activities
but it is the leader who is responsible for strategic nuclear
issues including socio economic responsibility pre / post
decommissioning. Any councillor who works within the nuclear
industry is an asset to Copeland Borough Council as they bring
expertise and local knowledge, a necessity for Copeland.â€
 
BNG spokesman Emma Dobinson said the new post was not advertised
to the public domain, but recruitment took place â€œthrough our
agency systemâ€.
 
MEANWHILE the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority will be talking
to candidate firms bidding to take over the Drigg repository
later this summer. Brian Hough for the NDA confirmed that by the
end of the summer invitations to tender would go out to
potential bidders to run the low-level waste facility.
 
*****************************************************************
 60 Guardian Unlimited: Official Reprimanded in DOE Hacker Case
 
From the Associated Press        

[UP] 

Friday July 21, 2006 12:31 AM

By H. JOSEF HEBERT 

Associated Press Writer 

WASHINGTON (AP) - Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman has reprimanded
a senior official because 1,502 nuclear weapons workers were not
told for nearly 10 months that their Social Security numbers and
other information had been stolen by a computer hacker. 

The action came as the department's inspector general blamed a
breakdown in communications and poor management judgment for the
failures to properly respond to the theft. 

The IG report also said there was a ``lengthy delay in the
department's assessment of the impact'' of the improper
penetration of the National Nuclear Security Administration's
computers at a service center in Albuquerque, N.M., last
September. 

The incident was not made public, nor were the individuals whose
information had been compromised informed, until June. 

``These employees were not well served this department,'' said
Bodman, who apologized to them. 

The senior official who was reprimanded was not identified. 

NNSA Administrator Linton Brooks, who was interviewed
extensively by the IG investigators and named in the report, has
acknowledged that he learned of the computer file theft last
September but did not tell his superiors at the DOE. 

The IG report said Brooks, a former ambassador and nuclear arms
negotiator, ``took full responsibility'' for the failure to
inform Bodman and his deputy about the theft and acknowledged
that he was the most senior official responsible for not
following up to ensure the workers were notified of the theft. 

The IG investigators identified seven other senior officials
``who shared some level of responsibility for the way in which
the matter was handled,'' said a summary of the report. 

Bodman said there may be further disciplinary action, but he
added that with the changes he has ordered - based on the IG's
recommendations - ``the department is putting this incident
behind it and moving forward.'' 

The NNSA is a semiautonomous agency within the department and
oversees the nuclear weapons programs. The workers whose
information was compromised worked for contractors at NNSA
facilities around the country. 

The incident was first made public at a June 9 congressional
hearing. Bodman has said he and his top deputy first learned of
the theft two days before the hearing. 

At the time, Rep. Joe Barton, R-Texas, chairman of the Energy
and Commerce Committee, demanded that Brooks, the No. 3 official
at the Energy Department, be fired for not promptly informing
his superiors of the theft. 

The IG report said the ``department's handling of this matter
was largely dysfunctional'' and blamed the communications
breakdown on ``questionable management judgments'' and confusion
among some managers about lines of authority as they involved
the semi-independent NNSA and other DOE offices. 

It's not known whether any of the information on the files has
been used improperly. Nor has there been a great deal of
information made public about the theft. Although the theft
occurred from the NNSA's unclassified computer system - and not
the weapons-related classified system - the full IG report
remains classified and only a brief summary was released. 

Brooks told the congressional hearing in June that the file
contained names, Social Security numbers, date-of-birth
information, a code where the employees worked and codes showing
their security clearances. 

The IG report called on the department to establish a clear and
unambiguous policy on notifying employees of such thefts in the
future. 

It also said it needed to more clearly define who among various
DOE offices - some of which are duplicated within NNSA and other
parts of the DOE - is responsible for briefing the secretary and
deputy in such matters. 
		 	 	   
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
 61 Tri-City Herald: Council files natural resource suit 

Published Thursday, July 20th, 2006 

By Annette Cary, Herald staff writer 

The state of Oregon and the Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla
Indian Reservation are joining a lawsuit over natural resource
damage at the Hanford nuclear reservation. 

