***************************************************************** 07/27/06 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 14.177 ***************************************************************** 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 AFP: Iran remains a 'grave' world threat - Bolton 2 Guardian Unlimited: 8 Countries to Hold Talks Without N. Korea 3 AFP: Rice at Asian forum amid NKorea standoff 4 AFP: North Korea says no nuclear talks until US lifts sanctions - 5 US: SF Chronicle: The Middle East: Spun again? 6 AFP: India warns against changes to US nuclear deal - 7 UPI: U.S. officials get Libya to return uranium 8 AU ABC: US Air Force begins bombing missions in NT 9 Guardian Unlimited: House OKs Nuclear Fuel, Tech to India 10 Guardian Unlimited: Government backs off from replacing Trident miss 11 Guardian Unlimited: First trial over Libya's nuclear bomb plan colla 12 Times of India: Pak has 25-50 nuclear weapons - Report- 13 Economic Times: N-deal: It's a "monumental piece of legislation" 14 Times of India: Indo-US nuke deal not in India's interest - Advani- 15 Independent: India could make 50 warheads under nuclear deal with Bu 16 Asia Times: India-US nuclear deal crosses major hurdle 17 AP: Kazakhstan, Russia in Nuclear Power Deals 18 IRNA: Uproar in Indian parliament over Pakistan's N-plans NUCLEAR REACTORS 19 IPS-English ENVIRONMENT: Heat Wave Shows Limits of Nuclear 20 US: [NukeNet] Sidney Goodman Re APP July 26 Oyster Creek faces new 21 US: [NukeNet] APP July 27, 2006 NRC faults Oyster Creek staff 22 US: NRC: NRC to Discuss 2005 Performance Assessment for Braidwood Nu 23 US: Philadelphia Inquirer: Limerick's plans to store nuclear waste r 24 US: AP Wire: AP Interview: TVA set to pursue 2nd nuclear reactor at 25 US: NRC: NRC Proposes $65,000 Fine for Violation at Seabrook Station 26 US: Platts: TVA board expected to approve nuclear-related contracts 27 The Local: Nuclear plant shut after incident 28 Mos News: Russian Embattled Atomic Minister Sought in U.S. Wants Tri 29 US: IndyStar.com: Nuclear power problems - waste, radioactive half-l 30 US: Rutland Herald: Vermont Yankee's spotty history 31 US: APP.COM: NRC faults Oyster Creek staff | 32 Kyiv Post: Kazakhstan, Russia strike deals to set up 3 nuclear power 33 IPS: ENVIRONMENT: Heat Wave Shows Limits of Nuclear Energy 34 US: The Day: Millstone Malfunction Mistakenly Reports Unit Shutdown 35 AFP: House backs US-India nuclear energy bill NUCLEAR SECURITY 36 Guardian Unlimited: Empty Serb Reactor Inviting for Terrorists 37 US: CFR: Preventing Catastrophic Nuclear Terrorism NUCLEAR SAFETY 38 US: Seattle Times: Study ties thyroid ills to Hanford 39 US: NRC: [Docket No. 52-009-ESP; ASLBP No. 04-823-03-ESP] NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE 40 US: Bradenton Herald: Each side at Tallevast hearing makes small gai 41 US: The State: Lawmakers scramble to save MOX plant 42 US: The Onion: Nuclear Waste Accumulating | 43 Platts: Russia won't import foreign-origin spent fuel 44 US: Concord Monitor: We don't need another radioactive dump 45 US: IRNA: India to double uranium capacity this year 46 US: Salt Lake Tribune: Flooding spurs new tailings concerns 47 US: NRC: Request for Comments on the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's 48 Scotsman: 3bn to clean up MoD nuclear sites 49 Scotsman: More new buildings go up at Dounreay 50 Scotsman.com: Scotland - More new buildings go up at Dounreay 51 US: UPI: Abandoned radioactive material found 52 US: Fontana Herald News: Congress approves funding for perchlorate c 53 US: Australian: ALP campaign falls short of critical mass PEACE US DEPT. OF ENERGY 54 DOE: DOE Distributes Energy-Saving Tools to Help Manufacturers Save 55 DOE: Secretary Bodman Hosts Iraqi Ministers of Oil and Electricity 56 SF New Mexican: State cashes in on new LANL management 57 Oak Ridger: TVA wants to study finishing 2nd nuclear reactor 58 DOE: Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board, Paducah 59 UPI: U.S. has 76 tons of surplus nuke material 60 Knox News: Strike means more oversight for nuclear firm 61 Rocky Mountain News: Justice elusive for Flats workers ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** FULL NEWS STORIES ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** 1 AFP: Iran remains a 'grave' world threat - Bolton Thu Jul 27, 12:49 PM ET WASHINGTON (AFP) - US Ambassador to the United Nations" /> John Bolton said Washington remains focused on the "grave and direct" threat posed by Iran" /> 's nuclear program, despite the distraction created by the recent crisis in the Middle East. "While the crisis in the Middle East is, of course, a priority at the moment, we are ... currently involved in intense negotiations on the subject of Iran's pursuit of nuclear weapons," Bolton told the US Senate's Foreign Relations Committee, shortly before the UN Security Council announced it would delay taking up the issue of Iran's nuclear program. "We have expended considerable diplomatic efforts through a variety of venues to try to persuade Iran that its pursuit of nuclear weapons makes it less, not more secure," he said at a hearing on extending his tenure as UN ambassador. "Iran has consistently rebuffed those efforts, most recently just last week in Paris, which led to the collective decision of the P-5 Foreign Ministers, plus Germany, that it is now time for the Security Council to take action," said Bolton. His comments came as six major powers on Thursday postponed a meeting on Iran's nuclear program, with diplomats linking it to the UN Security Council's failure to pass a statement on the deaths of four UN peacekeepers this week. No official reason was given for the postponement of the meeting by the five UN Security Council permanent members -- Britain, China, France, Russia and United States -- and Germany to discuss a resolution against Iran. Bolton told the Senate panel Thursday that the urgency posed by Tehran's atomic program is undiminished. "Iran's unrelenting pursuit of nuclear weapons poses a grave and direct threat to international peace and security. In tandem with their pursuit of even longer-range ballistic missiles, we must treat the threat they pose to our friends and allies in the region and beyond with the utmost gravity," Bolton told lawmakers. "This is particularly clear in light of the inflammatory rhetoric of Iran's leader, who is recklessly calling for Israel" /> to be 'wiped off the map' and even questions the tragic events of the Holocaust," he said. "The discussions are still ongoing," Bolton added, "but I am hopeful that the Council will recognize the threat Iran's program poses to international peace and security and take appropriate action." Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The ***************************************************************** 2 Guardian Unlimited: 8 Countries to Hold Talks Without N. Korea From the Associated Press [UP] Thursday July 27, 2006 3:01 PM AP Photo KL139 By WILLIAM FOREMAN Associated Press Writer KUALA LUMPUR, Malaysia (AP) - Eight nations will discuss North Asian security issues Friday in lieu of formal talks on North Korea's nuclear and missile programs, but North Korea will not attend, officials said. The participants include five nations that had been negotiating with North Korea - the United States, South Korea, China, Japan and Russia - plus Australia, Malaysia and Canada, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Jiang Yu said. ``The eight countries will exchange views on regional issues that they are concerned about,'' she said. U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Christopher Hill confirmed the eight-party talks. North Korea has refused to attend formal six-party talks that many had hoped would be revived on the sidelines of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations' annual security meeting Friday. The wider regional meeting appeared intended as a compromise to give Pyongyang a face-saving way to return to the negotiating table while technically maintaining its boycott of the six-party talks. Jiang expressed the hope that North Korea still could decide to attend. ``We hope the North Koreans can come and sit down together with us,'' she said. North Korea prompted international condemnation by launching seven missiles this month. Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006 ***************************************************************** 3 AFP: Rice at Asian forum amid NKorea standoff by Danny Kemp Thu Jul 27, 7:50 AM ET KUALA LUMPUR (AFP) - US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice" /> has arrived for a regional security forum in Malaysia holding out little hope that North Korea" /> would return to stalled talks on its nuclear weapons. Rice said en route to Kuala Lumpur from a failed Middle East peace conference in Rome that she did not anticipate any resumption here of the six-nation talks that have been on ice since November. Her North Korean counterpart, Foreign Minister Paek Nam-Sun, was due here later Thursday, with no indication that he would respond to diplomatic efforts to get the communist country to the negotiating table. "I don't anticipate any six-party talks," she told reporters aboard her plane. Top US nuclear negotiator Christopher Hill said the other five countries involved -- South Korea" /> , Japan, China, the United States and Russia -- were willing to take part but the North was "lost on the way." "We tried to invite the DPRK to come to a six-party meeting and they showed no interest and I think we therefore are unfortunately not going to be able to have any kind of six-party meeting here," Hill told reporters, referring to the North's official name, the Democratic People's Republic of Korea. However, China remained optimistic that its high-profile campaign to bring North Korea back to the meeting table still had a chance of success. "We very much hope that North Korea will participate," said foreign ministry spokeswoman Jiang Yu. North Korea, which has already dominated an Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) foreign ministers meeting this week, walked out of the three-year-old talks last year in protest over US financial sanctions. Pyongyang provoked further outrage as well as condemnation by the UN Security Council when it test-fired seven missiles on July 5 that splashed into the Sea of Japan (East Sea). Rice has said that while in Malaysia she would follow up on the North Korea issue with the other participants in the six-way talks. Russia's Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov is also due in Kuala Lumpur along with the European Union" /> 's foreign policy chief Javier Solana. Police said snipers, sniffer dogs and hundreds of police were in place around the conference venue next to Kuala Lumpur's iconic Petronas towers. The South Korean, Japanese and Chinese foreign ministers joined forces Wednesday and Thursday to breathe life into the nuclear talks, despite underlying bilateral tensions. "The two most important things for us are that North Korea should not take extra measures to worsen the situation and also that the six-way nuclear talks should resume as soon as possible," officials quoted South Korean foreign minister and potential future UN chief Ban Ki-Moon as saying. The Asian powers and the United States have been considering other ways to tackle the issue, although they have disagreed about going ahead without North Korea, with both China and South Korea opposing such a move. US envoy Hill suggested that the talks could be broadened to include other countries, following a South Korean suggestion for multilateral talks also including Malaysia, Australia and Canada. "We are hoping to have a broader discussion on security in Northeast Asia," he said. China, North Korea's major ally, warned late Wednesday it was "seriously concerned" about the situation on the Korean peninsula. Earlier it had said that Friday was pencilled in as a potential date for the talks. Pyongyang dramatically upped the stakes this week, branding Rice a "political imbecile" in retaliation for her description of the missile launches as "completely irresponsible" and "dangerous." Meanwhile the US Secretary of State will face renewed pressure on the Middle East in Asia even as she canvasses support for US positions on North Korea, Myanmar and Iran" /> 's nuclear ambitions. Asian ministers have condemned Tuesday's Israeli air strike on a United Nations" /> post in southern Lebanon, which killed four UN observers, and said they would raise the issue with Rice. Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The ***************************************************************** 4 AFP: North Korea says no nuclear talks until US lifts sanctions - by Jun Kwanwo Thu Jul 27, 1:34 PM ET KUALA LUMPUR (AFP) - North Korea" /> refused to rejoin nuclear talks until the United States drops financial sanctions, dimming hopes of reviving the stalled discussions at a security meeting here. The communist state's announcement comes despite days of hectic diplomacy aimed at dragging Pyongyang back to the negotiating table on the sidelines of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) Regional Forum. US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice" /> , also in Malaysia, had earlier said she did not expect a positive response from North Korea which carried out controversial missile tests this month. "There can be no such a thing as six-way talks," said Chung Sung-Il, a spokesman for the North Korean delegation to the forum, after the country's Foreign Minister Paek Nam-Sun arrived in Kuala Lumpur. "As we have already said, the United States should first lift its financial sanctions on us... if they want to see the six-way talks resume at an early date," Chung added. Foreign Minister Paek refused to answer reporters' questions. Wearing a dark suit and apparently suffering from a limp, an electric airport buggy whisked him through the arrivals hall to a waiting North Korean embassy car. North Korea walked out of the talks in November after Washington accused a Macau-based bank of helping Pyongyang launder earnings from fake US currency, and told US financial institutions to stop dealing with the bank. The US says the clampdown on the bank is a criminal matter and should not be linked to the nuclear issue. Financial sanctions are a sensitive topic with North Korea, whose accounts at the Bank of China have reportedly been frozen in a move that shows Beijing's frustrations with its unpredictable long-time ally. Chinese officials were due to meet their North Korean counterparts on Friday, the latest in a series of two-way meetings between the major players in the nuclear standoff. US officials had earlier played down the likelihood of North Korea attending the six-way talks, which group North and South Korea" /> , China, Japan, the United States and Russia. "I don't anticipate any six-party talks," Rice told reporters aboard her plane while en route from a failed Middle East peace conference in Rome. Pyongyang earlier in the week branded Rice a "political imbecile" in retaliation for her description of the seven missile test launches on July 5 as "completely irresponsible" and "dangerous." Top US nuclear negotiator Christopher Hill said the other countries involved in the talks should proceed without North Korea. "(We have) five parties already, it's just the sixth that's lost on the way. So we are hoping to have a broader discussion on security in Northeast Asia," he said. However, China, which has been spearheading the drive to bring its ally back to the negotiating table, said it was still holding out hopes for a six-nations meeting on Friday. "Whatever the situation is, China will absolutely not give up, we will insist on making efforts towards the six-party talks progress," said foreign ministry spokeswoman Jiang Yu. "We hope other parties will make efforts together with China for that aim." Tokyo, which sponsored a UN Security Council condemnation of the reclusive regime after the missile launches, also said North Korea's statement did not spell the end of the talks. "Japan does not jump to react every time North Korea says something," a Japanese foreign ministry spokesman said. "Japan is in the position of waiting, if China can successfully hold the six-way talks Japan will be there, but if not Japan won't." Anticipating that the North Koreans would refuse to come back to the talks, the Asian powers and the United States have been considering other ways to tackle the issue. US envoy Hill suggested that the talks could be broadened to include other countries, following a South Korean suggestion for multilateral talks also including Malaysia, Australia and Canada. Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The ***************************************************************** 5 SF Chronicle: The Middle East: Spun again? Edmund Burke III Thursday, July 27, 2006 What a delightful concoction is the word "spin." It sounds so innocent. For those who practice the arcane art of the focus group and market survey, the word is itself a demonstration of marketers' power to make bad news go away. Unfortunately, the news from the Middle East is grim and getting grimmer by the minute. We've barely recovered from being spun into backing the war in Iraq. Did Saddam Hussein have nukes? (There is no evidence he did, and our government knew it at the time). Was there an alliance between Hussein and al Qaeda? Most Americans (including Vice President Dick Cheney) continue to believe this, even though it is a patent untruth. Spin works. Did Hezbollah invade Israeli territory and capture two Israelis on July 12? This apparent fact has been called into question by contemporary news reports by the Associated Press, Agence France-Presse and French Yahoo. These reports suggest the opposite occurred, that is to say, Israel invaded Lebanon -- that two Israeli soldiers crossed into southern Lebanon near Aita al-Shaab, where the soldiers were captured by Hezbollah. Spun again? The incident remains murky, but given the stakes, the question needs to be raised. As the conflict in Lebanon enters Week Three with no end in sight, even raising this question may seem beside the point. Most people have allowed themselves to be convinced that Hezbollah terrorists attacked Israel and must be punished. Spin works. Which brings us back to Iraq, where it all started. During the Iraq war, we were told by our leaders: We have a plan to remake the Middle East. Trust us. First Afghanistan, then Iraq. Next Lebanon and Syria. But why stop there: "Real men go to Tehran," to quote a 2003 statement of a senior Bush official. Echoing the neoconservatives who advise President Bush on foreign policy, U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice speaks of the need for "creative chaos" to remake the Middle East, one step at a time. As we have discovered at our cost in blood and treasure, erasing history is hard work. Still, the idea of remaking the Middle East, as a viable goal of U.S. foreign policy, has not gone away. Indeed, with the onset of the conflict in Lebanon, it is clear that the idea is very much alive. As the relentless pounding of Lebanon continues day after day, Rice pleads for the world to understand that out of this "creative chaos" the outlines of a "new" Middle East are already on the horizon. It is not yet the time for peace. The terrorists must be taught a lesson. But how plausible is this? In the opinion of those in the U.S. military and the CIA with real knowledge of the realities of the Middle East, these objectives are not feasible. Yet U.S. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and Cheney have continued to push. So alarmed are some in the military that a group of senior officers publicly dissented from being "tasked" to develop a first-strike nuclear option for Iran this spring, the so-called revolt of the generals reported by Seymour Hersh in the April 17 New Yorker magazine. It is now clear that the generals, despite risking their careers, may not have won. Are Americans being spun into backing an even more reckless adventure in the Middle East? Can history be so easily wished away? What price are we willing to pay as a society for a new Middle East? It is imperative that we ask ourselves these questions, and demand some answers from our leaders. Edmund Burke III is a professor of Middle East history at UC Santa Cruz. Page B - 9 The San Francisco Chronicle] ***************************************************************** 6 AFP: India warns against changes to US nuclear deal - Thu Jul 27, 12:53 PM ET NEW DELHI (AFP) - India said it would not accept any changes by the US Senate to a controversial US-India nuclear energy agreement, a day after the US House of Representatives approved the deal. "The US legislative process is still on. There is the Senate bill," Prime Minister Manmohan Singh told India's upper house of parliament after the US House of Representatives cleared the deal by a 359-68 vote. "If the US legislative process leads to an end product not consistent with what we have commited to, that will be the determining factor of what we do next," he said. On Wednesday Singh said India would "never compromise in a manner which is inconsistent with the provisions of the joint statement" that he and US President George Bush" /> George Bushsigned in July 2005 to share civil nuclear technology. Indian lawmakers have voiced concern that the Senate will attach riders to the agreement that would impose more curbs on India's nuclear program in addition to those agreed during negotiations. The foreign ministry said in a statement that the final legislation "must not deviate" from the agreement. Singh told lawmakers that he had asked the US administration for assurances that the "goalposts are not tampered with." The United States has withheld its civil nuclear know-how from India since 1974 when it conducted its first nuclear test. India tested nuclear weapons in 1974 and 1998 and, as a result, is banned by the United States and other major powers from buying fuel for atomic reactors and other related equipment. Democratic and Republican leaders in both houses of Congress have expressed strong support for the bill. Supporters see the deal as a sign of a geopolitical re-alliance following the Cold War, one which allows India to jump-start its quest for alternative energy, as its economy booms. New Delhi relies on imported oil for some 70 percent of its energy needs. But some US politicians have expressed doubts about extending civil nuclear technology to India, which is not a member of the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, without first putting the most stringent safeguards in place. Although attempts to pass amendments that would place further restrictions on India's nuclear program failed in the House, the Senate is expected to take a tougher stance. "The next step will be much trickier for us," C. Raja Mohan, a strategic analyst, told Indian news channel NDTV. "The Senate bill has some objectionable components to it and for us now the challenge is to make sure the language gets diluted or removed." India's main opposition Bharatiya Janata Party has said it is concerned the agreement would make the country "perpetually dependent" on the United States for all its nuclear energy initiatives. Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The ***************************************************************** 7 UPI: U.S. officials get Libya to return uranium United Press International - Security &Terrorism - 7/27/2006 11:45:00 AM -0400 WASHINGTON, July 27 (UPI) -- U.S. officials have removed 6.6 pounds of highly enriched uranium, or HEU, from Libya that could be used for a nuclear weapon. The material was of Russian origin and was returned to Russia from the Tajoura research reactor in Libya, the Department of Energy's National Nuclear Security Administration said in a statement Thursday. "International security relies on our ability to work together with other countries and partners to protect and safeguard nuclear material around the world," said NNSA Administrator Linton F. Brooks. "Libya's cooperation and commitment was key to this joint nonproliferation effort. It is a clear indication of Libya's continued commitment to rid itself of weapons of mass destruction and proliferation-sensitive materials." The two-day operation to remove the HEU was conducted jointly under NNSA's Global Threat Reduction Initiative by the United States, Libya, the Russian Federation, and the International Atomic Energy Agency, the NNSA said. At the Tajoura Research Center, the HEU was loaded into three specialized transportation containers provided by the Russian Federation. NNSA technical experts and IAEA safeguards inspectors monitored the process to load the fuel into canisters. The containers were airlifted under guard from an airport near Tripoli, Libya, to a secure facility in Russia. The HEU will be down blended into low-enriched uranium, or LEU, the statement said. Since renouncing its nuclear weapons program in 2003, Libya has been cooperating with the United States on a wide range of nonproliferation activities. This latest shipment is part of a multi-step project to remove all Russian-origin HEU material from Libya. An earlier unannounced shipment of 37.4 pounds of HEU was returned to Russia in 2004. © Copyright 2006 United Press International, Inc. All Rights * Email: * Comments: ***************************************************************** 8 AU ABC: US Air Force begins bombing missions in NT Thursday July 27, 05:19 PM The United States Air Force has given the first details of new long range missions that will see it dropping bombs on the Northern Territory in up to six separate exercises a year. The first exercise started on Tuesday, with two stealth aircraft flying non-stop return trips to Guam and releasing two concrete-filled bomb casings at the Delamere Range near Katherine. Only one of the B-2 bombers has actually touched down in Australia, the others are being refuelled in the air. US Air Force Colonel Bob Wheeler says the stealth bombers can carry nuclear weapons, but that will not happen during the training exercises. "No. That will never be done. The weapons that we will be using here are the ones that are approved for your ranges," he said. "And those do not include anything with depl- (sic) uranium or any kind of replicas or regular nuclear weapons. There will be nothing in that area." Bombing accident One of the Territory's top Defence commanders says he will try to find out why an official report into a bombing accident in the Northern Territory has been suppressed. The Defence Department has repeatedly refused to release the official report into how a US bomb nearly hit a control tower at the Delamere Range last August. Today, as the US announced the details of the new exercises, Commodore Campbell Darby said last year's incident has triggered changes. "You've got to understand it's actually a very barren environment there," he said. "Even just making some of the way points that air craft pilots will identify with clearer, so they know where they are. "A lot of procedural changes to do with the briefing of pilots which has been tightened up considerably, control arrangements for aircraft over the range, so there are a number of enhancements." Copyright © 2006 Australian Broadcasting Corporation ***************************************************************** 9 Guardian Unlimited: House OKs Nuclear Fuel, Tech to India From the Associated Press [UP] Thursday July 27, 2006 3:16 AM By FOSTER KLUG Associated Press Writer WASHINGTON (AP) - The House voted overwhelmingly Wednesday to allow U.S. shipments of civilian nuclear fuel and technology to India, handing President Bush a victory on one of his top foreign policy initiatives. Rep. Tom Lantos said the proposal, which reverses decades of U.S. anti-proliferation policy, is ``a tidal shift in relations between India and the United States.'' ``We are at a hinge of history, as we seek to build a fundamentally new relationship,'' said Lantos, the top Democrat on the House International Relations Committee and a strong champion of the plan. The House approved the measure 359-68. The Senate has yet to vote on the plan, which must clear several more hurdles before nuclear trade between the two countries could begin. For Bush to implement his accord with India, lawmakers must first exempt New Delhi from U.S. laws that bar nuclear trade with countries that have not submitted to full international inspections. Congressional action is needed because India built its nuclear weapons program outside the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, which provides civil nuclear trade in exchange for a pledge from nations not to pursue nuclear weapons. Before the vote, lawmakers made last-ditch attempts to attach conditions they said were needed to make sure the United States was not supporting a massive increase in India's nuclear stockpile. Supporters of the accord quashed proposals they said would cause India to balk and the delicately worded deal to collapse. Several lawmakers strongly questioned the initiative, arguing that it would undermine the world's premier nonproliferation treaty. Rep. Ed Markey, D-Mass., portrayed the plan as a ``historic failure'' that ``pours nuclear fuel on the fire of an India-Pakistan nuclear arms race.'' Pakistan, India's nuclear-armed archrival and neighbor, has not been offered a similar deal by the United States. Bush and Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh agreed in March to a plan that would allow civil nuclear trade with India in return for safeguards and inspections at India's 14 civilian nuclear plants; eight military plants would be off-limits. Supporters said the deal strengthens a strategic relationship with a friendly country that has long maintained a responsible nuclear program. It would also provide clean energy to a country desperate to fuel a booming economy, they said. Rep. Dennis Kucinich, D-Ohio, disagreed, saying that ``at this time of great crisis in the world, we should be looking for nuclear disarmament, nuclear abolition - saving the world, not ramping up for Armageddon by nuclear proliferation.'' ``We're going in the wrong direction here,'' he said. While the initiative enjoys broad support from lawmakers in both political parties, several more steps remain. The Nuclear Suppliers Group, an assembly of nations that export nuclear material, must decide whether to make an exception for India. Officials from India and the U.N. nuclear watchdog must also negotiate a safeguard agreement. Once technical negotiations on an overall cooperation agreement are settled between India and the United States, the Congress would then hold another, expedited vote. Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006 ***************************************************************** 10 Guardian Unlimited: Government backs off from replacing Trident missile fleet Richard Norton-Taylor Thursday July 27, 2006 The Guardian The government yesterday gave the strongest indication yet that it will maintain Britain's existing fleet of Trident submarines rather than provoke more controversy by deciding on a new nuclear missile system. It revealed its latest thoughts in response to a report by the Commons defence committee which chastised the government for not explaining "the purpose and continuing relevance of nuclear deterrence". Replacing the Trident missile system and four submarines could cost as much as £25bn. The government said yesterday it now believed it "would be possible" to continue operating the existing submarines beyond the original timescale. Labour's last election manifesto included a pledge only to retain the nuclear deterrent, a commitment repeated last month by Gordon Brown. His speech provoked a furore but the chancellor was careful not to commit himself to any plan to "replace" the Trident system if, as expected, he becomes prime minister. The Treasury suggested at the time that no decision had been made by Mr Brown or the cabinet on how to replace Trident, or on the estimated cost to the taxpayer. A range of options was available, with a full replacement costing the most, retaining the existing system the least. The submarines were designed to last about 25 years, which means they would start being withdrawn from service late in the next decade. The government told the Commons committee yesterday that the vessels could be kept on until the mid-2020s, "albeit with gradually increasing cost and some increasing risk of reduced availability". Ministers have said MPs will be able to vote on the issue after the government publishes a white paper before the end of the year. The government yesterday also pointed out that the US navy recently announced plans to extend the life of the Trident D5 missile, a weapon system which Britain could buy off the shelf. It said the £1bn being spent at the Aldermaston atomic weapons establishment was to allow the "current warhead design" for nuclear missiles to be "maintained in service at least until the 2020s". Ministers said they did "not see Trident as a weapons system for fighting wars, but as having a fundamentally political role in deterring aggression". They told the committee: "We would only ever contemplate its use in extreme circumstances of self-defence." The government also insisted that the British Trident system was "fully operationally independent of the US or any other state". It added: "Only the prime minister can authorise the use of the UK's nuclear deterrent, even if the missiles are to be fired as part of a Nato response." Useful links British army Royal Navy RAF Ministry of Defence Nato United Nations [UP] Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006 ***************************************************************** 11 Guardian Unlimited: First trial over Libya's nuclear bomb plan collapses Ian Traynor Thursday July 27, 2006 The international effort to get to grips with the world's worst nuclear proliferation racket suffered a serious setback yesterday when the first criminal trial of an alleged top figure collapsed. A judge in the south-west German town of Mannheim threw out the prosecution case against Gotthard Lerch, a German engineer, four months into his trial on charges of helping Libya clandestinely build a nuclear bomb. Judge Peter Seidling said there was a danger of Mr Lerch not receiving a fair trial as the prosecution had withheld evidence. The collapse of the proceedings is a major setback to the international attempt to close down the proliferation network of disgraced Pakistani metallurgist Abdul Qadeer Khan, who was exposed in 2003-4 as the supplier of nuclear technology, bomb blueprints and scientific expertise to Libya, Iran and North Korea. The outcome is a disaster for the German prosecution service, and came as the climax to a series of prosecution blunders. Mr Lerch, 63, had been charged with violations of Germany's arms and exports laws for allegedly trafficking components for centrifuges for enriching uranium to Libya for Muammar Gadafy's since abandoned nuclear bomb programme. The prosecution alleged Mr Lerch was paid 28m (£19m) for the contracts. He faced up to 15 years' prison if found guilty. The state prosecutor, Peter Lintz, said that Mr Lerch was among Mr Khan's four main associates, also said to have included British businessman Peter Griffin - who testified in May against Mr Lerch. Mr Griffin has denied any witting role in the scheme to turn Libya into a nuclear power. Mr Lerch also denied the charges. Judge Seidling has yet to rule on whether there will be a retrial. The accused has been in German custody for more than a year and his defence team, which maintains that he was a fall guy for a western intelligence plot, is demanding his release. The defence team has regularly complained it was denied access to evidence, including German intelligence material. The Lerch case was being closely monitored by international investigators since it was the first time that any suspect from the Khan network had been put on trial. Mr Khan admitted running the nuclear racket in February 2004 and was instantly pardoned by the Pakistani president, Pervez Musharraf. [UP] Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006 ***************************************************************** 12 Times of India: Pak has 25-50 nuclear weapons - Report- [ 27 Jul, 2006 1450hrs ISTPTI ] NEW YORK: Pakistan currently has between 25 and 50 nuclear weapons, mostly relatively simple uranium arms with "modest" yields around the size of the bombs that destroyed Hiroshima and Nagasaki, a journal claimed on Thursday. The Nature magazine's claim followed media reports that satellite photos of Pakistan's Khushab nuclear site have shown what appears to be a partially completed heavy-water reactor capable of a 20-fold increase from its current nuclear capabilities. Quoting John Pike, Director of globalsecurity.org, a non profit group that specializes in image analysis, Nature says if the new facility is what it seems to be, it would allow Pakistan to build a lot more bombs. The reactor is "gigantic" and would allow Pakistan to increase its total number of weapons tenfold, he says. Plutonium can be used to construct smaller and more lightweight weapons than uranium. Most uranium bombs require 15 to 20 kilograms of material, but plutonium weapons can be built with as little as 5 kilograms. That makes it easier to fit plutonium warheads on missiles. In addition, small plutonium bombs are often used to trigger larger hydrogen weapons. So the technology, says Pike, is an important step towards developing those bombs, which are thousands of times more powerful than uranium and plutonium weapons. Copyright ©2006Times Internet Limited. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 13 Economic Times: N-deal: It's a "monumental piece of legislation" PTI[ THURSDAY, JULY 27, 2006 03:57:36 PM] WASHINGTON: Shortly after the House of Representatives overwhelmingly voted in favour of the Indo-US nuclear deal, prominent lawmakers hailed it as a "monumental piece of legislation" that would strengthen non-proliferation efforts and clear the way for the two countries to "reinforce an already strong, strategic alliance." "...it represents a judicious balancing of competing priorities. On the one hand, the world has known that India possesses nuclear weapons, yet India has not had a seat at the table of nuclear stakeholders." House International Relations Committe Chairman Henry Hyde said in a statement after the House approved the pact with a 359-68 vote. The Illinois Republican said "while it is important to note that this deal would improve international nuclear security, at the same time, it will expand relations between the US and one of the most important emerging nations in the world. "It will enable India to make energy cheaper, cleaner and more accessible. It would create more customers for US firms and, in the end, both countries will benefit," Hyde said, addding the approval by the House clears the way for the two countries to "reinforce an already strong, strategic alliance." Congressman Joe Wilson of South Carolina said that the House has aproved a "monumental piece of legislation that will strengthen our non-proliferation efforts, increase national security and create jobs". "While working on this bill, we encountered resistance from some who did not want this agreement to come to fruition. Thankfully, we were able to overcome their obstructionist efforts and approve this critical measure," Wilson noted. "Passage of this agreement holds countless economic benefits for the United States. Secretary (of State) Condoleezza Rice has noted that as many as 5,000 direct jobs and 15,000 indirect jobs could be created as a result of this agreement. In addition, India will be better positioned to compete in the global economy, and trade between our countries will continue to grow," he said. Deputy Whip Joseph Crowley, member of the House International Relations Committee and former Democratic Chairman of the Caucus on India and Indian Americans, also hailed passage of legislation supporting the transfer of US civilian nuclear technology to India. "The United States and India Nuclear Cooperation Promotion Act of 2006 ... authorises the President to waive the application of certain requirements under the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 with respect to India, while asserting Congressional oversight of the negotiations of the deal. All deal breaking amendments were successfully defeated," the New York lawmaker said. "Today we have begun the process of positively redirecting our relationship with India - a move that will bring both our nations closer and cement a critical partnership that will continue for decades," Crowley said in his statement. "As someone who has fought for this agreement between the United States and India for a long time, I consider today's vote a strong indicator of support to the goal of achieving a strategic and economic alliance between the world's largest democracy and the world's oldest democracy," Crowley said. He recognised the Indian American community "for its incredible advocacy work done to educate members of Congress on the importance of this agreement." Copyright ©nbsp2006Times Internet Limited. All rights reserved.|| | | | | ***************************************************************** 14 Times of India: Indo-US nuke deal not in India's interest - Advani- [ 27 Jul, 2006 1732hrs ISTPTI ] BHUBANESWAR: Senior BJP leader L K Advani on Thursday said that the Indo-US nuclear deal was not in India's interest at the moment. "The deal will close all strategic options for the country," the Leader of Opposition in the Lok Sabha told reporters after arriving at Orissa's Biju Patnaik airport here. "It may help the US but is not in India's interest." Advani, who proceeded to Puri to attend a meeting of party functionaries, said the Parliament "should give a clear direction to the government in this sensitive matter." On the issue of suspected infiltration by the Lashkar-e-Taiba in the country's armed forces, Advani said "it is a matter of grave concern for every nationalist. Such infiltration should be firmly dealt with." Copyright ©2006Times Internet Limited. All rights reserved. For ***************************************************************** 15 Independent: India could make 50 warheads under nuclear deal with Bush By Justin Huggler in Delhi Published: 27 July 2006 The US House of Representatives was set to vote yesterday on a nuclear deal with India that threatens to fuel a nuclear arms race in Asia. The deal, a centrepiece of the Bush administration's foreign policy, comes as the US is pressuring Iran and North Korea to halt their nuclear programmes. Under the deal, the US will sell India nuclear fuel and technology for civilian purposes, in exchange for India putting most of its reactors under international safeguards. But a former head of Indian intelligence has said publicly the deal will allow India to produce 50 more nuclear warheads a year than it can now, by freeing up existing uranium reserves for military use. The vote in Washington comes days after satellite photographs revealed Pakistan is building what analysts believe is a large reactor capable of producing enough plutonium for 50 warheads a year, a discovery which has led to fears of an intensified nuclear arms race between India and Pakistan. US congressmen were yesterday trying to attach last-minute conditions to the deal with Delhi to prevent India from using it to enlarge its nuclear arsenal. But the Indian Prime Minister, Manmohan Singh, said his country would accept no new conditions. There were angry scenes in the Indian parliament as opposition parties said the existing deal already gave up too much control over India's nuclear programme. The deal is at the heart of attempts by George Bush to forge a strategic alliance with India as a counterweight to the rising power of China. It has also been touted as a major environmental initiative, since it will enable India to shift away from reliance on fossil fuels to satisfy the growing energy demands of the world's second fastest growing economy. But observers are now warning that behind the environmental claim lies a deal that will allow India massively to increase its nuclear arsenal. India currently produces most of its electricity from coal power stations, and its demand for oil is expected to rise. Delhi wants to invest in nuclear power, but India has very limited sources of uranium to fuel its reactors, and has been barred from buying nuclear fuel from other countries because it developed the nuclear bomb in defiance of international calls for non-proliferation. Under the new nuclear deal, the US will exempt India from its own laws banning any nuclear dealings with countries that do not submit to international inspections, and sell it nuclear fuel and reactors. In return, India is to place 13 of its existing reactors under international safeguards. © 2006 Independent News and Media Limited ***************************************************************** 16 Asia Times: India-US nuclear deal crosses major hurdle By Siddharth Srivastava NEW DELHI - The India-US nuclear deal moved a significant step toward fruition when on Wednesday, the US House of Representatives overwhelmingly approved the US and India Nuclear Cooperation Promotion Act by a vote of 359-68. The bill now goes to the Senate and a conference committee to work out differences between the two houses of Congress. The deal was negotiated a year ago and announced in March. It will allow India, a nuclear-weapons state, to purchase nuclear fuel and reactors from abroad for the first time in more than three Congress exempt India from certain sections of the Atomic Energy Act. The House rejected at least three "killer" amendments that sought to constrain India's strategic nuclear deterrence. One would have required India to halt fissile-material production as a precondition of the nuclear deal. The House also rejected an amendment that would have prohibited India from taking advantage of its new nuclear status by diverting its domestically produced uranium for weapons use. And the House shot down a move that sought to audit India's fissile-material stock annually. According to US lawmakers, India now uses half of its domestic uranium for energy production and half for weapons. A surprise move to defer a vote until India did more to back US efforts to contain Iran also failed decisively. Congressman Tom Lantos said the deal would be a "tidal shift in relations between India and the United States'', leading to "a new era of mutual respect and cooperation. This will be known as the day when Congress signaled definitively the end of the Cold War paradigm governing interactions between New Delhi and Washington.'' Critics argue that the deal could enlarge India's nuclear arsenal and sends the wrong signal to Iran and North Korea, whose nuclear intentions Washington opposes. "By shipping India fuel for its civilian reactors, this legislation potentially frees up their [India's] entire supply of domestic uranium for use in weapons,'' Congressman Ed Markey, head of a bipartisan non-proliferation task force, said before the vote. In a last-minute effort to scuttle the accord, lawmakers led by Markey sent a letter on Monday to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice demanding that the State Department submit a required semi-annual report that details the activities of foreigners (including Indian firms and individuals) deemed to have dealt with Iran or Syria in nuclear trade. The State Department's deputy spokesman Tom Casey, however, allayed suggestions that the administration of President George W Bush was withholding the report pending the passage of the nuclear deal. The semi-annual Iran Non-proliferation Act Compliance Report detailing activities of foreign companies and entities that may have assisted Iran in proliferation activities will be out very shortly, he said, asserting there are no political considerations that are delaying its release to Capitol Hill. Still a long way to go The deal has still quite a way to go before it can become a reality. The Senate must also approve the pact; then the House and Senate will vote again after US-India negotiations on the technical details of the agreement are completed. India also has to satisfy the International Atomic Energy Agency (which has been supportive of the deal so far) on inspection procedures for its civilian nuclear facilities; then there is the 45-nation Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) to contend with, with China likely to put up some opposition to changing international regulations to allow nuclear transfers to India. Some experts say that the deal will lead to an arms race in South Asia, with recent reports (the timing of which seems curiously linked to the House vote) saying that Pakistan is a building a new 1,000-megawatt nuclear power station that could produce weapons-grade plutonium. Critics sought to link the Indian deal to a report by the Institute for Science and International Security that said Islamabad was building a nuclear reactor able to provide fissile material for up to 50 atomic bombs a year. The move could signal an acceleration of regional nuclear proliferation, and the new reactor could be finished within a few years, the report said. Washington quickly acknowledged that it already knew about Pakistan's plans. "Pakistan is not a party to the Non-Proliferation Treaty, nor is India, and therefore they do develop their capabilities independently. But we continue to discourage the expansion and modernization of nuclear-weapons programs, both of India and Pakistan,'' said White House spokesman Tony Snow. Success in Washington is one thing, but Prime Minister Manmohan Singh must still sell the pact to India's own legislature against the opposition of both the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and the left-wing members who support his government, In his first reaction after the House vote, Manmohan told parliament that India needs to be patient as the final version of the act will only emerge after the Senate and the House meet. He said the Indian government has conveyed to Washington its apprehensions, and it is up to the US administration to ensure that Indian's interests are appropriately safeguarded in the two houses. India will then assess whether the final act meets its requirements. The nuclear deal has led to a peculiar situation of the BJP and the left talking in the same voice, with only the Congress party members supporting the deal. In an unusual show of solidarity, the BJP and the left, along with smaller and regional representations, have joined hands to press for a "resolution'' expressing the "sentiments" of the two houses of parliament that the final pact should not transgress the parameters laid down by the Singh-Bush joint statement of July 18 last year. The parties accuse the government of selling out to the US and acquiescing to unfair dictates that could impinge on India's independent nuclear-weapons program and strategic security. The BJP, normally pro-American, has called the deal "unacceptable'' as it would make India "perpetually dependent'' on outside sources of nuclear energy. On Wednesday (in India, a day before the US House vote), Manmohan assured parliament that his government will never compromise in a manner that is inconsistent with the July 18, 2005, Indo-US joint statement on civilian nuclear energy. In the end, however, the deal will and should boil down to meeting India's growing energy needs. Oil is expensive, coal causes pollution and reserves are being depleted, while hydro energy brings about problems related to environment and rehabilitation. In this context, nuclear and renewable energy sources need to be tapped aggressively if India is to sustain more than 8% growth in the long term. India has 14 reactors in commercial operation and nine under construction. Currently, nuclear power supplies a measly 3% of India's electricity; by 2050, nuclear power is expected to provide 25% of the country's power. Given its limited uranium reserves, India will have to look at international resources and technology as well as tap its huge thorium reserves, about 25% of the world's total, to sustain a long-term nuclear-power program. Manmohan recently said: "The speed with which we can develop nuclear power is constrained by the availability of uranium. The civil nuclear agreement we have entered into with the United States, and our discussions with the NSG, should help in accelerating the development of nuclear energy.'' India needs the nuclear deal with appropriate safeguards to its sovereignty in place. Siddharth Srivastava is a New Delhi-based journalist. (Copyright 2006 Asia Times Online Ltd. All rights reserved. .) (Jul 27, '06) Office: Rm 202, Hau Fook Mansion, No. 8 Hau Fook St., Kowloon, Hong Kong Thailand Bureau: 11/13 Petchkasem Road, Hua Hin, Prachuab Kirikhan, Thailand 77110 ***************************************************************** 17 AP: Kazakhstan, Russia in Nuclear Power Deals Thursday July 27, 7:43 am ET Kazakhstan, Russia Strike Deals to Set Up 3 Nuclear Power Joint Ventures ALMATY, Kazakhstan (AP) -- Kazakhstan and Russia agreed to set up three joint ventures related to nuclear power, the Kazakh national atomic energy company said Thursday. Two of the ventures will be set up in Kazakhstan: one will produce uranium to be used as fuel for Russian-designed nuclear reactors and another will build a nuclear power plant with a capacity of 300 megawatts, KazAtomProm said in a statement. The third venture will enrich uranium for atomic power stations and will be based in Russia, the statement said. The cost of the projects, as yet undetermined, will be shared 50-50, KazAtomProm said. The deals were signed Tuesday after talks between Kazakh Prime Minister Daniyal Akhmetov and Russian Atomic Agency Chief Sergei Kiriyenko. Kazakhstan has 30 percent of the world's uranium reserves and is currently the fourth biggest uranium producer, according to KazAtomProm. KazAtomProm plans to boost production more than fourfold by 2010 to 15,000 metric tons (16,500 short tons) and become the world's largest uranium producer. In 2005 it produced 4,300 metric tons (4,740 short tons) of uranium. Copyright © 2006 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. The ***************************************************************** 18 IRNA: Uproar in Indian parliament over Pakistan's N-plans Islamabad, July 27, IRNA Pakistan-India India's parliament was in turmoil on Wednesday after Defense Minister Pranab Mukherjee turned down opposition's demand to comment on Pakistan's nuclear expansion plans, saying a statement on the issue was a serious matter and could not be produced like instant coffee. According to" the DAWN", Opposition MPs had sought the government's point of view on media reports that Pakistan was building a 1000MW nuclear power station which was capable of producing material for 50 nuclear bombs. Mr Digvijay Singh, minister in waiting for President Gen Pervez Musharraf during the Agra summit, raised the issue. He wanted India to have a rethink on the US civil nuclear deal which prescribed freezing of weapons program, an issue all the more serious in view of Pakistan building a huge nuclear capacity. He was joined by Mr Shahid Siddiqui of Samajwadi Party and BJP's Dr Murli Manohar Joshi who protested against the double standard prescribed by the United States for India and Pakistan. Mr. Mukherjee's terse comments were one among several issues concerning ties with Pakistan that came up for discussion, mostly related to the Mumbai blasts. Home Minister Shivraj Patil said violence by militants had come down marginally in Kashmir but their alleged influx from across the LoC showed an increase. Mr. Patil also said that two persons nabbed in Jammu and Kashmir for their alleged links with terrorists belong to Rashtriya Rifles, and not to the regular army. They are not armymen but from RR battalions, he said in the Rajya Sabha, intervening in a short duration discussion on the Mumbai blasts. The two were arrested on Saturday for suspected links with a commander of the Lashker-i-Taiba. ***************************************************************** 19 IPS-English ENVIRONMENT: Heat Wave Shows Limits of Nuclear Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2006 15:03:53 -0700 ROMAIPS EU EN KP=20 ENVIRONMENT: Heat Wave Shows Limits of Nuclear Energy By Julio Godoy PARIS, Jul 27 (IPS) - The extreme hot summer in Europe is restricting nuc lear energy generation and showing up the limits of nuclear power, leadin g environmental activists and scientists say. The heat wave since mid-June has led authorities in France, Germany, Spai n and elsewhere in Europe to override their own environmental norms on th e maximum temperature of water drained from the plants' cooling systems. The French government announced Jul. 24 that nuclear power plants situate d along rivers will be allowed to drain hot water into rivers at higher t emperature. The measure is intended to guarantee the provision of elec tricity for the country, according to an official note. France has 58 nuclear power plants, which produce almost 80 percent of el ectricity generated in the country. Of these, 37 are situated near rivers , and use them as outlet for water from their cooling systems. The drought accompanying the hot summer has reduced the volume of water i n the rivers, and might force some power plants to shut down. Under normal circumstances, environment rules limit the maximum temperatu re for waste water in order to protect river flora and fauna. For many years now, French authorities have defended nuclear power arg uing that it is clean energy, good for the environment, and that it will help combat global warming, for it does not emit greenhouse gases, Ste phane Lhomme, coordinator of the environmental network Sortir du NuclE9a ire (Phase Out Nuclear Power) told IPS. Now, with global warming leading to extreme hot summers, we are witnes sing that it is the other way round, Lhomme said. Global warming is showing the limits of nuclear power plants, and nuclear power is destroy ing our environment. During the hot summer of 2003, French authorities had allowed nuclear pow er plants to drain excessively hot water into rivers, leading to consider able damage to flora and fauna, Lhomme said. According to the minutes of the National Surveillance Committee on water drained from reactors Aug. 21 and Sep. 3 2003, hot water temperatures might have led to high concentrations of ammoniac, which is potentially t oxic for the rivers' fauna. The minutes point to a European norm on the concentration of ammoniac in rivers, which France did not respect. Meanwhile France is importing some 2000 megawatts of power per day from n eighbouring countries to compensate for shortages in production at nuclea r power plants. While the French authorities have overridden their own environmental norm s, in Germany energy providers have slowed down some nuclear reactors to limit waste water temperature and to protect flora and fauna. Reactors Kruemmel, Brunsbuettel and Brokdorf situated along the river Elb e which flows through Eastern and Northern Germany have all been slowed d own. So have traditional fossil fuel power plants situated along the rive r Rhine. The nuclear reactors Isar 1 near Munich, and Neckarwestheim near Stuttgar t have being authorised to drain hotter water into the nearby rivers than normally allowed. In Spain, the nuclear power plant at Santa Maria de GaroF1a, one of eigh t Spanish reactors, was shut down last weekend due to the high temperatur es recorded in the river Ebro, into which the reactor drains the water us ed in its cooling system. The power plant, Spain's oldest, provides 20 percent of the electricity g enerated in the country. German energy expert Hermann Scheer says the situation shows a need for r adical change in policy. We must massively invest in renewable energy sources, and get rid of nuclear power as soon as possible, he told IPS 2E Scheer is president of Eurosolar, the European association for renewable energy resources, and winner of the 'Alternative Nobel prize' for his com mitment to the environment. In France, nuclear scientist Hubert Reeves urged the government to inv est massively in renewable energy resources. We are behind many of our European partners such as Germany, Denmark and Spain in this matter, and cannot wait until the energy crisis reaches its climax to find an alt ernative to our present model, he told IPS. A crisis, he said, is round the corner. Fossil energy sources are a bout to be exhausted, and nuclear technology will not solve present pr oblems within a reasonable period of time.we should abandon nuclear power and invest in alternative sources. (END/IPS/EU/EN/KP/JG/SS/06) =20 =3D 07271330 ORP009 NNNN ***************************************************************** 20 [NukeNet] Sidney Goodman Re APP July 26 Oyster Creek faces new Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2006 15:09:10 -0700 From: Sidney Goodman Sent: Thursday, July 27, 2006 12:42 AM Subject: [JerseyShoreNuclearWatch] APP July 26 Oyster Creek faces new challenges Have X-rays been taken of the metal components to confirm that metallurical structures are sound? X-raying metals is a standard procedure in quality control. When I worked for Hamilton Standard, Division of United Aircraft (now United Technologies), One shipment of propellors was pulled back because they had been shipped without the X-ray check. Neutron bombardment and high temperature degrades the strength of all materials. This is basic. And, not only will heat and radioactivity degrade strength but repetitious cycles of stress, causes fatigue. All materials have a limited fatigue life. An independent metalurgist should evaluate integrity of the metals involved. When a structure is designed, a safety factor must be incorporated according to the structural code. The safety factor is necessary to cover unforseen circumstances, and the fact that theoretical calculations do not anticipate everything. When the strength of materials in a structure is weakened, it reduces or eliminates the safety factor. Licensed Professional Engineers are not allowed to approve a design unless it has the required safety factor. Without it, the structure is not legal. A Professional Engineer can lose his/her license or be sued if a structure was approved without this precaution. How did the people at AmerGen expect that epoxy paint can arrest liner rust? Epoxy, or any coating, can only function if it is applied to absolutely clean rust free metal. UNLESS A RUST FREE UNDERBASE EXISTS, NO COATING WILL ARREST RUST. Elementary! Sid Goodman, Professional Engineeror nclunn@app.com ***************************************************************** 21 [NukeNet] APP July 27, 2006 NRC faults Oyster Creek staff Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2006 15:09:34 -0700 NukeNet Anti-Nuclear Network (nukenet@energyjustice.net) NRC faults Oyster Creek staff Posted by the Asbury Park Press on 07/27/06 BY NICHOLAS CLUNN STAFF WRITER When interviewed by federal regulators investigating a safety violation caused by human error at the Oyster Creek Generating Station, plant operators said they would execute step-by-step procedures by skipping around instead. Those responses, which indicated to regulators that "key procedural steps" could be missed, were part of a U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission report released Wednesday on whether plant operator AmerGen Energy Co. had addressed the violation's two causes. AmerGen successfully dealt with a failure in emergency preparedness, but not the one associated with operator performance, according to the report. Both shortcomings explain why AmerGen in August 2005 failed to issue a mandatory advisory in time. AmerGen should have issued the advisory, meant to inform state and local officials about a plant condition that could have affected the public, after sea grass briefly clogged an intake used to pump cooling water into the plant. Though AmerGen took corrective actions to improve operator performance after the emergency, regulators found that operators continued to demonstrate weakness when it came to adhering to procedures and understanding the expectations of management. As a result, AmerGen will submit itself to further investigations until regulators are satisfied with operator performance. When that happens, regulators will close the violation, which had a low-to-moderate safety significance. Oyster Creek now runs the risk of coming under increased oversight if regulators find another violation of similar severity — and in the emergency preparedness area of operations — while the August citation remains open. "Important milestone" Showing regulators that plant operators can follow procedures is an "important milestone" in a wider improvement program at the Route 9 facility, plant Vice President Tim Rausch said in a prepared statement. "We expect all station employees to strictly adhere to procedures, and we continue to drive toward excellence in that area," Rausch said. Regulators discovered that some operators did not understand how to follow procedures after interviewing eight of them from several crews. In the report, regulators wrote that there "appeared to be confusion as to the definition of "step by step' and that it was okay to skip around in the procedure as long as the subset steps of a particular section were performed in sequence." They went on to say that "several operators conveyed that performance of the step could be a judgment or subjective call." Making sure that operators contact key decision-makers in government when emergencies happen appeared important to Rep. H. James Saxton, R-N.J., who spoke about Oyster Creek and other topics with members of the Asbury Park Press editorial board Wednesday. Saxton, on a conference call, described former plant owner GPU Nuclear as "extremely cooperative" but said AmerGen was more difficult to deal with because "local control has been diminished to a large degree." GPU was based in Parsippany. AmerGen is owned by Illinois-based Exelon. "GPU actually used to call me in the middle of the night when they had a so-called event, when something went wrong," Saxton said. Staff writer Todd B. Bates contributed to this story. Nicholas Clunn: (732) 643-4072 or nclunn@app.com Text Size:A+|A|A- E-mail E-mail Printer Print Subscription Subscribe Newsletters E-mail alerts BEHIND THE NEWS The violation discussed in the federal report released Wednesday was one of two plant errors that caused Oyster Creek to rank among the worst in the nation — in terms of safety performance — during the third quarter of 2005. Site design by Asbury Park Press / Contact us USA Today • USA Weekend • Gannett Co. Inc. • Gannett Foundation ***************************************************************** 22 NRC: NRC to Discuss 2005 Performance Assessment for Braidwood Nuclear Power Plant News Release - Region III - 2006-02 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs, Region III No. III-06-029 July 26, 2006 CONTACT: Jan Strasma (630) 829-9663 Viktoria Mitlyng (630) 829-9662 E-mail: opa3@nrc.gov The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff will meet with representatives of Exelon Generation Co. on Monday, July 31, to discuss the agencys assessment of safety performance for last year at the Braidwood Nuclear Power Plant. The plant is located near Braceville, Ill. The meeting, which is open to the public, is scheduled to begin at 6 p.m. at the Reed-Custer High School, 249 South Comet Drive, in Braidwood. The NRC will respond to questions or comments from the public before the close of the meeting. The NRC continually reviews the performance of the Braidwood plant and the nations other commercial nuclear power facilities, NRC Region III Administrator James Caldwell said. This meeting will provide an opportunity for a discussion of our annual assessment of safety performance with the company and with local officials and residents who live near the plant. Our goal is to explain the NRC oversight process and make as much information as possible available to the public regarding our regulation of these facilities. A letter sent from the NRC Region III Office to plant officials addresses the performance of the plant during the period and will serve as the basis for the meetings discussion. It is available on the NRC web site at: http://www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/LETTERS/brai_2005q4.pdf . The NRCs assessment concluded that the Braidwood plant operated safely during the period. The NRC uses color-coded inspection findings and performance indicators to assess nuclear plant performance. The colors start with green and then increase to white, yellow or red, commensurate with the safety significance of the issues involved. All of the inspection findings and performance indicators for Braidwood during 2005 were determined to be green. The NRC will conduct normal, baseline level of inspections during 2006. However, the NRC recently identified a white finding related to the unplanned releases of trititum onsite and offsite and is evaluating the need for additional inspections. Routine inspections are performed by two NRC Resident Inspectors assigned to the plant and by inspection specialists from the Region III Office in Lisle, Ill. Among the areas of plant operations to be inspected this year by NRC specialists are fire protection, problem identification and resolution, access control to radiologically significant areas, and reactor pressure vessel head and vessel head penetration nozzles. Current performance information for Braidwood is available on the NRCs web site at: http://www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/BRAI1/brai1_chart.html (Unit 1) and http://www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/BRAI2/brai2_chart.html (Unit 2). Last revised Thursday, July 27, 2006 ***************************************************************** 23 Philadelphia Inquirer: Limerick's plans to store nuclear waste raise fears | 07/23/2006 | Steel canisters containing spent fuel would be placed inside concrete vaults that sit out in the open. By Sandy Bauers Inquirer Staff Writer Deep inside the Limerick nuclear power plant - past concrete barriers, razor wire, armed guards, four-inch-thick steel doors, and detectors for explosives and metal - bluish water undulates gently in two deep pools, stirred by pumps. More than 20 feet below the surface sit 5,000 bundles of spent fuel rods, from Limerick's 20 years of operation. And now, the pools are expected to be full in three years. So Limerick intends to transfer some of the spent fuel - highly radioactive for thousands of years - into steel containers that will be put in concrete vaults sitting in the open on the property. The plan has alarmed many in the community. They fear that a terrorist attack could rupture a cask and release radiation. They worry that the site will become a permanent nuclear-waste dump. Critics are outraged that the industry still lacks a good solution to spent fuel a half-century after the first large-scale plant began operating in Shippingport, Pa. But officials for plant owner Exelon Corp. and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission insist that it's safe. And they say they have no other options - for Limerick, or any other nuclear plant in the United States. The contentious debate over what to do with spent fuel may even stall President Bush's plan, promoted during his May 24 visit to Limerick, to build more nuclear power plants. Roughly 12 to 18 plants are in planning, said Steven Kraft of the industry lobbying group, the Nuclear Energy Institute. But fuel storage "comes up as a concern," he said, and he expects that "visible progress" on a solution will be needed before any get the go-ahead. John Hanger, president of Citizens for Pennsylvania's Future, an environmental group, put it more bluntly. "It's the height of irresponsibility," said Hanger, a former member of Pennsylvania's Public Utility Commission. The industry "is out there beating the drums for creating more plants when there is no place to store the waste." Limerick is merely the latest to move to so-called dry cask storage. Similar facilities have been built - with varying levels of protest - at 33 of 65 commercial nuclear power sites in the nation, including New Jersey's Oyster Creek plant and Pennsylvania's Susquehanna plant in Luzerne County and Peach Bottom in York County. Dry cask storage is nearing completion for Salem and Hope Creek in New Jersey. This wasn't how it was supposed to be. When construction began at Limerick in 1974, the plan was to cool the spent fuel in pools, then take it to a reprocessing plant. But in 1979, President Jimmy Carter banned reprocessing, fearing that a byproduct, plutonium, which is used in nuclear weapons, would fall into the wrong hands. In the 1980s, the government decided to take responsibility for the nation's spent fuel. That led to the Yucca Mountain, Nev., storage plan; the facility was to start accepting deliveries in 1998. But that has hit a multitude of snags, not to mention opposition from Nevada. On Thursday, the Energy Department's Ward Sproat, director of the Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management, told Congress that the earliest Yucca Mountain could open is 2017. And that "is our best achievable schedule," said Sproat, a Tredyffrin resident and former Peco Energy and Exelon employee who worked at Limerick. Meanwhile, electricity users across the country have, through their rates, been paying into a Nuclear Waste Fund specifically for Yucca Mountain, which has grown to $19 billion. Every March, Limerick shuts down one of its reactors and replaces about one-third of the fuel, moving the spent fuel into adjacent steel-lined pools. Officials figure that they have until 2009 before Limerick's pools are filled to a "conservative" limit, said Kevin J. Carrabine, the dry cask project manager. He expects to have the dry storage ready by 2008. Some residents are angry that, ultimately, they have no say in whether spent fuel is stored in casks on the site. Under Limerick's NRC license, it can store spent fuel. Dry casks are just a different method. Limerick Township's main purview is whether the thick cement slab that's needed is within setbacks defined by the zoning ordinance and whether it will alter storm-water runoff. In July, the township supervisors gave the project preliminary approval. Final approval could come by September, Supervisor Renee Chessler said. But at each meeting, dozens of residents show up. In a post-Three Mile Island, post-9/11 world, some worry about radiation. "You're asking us to put double trouble in our backyard," said Donna Cuthbert, a resident of neighboring North Coventry Township in Chester County. "It's really irresponsible to go down this path." Limerick is also home to 80 of the plant's 700 workers - and nearly 500 more live within 10 miles. One of them, Bob Mandik, rose at two recent township meetings and asked other coworkers there to do the same. "It's not just some outside company that's in here," he said. Others chafe with long-standing bitterness over the nuclear giant in their midst, township historian Bill Miller said. They didn't want it in the first place, and don't feel adequately compensated for the risks. In 2005, Exelon won a reduction in the plant's assessed value for taxes from $912 million to $20 million. It is now the fourth-largest contributor to the Spring-Ford School District's coffers. But one of the critics' biggest concerns is terrorism. What would happen if the exposed concrete vaults were targeted? The NRC has done "extensive modeling," the commission's Randy Hall at a recent township meeting. Its research shows that the casks could withstand an attack "up to and including the crash of a fully loaded jetliner." Michele Boyd of Public Citizen, a national watchdog group, said other tests showed that the casks could be harmed by a shoulder-fired missile. Her groups favors putting earth berms around the storage site, which a Maine plant has done. Limerick is not planning to do so. A California antinuclear group, Mothers for Peace, sued the NRC, saying it should have considered the possibility of a terrorist attack at the Diablo Canyon nuclear power plant in San Luis Obispo when it allowed dry cask storage there. In June, a federal appeals court agreed. Dry cask opponents hope the ruling will prompt closer study of casks at other sites. Kraft, of the lobbying group, said he thought that if the ruling stood, it would only present "an opportunity for anyone to stop anything." At best, the casks are viewed as a stopgap solution until Yucca Mountain opens and other proposals - temporary regional storage sites, for instance, or new reprocessing technology - get traction. David Lochbaum, director of the nuclear safety project for the Union of Concerned Scientists, said that, in some ways, dry cask storage is actually safer than a nearly full pool. If the pool leaks or the pumps and backup pumps fail, the rods could melt or catch fire, releasing a cloud of radiation. Having an emptier pool would give workers extra hours in which to respond to an emergency, he said. "There is no zero-risk answer to this problem," he said. "It's managing the risk to as low as you can get." Contact staff writer Sandy Bauers at 215-854-5147 or sbauers@phillynews.com. ***************************************************************** 24 AP Wire: AP Interview: TVA set to pursue 2nd nuclear reactor at Watts Bar | 07/27/2006 | DUNCAN MANSFIELD Associated Press KNOXVILLE, Tenn. - The Tennessee Valley Authority is ready to pursue completing a second nuclear reactor at its Watts Bar station - the site of the last nuclear plant to come on line in the United States - a top official said Thursday. Directors of the nation's largest public utility will be asked Friday to approve $20 million for a "detailed engineering study on Watts Bar 2 completion," TVA President and acting CEO Tom Kilgore told The Associated Press in an interview. "That doesn't mean that they are deciding to do Watts Bar 2," he said. "It means that we are asking them to spend money so that we can decide how much it would cost." Kilgore said a decision to finish the 1,160-megawatt reactor in Spring City, Tenn., about 50 miles south