All members of the Hanford Natural Resource Trustee Council,
except those representing the federal government, now are
plaintiffs in the lawsuit or have filed to become plaintiffs. 

The council is made up of governments with authority under the
Superfund law to seek legal damages for injury to natural
resources at Hanford. 

The council works with the Department of Energy to provide input
and information for a sound clean up effort at the nuclear
reservation. 

Plaintiffs in the lawsuit are alleging that the federal
government has failed to adequately assess harm to natural
resources caused by nuclear contamination at Hanford from the
past production of plutonium for the nation's nuclear weapons
program. 

The suit asks the federal court to order DOE to follow federal
law and begin an assessment of resources, such as vegetation,
animals, ground water and the Columbia River. 

"If the Bush administration fails to perform an adequate
environmental assessment, we will do this critical work
ourselves and send the bill to the federal government," said
Oregon Gov. Ted Kulongoski, in a statement. 

But DOE has said it's too soon to look at damages, with cleanup
plans still being developed and cleanup continuing at Hanford. 

The state of Washington has countered that knowing what harm has
been caused is needed to guide cleanup and prevent the state
from having to pursue legal action later to get the site
restored. 

The suit was brought by the Yakamas and joined by the state of
Washington and the Nez Perce Tribes earlier this year after an
unsuccessful attempt at mediation ended in the suit being opened
to new filings in U.S. District Court. 

The Umatillas is the most recent party to join, after the state
of Oregon earlier this month. 

"With both Washington and Oregon in the lawsuit as well as the
Yakama and Nez Perce Tribes, the Umatilla Tribes were left with
little choice but to join," said Stuart Harris, director of the
Umatilla's Department of Science and Engineering, in a
statement. "Otherwise we might be unable to participate in any
settlement negotiations which will affect the assessment of
natural resource injuries at Hanford." 

The tribes have treaty rights reserved at Hanford for hunting,
fishing and gathering. 

The state of Oregon's interests include people living within 50
miles of the site in Hermiston, Umatilla and Boardman and the
more than 1 million Oregon residents living downstream Columbia
River from Hanford. 

"We must obtain a reliable assessment of the extent of the
contamination at Hanford," said Oregon Attorney General Hardy
Myers in a statement. "Without Oregon's participation, the
necessary assessments may not be designed in a manner, or funded
adequately, to protect the interests of Oregonians." 

© 2006 Tri-City Herald, Associated Press &Other Wire Services
*****************************************************************
 62 FCW: DOE: No privacy on agency computers
 
FCW.com

BY Michael Hardy

 Published on July 20, 2006

The Energy Department finalized a rule that essentially requires
all employees and contractors to give up any expectations of
privacy when using agency computers. 

DOE's rule, which will become effective Aug. 18, also specifies
that members of the public who interact with DOE computers via
e-mail likewise have no promise of privacy. 

The rule is an effort to create a standard agencywide policy for
access to agency computers. It follows a proposed rule that the
department published March 17, 2005, and incorporates comments
the agency received. 

A main feature of the rule is that DOE employees and contractors
must acknowledge in writing that authorized investigative
agencies can have access to computers they used during the time
of their employment and for as many as three years after they
leave. That provision previously was explained only for
employees of the National Nuclear Security Administration, an
organization within DOE. Because of NNSA's recommendation,
department officials determined it should apply agencywide,
according to the rule published July 18 in the Federal Register. 

The rule, which follows a proposed rule the department published
March 17, 2005, also specifies that: 
  + Individuals seeking access to information on DOE computers
must acknowledge in writing that there is no expectation of
privacy. 
  + Contractors are responsible for making sure that each
employee or subcontractor employee has provided the proper
written acknowledgements. A DOE contracting officer can inspect
and copy contractors' files of such acknowledgements at any time.           

FCW.com - DOE: No privacy on agency computers
 
Copyright 2000-2006 1105 Media Inc..
*****************************************************************
 63 lamonitor.com: Projects in defense bill 

The Online News Source for Los Alamos
 
MONITOR STAFF REPORT

The Senate Appropriations Committee is set to vote today on a
bill that includes $88 million in defense projects in New
Mexico. 
Sen. Pete Domenici, R-NM, said Tuesday the defense subcommittee
of which he is a member, approved the additional projects he'd
requested for New Mexico, including some that involve Los Alamos
National Laboratory.