of Knoxville, would be independent of a consortium study into building a next-generation reactor at TVA's unfinished Bellefonte nuclear station in Alabama. "We will compare it to probably a new coal plant, to other options on nuclear, such as Bellefonte," Kilgore said. "But it is not an either-or on Bellefonte. It is more of timing with Bellefonte. In other words, we could finish Watts Bar 2 faster than we could finish Bellefonte." TVA believes it will need new base generation capacity by 2014. Construction on the Watts Bar station stopped in 1985 with the rest of TVA's nuclear program because of safety concerns. Construction later resumed on Watts Bar 1, which came on line in 1996 - the last nuclear reactor to start up in the U.S. ***************************************************************** 25 NRC: NRC Proposes $65,000 Fine for Violation at Seabrook Station News Release - Region I - 2006-04 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs, Region I No. I-06-043 July 27, 2006 CONTACT: Diane Screnci (610) 337-5330 Neil A. Sheehan (610) 337-5331 E-mail: The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has proposed to fine FPL Energy Seabrook, LLC, $65,000 for a violation related to security requirements at Seabrook Station in Seabrook, N.H. The issues were corrected immediately and the plant remains secure. In Spring 2005, the NRC dispatched a special inspection team to Seabrook after a routine security inspection found issues at the site in May. This enforcement action stems from those inspections and additional NRC follow-up. Immediately upon identification of the issues, FPL took actions to address them. NRC inspectors have reviewed the companys corrective actions and found them to be in compliance with NRC security requirements. The NRC has cited the company for the failure to maintain complete and accurate records of test results and proposed a $65,000 fine. A second violation that occurred, in part due to inadequate management oversight, has been characterized by the NRCs Reactor Oversight Process as low-to-moderate security significance. There was no additional fine associated with this violation. NRC Region I Administrator Samuel J. Collins said, The action was necessary to emphasize the importance of oversight and corporate support of the installation and testing of equipment, as well as maintaining complete and accurate records of such testing. The company has 30 days from receipt of the Notice of Violation to either pay the civil penalty or to protest it, in whole or in part. The NRC routinely conducts inspections of security at the nations nuclear power plants. The details of those inspections are not publicly available because certain security information could be useful to an adversary. Last revised Thursday, July 27, 2006 ***************************************************************** 26 Platts: TVA board expected to approve nuclear-related contracts Washington (Platts)--25Jul2006 The Tennessee Valley Authority's board is expected to approve nuclear-related contracts totaling $402 million when it meets July 28. A contract with Louisiana Energy Services LP for enrichment services for TVA's Sequoyah-1 and Watts Bar-1 is valued at $192 million. A contract supplement with Areva NP Inc. for nuclear fuel fabrication and related engineering services for Sequoyah-1 and -2 is valued at $100 million. Another contract supplement, with Pinkerton Government Services for security services at all TVA's nuclear plants, is valued at $65 million. The last contract, with Areva NC Inc. for purchase of uranium hexafluoride for use in nuclear fuel, is valued at $45 million. Copyright © 2006 - Platts, All Rights Reserved [The McGraw-Hill Companies] ***************************************************************** 27 The Local: Nuclear plant shut after incident [The Local: Sweden's news in English] Published: 27th July 2006 19:46 CET An investigation has been launched after two safety systems at the Forsmark nuclear power station did not function properly when a reactor was shut down, in the most serious incident ever to occur at the plant. The shutdown happened automatically after a short circuit in a distribution plant outside the power station, around 130 kilometres north of Stockholm, at around 2pm on Thursday. diesel generators that should start automatically during a shutdown failed to do so. The generators are supposed to power the station's safety systems. The two were started manually, a process that took 20 minutes, news agency TT reported. The failure also meant that a number of computers did not work as they should. Forsmark spokesman Anders Markgren said this did not cause important information to be lost. "The reactor is now shut down and cooled down until the results of the investigation are known," a statement on the inspectorate's site said on Thursday. The incident has been classed as a level 2 incident on the international INES scale. The INES scale gives nuclear power plant incidents a grade of between 0 and 7, with 7 being the most serious kind of accident. The Chernobyl disaster in 1986 was a level 7 accident. Thursday's event was the first level 2 incident at the plant. Anders Markgren said that the power station would be redesigned to make it better able to cope with electrical problems, in consultation with the Swedish Nuclear Power Inspectorate. He said he didn't know when the station would be generating electricity again. "I don't think it will be running again before the beginning of next week. There's a lot of work to do, which will need to be approved by the authorities," he said. James Savage ***************************************************************** 28 Mos News: Russian Embattled Atomic Minister Sought in U.S. Wants Trial by Video Link - NEWS - MOSNEWS.COM Yevgeny Adamov / Photo: AP Created: 27.07.2006 12:10 MSK (GMT +3), Updated: 12:10 MSK Five days after his release on bail from a Moscow prison, Russia’s former atomic power minister wanted in the United States on embezzlement charges said he was ready to face trial, but only via a video link. Yevgeny Adamov, wanted by the United States on charges of embezzling U.S. aid money, walked out of prison last Friday after the Supreme Court ordered him released on bail. As a condition of his release, Adamov agreed not to travel beyond the Moscow region. Immediately after his release he told reporters, however, that he intended to go to the United States to attend a hearing in the case against him there. But before a news conference hosted by Adamov Wednesday he had apparently changed his mind. “I not only want to stand trial, I insist on being present at the trial,” Adamov told Ekho Moskvy radio Wednesday. “I know that the law provides for the use of video links,” Adamov said, clarifying remarks that he made last Friday after his release from Matrosskaya Tishina prison. At that time, Adamov said he would go to the United States to stand trial. Adamov would almost certainly be arrested if he traveled to the United States, where the charges against him are still pending. The former official arrived at the Ekho Moskvy office in handcuffs and escorted by two masked men in camouflage. “This is a tribute to the wishes of a considerable part of Russian society that wants to see at least one minister in handcuffs,” Adamov said to explain the stunt. The guards are employees of a privately-owned security firm, the NTV television reported. Adamov was arrested at the request of U.S. prosecutors while visiting his daughter in Switzerland in May last year. He is charged with siphoning off $9 million provided by the United States to enhance Russia’s nuclear safety. Some of the money, U.S. prosecutors said, turned up in bank accounts in Pennsylvania. Russia objected to his extradition, saying the U.S. case was intended to get leverage over Adamov and extract nuclear secrets from him. Switzerland extradited him to Russia in December after Russia said it would investigate the allegations itself. The Supreme Court on Friday accepted defense lawyers’ argument that Adamov deserved release because he returned to Russia from Switzerland willingly and because the criminal investigation was completed, Itar-Tass reported. Prosecutors objected to his release, suggesting that he might flee. Adamov, who has maintained his innocence, is charged with fraud and abuse of office, and faces a maximum sentence of ten years if convicted. The trial could begin as early as next month. The charges are more extensive than those in the United States and are partly related to older allegations that he embezzled money from the Russian government. But they do not cover all of the charges made by the United States. Adamov, who worked on nuclear technology sales to Iran during his tenure as minister, has reportedly suffered heart problems while under arrest. Adamov was dismissed in 2001 by President Vladimir Putin. Later, an anti-corruption committee in Russia’s lower house of parliament accused him of illegally setting up companies inside and outside Russia. Adamov was arrested May 2 while he was visiting his daughter in the Swiss capital, Bern. Write us: info@mosnews.com Copyright © 2004 MOSNEWS.COM ***************************************************************** 29 IndyStar.com: Nuclear power problems - waste, radioactive half-life IndyStar.com Opinion Letters to the editor July 27, 2006 Jack Corpuz wrote a very informative article about nuclear power in the July 23 Focus section of The Star. Although not completely up to date, it did have excellent facts. However, I do not know if Corpuz, along with other pro-nuclear people, is ignorant or ignoring the two biggest problems associated with nuclear power: the disposal of the waste products that have a radioactive half-life of 50,000 years and the fact that the entire plant becomes radioactive in approximately 30 to 40 years. Please let's not try to gloss over these items and have a rational and logical discussion about an issue that doesn't just concern us, our children, our grandchildren, but many generations of mankind that are to come.Paul DombroskyIndianapolis Copyright 2006 IndyStar.com. All rights reserved Copyright 2006 IndyStar.com. All rights reserved ***************************************************************** 30 Rutland Herald: Vermont Yankee's spotty history Rutland Vermont News & Information July 27, 2006 Recently a former Vernon Select Board member came out with the opinion on Vermont Yankee without acknowledging Vermont. Yankee's history. In 1972 the 513-megawatt Vermont Yankee reactor began generating power. It promptly shutdown 17 times during a 19-month period. One shutdown occurred because of the fear the control rods in the reactor might have been installed upside down. Major "off-lines" were due to accidents, equipment failures, defective parts and the discovery of dangerous operating conditions. A spokesman for Vermont Yankee at the time, asked to comment on the plant's reliability, was quoted by The New York Times as saying, "We're not as good as some, but we're not as bad as others" High praise, indeed! Nuclear fuel was one of the problems. Radioactive moisture inside fuel pellets ate through the fuel rods and escaped. The plant had to install a new filter system, at a cost of $10 million, to trap the dangerous escaping vapor. Another time the plant was closed for months because the fuel pellets kept sliding in the cladding forming "hot spots" that could cause the radioactive fuel core to overheat, then melt. Then the power to a vital safety device was cut off by workmen installing a TV unit. This caused the reactor to speed up - a very dangerous occurrence. These are just a few examples of Vermont Yankee's failure to "provide Vermonters with a clean and reliable environment and socio-economic advantages." ROBERT LINCOLN Rutland ***************************************************************** 31 APP.COM: NRC faults Oyster Creek staff | Asbury Park Press Online Thursday, July 27, 2006 NEW REPORT: Nuclear plant operators didn't follow procedures AMERGEN REPLY: New stress placed on adhering to instructions BY STAFF WRITER When interviewed by federal regulators investigating a safety violation caused by human error at the Oyster Creek Generating Station, plant operators said they would execute step-by-step procedures by skipping around instead. Those responses, which indicated to regulators that "key procedural steps" could be missed, were part of a U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission report released Wednesday on whether plant operator AmerGen Energy Co. had addressed the violation's two causes. AmerGen successfully dealt with a failure in emergency preparedness, but not the one associated with operator performance, according to the report. Both shortcomings explain why AmerGen in August 2005 failed to issue a mandatory advisory in time. AmerGen should have issued the advisory, meant to inform state and local officials about a plant condition that could have affected the public, after sea grass briefly clogged an intake used to pump cooling water into the plant. Though AmerGen took corrective actions to improve operator performance after the emergency, regulators found that operators continued to demonstrate weakness when it came to adhering to procedures and understanding the expectations of management. As a result, AmerGen will submit itself to further investigations until regulators are satisfied with operator performance. When that happens, regulators will close the violation, which had a low-to-moderate safety significance. Oyster Creek now runs the risk of coming under increased oversight if regulators find another violation of similar severity — and in the emergency preparedness area of operations — while the August citation remains open. "Important milestone" Showing regulators that plant operators can follow procedures is an "important milestone" in a wider improvement program at the Route 9 facility, plant Vice President Tim Rausch said in a prepared statement. "We expect all station employees to strictly adhere to procedures, and we continue to drive toward excellence in that area," Rausch said. Regulators discovered that some operators did not understand how to follow procedures after interviewing eight of them from several crews. In the report, regulators wrote that there "appeared to be confusion as to the definition of "step by step' and that it was okay to skip around in the procedure as long as the subset steps of a particular section were performed in sequence." They went on to say that "several operators conveyed that performance of the step could be a judgment or subjective call." Making sure that operators contact key decision-makers in government when emergencies happen appeared important to Rep. H. James Saxton, R-N.J., who spoke about Oyster Creek and other topics with members of the Asbury Park Press editorial board Wednesday. Saxton, on a conference call, described former plant owner GPU Nuclear as "extremely cooperative" but said AmerGen was more difficult to deal with because "local control has been diminished to a large degree." GPU was based in Parsippany. AmerGen is owned by Illinois-based Exelon. "GPU actually used to call me in the middle of the night when they had a so-called event, when something went wrong," Saxton said. Staff writer Todd B. Bates contributed to this story. Nicholas Clunn: (732) 643-4072 Copyright © 2006 Asbury Park Press. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 32 Kyiv Post: Kazakhstan, Russia strike deals to set up 3 nuclear power joint ventures by Bigmir Jul 27 2006, 16:46 ALMATY, Kazakhstan (AP) - Kazakhstan and Russia agreed to set up three joint ventures related to nuclear power, the Kazakh national atomic energy company said Thursday. Two of the ventures will be set up in Kazakhstan: one will produce uranium to be used as fuel for Russian-designed nuclear reactors and another will build a nuclear power plant with a capacity of 300 megawatts, KazAtomProm said in a statement. The third venture will enrich uranium for atomic power stations and will be based in Russia, the statement said. The cost of the projects, as yet undetermined, will be shared 50-50, KazAtomProm said. The deals were signed Tuesday after talks between Kazakh Prime Minister Daniyal Akhmetov and Russian Atomic Agency Chief Sergei Kiriyenko. Kazakhstan has 30 percent of the world's uranium reserves and is currently the fourth biggest uranium producer, according to KazAtomProm. KazAtomProm plans to boost production more than fourfold by 2010 to 15,000 metric tons (16,500 short tons) and become the world's largest uranium producer. In 2005 it produced 4,300 metric tons (4,740 short tons) of uranium. www.bigmir.net www.korrespondent.net www.ukrbiz.net www.uasport.net www.ukrjob.net www.afisha.ua www.bigbn.com.ua © 2004 - 2006, SputnikMedia.net. ***************************************************************** 33 IPS: ENVIRONMENT: Heat Wave Shows Limits of Nuclear Energy Inter Press Service News Agency Julio Godoy PARIS, Jul 27 (IPS) - The extreme hot summer in Europe is restricting nuclear energy generation and showing up the limits of nuclear power, leading environmental activists and scientists say. The heat wave since mid-June has led authorities in France, Germany, Spain and elsewhere in Europe to override their own environmental norms on the maximum temperature of water drained from the plants' cooling systems. The French government announced Jul. 24 that nuclear power plants situated along rivers will be allowed to drain hot water into rivers at higher temperature. The measure is intended "to guarantee the provision of electricity for the country," according to an official note. France has 58 nuclear power plants, which produce almost 80 percent of electricity generated in the country. Of these, 37 are situated near rivers, and use them as outlet for water from their cooling systems. The drought accompanying the hot summer has reduced the volume of water in the rivers, and might force some power plants to shut down. Under normal circumstances, environment rules limit the maximum temperature for waste water in order to protect river flora and fauna. "For many years now, French authorities have defended nuclear power arguing that it is clean energy, good for the environment, and that it will help combat global warming, for it does not emit greenhouse gases," Stephane Lhomme, coordinator of the environmental network Sortir du Nucléaire (Phase Out Nuclear Power) told IPS. "Now, with global warming leading to extreme hot summers, we are witnessing that it is the other way round," Lhomme said. "Global warming is showing the limits of nuclear power plants, and nuclear power is destroying our environment." During the hot summer of 2003, French authorities had allowed nuclear power plants to drain excessively hot water into rivers, leading to considerable damage to flora and fauna, Lhomme said. According to the minutes of the National Surveillance Committee on water drained from reactors Aug. 21 and Sep. 3 2003, "hot water temperatures might have led to high concentrations of ammoniac, which is potentially toxic for the rivers' fauna." The minutes point to a European norm on the concentration of ammoniac in rivers, which France did not respect. Meanwhile France is importing some 2000 megawatts of power per day from neighbouring countries to compensate for shortages in production at nuclear power plants. While the French authorities have overridden their own environmental norms, in Germany energy providers have slowed down some nuclear reactors to limit waste water temperature and to protect flora and fauna. Reactors Kruemmel, Brunsbuettel and Brokdorf situated along the river Elbe which flows through Eastern and Northern Germany have all been slowed down. So have traditional fossil fuel power plants situated along the river Rhine. The nuclear reactors Isar 1 near Munich, and Neckarwestheim near Stuttgart have being authorised to drain hotter water into the nearby rivers than normally allowed. In Spain, the nuclear power plant at Santa Maria de Garoña, one of eight Spanish reactors, was shut down last weekend due to the high temperatures recorded in the river Ebro, into which the reactor drains the water used in its cooling system. The power plant, Spain's oldest, provides 20 percent of the electricity generated in the country. German energy expert Hermann Scheer says the situation shows a need for radical change in policy. "We must massively invest in renewable energy sources, and get rid of nuclear power as soon as possible," he told IPS. Scheer is president of Eurosolar, the European association for renewable energy resources, and winner of the 'Alternative Nobel prize' for his commitment to the environment. In France, nuclear scientist Hubert Reeves urged the government to "invest massively" in renewable energy resources. "We are behind many of our European partners such as Germany, Denmark and Spain in this matter, and cannot wait until the energy crisis reaches its climax to find an alternative to our present model," he told IPS. A crisis, he said, "is round the corner." Fossil energy sources are about to be exhausted, and "nuclear technology will not solve present problems within a reasonable period of time.we should abandon nuclear power and invest in alternative sources." (END/2006) Copyright © 2006 IPS-Inter Press Service. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 34 The Day: Millstone Malfunction Mistakenly Reports Unit Shutdown theday.com Published on 7/27/2006 in Business » Business Briefs Equipment at the Unit 2 reactor at Millstone Power Station signaled a shutdown during maintenance Tuesday when in fact the plant was operating properly. The reactor continued to operate properly but the malfunction, reported to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission on Wednesday, now requires an investigation to determine its cause. Operators at Unit 2 were replacing a circuit card used in an electronic reactor protection system for the steam generator when four circuit breakers opened, indicating something was wrong and the plant needed to be shutdown, said Pete Hyde, spokesman for Dominion, the nuclear complex owner. Four additional backup circuit breakers would have had to open as well to prompt an unplanned shutdown, known as a trip, but they were working properly and did not open, Hyde said. [TheDay.com] Site Map Contact Us at 1 (860) 442-2200 | New London, CT | © 1998-2006 The Day Publishing Co. [Beacon Locator] ***************************************************************** 35 AFP: House backs US-India nuclear energy bill by Stephanie Griffith Thu Jul 27, 6:34 AM ET WASHINGTON (AFP) - The US House of Representatives has approved a controversial US-India civilian nuclear energy deal, which supporters said will be the cornerstone of a new strategic alliance between the two countries. The House lawmakers voted 359-68 in favor of the legislation, which must now be approved by the Senate before President George W. Bush" /> can sign it into law. "This will be known as the day when Congress signaled definitively the end of the Cold War paradigm governing interactions between New Delhi and Washington," US Representative Tom Lantos (, , ), the top Democrat on the House of Representatives' International Affairs Committee, said before the vote on Wednesday. He said passage of the bill -- the United States and India Nuclear Cooperation Promotion Act -- would launch "a new era of mutual respect and cooperation." The bill "clears the way for the United States and India to reinforce an already strong, strategic alliance," said Republican Representative Henry Hyde (, , ), adding that it "would improve international nuclear security." The bill emerged after a meeting last year between Bush and Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh. Democratic and Republican leaders in both houses of Congress have expressed strong support for the bill. If it becomes law, the measure would reverse some three decades of US policy to restrict access to nuclear technology. The United States has withheld its civilian nuclear know-how from India since 1974, when it conducted its first nuclear test. India tested nuclear weapons in 1974 and 1998 and, as a result, is currently banned by the United States and other major powers from buying fuel for atomic reactors and other related equipment. But some lawmakers have expressed doubts about extending civil nuclear technology to India, which is not a member of the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, without first putting the most stringent of safeguards in place. Under the deal, the United States will aid the development of civil nuclear power in India in return for New Delhi placing its civil nuclear facilities under International Atomic Energy Agency" /> (IAEA) inspections. Supporters see the deal as a sign of a geopolitical re-alliance following the Cold War, one which allows India to jump-start its quest for alternative energy, as its economy booms. Detractors say, however, they are not convinced that India can be trusted to safeguard critical atomic secrets, or to refrain from using atomic material to gain an edge over neighboring rival power, Pakistan. "We are deeply concerned that this proposal, in its current form, will blow a hole in the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, allow India to greatly increase the size of its nuclear arsenal, and potentially spark a nuclear arms race in Asia," House Democrat Ed Markey told a press conference Tuesday. Markey said the bill would allow India to dramatically increase its production of nuclear weapons. "The agreement would create a huge exemption for India from US non-proliferation laws and international norms," he said. "By shipping India fuel for its civilian reactors, this legislation potentially frees up their entire supply of domestic uranium for use in weapons." He cited expert estimates that India could increase nuclear weapons production from seven warheads to 40-50 warheads a year. "What kind of signal are we sending to the world when Iran" /> is on trial in the (UN) Security Council for its nuclear program, and we are turning a blind eye to India?" Markey asked, warning that the bill could "make a mockery" of nonproliferation efforts. But House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi said there were safeguards built into the bill, that it "requires that before Congress votes on the agreement, India and the IAEA will have had to establish a process through which IAEA safeguards will be applied forever to India's civilian nuclear facilities, programs, and materials." Pelosi said in a statement that if the agreement is ultimately approved, "Congress will retain an ability to monitor it through the required annual reports on US nonproliferation policy in South Asia, and on the implementation of the US-India nuclear deal." But Markey said the bill could ratchet up the arms race in Asia. "Just yesterday the world learned that Pakistan is building a huge new plutonium-production reactor, which will allow them to increase their weapons production from two to three weapons a year to 40-50," Markey said. "If you think that Pakistan's new reactor and this nuclear deal with India aren't related, you're fooling yourself." Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The ***************************************************************** 36 Guardian Unlimited: Empty Serb Reactor Inviting for Terrorists From the Associated Press [UP] Thursday July 27, 2006 4:16 PM AP Photo XDMV101 By GEORGE JAHN Associated Press Writer VINCA, Serbia (AP) - The Vinca reactor stands still, its decrepit innards purged of their unused weapons-grade fuel. But it remains Serbia's little shop of nuclear horrors, and a potential magnet for terrorists. That makes it representative of the next step in the world's quest to lift the threat of nuclear material falling into the wrong hands - first by taking control of the fuel that makes atomic bombs, and now by tackling the lesser but still potent menace of a dirty bomb, meaning radiation spread by blowing up radioactive material with conventional explosives. At the Vinca Institute of Nuclear Sciences outside Belgrade, there are only a few armed guards in sight, and the barbed-wire fence around the 48-acre facility is only as tall as a man. For would-be terrorists, ``it's almost like a candy store,'' says Mike Durst, the International Atomic Energy Agency's point man working to strip Vinca of its attraction to nuclear thieves. These fears are driving international agendas. Presidents Bush and Vladimir Putin used a summit of the world's richest countries earlier this month to launch the ``Global Initiative to Combat Nuclear Terrorism,'' which calls for better accounting and protection of the Vincas of the world, scattered around the former Soviet Union, Eastern Europe, Asia and Africa. The new program is meant to build on others created by the Bush administration, including the 3-year old ``Global Threat Reduction Initiative'' to deal with a broad range of vulnerable nuclear and radiological materials around the world. Most of the existing programs focus on unused weapons-grade fuel, nearly 100 pounds of which lay in Vinca until four years ago, when Washington, Moscow and Belgrade mounted a joint operation to remove it. Helicopters and 1,200 heavily armed troops including snipers were deployed along with decoy trucks to thwart potential mischief-makers. Half of Belgrade was sealed off, and within six hours, the fuel - enough to make at least two simple nuclear warheads - was trucked from Vinca to the airport and onward to a Russian government plant about 470 miles east of Moscow. But that still leaves dozens of other badly secured and dangerous nuclear facilities to deal with. Inside the Vinca reactor building, 8,000 spent fuel rods sit in pools of brackish water. Dozens contain uranium in varying degrees of enrichment - potential dirty bomb material, not to mention the environmental hazard. The bomb-worthy material is not uranium, but its highly radioactive byproducts. These would quickly kill any terrorist who was not equipped with protective suits, robotic arms and tons of lead to encase the stolen material. Still, research reactors such as Vinca tend to be less heavily protected than power plants, and experts like Durst fear terrorists shown willing to sacrifice their lives in other situations might do so as well to secure the material. And while building a full-blown nuclear device is technologically daunting, terrorists could easily use the material such as that in the rods to construct a dirty bomb. With just one dirty bomb, ``you could hit Broadway, and you couldn't decontaminate it for years,'' says Obrad Sotic, Vinca's former operations manager. And there are concerns other than raids on Vinca. While no nuclear material is known to have gone missing employees speak openly of the potential temptations of selling some on the black market as a way supplementing monthly incomes of less than $750. There's a lot to steal - old medical and industrial equipment, and tons of material inside the reactor or in two rickety corrugated metal sheds. There are bags of irradiated grass, containers of depleted uranium ammunition fired by NATO during its 1999 Kosovo campaign, and several tons of yellowcake - processed uranium ore of the kind Iran plans to process and enrich in what the U.S. says is an attempt to make nuclear arms. The Serbian Science Ministry, which is responsible for Vinca, has a budget of less than $90 million for this year. That wouldn't cover the cost of upgrading security, shipping the spent fuel back to Russia and dismantling the reactor. A centrally monitored alarm system is being installed and police will be tasked with security under a plan being worked out under IAEA guidance. Also foreseen is the shipment of the spent fuel to Russia and building safer storage facilities for the collected nuclear junk. The ultimate goal is to dismantle of the reactor and other parts of the facility. But again, money is a problem. Sending the spent fuel back to Russia will cost around $10 million, and more money is needed to reprocess the fuel in Russia. Building better storage will cost an additional $5 million. About 60 percent of that amount has been pledged by donor countries, but dismantling the facility will cost some $60 million. For Serbia's science minister, Aleksandar Popovic, the 2002 operation to remove the weapons-grade fuel has left the job only half done. He told The Associated Press he was ``very unhappy'' that help has not materialized for the other half. ``Once the spent fuel is gone, I'll be one happy guy,'' he said. Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006 ***************************************************************** 37 CFR: Preventing Catastrophic Nuclear Terrorism Prepared Testimony before the Senate Subcommittee on Terrorism, Technology, and Homeland Security - Council on Foreign Relations By Charles D. Ferguson, Fellow for Science and Technology Author: Michael A. Levi, Fellow for Science and Technology July 27, 2006 Chairman Kyl, Senator Feinstein, thank you for inviting me to speak with you about U.S. efforts to detect smuggled nuclear weapons. Current programs to enhance detection of smuggled nuclear weapons are, despite some important flaws, making valuable contributions to national security.They are not, and will never be, the most powerful means of defensethat role falls to programs that secure nuclear weapons and materials at the source. But assessed in the context of a much broader system aimed at reducing the likelihood of catastrophic nuclear attack, and judged against the full range of existing and potential adversaries, not only against worst-case scenarios, their value is undeniable. There remains much room for improvement. U.S. efforts to defeat nuclear terrorism are insufficiently integrated across the federal government, between federal, state, and local levels, with the private sector, and internationally. This reduces the value of those detection programs that are currently underway. The Domestic Nuclear Detection Office (DNDO) has taken important steps to promote integration, but it cannot, and should not, do the entire job itself. It would be best for DNDO to focus on developing and deploying technology and on integrating radiation detection efforts, as it largely does today. Congress should explore the utility of establishing a broader system integrator in the Executive Office of the President. An effective strategy to detect smuggled nuclear weapons would also benefit enormously from a far better understandinga strategic intelligence assessmentof the covert nuclear threat. We are not fighting the movement of radioactive materialswe are fighting states or organizations with their own internal limits that must acquire, possibly build, transport, and detonate a weapon, all with some strategic, political, or religious goals in mind. Simply testing the sensitivity of our radiation detection instruments is thus insufficient alone for judging whether our investments are worthwhile. Without a better understanding of the enemy, we cannot adequately assess the value of our defensive investments. Congress should support a concerted effort to produce a detailed strategic intelligence assessment of the covert nuclear threat, and use this assessment as the basis for judging investments in defense against nuclear smuggling. This assessment should draw upon analysts with expertise in terrorism, rogue states, and nuclear technology, as well as on new intelligence operations as required. You have also asked me to comment on the potential of transformational technology. This is technology that could lead to dramatic improvement in national capabilities in nuclear/radiological detection and verification. Physics imposes basic limits that must be acknowledged, but there is room for technological advance. Congress should, in principle, support long-term transformational programs, which would benefit from increased funding and from better use of the national laboratories. Congress should, however, exercise oversight to ensure that resources are deployed in ways that complement broader defensive efforts. Outline The remainder of this testimony is divided into five parts: 1. Describes the broad system for defending against covert nuclear attack, of which direct defense against nuclear smuggling is a part, and makes recommendations for better integrating the system. 2. Makes the case for a new strategic intelligence assessment of the covert nuclear threat, as a basis for defensive planning and evaluation. 3. Assesses the potential of transformational radiation detection technology. 4. Describes the transformational potential for detection systems that integrate radiation detection with other detection tools. 5. Explains why traditional detection efforts will be less effective against covert nuclear attack by states, and stresses the importance of attribution and deterrence in these cases. The Defensive System Were we able to secure all nuclear weapons and materials, there would be no need for a broader effort to prevent nuclear smuggling. Security at the source, including, most prominently, cooperative threat reduction, is the most powerful tool available, and would benefit from increased investment and attention. But it will never be sufficient alone. A system of defensive tools, including materials and weapons security, law enforcement, intelligence, border controls, consequence management, denial of sanctuary, targeting of terrorist financing, and disruption of terrorist recruitment, can work to significantly reduce the likelihood of a successful nuclear plot, and to dissuade terrorist groups from pursuing such plots in the first place. (Preventing covert state attack is very different from preventing terrorist attack. I discuss this challenge below under Attributing Attacks.) Even if no single defensive tool has a high probability of defeating a given terrorist attack, a combined defensive system can still be effective. If, for example, twenty independent defensive measures each have only a 10% chance of defeating a terrorist plot, they would, combined, have a 90% chance of defeating that plot. If each defensive element forces a terrorist group to alter its plot, the effect is even more powerful. Tools for detecting nuclear smuggling must be developed and assessed in this context. That a particular defensive tool cannot defeat all terrorist plots is not reason enough for rejecting itso long as a defensive tool complicates terrorist plots, increases their probabilities of failure, and is pursued within a broad defense, it may deserve investment. This way of thinking about nuclear terrorismrefusing to assess defensive elements except as parts of a systemmust be institutionalized. DNDO was in part an attempt to do that, but it falls short. Though DNDO includes interagency mechanisms for coordination, its efforts have been principally focused on coordinating radiation detection programs. This is useful but insufficient, as the wide range of tools relevant to defense against nuclear terrorism, outlined above, suggests. It is, however, natural, and perhaps inevitable, for an organization whose funds are spent primarily on radiation detection. Ultimately, DNDO should be one (major) piece within a broader effort to defeat nuclear terrorism, directed from within the Executive Office of the President. The National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC), which is responsible for strategic operational planning against terrorist threats, appears to be the right place for such coordination. Congress should consider directing the NCTC to produce a strategic operational plan that prescribes and delineates responsibilities for defense against nuclear terrorism across the U.S. government, and to periodically assess the effectiveness of that plan. Such a scheme would help efforts to detect nuclear smuggling, and provide context for evaluating them. Understanding the Enemy It is meaningless to talk about the effectiveness of a defense without understanding the enemy that it faces. Yet we do not have a strong understanding of that enemy. In assessing detection of nuclear smuggling, we thus fall back against two poor substitutes. Sometimes, we adopt a narrow technical focus, evaluating technologies against quantitative goals that are at best loosely connected with careful study of terrorist plots. Here, our tendency is often to adopt goals simply because they are achievable. At the other extreme, we focus on the worst-case threat, a terrorist group that is so resourceful, flexible, and lucky that it can evade essentially any defense. This is what many would call the Ten-Foot Tall Terrorist. In reality, many terrorist groups have far more limited, though still very threatening, capabilities. These are the Five-Foot Tall Terrorists. It is critical to understand these more limited threats, and to design defenses against them as well. As in military planning, defenses optimized against the worst-case threat are not necessarily the best possible defenses. Instead, defenses designed to contend with a range of enemy capabilities have the potential to be far more effective. What does this mean in practice? TheUnited Statesneeds a new strategic intelligence assessment of potential covert nuclear plots. That assessment should draw upon expertise in terrorism, rogue state behavior, and nuclear technology, and outline a range of terrorist capabilities, rather than simply estimate a worst-case or most-likely threat. Novel intelligence operations can help refine this estimate  for example, intelligence operatives posing as nuclear scientists could improve our understanding of how terrorist groups might recruit technically skilled assistance. As with the strategic operational plan, this intelligence assessment most likely should be led by the NCTC. This would provide an intimate connection between underlying intelligence and strategic operational planning. It would also help institutionalize the practice of assessing the value of U.S. programs against a realistic assessment of the threats they face. Radiation Detection: Techniques, Targets, and Transformational Potential Materials used in nuclear weaponsuranium and plutoniumemit radiation: neutrons and gamma rays. Detectors are designed to sense that radiation. To be useful, they must be able to distinguish radiation emitted by nuclear materials from naturally occurring radiation, which may come from the earth, from building materials, from space, and from other sources. In many cases, detectors must be able to do that in the presence of shielding, material placed around the nuclear material that absorbs gamma rays or neutrons before they can reach a radiation detector. Unfortunately, material used in nuclear weapons need not be highly radioactive, and hence may not emit many neutrons or gamma rays, making detection difficult. Much has been made of the difficulty of detecting highly-enriched uranium, a challenge to which I will return later. It is important, though, not to focus narrowly on this worst-case threat. Many materials that terrorists might transport as part of a nuclear plot emit considerably more radioactivity, providing greater opportunities for detection. (There is no reason to believe that terrorists can be selective, rather than opportunistic, in acquiring nuclear materials, at least without making themselves more vulnerable to defeat.) These materials include highly-enriched uranium that is below weapons-grade, that it not metallic, or that has been extracted from used nuclear fuel (as much Russian nuclear-weapons material has been). They also include plutonium, in both metallic and non-metallic forms. And stolen weapons may incorporate large masses of depleted uranium, which substantially increases radiation emissions. Detectors that can spot some but not all potential weapons or materialsan accurate description for many detectorscan be valuable. Many challenges still remain, both in detecting low-radioactivity materials (including weapons-grade uranium metal) and in detecting shielded materials. Here, at least four types of transformational technology make sense. It is too early to evaluate specific technologies, but it is useful to understand where the potential for advances exists, along with their limits. Combined radiation detection and radiography, analyzed using new software, has the potential to substantially increase detection capabilities. Used in close proximity to a suspect source such as a cargo container (within a few meters), radiography, like an x-ray, produces an image that may be able to identify shielding material. Thus, if a terrorist group uses shielding to hide material from radiation detectors, radiography may be able to identify it. Intelligent data analysis algorithms can increase the combined value of radiation detection and radiography by automatically synthesizing data from both sources, a process that is currently labor-intensive, prone to human error, and slow. Indeed, it is this software, rather than any of the hardware used, which has the potential to be transformational, and that should be the focus of investments. Active interrogation is also potentially transformational. Again, it must be used in fairly close proximity to a suspect source. Active interrogation bombards suspect objects with radiation. If those objects contain nuclear materials, they will, in turn, emit radiation that can be detected. In principle, such technology can be used to detect well-shielded material, so long as an intense enough radiation source is used. (Increasing the radiation source is, very crudely, like turning on a brighter light when searching for something.) However, such strong sources of radiation raise health concerns, since they can be dangerous to operators and to bystanders, among other problems. It is thus essential that development of active interrogation systems be accompanied by careful evaluation of what radiation exposure is socially acceptable, a process that has not received the same attention as the technology has. (This is a political process.) Current limits on radiation exposure may already be too low. Moreover, in a very high threat environmentfor example, in the aftermath of a theft of nuclear materialsociety will likely be willing to accept much more hazardous means of inspecting cargo. Yet if we do not develop technologies in advance, we will not be able to exploit such situations. Ultimately, though, safety issues will place limits on the potential of active interrogation. Detectors that are more efficient and that have better energy resolution than current models might also be transformational. (Their potential, however, is more limited than that of active interrogation, though they do not carry the same dangers.) What does this mean? Radiation detectors only detect a fraction of the radiation emitted by nuclear materials. That fraction is called their efficiency. While we cannot change the fact that many nuclear materials emit little radiationthese are the limits of physics that many refer towe can improve how much of that radiation we detect, allowing us to better find nuclear materials. Radiation detectors are also characterized by their resolution. Radiation varies in energy, and the energy of radiation can sometimes be used to distinguish nuclear material. If a detector can more effectively discriminate between different energiesif it has improved resolutionit will be better at identifying nuclear material. Think of energy as color, and the gamma rays emitted by a particular type of nuclear material as red. A detector with poor energy-resolution is color-blindit cannot use color to spot the nuclear material. Improving detector resolution is like improving ability to see in color, and thus to identify nuclear material. A final potential for transformational radiation detection technology lies in integrating data from large numbers of detectors. This has both hardware and software components. It requires reduction in weight, cost, and power requirements for detection systems, so that large numbers can be deployed cost-effectively, and often in mobile configurations. It requires software to dynamically integrate data from a large number of detectors. One example of such a program might involve radiation detectors mounted on large numbers of police cars, transmitting data to a central location where it is continuously combined. Advances in computational power would also help advance these technologies. These technological innovations might also be combined. For example, higher efficiency radiation detectors might be combined with radiography using advanced data analysis. How should this affect American investments? In FY06, DNDO received $56.6 million for Transformational Research and Development. In contrast, only one major program area at DARPA, which supports transformational research through the Department of Defense, was funded at less than $100 million during FY06. As DAPRA understands, ambitious, high-risk research requires funding many failures in order to yield a single success. Transformational efforts would profit from expanded funding. Congress should consider earmarking such funds for the national laboratories, which are currently excluded from applying for several critical DNDO transformational R&D grants. (They may apply as subcontractors.) This occurs despite their having deep strength in relevant technologies. Moreover, if we are to direct efforts at detecting realistic nuclear weapons, rather than just generic samples of radioactive materials, we must exploit the understanding of weapons design that the laboratories have accumulated over more than half a century. DNDO has asserted that most of its transformational work will be unclassified; as a result, it will not be able to exploit this opportunity. The national laboratories will. In the long term, transformational detection efforts should be assessed against a new, nuanced strategic intelligence assessment, and within the context of a broad strategic operational plan. Integrating Radiation Detection into a Broader System for Detecting Nuclear Smuggling Radiation detection is not the only way to spot nuclear smuggling, especially if terrorists decide to smuggle an assembled bomb. In many cases, explosives detection may play an important role, as might detection of the weight and bulk of a weapon or of nuclear materials. Automated systems that integrate data from multiple detectors would be particularly valuable. Strategists should also explore automated means for integrating radiation detection with non-technical detection. For example, it would be useful to develop algorithms for airports and official border crossings that combine radiation data with passenger profile information to yield combined assessments of nuclear threats. A similar scheme could be useful for identifying suspect cargo containers, based on radiation detection and non-technical intelligence. In many cases, radiation detection will play a supporting, rather than a leading, role. This is particularly notable in defending against nuclear smuggling at non-official points of entry, such as land, sea, and air borders. Transformational schemes envisioning continuous and universal radiation monitoring of American borders are unrealistic. Instead, efforts aimed at identifying and interdicting terrorists attempting to enter theUnited States, regardless of whether they are involved in nuclear plots, will play the leading role, with radiation detection supporting them. Consider, for example, attempts to smuggle nuclear weapons or materials across the southern border. The probability of an illegal immigrant successfully crossing the border after one attempt is likely less than fifty percent; such low odds of success might well deter a would-be nuclear terrorist from attempting a crossing. What makes illegal immigration easier is the catch-and-release policy that affords would-be-immigrants multiple chances to attempt illegal entry. Portable radiation detection equipment can, however, be used to ensure that individuals caught at the border while carrying nuclear weapons or materials are not released. Here, radiation detection plays a critical but supporting role. Similar schemes might be applied to aircraft intercepted while illegally entering U.S. airspace. Applying this approach on the water presents greater challenges, as the United States currently has much weaker capabilities to detect illegal sea-based entry. Addressing this requires efforts to improve maritime domain awareness, and maritime interdiction capabilities, rather than to improve radiation detection. This emphasizes the need for a broad defensive plan, and cautions that technical detection investments must not outpace other complementary, non-technical, homeland security needs. Intelligence can also multiply the effectiveness of radiation detection. If we know or strongly suspect that terrorists have acquired nuclear weapons or significant amounts of nuclear materials, a surged response is possible. Such detection begins at the source of nuclear materials and weapons. For over a decade, the United States has been helping other countries install systems for protecting their nuclear weapons and materials (so-called MPC&A systems). If terrorists acquire materials or weapons, MPC&A systems will in many cases provide warning, allowing a surged response to any ensuing attempt at nuclear smuggling. The United States should attempt to secure agreements with facilities that receive MPC&A assistance, requiring that they promptly share warning information. DNDO is already tackling this challenge, and should be strongly supported by other parts of the U.S. government. It would be wise to go beyond this and develop protocols and agreements for sharing warnings of theft, including from facilities secured without U.S. assistance. Such warning may be the most powerful source of intelligence that can be leveraged by detection systems. Its value would be strengthened if the United States stockpiled equipment needed for a surged response, which could be deployed only when necessary. (Despite the high prices of many detection systems, the bulk of their costs come from the labor required to operate them.) Other sources of intelligence should also be pursued. For example, if terrorists are caught attempting to bribe radiation detector operators, intensified interdiction efforts might be mounted. Advance development and stockpiling of detection equipment would be essential. Attributing Attacks Against states, which generally have deeper resources and more extensive military and intelligence capabilities than terrorist groups, American efforts to directly defeat nuclear smuggling are far less likely to be successful. In particular, states will have greater abilities than terrorists will to evade radiation detection and border control efforts. Our best hope against these threats is to enhance deterrence by improving our ability to attribute covert attacks to their sponsors, thus allowing us to threaten retaliation. (This is a form of detection, albeit post-attack detection.) Attribution would work through a mixture of traditional forensics and technical tools that exploit nuclear-specific signatures. The latter would operate primarily by analyzing samples of material dispersed in a nuclear attack, and comparing them to a database of fingerprints for various nuclear states. Our greatest current deficiency on this front is in the fingerprint database. Theoretical analyses of material produced by suspect facilities, along with intelligence operations to obtain foreign material samples, would be valuable. So would better coordination: multiple government agencies with strong capabilities in this area, such as the CIA and the DOE, are not fully sharing what they know with each other. International cooperation, done with appropriate consideration for secrecy, would also help enhance deterrence. Summary Six points should be kept in mind when thinking about detecting smuggled weapons: 1. Securing nuclear weapons and materials at the source will always be the most powerful defensive tool. 2. Within the context of a broader defensive system, efforts to detect nuclear smuggling can be valuable. 