Among them, Domenici requested and won subcommittee approval for
$8 million to support a proposal by LANL and University of
California-Los Angeles to establish a network of high-throughput
automated laboratories that can process and test deadly human
and animal pathogens. The proposal would give government
officials faster access to critical information in the event of
an infectious disease outbreak. 

Domenici's announcement said the bill now includes $2 million to
fund an HMX Requalification Program, involving LANL, TPL Inc. of
Albuquerque and the Naval Surface Warfare Center at Fort Wingate
in McKinley County. The program is described as an effort to
reduce contamination from explosives through a program of
recovering high explosive residues from demilitarized energetic
material.

LANL is part of a collaboration with eight other organizations
working on a Field Programmable Gate Array project, which would
receive $2 million in funding under provisions in the DOD bill. 
"New Mexico provides the Defense Department with a dynamic
environment for advancing the high technology that makes the
American Armed Forces the best equipped and trained in the
world. I am pleased with Senate's defense funding bill supports
work carried out in our state," Domenici said.

In all, the bill appropriates $453.5 billion for defense. 
The $88 million for New Mexico includes 27 defense projects
carried out at the national laboratories, Kirtland Air Force
Base, the Air Force Research Laboratory in Albuquerque and White
Sands Missile Range. The bill also supports the New Mexico
National Guard and research done by New Mexico universities and
defense contractors in the state.

A 2.2 percent across-the-board pay raise has been included in
the defense budget, part of $99 billion allocated for military
personnel.

In addition, $126.3 billion are proposed for operations and
maintenance, $50 billion for operations related to the war on
terror and $73 billion for Pentagon research, development, test
and evaluation activities.

The bill increases last years' funding by $14.7 billion,
Domenici's announcement stated.

The Domenici-supported projects deal with work ranging from
satellite-to-earth tagging capabilities to water supply devices
for individual soldiers.

For example, Domenici secured $1.5 million to support a Sandia
National Laboratories effort to develop a new "radar tag
emitter" that would allow existing radars to determine the
identities, location and status of "tagged" ground assets.

Among other New Mexico Projects, Domenici requested and won
approval for the following military-related water research and
development projects:

Expeditionary Unit Water Purification-II (Otero County) - $5.0
million in Navy research and development funding is provided to
continue support for the EUWP project in the Tularosa Basin on
New Mexico. The DOD research on high efficiency, compact
technology will help alleviate the significant logistical load
for transporting water. This funding will expand the research to
address complex threats to water and work toward higher capacity
and efficiencies in the system for use on aircraft carriers. The
program also involves the Bureau of Reclamation and Sandia
National Laboratories. Through DOD, Domenici gained $8.7 million
in FY2006, $11.5 million in FY2005, $5.6 million in FY2004 and
$6 million in FY2003 for this project.

Water Security Program (New Mexico State University and General
Electric) - $1.0 million to support a joint effort to develop
water treatment technologies that will reduce the cost of
desalinating ground and surface water, reduce the cost of
removing contaminants from water supplies, and provide for water
reuse. The project, associated with the Navy's desalination
project in Otero County, has military and civilian applications.

Individual Water Purifier System (IWPS) (Marine Corps and Miox
Corp., Albuquerque) - $3.5 million to develop an individual
water purifier system that will enable soldiers to gather water
from any source, anywhere and purify it into drinking water that
meets EPA standards. This additional FY07 funding for this
Marine Corp unfunded priority will allow for procurement of
additional purifier systems next year.   

  © 2003 Los Alamos Monitor All Rights Reserved.   
*****************************************************************
 64 Daily Californian: Regents Consider Third Lab Contract - 

BY Alice Tzou                                                   

Daily Cal Staff Writer                                                  

Thursday, July 20, 2006

Study to Revisit Proposition 209 

SAN FRANCISCO-The UC Board of Regents authorized UC officials to 
prepare for a bid for a third laboratory contract yesterday, just 
over half a year after the university secured stewardship of the 
Los Alamos National Laboratory. 