3. It is essential to assess these efforts against a wide range of realistic threats, not only against semi-arbitrary numerical targets or worst-case scenarios. 4. Transformational technology has real potential but firm limits. It is as much about innovative software, concepts of operations, and leveraging intelligence, as it is about hardware. 5. Technology will often play a supporting role to traditional tools for controlling land, sea, and air borders. Those traditional tools must receive strong support. 6. Detection and interdiction are much weaker tools against covert state threats than against terrorist plots. Against state threats, enhancing attribution capabilities is critical. + New Task Forces Russias Wrong Direction: What the United States Can and Should Do [Russias Wrong Direction cover] Independent Task Force report on Russia says partnership between the two countries is not a realistic short-term goal. More Than Humanitarianism: A Strategic U.S. Approach Toward Africa [More Than Humanitarianism: A Strategic U.S. Approach Toward Africa cover] Independent Task Force report on Africa finds that a policy based on humanitarian concerns alone serves neither U.S. interests nor Africas. To learn more about Independent Task Forces at the Council, click here. New Council Special Reports U.S.-India Nuclear Cooperation: A Strategy for Moving Forward [U.S.-India Nuclear cover] Council Special Report on U.S.-India nuclear deal argues that Congress should formally endorse the deals basic framework, while delaying final approval until critical nonproliferation needs are met. Neglected Defense: Mobilizing the Private Sector to Support Homeland Security [Neglected Defense cover] Council Special Report on Homeland Security warns the federal government is not doing enough to harness the capabilities, assets, and goodwill of the private sector to protect the homeland. To see a complete list of Council Special Reports, click here. [Foreign Affairs] July/August 2006 + + Subscribe Publications Information To order Council Books, Task Force Reports, Council Special Reports, and Critical Policy Choices, please call, fax, or from our distributor, the Brookings Institution Press: phone +1-800-537-5487, fax +1-410-516-6998. For information on other reports that are not for sale, or for general publications information, please call +1-212-434-9516 or email . Permissions Requests To request permission to reuse Council materials, please email or fax +1-212-434-9859. Please include the complete information of the requested workauthor, title, sections/pages to be copied or reprinted, and number of copies to be madealong with a brief description of where and how you would like to reuse the work. You may also request permission for Council material through Copyright Clearance Center. For more information, please click on the logo below. Copyright 2006 by the Council on Foreign Relations. All Rights Reserved. [ /] ***************************************************************** 38 Seattle Times: Study ties thyroid ills to Hanford Thursday, July 27, 2006 - Page updated at 12:00 AM By The Associated Press RICHLAND  Men who grew up near the Hanford nuclear reservation in south-central Washington during the 1940s and 1950s have a slightly higher risk of developing thyroid disease, according to a new federal study. The results of the study may provide the strongest potential link to date between radioactive emissions from Hanford and disease in people who lived downwind of the plant. About 2,000 people have filed suit against the federal government, saying that radioactive releases from Hanford damaged their health. The federal government created Hanford in the 1940s as part of the top-secret Manhattan Project to build the atomic bomb. During the process, radioactive iodine was released to drift with the wind, contaminating produce and grass that milk cows ate. Radioactive iodine concentrates in the thyroid and can result in disease decades later. The larger, earlier Hanford Thyroid Disease Study failed to find increased thyroid disease in people who lived downwind of Hanford. The latest study, conducted by the Centers for Disease Control's Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, found a statistically significant increase in thyroid disease in men who lived next to Hanford, said Greg Thomas of the agency's Seattle office. The increase was in underactive thyroids, or Hashimoto's thyroiditis, a condition in which the thyroid produces too little thyroid hormone. Symptoms can include an enlarged thyroid, fatigue and weight gain. However, the study did not link the increase to iodine 131, Thomas said. Women in the study also did not show a similar risk. 6 counties studied The study collected health information from people who were born in Washington between 1945 and 1951 and lived in Adams, Benton or Franklin counties for at least one year. Those years are believed to have had the largest radioactive iodine releases from Hanford. The information then was compared with people who were born and lived in Mason, San Juan or Whatcom counties  far from Hanford  at the same time. The study included 1,160 people from all six counties. They were among 4,190 people randomly selected from birth records who proved eligible and could be interviewed. Of the 291 men living near Hanford, the study found that 10 men had underactive thyroids, compared with four of 385 men in the counties far from Hanford. Among women, 10 cases of underactive thyroids were found in 185 women who lived near Hanford. Twenty-three cases were found among 275 women who lived in the other counties. Underactive thyroids are much more common in women than men nationwide. Although study participants reported some health problems more often than the general population, other factors such as diet, lifestyle and work history make it difficult to determine if exposure to radiation caused the findings, according to a statement from the federal agency. Thomas also pointed out it was a relatively small study of a small number of people. The study was conducted to address concerns among people who grew up downwind of Hanford that radiation releases may have caused autoimmune or heart disease. Because of the earlier Hanford Thyroid Disease Study, it was not looking specifically for a link to thyroid disease. But the only autoimmune disease that showed up at a statistically significant level was hypothyroidism, or underactive thyroid, in men. There was no increase in heart disease, or other autoimmune disease, among those living close to Hanford. Among health conditions the study checked for were chronic-fatigue syndrome, heart attacks, hypertension, multiple sclerosis, psoriasis and stroke. Earlier study flawed? Attorneys representing people who have sued the federal government have argued that the earlier $22 million Hanford Thyroid Disease Study was flawed. That study estimated a dose of radiation for people who lived downwind of Hanford and then considered whether they developed thyroid disease. In the first cases to be tried, a jury awarded $550,000 combined to two people who developed thyroid cancer. Juries rejected four other claims. The latest study is consistent with the scientific evidence presented during the initial downwinder trials that radiation doses of any amount can lead to thyroid disease, said Roy Haber of Eugene, Ore., an attorney who represents some of the plaintiffs in the case. The U.S. Department of Energy, meanwhile, is interested in learning more about how the new study was conducted, said spokeswoman Karen Lutz. Copyright © 2006 The Seattle Times Company ***************************************************************** 39 NRC: [Docket No. 52-009-ESP; ASLBP No. 04-823-03-ESP] FR Doc 06-6507 [Federal Register: July 27, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 144)] [Notices] [Page 42676-42677] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr27jy06-80] In the Matter of System Energy Resources, Inc. (Early Site Permit for Grand Gulf ESP Site); Notice of Opportunity To Make Oral or Written Limited Appearance Statements July 21, 2006. Before Administrative Judges: Lawrence G. McDade, Chairman; Nicholas G. Trikouros, and Dr. Richard E. Wardwell. This proceeding involves the application of System Energy Resources, Inc., (SERI) for a 10 CFR Part 52 early site permit (ESP). The ESP application seeks approval of the site at the existing Grand Gulf nuclear power station in Claiborne County, Mississippi, for the possible future construction of a new nuclear power generation facility. SERI filed its application on October 16, 2003. Thereafter, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (Claiborne County, Mississippi Branch), Nuclear Information and Resource Service, Public Citizen, and the Mississippi chapter of the Sierra Club (Petitioners) filed a request for hearing and petition to intervene. Based on the pleadings submitted, and after hearing argument regarding the standing of the Petitioners and the admissibility of their seven proffered contentions, the previously assigned Atomic Safety and Licensing Board determined that although Petitioners had established the requisite standing to intervene in this proceeding, they had failed to submit at least one admissible contention. LBP-04-19, 60 NRC 277 (2004). Petitioners collectively appealed the Board's Order and, on January 18, 2005, the Commission affirmed the Board's rulings. CLI-05- 04, 61 NRC 10 (2005). Therefore, the only matter remaining before this Board is satisfaction of the Mandatory Hearing requirement with regard to SERI's ESP Application. 42 U.S.C. 2235 (2000); 10 CFR 52.18, 52.21, 52.24. This Atomic Safety and Licensing Board hereby gives notice that, in accordance with 10 CFR 2.315(a), the Board will entertain oral limited appearance statements from members of the public in connection with this proceeding at the date, time, and location specified below. A. Date, Time, and Location of Oral Limited Appearance Statement Session The session will be held on the following date at the specified location and time: Date: August 28, 2006. Time: 6 p.m. CDT until 9 p.m. CDT. Location: City Hall, 1005 College Street, Port Gibson, Mississippi 39150. B. Participation Guidelines for Oral Limited Appearance Statements Any person not a party, or the representative of a party, to the proceeding will be permitted to make an oral statement setting forth his or her position on matters of concern relating to this proceeding. Although these statements do not constitute testimony or evidence in the proceeding, they nonetheless help the Board and/or the parties in their consideration of the issues. Oral limited appearance statements will be entertained during the hours specified above, or such lesser time as might be necessary to accommodate the speakers who are present. In this regard, if all scheduled and unscheduled speakers present at the session have made a presentation, the Licensing Board reserves the right to terminate the session before the ending time listed above. During the limited appearance session no signs or banners will be permitted in the hearing room. In order to allow all interested persons an opportunity to address the Board, the time allotted for each statement normally will be no more than five (5) minutes, but may be limited, or expanded, depending on the number of written requests to make oral statements that are submitted in [[Page 42677]] accordance with Section C below, and/or the number of persons present at the designated time. At the outset of each statement, the speaker should identify himself or herself by stating their name, city and state of residence, and stating whether they have any affiliation (such as employment, consultancy, or membership) with any of the parties (SERI or the NRC). C. Submitting a Request To Make an Oral Limited Appearance Statement Persons wishing to make an oral statement who have submitted a timely written request to do so will be given priority over those who have not filed such a request. To be considered timely, a written request to make an oral statement must either be mailed, faxed, or sent by e-mail so as to be received by 5 p.m. EDT on August 21, 2006. Written requests to make an oral statement should be submitted to: Mail: Office of the Secretary, Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001. Fax: (301) 415-1101 (verification (301) 415-1966). E-mail: hearingdocket@nrc.gov. In addition, using the same method of service, a copy of the written request to make an oral statement should be sent to the Chairman of this Licensing Board as follows: Mail: Administrative Judge Lawrence G. McDade, c/o: Debra Wolf, Esq., Law Clerk, Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel, Mail Stop T-3 F23, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001. Fax: (301) 415-5599 (verification (301) 415-6094). E-mail: daw1@nrc.gov. D. Submitted Written Limited Appearance Statements A written limited appearance statement may be submitted to the Board regarding this proceeding at any time, either in lieu of or in addition to any oral statement. Such statements should be sent to the Office of the Secretary using the methods prescribed above, with a copy to the Licensing Board Chairman. E. Availability of Documentary Information Regarding the Proceeding Documents relating to this proceeding are available for public inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room (PDR), located at One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland, or electronically from the publicly available records component of NRC's document system (ADAMS). ADAMS is accessible from the NRC Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html (Electronic Reading Room). Persons who do not have access to ADAMS or who encounter problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS should contact the NRC PDR reference staff by telephone at (800) 397- 4209 or (301) 415-4737, or by e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov. F. Scheduling Information Updates Any updated/revised scheduling information regarding the limited appearance session can be found on the NRC Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/public-involve/public-meetings/index.cfm or by calling (800) 368-5642, extension 5036, or (301) 415-5036. Dated in Rockville, Maryland, July 21, 2006. For the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board.\1\ Lawrence G. McDade, Chairman, Administrative Judge. ----------------------------------------------------------------- ---------- \1\ Copies of this Notice were sent this date by Internet electronic mail transmission to counsel for (1) applicant SERI; and (2) the NRC Staff. ----------------------------------------------------------------- ---------- [FR Doc. 06-6507 Filed 7-26-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P ***************************************************************** 40 Bradenton Herald: Each side at Tallevast hearing makes small gain 07/27/2006 | DONNA WRIGHT Herald Staff Writer BRADENTON - Judge Durand Adams of the 12th Judicial Circuit presided Wednesday over the first hearing to define the extent of Tallevast residents' lawsuit against Lockheed Martin Corp. Both sides got something, but no one walked away a clear winner as Adams adjourned the hearing to further study motions filed by Lockheed to limit the scope of the lawsuit. Lockheed succeeded in convincing Adams to remove Loral Corp. from the list of defendants Tallevast residents allege are responsible for damaging their property and causing emotional distress by allowing toxic waste to contaminate their properties. Tallevast residents learned three years ago that they are sitting on top of a toxic plume of industrial waste now known to cover more than 200 acres. The underground plume includes cancer-causing industrial degreasers and solvents and has been traced back to a broken sump at the former Loral American Beryllium Co. plant at 1600 Tallevast Road. Adams ruled that since Loral ceased to exist when Lockheed purchased the company in 1996, Loral had no legal standing as a defendant. But residents won a reprieve when Adams ruled that it was premature to rule on Lockheed's request to dismiss their requests for relief and damages. The relief residents seek would allow the court to impose injunctions regarding the abatement and remediation of the toxic waste, as well as monetary damages based upon the profits Lockheed was able to make by failing to disclose the contamination to residents after its discovery. Other defendants named in the suit include BECSD, a limited holding company that owns the former beryllium company plant; Wire Pro Inc, a cable manufacturer that runs the plant; and WPI-Sarasota, which operates out of the Tallevast facility. Those defendants are collectively referred to by defense attorney Clifford B. Zatz as the WPI defendants. Zatz is a member of the Crowell &Moring law firm in Washington, D.C., which represents Lockheed. The lawsuit filed on behalf of 322 Tallevast residents makes six claims: Claim 1: A common law strict liability complaint alleging abnormally dangerous actions on the part of Lockheed and other defendants. Claim 2: Violation of a Florida statute that governs the release and discharge of hazardous chemicals. Claim 3: Negligence and breach of duty in the release of those chemicals and failing to adequately inform and warn residents. Claim 4: Trespass, because those chemicals invaded the property of residents. Claim 5: Private nuisance, because the chemicals interfered with and impaired residents' use of their property. Claim 6: Intentional infliction of emotional distress and outrage stemming from Lockheed's failure to inform residents. Lockheed's legal team has asked the court to dismiss claims 1, 4, 5 and 6. Adams heard arguments for and against dismissing those counts and is expected to issue a ruling at a later date. Zatz said that pared down to its proper size, the suit would have just two claims - a negligence claim and a claim under Florida law governing pollution discharge. He further argued that since no one knows for sure when the migration of the pollution occurred, there is no factual basis for claiming Lockheed or any of the current owners or operators of the plant could have been responsible. Bruce Denson, a St. Petersburg attorney and member of the Tallevast legal team, defended the suit at Wednesday's hearing as a common law trespass case because Lockheed and others knowingly allowed the contamination to continue. Zatz, however, said that the gradual movement of microscopic chemicals underground is not trespass and the plaintiffs' claims offered no facts to prove that the defendants intentionally allowed the contamination to migrate. For that to be true, Zatz cited the following example: Someone at the former beryllium plant would had to have knowingly put hazardous chemicals into the groundwater with the intent and knowledge that the chemicals would travel through the soil to the yard of Laura Ward, a plaintiff in the suit, with the clear intention of doing her harm. But Denson, in a motion, wrote that Lockheed's mishandling and release of the hazardous chemicals and its failure to properly contain the chemicals to prevent the pollution of plaintiffs' property or to notify plaintiffs of the danger "more than adequately" supports the trespass claim. Zatz took issue with the plaintiffs' claim of intentional infliction of emotional distress and outrage. The plaintiffs could not contend that defendants' conduct was either outrageous or directed at them, Zatz said. Denson curtly replied, "There are people here for whom outrage is not a sufficient word to describe what they have experienced." After the hearing, another member of Tallevast's legal team took issue with Zatz's dismissal of the suit as a "garden variety" negligence complaint. "This is about more than the value of a house," said Gary W. Kendall, of Michie Hamlett Lowry Rasmussen &Tweel, PLLC, in Charlottesville, Va. "This is about a community of people who have the right to enjoy their lives and their community. If you woke up some morning and found you were living on a toxic dump, you would be concerned about your health, your family, your future. What we want to make sure (is that) these people are being treated fairly for the losses they have incurred. "There is no issue that Lockheed Martin contaminated their properties," said Kendall. "There is no issue that it will take 20 years to clean it up. The only issue that is on the table is what Lockheed Martin is going to do to compensate Tallevast residents for their losses." Zatz declined to talk to The Herald, referring questions to Lockheed spokeswoman Gail Rymer, who said the defense giant does not normally comment on court hearings. Beatrice Zeigler, one of the Tallevast residents who has tested positive for beryllium exposure, was hopeful as she exited the courtroom. "It sounds like we've got something going," she said, "We will just have to wait and see." ***************************************************************** 41 The State: Lawmakers scramble to save MOX plant 07/27/2006 S.C. congressional delegation rallies for SRS program By JAMES ROSEN Washington Correspondent WASHINGTON  Senior U.S. nonproliferation officials urged lawmakers Wednesday to save a post-Cold War program aimed at slashing American and Russian stockpiles of weapons-grade plutonium left from dismantled nuclear arms. A House bid to block $368 million for the Savannah River Site to convert the plutonium into fuel for nuclear power plants galvanized the South Carolina congressional delegation to salvage the program. Rep. John Spratt, a York Democrat, convened a House committee hearing also attended by Republican Reps. Joe Wilson of West Columbia and Gresham Barrett of Westminster. Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham hosted an urgent meeting Tuesday of South Carolina and Georgia lawmakers with Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman and White House budget director Rob Portman. Energy Department workers have already broken ground for a plutonium-conversion plant on the sprawling Savannah River Site complex in Aiken County. If the program to convert plutonium to mixed oxide, or MOX, fuel is ended, it would cost thousands of promised constructions jobs, and hundreds of permanent ones, for South Carolina and Georgia workers. It would also saddle South Carolina with tons of highly toxic plutonium from nuclear arms made at the Savannah River Site and other government weapons factories elsewhere in the country. Without a MOX fuel-fabrication plant, South Carolina will be stuck with tons of weapons-grade plutonium with no clear pathway for disposal, Spratt said at a session of the House Armed Services Committees strategic forces subcommittee. Duke Energy is already burning MOX fuel from Europe, where it is widely used, in a test project at its Catawba Nuclear Station in York. But, upset by delays, cost increases and changes by the Russian government since the 2000 inception of the program, the House in May removed $368 million in funding for the project from a massive energy appropriations bill. Almost $418 million for the program remains in the Senates version of the funding measure, and the two chambers will have to settle their differences before final passage later this year. Wilson said backing away from the MOX program would cost Americans more money and harm U.S. standing in the world. MOX is the best form of disposition for the American taxpayer, he said. Building this facility sends a clear signal to the international community that we are serious about maintaining our commitment to dispose of excess plutonium. ***************************************************************** 42 The Onion: Nuclear Waste Accumulating | Wednesday, July 26, 2006 Thousands of tons of spent nuclear fuel is building up at three power plants because the government¹s failure to open a promised storage facility in Nevada. What do you think? [Old Woman] Yvonne Breen, Building Contractor "Surely there are faster, less costly ways to turn Nevada into a barren wasteland of radioactive decay." [Black Man] Peter Wexler, Door-to-Door Salesman "It's like my mom always said: 'A place for everything and everything in its place.' Of course, I never had more than one or two rods of nuclear waste lying around in my room." [Young Man] Ron Breslin, Systems Analyst "Whoever put Troma in charge of federal hazardous-waste management is an idiot." More American Voices © Copyright 2006, Onion, Inc. All ***************************************************************** 43 Platts: Russia won't import foreign-origin spent fuel Washington (Platts)--26Jul2006 In a reversal of policy, Russia won't import foreign-origin spent nuclear fuel, the Federal Atomic Energy Agency, Rosatom, confirmed July 26. Sergey Novikov, a spokesman for Rosatom, told Platts the Russian nuclear industry had decided to focus on international business in uranium and uranium enrichment sales as well as building up a nuclear power plant fleet at home. Legislation approved in June 2001 by the State Duma, the lower house of parliament, allows Russia to take in for long-term storage and reprocessing, foreign-origin spent nuclear fuel. About 80% of the spent fuel in target markets is under US control. Thus, US approval would be needed for the predicted $20 billion spent fuel reprocessing and management business to materialize, but securing such approval would involve complex negotiations. Novikov said Russia now has different priorities and will concentrate on building more nuclear power plants at home and developing its nuclear industry. Copyright © 2006 - Platts, All Rights Reserved [The McGraw-Hill Companies] ***************************************************************** 44 Concord Monitor: We don't need another radioactive dump - Concord, NH 03301 July 27, 2006 Concord Monitor and New Hampshire Patriot P.O. Box 1177 Concord NH 03302 603-224-5301 By Robert b. Williams jr. For the Monitor W illiam Klapproth wrote in his July 13 "My turn" that his testimony encouraging more nuclear power plants at the recent hearing of the Energy Planning Advisory Board "was the only mention of nuclear energy." It would be correct to say that he was the only person to promote nuclear energy but not the only one to mention it. I was the speaker immediately after him. I presented a resolution from the board of directors of the Campaign for Ratepayers Rights promoting a state energy policy that emphasizes conservation and efficiency and the use of renewable sources for generating power, such as wind. Our statement specifically opposed construction of additional nuclear reactors. Most of my oral comments related to problems with nuclear power - dangers related to accidents, exposure to low-level radiation released during normal operation, problems with evacuation (a former Hampton police chief told me, "Of course you can't evacuate the Seabrook area"), risks from nukes as possible terrorist targets and unsolved radioactive waste storage issues. I referred to the "Judd Gregg Memorial High-Level Radioactive Waste Dump" that we have in Seabrook. It is a dump that no New Hampshire legislator ever really voted for, but we have it nonetheless. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission had a rule that it would license only nukes run by "financially viable" owners. As Public Service was bankrupt in the late 1980s, even the NRC couldn't quite say with a straight face that PSNH was financially qualified. As governor at that time, Gregg helped engineer the takeover of Public Service by Northeast Utilities of Connecticut. Although some of the NU nukes in Connecticut were on the NRC's watch list because of poor management, at least NU was financially qualified and Seabrook started operation. Once nuclear operation started, additional, different isotopes were created that now form some of the high-level radioactive waste. An article in Business Week of July 10 was titled "Nuclear Power's Missing Fuel -Why Wall Street is skeptical of backing a new round of proposed nuke plants." Last year's Energy Act offered $13 billion in subsidies for nukes. The article quoted a director of Standard &Poor's as saying that even that large subsidy may not "provide a sufficient incentive to pursue new construction." If nuclear power is a proven technology, why are additional subsidies still needed or deserved? I am thankful that Wall Street is not rushing to build more nukes. (Robert B. Williams Jr. lives in Chichester.) Concord Monitor Online, P.O. Box 1177, Concord NH 03302 Phone: 603-224-5301 ***************************************************************** 45 IRNA: India to double uranium capacity this year New Delhi, July 26, IRNA India-Nuclear-Uranium India will double uranium capacity this year to meet requirements of its nuclear programs, a top government official said on Wednesday. "We are in the process of expanding uranium capacity. Projects are already underway and uranium capacity would be doubled this year," Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) Chairman Anil Kakodkar said at a seminar here. Kakodkar, however, did not give the exact quantity of the present uranium capacity in the country or the targeted addition. According to estimates, existing uranium reserves in the country are around 78,000 tons. He said domestic uranium is sufficient to fire power generation plants of 10,000 MW capacity. For any additional generation from nuclear fuels, India would have to depend either on imported uranium or domestically available thorium, he said. India currently has a total nuclear power generation capacity of about 3,800 MW and plans to scale it up to 20,000 MW by 2020. Kakodkar said the ore available in India contained only 0.06 percent of uranium compared to 18 percent in ores found in countries like Canada. Nuclear power generation so far has been limited to public sector companies only, but government is in the process of liberalizing the regime, he said. ***************************************************************** 46 Salt Lake Tribune: Flooding spurs new tailings concerns Article Last Updated: 07/27/2006 02:27:05 AM MDT By Judy Fahys The Salt Lake Tribune Flash flooding in Moab two weeks ago has provided new incentive for state and local officials to keep the pressure on the U.S. Energy Department to stay on schedule with the cleanup of the Atlas mill uranium tailings. The deluge - 2 to 4 inches of rain in a matter of hours - cut through the layer of sand that covers the massive pile of uranium waste on the banks of the Colorado River. It also washed out a containment berm and left a puddle on top of the 130-acre pile. The Energy Department oversees the cleanup and says there is no evidence that contaminated tailings escaped. Don Metzler, in charge of the massive cleanup, said his crews quickly replaced the dirt cover. Local and state leaders said the storm damage shows how vulnerable the pile is to nature's fickle forces. They are determined to prevent delays and lean budgets to leave the pile in harm's way long enough for the next natural disaster. "That's not what anyone wants to see," said Alyson Heyrend, an aide to U.S. Rep. Jim Matheson, D-Utah. "The tailings need to be moved." "It was amazing to see what happened," said Grand County Council member Joette Langianese. "It sends the message that we've got to get this thing out of here." The Energy Department has the project on a 10- to 12-year timetable. Grand County and Matheson would like to trim two years from that, but they question whether current funding levels - about $28 million this year - will be enough to keep that schedule for work estimated to cost between $458 million and $697 million. Plans are to build a rail spur to haul the uranium mill waste to Crescent Junction, 32 miles north, between I-70 and the Book Cliffs. About 18 million tons of waste - 1 1/2 times the debris left by the World Trade Center collapse - was left behind after the Atlas uranium mill went bankrupt in the 1980s. Metzler said the Energy Department will have to be prepared to deal with Mother Nature until the cleanup is done, and he believes it is prepared. Meanwhile, he's pleased to be keeping up on the monitoring and preparation. "Right now, we're in great shape" for funding, he said. "The project is being supported within the highest levels." Langianese plans a lobbying trip to Washington in the next few months as Congress refines next year's budget. fahys@sltrib.com © Copyright 2006, The Salt Lake Tribune. ***************************************************************** 47 NRC: Request for Comments on the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Low FR Doc E6-12022 [Federal Register: July 27, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 144)] [Notices] [Page 42677] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr27jy06-81] Level Radioactive Waste Program; Extension of Comment Period AGENCY: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. ACTION: Request for comments on the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's low level radioactive waste program; Extension of Comment Period. DATES: The public comment period for this action has been extended and now closes September 5, 2006. Written comments should be submitted as described in the ADDRESSES section of this notice. Comments submitted by mail should be postmarked by that date to ensure consideration. Comments received or postmarked after that date will be considered to the extent practical. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Ryan Whited, Chief, Low Level Waste Section, Environmental and Performance Assessment Directorate, Division of Waste Management and Environmental Protection, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Rockville, MD 20852. Telephone: (301) 415-7257; fax number: (301) 415-5370; e-mail: arw2@nrc.gov. SUMMARY: On July 7, 2006 (71 FR 38675), the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission published a document requesting public comment on its low level radioactive waste regulatory program. The comment period for this action, which was to have closed 30 days after publication, is being extended for an additional 30 days. ADDRESSES: Members of the public are invited and encouraged to submit comments to the Chief, Rules and Directives Branch, Mail Stop T6-D59, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001. Comments will also be accepted by e-mail at NRCREP@nrc.gov or by fax to (301) 415-5397, Attention: Ryan Whited. Dated at Rockville, Maryland this 20th day of July, 2006. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Scott Flanders, Deputy Director, Environmental and Performance Assessment Directorate, Division of Waste Management and Environmental Protection, Office of Nuclear Materials Safety and Safeguards. [FR Doc. E6-12022 Filed 7-26-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P ***************************************************************** 48 Scotsman: 3bn to clean up MoD nuclear sites 27th July 2006 Change DateLatest Issue JAMES KIRKUP POLITICAL EDITOR + It will cost taxpayers £3bn to decontaminate military bases + Sites include Rosyth dockyard in Fife the and Dounreay nuclear complex + Accountants estimate the costs will not be paid for another ten years Key quote "Genuine action to clean up radioactive contamination is good news for areas currently blighted by the MoD's nuclear programme, but yet more bad news for the taxpayer," - Stuart Hay, Friends of the Earth Scotland Story in full CLEANING up military nuclear sites and equipment in Scotland will cost taxpayers up to £3 billion, official figures have revealed. The bulk of the costs north of the Border will come at the Dounreay nuclear complex in Caithness, where the Royal Navy's nuclear submarine programme has a test reactor and waste disposal facility. The Ministry of Defence forecasts that decommissioning the two units will cost £2.1 billion. Decommissioning both retired and active Trident nuclear submarines will take place at the Rosyth dockyard in Fife and at the Devonport yard in Plymouth. The cost of that work will be £837 million, with another £4 million set aside for the "disposal of support equipment which contains depleted uranium". Cleaning up Rosyth and the surrounding area following the decommissioning work there will cost another £32 million, the MoD calculates. At the Faslane submarine base on the Clyde, arguably Scotland's best-known military nuclear site, technology used to process the radioactive "effluent" produced by nuclear submarines is being replaced at a cost of £2.2 million. The detailed estimates made by the MoD put the department's total bill for decommissioning sites around the UK at almost £10 billion in the coming years. The MoD's projected costs of £9.8 billion are in addition to the £70 billion the government estimates will be needed to clean up civilian nuclear work. Opponents of nuclear weapons last night seized on the military clean-up costs as another argument against replacing Britain's ageing Trident nuclear missile system, which is due to be retired by 2024. A new deterrent system could cost more than £20 billion, but Gordon Brown, the Chancellor, has signalled he is ready to pay for new nuclear arms when he becomes prime minister. But as the MoD's own figures make clear, the government is already facing a huge bill as a legacy of Britain's existing nuclear weapons programme. The bulk of the MoD's remaining £6 billion in nuclear liability costs will come at the Atomic Weapons Establishment at Aldermaston in Berkshire. Another £1.1 billion will help NIREX, the nuclear industry's clean-up contractor, build a "deep waste repository". In all, the MoD's latest accounts forecast that the department will incur "undiscounted costs" of £9,753,827,000 in the coming years. The timetable is not precise because of uncertainties about the retirement of various facilities, but accountants estimate most of the bill will not have to be paid for at least ten years. But at least £311 million will have to be paid over the next three years. Opponents of a new British nuclear deterrent said the MoD's costs should count against a replacement for Trident. "Genuine action to clean up radioactive contamination is good news for areas currently blighted by the MoD's nuclear programme, but yet more bad news for the taxpayer," said Stuart Hay, of Friends of the Earth Scotland. "This is yet another wake-up call highlighting the folly of creating a new generation of radioactive waste whilst we still have to meet the costs of dealing with a historic legacy of contaminated sites." Willie Rennie, the Liberal Democrat defence spokesman and Dunfermline MP, said he was pleased the MoD was planning a clean-up at Rosyth, but added: "The cost of decommissioning nuclear sites must be a consideration in the wider debate about replacing the UK's nuclear deterrent." An MoD spokesman said it was "too early to say" what possible clean-up costs might be, but insisted it would be properly and publicly assessed when ministers reached a decision. Related topics + http://news.scotsman.com/topics.cfm?tid=1034 + http://news.scotsman.com/topics.cfm?tid=373 This article: http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=1088632006 Last updated: 27-Jul-06 12:50 BST ***************************************************************** 49 Scotsman: More new buildings go up at Dounreay Thu 27 Jul 2006 JOHN ROSS THE programme to decommission the Dounreay nuclear site has resulted in more money spent last year on putting buildings up than pulling them down, a new report has shown. The UK Atomic Energy Authority (UKAEA) spent £35 million on new construction projects compared with £33 million on demolitions. The first annual report on progress to decommission the former experimental reactor site, published yesterday, shows £145 million was spent last year on the site clean-up, This should be completed by 2033 at a cost of £2.9 billion. The report covers the period from 1 April, 2005 when the UKAEA became a contractor to the new Nuclear Decommissioning Authority. The new buildings have a 100-year life-span and are needed to treat and store waste created during the decommissioning process. Costs on these projects will be spread over several years prior to the waste shaft being cleaned out. Last updated: 27-Jul-06 01:11 BST ***************************************************************** 50 Scotsman.com: Scotland - More new buildings go up at Dounreay Thu 27 Jul 2006 JOHN ROSS THE programme to decommission the Dounreay nuclear site has resulted in more money spent last year on putting buildings up than pulling them down, a new report has shown. The UK Atomic Energy Authority (UKAEA) spent £35 million on new construction projects compared with £33 million on demolitions. The first annual report on progress to decommission the former experimental reactor site, published yesterday, shows £145 million was spent last year on the site clean-up, This should be completed by 2033 at a cost of £2.9 billion. The report covers the period from 1 April, 2005 when the UKAEA became a contractor to the new Nuclear Decommissioning Authority. The new buildings have a 100-year life-span and are needed to treat and store waste created during the decommissioning process. Costs on these projects will be spread over several years prior to the waste shaft being cleaned out. Last updated: 27-Jul-06 01:11 BST ***************************************************************** 51 UPI: Abandoned radioactive material found United Press International - NewsTrack - 7/27/2006 4:24:00 PM -0400 RACHA, Georgia, July 27 (UPI) -- Two abandoned but potentially dangerous radioactive devices have been found in the former Soviet republic of Georgia. A Georgian Ministry of Environment and International Atomic Energy Agency team found a powerful source in a dirt pile at a derelict factory in isolated Racha. Background radiation levels were elevated 12 times above normal in the village center. A second smaller source was found inside wooden wall from a bedroom in a house, IAEA reported. The radioisotope in both sources was Cesium 137, among the most common radioactive isotopes in industrial use. © Copyright 2006 United Press International, Inc. All Rights Reserved * Email: * Comments: ***************************************************************** 52 Fontana Herald News: Congress approves funding for perchlorate cleanup Fontana, California By FONTANA HERALD NEWS Congressman Joe Baca (D-Rialto) applauded the recent Congressional passage of funding for cleaning up groundwater contaminated by perchlorate. "This is great news for the residents of Rialto, Fontana and Colton especially," Baca said. "I have been working hard to make sure federal funding is provided to clean up our drinking water. The health hazard was created by former military sites as part of national defense, so the federal government should help pay the costs and not leave our local communities to foot the entire bill." The House of Representatives had previously passed Baca's legislation, the Southern California Groundwater Remediation Act (H.R. 18), to help areas covered by the Santa Ana Watershed Project Authority, including San Bernardino, Riverside and Orange counties, but the Senate had not yet done so. Baca worked with Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) to gain support, and she included a version of his bill in S. 203, the National Heritage Areas Act, comprehensive legislation that passed the Senate last week and won House approval on Monday. S. 203 authorizes $25 million for groundwater remediation by providing grants to local water authorities both in the Inland Empire and in Santa Clara County. Perchlorate, a rocket fuel additive, is a volatile organic compound that has been found to be harmful to humans as it interferes with thyroid function. According to experts, 90 percent of the perchlorate found in water comes from a federal source, primarily from former military sites and other Department of Defense installations. Perchlorate affects the safety of drinking water and also contaminates the food supply. It has been detected in lettuce in Southern California. Perchlorate has even been found in milk from dairies near contaminated water sources, Baca said. Cities and counties across the country are closing their groundwater wells due to perchlorate contamination. Throughout the state of California, hundreds of wells are impacted, including 78 in the 43rd Congressional District, the Inland Empire area represented by Baca. Baca has secured an additional $2.5 million in the Fiscal Year 2007 Defense Appropriations bill for perchlorate cleanup in areas such as Rialto, Colton and Fontana. Copyright © 2006 Fontana Herald News Tel: (909)822-2231 ***************************************************************** 53 Australian: ALP campaign falls short of critical mass + July 28, 2006 The Australian Dennis Shanahan On uranium mining, Kim Beazley is clearly on the right track but he is refusing to go all the way, says Political editor KIM Beazley has been up to his armpits in radioactive alligators since he renounced Labor's 30-year restrictions on uranium mining. He has copped flak from greenies and lefties, and faces opposition from his own front bench. It's a classic Labor Party brawl that the Opposition Leader expected, couldn't avoid and has brought on earlier than scheduled. It also is a brawl his supporters want and are trying to use to bolster his leadership credentials. The aim is to clean up an anachronistic policy on uranium mining, portray Beazley as a tough conviction politician prepared to take on all comers for something he believes in, and to build his economic credibility. Labor is also preparing the ground for a scare campaign at the next election based on a nuclear reactor being built in your electorate. Beazley's announcement in Sydney this week that he opposed Labor's policy of banning or restricting uranium mining and would push for it to be changed at the national ALP conference in April was crafted with all these objectives in mind. "The years of cautious rebuilding in federal Labor have passed. Without question, these years of my leadership are years of decision," Beazley said. He says he overturned Labor's 2004 policy on funding private schools not because it was easy but "because I knew it was right". Apart from the logical problem that Mark Latham's 2004 private school hit list was remarkably similar to Beazley's in 2001, the rhetoric was right. Ditto the pledge to "rip up John Howard's wage-cutting AWAs" because "I knew it was right". And likewise taking a stand on uranium mining and lifting the ban on new mines: it was, Beazley said, "right for Australia's future". "Exporting uranium will help to build our future prosperity," Beazley declared, demonstrating his economic responsibility, while he ruled out nuclear power or uranium enrichment in Australia. On the scare side, he jumped well ahead of Howard's position to suggest the Prime Minister had a secret nuclear power plan that would be announced after the next election and was refusing to "say where the reactors would go". The response from the anti-uranium camp was predictable and served the purpose of creating the impression that Beazley was prepared to take on the greens and his own left wing, notably Labor's environmental spokesman Anthony Albanese. Beazley and his supporters relished the criticism from nuclear reactionaries such as Albanese, whom Howard had nominated as a neanderthal in the nuclear debate who was standing in the way of Australia's economic progress and our contribution to low greenhouse gas emissions via nuclear energy. Despite the sound and fury, Beazley's authority as party leader does not appear to be under serious threat: Labor's resources spokesman Martin Ferguson, a left-winger opposed to Albanese, various unions and the NSW Right will guarantee him a victory at the party conference. It also made sense for Beazley to act now rather than allow the issue to fester until the conference next April. There will be a vote at the conference, possibly only a couple of months before an election is called, but the heat will have gone out of the battle. Sweet as a nut, except for a couple of qualifications. Beazley is being negative and reactive again: his uranium policy still cuts Australia out of the bulk of the nuclear cycle and his energy policies are hobbled by the Kyoto Protocol and a corrupt carbon trading scheme, which don't cut greenhouse gas emissions and threaten Australia's