The university is forming a limited liability company to manage 
the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in the event that the 
regents opt to compete for the seven-year lab management 
contract. 

Last week, the Department of Energy issued its last call for 
contract bids. The university has said it will partner with 
Bechtel National Inc. if it submits a proposal, due in 90 days. 

Although the UC regents are widely expected to bid, the regents 
said yesterday they are still weighing the benefits of vying for 
the Livermore lab. 

"There are some strong similarities between the Livermore request 
for proposals and the earlier Los Alamos request for proposals," 
said UC President Robert Dynes. "It is up to the regents to 
decide ... whether we can respond in a way that is consistent 
with our mission, which is science and technology." 

	Last spring, the university nabbed the contract for the
Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, the laboratory with the
closest ties to UC Berkeley. 

	The UC system has run the three national laboratories since
their inception, but in 2003 Congress put the lab contracts up
for bid after a string of UC management problems surfaced. 

	The university won stewardship over the Los Alamos laboratory
in December after teaming with Bechtel Inc. to defeat competing
pair University of Texas and Lockheed Martin in a heated race. 

	Like the Los Alamos lab, the Livermore lab conducts classified
nuclear weapons research. The lab is also known as a hub of
biomedical and environmental research. 

	Currently, the laboratory hosts about 100 collaborative
projects with UC Berkeley researchers, although its closest ties
are to UC Davis and UC Irvine, lab officials said. 

	Some have criticized the university for participating in
nuclear weapons research. 

	UC faculty, however, have largely supported UC management of
the laboratories. A 2004 survey conducted by a faculty committee
on lab management found that faculty backed UC management by a
three to one ratio. 

	Faculty and UC officials said running the laboratories is part
of the university's public service mission. 

	"The alternative to university management is private industry
(management)," said UC Berkeley political science professor
Robert Powell, who sat on the faculty lab management committee.
"Given the alternative, I think there's a role for the
university, and I think it's appropriate and good for us to
compete." 

atzou@dailycal.org.			 			 			 		 		 			 
(c) 2005 the Daily Californian Berkeley, California                      

dailycalifornian@dailycal.org                                    
*****************************************************************
 65 KnoxNews: OR retirees to use voting influence

Group says it wants state's representatives to force DOE to 
increase pension benefits

By FRANK MUNGER, munger@knews.com 
                                
July 20, 2006                                                           

OAK RIDGE - Oak Ridge retirees say they control or influence as 
many as 50,000 votes in East Tennessee, and they're planning to 
put the heat on the state's elected officials in Washington. 

Their message, whether it comes by e-mail, phone or letter, is 
going to be pretty clear. They want senators and congressmen to 
force the U.S. Department of Energy - by pressure or legislation 
- to increase their pension benefits to offset the effects of 
inflation. 

According to leaders of the Coalition of Oak Ridge Retired 
Employees, a pay raise will not require a special appropriation 
or put a greater burden on the federal budget. 

David Reichle, the group's president and a former associate
director at Oak Ridge National Laboratory, said the Oak Ridge
pension fund currently has a surplus - money above and beyond
the liabilities - that approaches half a billion dollars. 

"The money is sitting there," Reichle said Wednesday to more
than 500 retirees who turned out for the group's annual meeting
at the Oak Ridge Mall. 

The Department of Energy recently came out with a proposal to
revamp the pension programs for DOE contractors nationwide,
including those in Oak Ridge, and the federal agency claims that
the benefit costs are growing like crazy - necessitating a
conservative approach. 

Ingrid Kolb, director of DOE's Office of Management, came to the
area last month for a meeting, and she bluntly told the retirees
that a pay raise was not forthcoming - at least not any time in
the foreseeable future. 

CORRE accused DOE of using false assumptions and misleading
data, and that's why the group is taking its cause to the
politicians. 

Representatives from the region's congressmen attended
Wednesday's meeting, as did some of the other candidates running
for those seats. All expressed support for the retirees in some
fashion. 

What drew the ire of the retirees was that neither of
Tennessee's U.S. senators was represented at the meeting. Sen.
Lamar Alexander came under fire from several speakers, including
Pete Lotts - the group's legislative chair. 

"He needs to be activated," Lotts said. "His letters (in
response to the group's requests for help) have not been very
responsive." 

Jim Atherton, a retiree from ORNL, said, "We need the man from
Maryville (Alexander) to be more like Pete Domenici." 

Domenici, a Republican senator from New Mexico, has been heavily
influential in DOE affairs and stalled DOE's attempt to
implement a new pension program this year. 

CORRE's leaders said they have more than 2,600 members and
represent about 12,000 Oak Ridge retirees or their surviving
spouses. Including relatives and others with close ties, their
voting bloc is potentially powerful, they said. 

Senior writer Frank Munger may be reached at 865-342-6329.

© 2006 - Knoxville News Sentinel
*****************************************************************
 66 KnoxNews: Uranium from Argentina arrives at Y-12

Effort is part of strategy to curb availability of
weapons materials

By FRANK MUNGER, munger@knews.com 
                                
July 20, 2006

OAK RIDGE - About 3.7 kilograms of weapons-grade uranium 
recovered from Argentina have been shipped to Oak Ridge for 
secure storage, and staff members at the Y-12 National Security 
Complex played a key role in the project, officials confirmed 
Wednesday. 

The project in Argentina is part of an overall U.S. strategy to 
reduce the worldwide availability of materials of potential use 
in nuclear weapons. 

The enriched uranium was contained in 24 fuel assemblies, which 
were removed from a research reactor in Buenos Aires, repackaged, 
and delivered to Y-12 earlier this week. 

Morris Hassler, manager of Y-12's Global Nuclear Security Group,
said Y-12 workers participated in every stage of the project
over the past 18 months: contract negotiations, characterizing
the nuclear materials at the Constituitentes nuclear complex in
Buenos Aires, packaging the uranium for safe shipment, and
arranging the high-security transportation to Oak Ridge. 

Trent Andes of Y-12 was the project manager, Hassler said. 

The National Nuclear Security Administration announced the
project in Washington after the material had safely arrived in
the United States, but there was no mention of Y-12 or the Oak
Ridge involvement. 

According to Hassler, there were a number of project delays
while dealing with various issues through the U.S. State
Department. 

"We had shipping containers on the ground (in Buenos Aires) last
September, but we got the export license out of Argentina just
this last week," the Y-12 official said in a telephone interview
from Nashville, where he was attending a conference. 

The project was a joint effort between the National Nuclear
Security Administration and Argentina's National Atomic Energy
Commission. 

Argentina has been cooperating on a number of nonproliferation
projects, the NNSA said. 

In a prepared statement, NNSA Administrator Linton Brooks said
the shipment of enriched uranium was part of a "broad global
effort to reduce the risk of terrorists acquiring nuclear
material." He applauded Argentina's move to eliminate
weapons-making materials from civilian programs. 

The fuel assemblies containing highly enriched uranium were
removed from an inactive nuclear reactor, and the United States
is helping Argentina convert another reactor to use low-enriched
uranium fuel, which cannot be used for a nuclear weapon. 

Instead of weapons-grade uranium - 90 percent U-235, the fissile
isotope of uranium - the new reactor fuel will be 19.75 percent
U-235, Hassler said. 

Y-12 is the principal U.S. repository for highly enriched
uranium. The Oak Ridge facility provided the previous uranium to
Argentina and it will make available future quantities for fuel
at the lower enrichment, Hassler said. 

Hassler would not comment on whether McGhee Tyson Airport was
used for delivery of the uranium from Argentina, citing security
concerns. However, he confirmed that the air transportation was
commercial. The uranium was trucked to Y-12 Tuesday, he said. 

The Oak Ridge plant has received nuclear materials from foreign
countries in the past, including high-profile projects involving
Kazakhstan and Libya. 

"There will be more of these to come," Hassler said. 

He declined to specify countries involved in the
nonproliferation projects, but he said some are in negotiations. 

Senior writer Frank Munger may be reached at 865-342-6329.

      © 2006 - Knoxville News Sentinel
    
*****************************************************************

NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 this 
material is distributed without profit or payment to those who 
have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for 
non-profit research and educational purposes only. For more 
information go to: 
<http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml> 
    
*****************************************************************