energy exports industries. Howard kicked off the nuclear debate a year ago. He has linked energy and fighting greenhouse emissions with prosperity and security. Unchallenged, Howard has developed the energy debate and forced Beazley to engage. As in the case of the new industrial relations laws, Labor is reacting to a Howard initiative. The reaction has been slow and leaves Howard ahead on economic management just as the economy begins to suffer from inflation and another interest rate rise looms. Beazley's economic arguments need to be clear and uncluttered; perceptions of $45 billion worth of threats to the resources industry and mineral exports must be dispatched. There is already widespread alarm among sections of the mining industry over Beazley's pledge to do away with private contracts and AWAs, which have allowed so much more flexibility in the sector. Energy security is obviously the prime objective of every country and Australia is best placed to take advantage of energy-related demand. As Howard said in his energy speech last week: "Man's hunger for energy, and all this involves, will profoundly shape geopolitics this century, perhaps even more so than last century. Energy security concerns are assuming the sort of strategic significance once reserved for territorial security." Australia is the largest coal exporter; it is likely to be become the second largest exporter of liquefied natural gas in the next few years; and it holds 40 per cent of the world's uranium reserves. This is a debate about the future. It is also a debate Beazley could not have engaged in while supporting a ban on uranium mining. He has gone as far as seems manageable within the ALP. A ban on new uranium mines is a hollow policy; South Australia's mines are so large that there is scope for vast expansion without a new mine being created. It is an anachronistic policy that doesn't change the reality of uranium mining in Australia. Beazley stood by the ALP's policy on banning any involvement in the nuclear fuel cycle, from enrichment to nuclear power stations, so that he could claim to be bringing Labor's energy policy into the 21st century while remaining opposed to nuclear expansion. The Labor leader is now portraying Howard's energy inquiry, which includes the feasibility of uranium enrichment and nuclear energy, as an ideologically driven quest for nuclear power - and ultimately weapons - in Australia. It's another scare campaign based on a negative approach and an illogical policy on energy and the environment, but it's more than he had last week. ***************************************************************** 54 DOE: DOE Distributes Energy-Saving Tools to Help Manufacturers Save Energy July 26, 2006 WASHINGTON, DC  The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) has distributed Save Energy Now CD-ROMs containing energy-saving information and software to 3,500 large industrial plant managers across the nation as part of a DOE initiative to help cut excessive energy use at industrial facilities across the nation. The CDs bring together  in a single product  a compendium of tip sheets, case studies, technical manuals and software tools to help plants assess energy-saving opportunities. President Bush has called on all Americans to be more energy efficient, and private industry, along with the federal government, are taking aggressive measures to reduce excessive energy consumption, DOE Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Alexander Karsner said. These Energy Department CD-Roms, packed with energy-saving information, offer valuable information and energy-saving tools to enable plant managers to reduce their energy costs, and alleviate price pressure nationally. DOE is also helping manufacturers by performing no-cost energy assessments of 200 large industrial facilities energy systems. As an example of completed assessments initial savings, eight plants have reported a total of $1 million in immediate savings in the first 30 days of implementing DOE recommendations. The first 61 energy-saving assessments of industrial facilities have identified, in aggregate, nearly $200 million per year in potential energy cost savings and could reduce natural gas consumption by over 22 trillion Btu per year, equivalent to the natural gas consumed by more than 300,000 homes annually. Approximately 3,500 plants were contacted based on publicly available data that DOE used to identify the most energy-intensive plants in the United States. This fall, DOE will be offering another round of Energy Saving Assessments for industrial facilities. Energy Saving Teams will again visit selected large industrial facilities to assess their steam or process heating systems. For more information on the Save Energy Now CD ROM, and to order one, visit: . For news on the upcoming round of assessments, application forms, results of ongoing work, and other resources for saving energy, visit: , or contact the EERE information Center at (877) 337-3463. Media contact(s): Chris Kielich, (202) 586-5806 [ ] U.S. Department of Energy | 1000 Independence Ave., SW | Washington, DC 20585 1-800-dial-DOE | f/202-586-4403 | e/General ***************************************************************** 55 DOE: Secretary Bodman Hosts Iraqi Ministers of Oil and Electricity July 26, 2006 Energy Leaders sign MOU to further promote electricity cooperation WASHINGTON, DC  U.S. Department of Energy Secretary Samuel W. Bodman today hosted Iraqs Minister of Oil Hussein al-Shahristani and Minster of Electricity Karim Wahid Hasan to discuss the rehabilitation and expansion of Iraqs energy infrastructure. The Ministers visit to the Department follows up on Secretary Bodmans invitation to them to come to the United States to talk to professionals in electricity generation, transmission and distribution, and oil sector development. The U.S. government is committed to providing scientific and technical assistance to help the Iraqi people expand their energy sector, Secretary Bodman said. We encourage and support Iraqi led changes and reforms as the people of Iraq work through the challenges of building a new democracy and a new economy. Secretary Bodman encouraged the Ministers to continue progress on economic and management reforms, including commercialization of the energy sector. Secretary Bodman also reiterated his commitment to continue a dialogue with the Ministries of Oil and Electricity, following his trip to Iraq last week where they discussed ways the U.S. Department of Energy can assist in rebuilding Iraqs energy infrastructure. During Secretary Bodmans meeting with Electricity Minister Karim Wahid Hasan, the two signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the U.S. Department of Energy and the Iraqi Ministry of Electricity. This MOU formalizes the increased bilateral cooperation between the two nations in the areas of energy analysis, science, technology, and energy awareness and education. During his meeting with Minister al-Shahristani, Secretary Bodman stressed the importance of developing and implementing a national hydrocarbon law, which will allow much needed foreign investment in the oil and natural gas sector of their economy and ensure Iraqs natural resources are used for the benefit of all the Iraqi people. In addition, at Minister al-Shahristanis request, Secretary Bodman convened a meeting of oil sector leaders to discuss how the private sector can help Iraq develop its energy infrastructure and the role of a national hydrocarbon law in Iraq. During their meeting the business leaders discussed infrastructure rehabilitation and expansion opportunities, technology and technical capabilities, and the need for transparent and consistent laws and guidelines that will allow investment to flourish. DOE currently provides technical experts to the Iraq Reconstruction Management Office and the U.S. Embassy Baghdad and will be pursuing joint projects to further strengthen the bilateral relationship with Iraqi energy and scientific ministries. Media contact(s): Craig Stevens, (202) 586-4940 [ ] U.S. Department of Energy | 1000 Independence Ave., SW | Washington, DC 20585 1-800-dial-DOE | f/202-586-4403 | e/General ***************************************************************** 56 SF New Mexican: State cashes in on new LANL management Thu Jul 27, 2006 6:42 pm By ANDY LENDERMAN | The The new manager of Los Alamos National Laboratory recently made its first installment payment of an estimated $80 million to $90 million New Mexico gross-receipts-tax bill. Los Alamos National Security LLC paid the bill last week, spokesman Steve Sandoval said. That first payment on this year's tax was due Tuesday. Sandoval said the company wanted to keep the amount of the tax bill private. The state also declined to reveal the amount. Sandoval said the payments will be made monthly. The state and Los Alamos County will share the money, which is new income for both governments. The lab's management contractor from 1943 to last May was the University of California, which did not pay the tax because it is a nonprofit educational institution. The federal government put the lab's contract out for bid in 2003 after a series of safety and security incidents prompted congressional debate about the lab's management. Los Alamos National Security won the performance-based contract, which has an initial term of seven years. The company took over June 1 and can be paid up to $79 million a year for its work. The Los Alamos National Security partners are Bechtel Corp., the University of California, BWX Technologies Inc. and Washington Group International. The state will get 54 percent of the lab's tax payment, and Los Alamos County, where the business activity is generated, will get 46 percent, Tom Clifford, chief economist with the state Taxation and Revenue Department, said. Of the overall gross-receipts-tax rate of 6.9375 percent, he said, the county gets 3.1625 percent and the state gets 3.775 percent. Clifford also explained a shifting in some of the local tax structure. The old University of California management did not have to pay taxes, he said, but some subcontractors based in Santa Fe, Bernalillo or Rio Arriba counties paid the tax there. Now things have changed. Since the private company took over, Clifford said, Los Alamos National Security can use its subcontractors as tax deductions. The result is a loss of local tax base in some places and a gain in Los Alamos County. "I'm sure there's a shift. I just don't know the amounts," he said. The lab's total budget is about $2.2 billion this year. It employs about 12,000 people. Contact Andy Lenderman at 995-3827 or alenderman@sfnewmexican.com. ©2006, Santa Fe New Mexican, all rights reserved. Opinions ***************************************************************** 57 Oak Ridger: TVA wants to study finishing 2nd nuclear reactor State AP News http://www.oakridger.com Associated Press Writer DUNCAN MANSFIELD --> Associated Press Writer --> KNOXVILLE, Tenn.  The Tennessee Valley Authority is ready to pursue a study on completing a second nuclear reactor at its Watts Bar station  the last nuclear plant to come on line in the United States, a top official said Thursday. --> --> KNOXVILLE, Tenn.  The Tennessee Valley Authority is ready to pursue a study on completing a second nuclear reactor at its Watts Bar station  the last nuclear plant to come on line in the United States, a top official said Thursday. Directors of the nation's largest public utility will be asked Friday to approve $20 million for a detailed engineering study to show how much it will cost to complete Watts Bar Unit 2, TVA President and acting CEO Tom Kilgore told The Associated Press in an interview. "That doesn't mean that they are deciding to do Watts Bar 2," he said. "It means that we are asking them to spend money so that we can decide how much it would cost." TVA will continue working with a group of utilities looking at another nuclear option  using TVA's unfinished Bellefonte nuclear reactor site in Alabama to build a modern nuclear reactor, which would be more reliable and less costly than current reactors. "It is not an either-or on Bellefonte," Kilgore said. "It is more of timing with Bellefonte. In other words, we could finish Watts Bar 2 faster than we could finish Bellefonte." TVA believes it will need new base generation capacity by 2014. The unfinished 1,160-megawatt reactor at Watts Bar in Spring City, Tenn., about 50 miles south of Knoxville, could produce enough electricity to serve more than 670,000 homes. Construction on the Watts Bar station halted in 1985 with the rest of TVA's nuclear program because of safety concerns. Construction later resumed on Watts Bar 1, which came on line in 1996  the last nuclear reactor to start up in this country. TVA currently operates three nuclear stations in Tennessee and Alabama with five running reactors. A sixth reactor is slated to return to service in 2007 at the Browns Ferry station in Alabama after a $1.8 billion modernization project. There are 103 licensed reactors operating at 65 sites in the United States. The Browns Ferry Unit 1 reactor would be the 104th, which TVA expects to start around May 2007. "There are a number of letters from a number of utilities saying they are contemplating applying for early site permits and-or construction permits for new reactors. None have come in yet," said Ken Clark, spokesman for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Designed in the 1970s, the Watts Bar Unit 1 reactor took nearly 23 years and $7 billion to complete. The twin Unit 2 reactor was more than half finished when construction stopped in 1985. Finishing Unit 2 is expected to cost less than Watts Bar 1  Kilgore estimated $2 billion to $3 billion  because of common facilities, but still would require replacing parts that have been cannibalized for other TVA reactors. "If we were to go back today and start finishing Watts Bar 2 we would obviously need to replace all those parts, and we would need to also update a lot of things. Controls and even processes. We would really have to look at everything to see what needed to be not just replaced but renewed," Kilgore said. The TVA board of directors will consider the study request as part of a nearly $9 billion budget request for fiscal 2007 that will include a staff recommendation to cut electric rates by 3.5 percent to 5 percent. TVA provides electricity to 158 distributors serving about 8.6 million consumers in Tennessee and parts of Kentucky, Alabama, Mississippi, North Carolina, Georgia and Virginia.  TVA: http://www.tva.gov--> Copyright 2006 The Associated Press. All ***************************************************************** 58 DOE: Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board, Paducah FR Doc E6-12038 [Federal Register: July 27, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 144)] [Notices] [Page 42637] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr27jy06-33] AGENCY: Department of Energy (DOE). ACTION: Notice of Open Meeting. SUMMARY: This notice announces a meeting of the Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board (EM SSAB), Paducah. The Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463, 86 Stat. 770) requires that public notice of this meeting be announced in the Federal Register. DATES: Thursday, August 17, 2006. 5:30 p.m.-9 p.m. ADDRESSES: 111 Memorial Drive, Barkley Centre, Paducah, Kentucky 42001. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: William E. Murphie, Deputy Designated Federal Officer, Department of Energy Portsmouth/Paducah Project Office, 1017 Majestic Drive, Suite 200, Lexington, Kentucky 40513, (859) 219-4001. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Purpose of the Board: The purpose of the Board is to make recommendations to DOE in the areas of environmental restoration, waste management and related activities. Tentative Agenda 5:30 p.m.--Informal Discussion 6 p.m.--Call to Order Introductions Review of Agenda Approval of July Minutes 6:15 p.m.--Deputy Designated Federal Officer's Comments 6:35 p.m.--Federal Coordinator's Comments 6:40 p.m.--Liaisons' Comments 6:50 p.m.--Public Comments and Questions 7 p.m.--Task Forces/Presentations Site Management Plan Land Acquisition Study Update Water Disposition/Water Quality Task Force 8 p.m.--Review of Action Items 8:05 p.m.--Public Comments and Questions 8:15 p.m.--Break 8:25 p.m.--Administrative Issues Preparation for September Presentation Budget Review Review of Work Plan Review of Next Agenda 8:35 p.m.--Subcommittee Report Executive Committee--Chairs' Meeting Homework 8:50 p.m.--Final Comments 9 p.m.--Adjourn Public Participation: The meeting is open to the public. Written statements may be filed with the Board either before or after the meeting. Individuals who wish to make oral statements pertaining to agenda items should contact David Dollins at the address listed below or by telephone at (270) 441-6819. Requests must be received five days prior to the meeting and reasonable provision will be made to include the presentation in the agenda. The Deputy Designated Federal Officer is empowered to conduct the meeting in a fashion that will facilitate the orderly conduct of business. Individuals wishing to make public comment will be provided a maximum of five minutes to present their comments. Minutes: The minutes of this meeting will be available for public review and copying at the U.S. Department of Energy's Freedom of Information Public Reading Room, 1E-190, Forrestal Building, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585 between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday-Friday, except Federal holidays. Minutes will also be available at the Department of Energy's Environmental Information Center and Reading Room at 115 Memorial Drive, Barkley Centre, Paducah, Kentucky between 8 a.m. and 5 p.m. on Monday through Friday or by writing to David Dollins, Department of Energy, Paducah Site Office, Post Office Box 1410, MS-103, Paducah, Kentucky 42001 or by calling him at (270) 441-6819. Issued at Washington, DC, on July 24, 2006. Rachel M. Samuel, Deputy Advisory Committee Management Officer. [FR Doc. E6-12038 Filed 7-26-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P ***************************************************************** 59 UPI: U.S. has 76 tons of surplus nuke material United Press International - Security &Terrorism - 7/27/2006 12:15:00 PM -0400 WASHINGTON, July 27 (UPI) -- The U.S. Department of Energy has 76 metric tons of surplus highly enriched uranium and plutonium in storage, a top U.S. official said. "The Department of Energy currently has approximately 50 metric tons of surplus weapons and non-weapons plutonium. In addition, the department has approximately 26 metric tons of surplus highly enriched uranium (HEU) that does not currently have a disposition path," Ambassador Linton F. Brooks, U.S. undersecretary for nuclear security and administrator of the National Nuclear Security Administration at the Department of Energy told the Armed Services Subcommittee on Strategic Forces of the U.S. House of Representatives Wednesday "This highly enriched uranium is part of a larger inventory of surplus HEU that will either be blended down for disposition in light water reactors or retained for use in Navy nuclear propulsion plants," Brooks said. "Finding a disposition path for that HEU is a necessary component of an overall materials disposition strategy," he said. "These surplus materials, which are no longer required for national defense or programmatic purposes, are stored at multiple locations, including the Savannah River Site; Hanford; Los Alamos National Laboratory; Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory; the Pantex Plant; and the Y-12 National Security Complex," Brooks said. "Since these materials could be used to make a nuclear weapon or a 'dirty bomb,' the department (of energy) spends hundreds of millions of dollars each year to ensure that these materials are stored safely and securely." © Copyright 2006 United Press International, Inc. All Rights * Email: * Comments: ***************************************************************** 60 Knox News: Strike means more oversight for nuclear firm By REBECCA FERRAR, ferrarr@knews.com July 27, 2006 The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission has increased oversight at Tri-Cities company Nuclear Fuel Services Inc. following a complaint by workers who are on strike at the facility, which supplies uranium fuel to TVA. United Steelworkers, Local 9677, sent a letter Wednesday to the NRC, asking the agency to investigate alleged safety and production problems at Nuclear Fuel Services since the union went on strike May 16. "We are urging the NRC to investigate whether NFS is putting worker or community safety, product quality and our nation's security at risk by having replacement workers perform work they are not qualified for,'' said United Steelworkers Director Connie Entrekin in the letter to the NRC. About 370 workers are on strike, in part because of a company proposal to eliminate the defined pension plan and replace it with a 401(k) retirement system for new employees. Nuclear Fuel Services, through a contract with Areva Inc., provides blended low enriched uranium to TVA for use as fuel at the Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant in Northern Alabama. NFS converts highly enriched uranium supplied by the Department of Energy so it may be used in a commercial reactor. TVA spokesman John Moulton said TVA is not aware of any problems at Nuclear Fuel Services . "Production has not been a problem," Moulton said. "We've received our shipments of blended low enriched uranium. I'm not aware of any problems at this time. As far as safety in operations, the NRC is responsible for regulating the safety of NFS operations." Nuclear Fuel Services also is the sole supplier of fuel for the U.S. Navy's nuclear fleet. Company officials could not be reached for comment. NRC spokesman Roger Hannah said the NRC will give the union's concerns "due consideration." He said the NRC has two resident inspectors at the Nuclear Fuel Services site in Erwin, Tenn. "We have increased our oversight," Hannah said. "We are looking a little more carefully at NFS. If we do have any concerns about safety issues, we will address them. At this point, we're not aware of any specific concerns that we are looking into immediately." He said the resident inspectors will make additional inspections "if appropriate," but that decision hasn't yet been made. According to the union, alleged safety and production problems at the facility since the strike began include: + A contractor completing work that its employees were not trained for. + Two security officers becoming contaminated by nuclear materials while performing their duties, indicating that contractors or salaried employees are not taking necessary safety precautions. + Salaried employees performing work that they do not normally perform, being exposed to nuclear materials and committing serious production errors. "We want to make sure the rules are being followed," said James Carvin, United Steelworkers' staff representative. "We're concerned about the safety of the community and the viability of the company, that it is still in operation when we conclude our dispute." Business writer Rebecca Ferrar may be reached at 865-342-6357. © 2006 - Knoxville News Sentinel ***************************************************************** 61 Rocky Mountain News: Justice elusive for Flats workers Opinion Editorials Congress could streamline process July 27, 2006 To the Rocky Flats workers trapped inside it, the system for compensating those who fell ill or died as a result of exposure to radioactive or toxic materials has been a nightmare. And while Colorado Reps. Mark Udall and Bob Beauprez have introduced a bill designed to help, the likelihood of its passing any time soon is depressingly small. First some context: There is no doubt that working on nuclear weapons during the height of the Cold War was potentially dangerous, not only at Rocky Flats but at other weapons sites around the country. But America was fighting a real war even though it mercifully never flashed hot, and weapons production was critical. Unfortunately, in the aftermath of anticlimactic victory, the country was slow to acknowledge its obligations to those who had served at home. Finally in 2000, Congress approved a plan to provide medical care and compensation, up to $150,000, to workers who could demonstrate, based on the amount of exposure, that their illness was more likely than not caused by their work. That opened up a new raft of problems. To various degrees, past exposure records were missing, incomplete or inaccurate - how much so is hotly disputed - and in the best of cases, such data offer only statistical evidence of a connection. Because cancer is extremely common anyway, it is possible to know that the rate among weapons plant workers is elevated, and reasonable to believe it is because of the exposure, but still not possible to say which individuals would have escaped the disease if only they had worked elsewhere. Around the country, far more claims are denied than approved - in part because of the demanding requirements. Of 2,400 Rocky Flats workers who filed claims, fewer than 500 have been paid, while more than 1,700 have been denied. The rest are pending. Because of the sometimes inadequate record-keeping, the law provides that workers at a site can petition to be part of a "special exposure cohort" whose members do not have to offer individual evidence of exposure to qualify for compensation. Such a petition is pending for Rocky Flats, although the deadline for action is long past. As an alternative, Udall and Beauprez have introduced a bill to designate Rocky Flats workers as members of the cohort. Unfortunately, it's so close to the end of the session that action is unlikely. Meaning those who served on the civilian front in the Cold War still await a fair deal. --> ***************************************************************** 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: *****************************************************************