*****************************************************************
08/21/06 ****     RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL)       **** VOL 14.198
*****************************************************************
   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 [du-list] Italy: the 2000 Dull-DU proposal still unanswered by
2 [NYTr] Venezuela Supports Iran's Right to Develop Nuclear Energy
3 IRNA: South African FM: Iran's right to nuclear technology undeniabl
4 IRNA: Iran committed to its stance - Elham 
5 Guardian Unlimited: Iran Says It Won't Stop Nuclear Program
6 Guardian Unlimited: A Look at Nuclear Incentives for Iran
7 Guardian Unlimited: Iran Denies Inspectors Access to Site
8 BBC: Iran reply may herald new confrontation
9 IRIB PERSIAN NEWS: Inspections limit if pressure keeps 
10 IRIB PERSIAN NEWS: Iran committed to its stance: Elham 
11 AFP: Iran ready to formally insist on uranium enrichment 
12 AFP: Defiant Iran says will press on with nuclear work 
13 AFP: Defiant Iran vows to press on with nuclear work - 
14 IRNA: Iran rejects preconditions for nuclear talks 
15 UPI: U.N. pleased Iran to respond on nukes
16 IRNA: Venezuelan VP against preventing Iran's nuclear program
17 IRNA: Mottaki: Iran committed to holding talks on its nuclear issue 
18 IRNA: Majlis to limit IAEA inspections if pressures continues - MP -
19 AFP: Bush asks Chinese leader to help end North Korean nuclear threa
20 Guardian Unlimited: Bush: Rush Peacekeeping Force to Lebanon
21 US: Judicial Watch: Judge Saves Corrupt Govt. Contractor
22 AFP: US makes missile data secret again 
23 US: UPI: U.S. makes 1971 missile data classified
24 US: UPI: UPI Energy Watch
25 Guardian Unlimited: Power and the people
26 RIA Novosti: Ex-minister graft case may be returned for further inve
27 IRNA: Afghan envoy: Afghanistan attaches importance to expansion of
 
                         NUCLEAR REACTORS
 
28 [KOPNListeners] GNEP, Bush Plan for Plutonium Economy/Article & Radi
29 US: NRC: NRC Issues Safety Evaluation Report with Open Items for Oys
30 US: NRC: NRC Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards to Meet Sept. 
31 Guardian Unlimited: Sell-off of nuclear plants faces delay
32 US: Charlotte Observer: NO: Nuclear power plants offer one-stop shop
33 US: Charlotte Observer: Should U.S. increase its use of nuclear powe
34 US: NRC: Notice of Opportunity To Comment on Model Safety Evaluation
35 US: NRC: Tennessee Valley Authority; Notice of Withdrawal of Applica
36 US: NRC: Notice of Availability of Environmental Assessment and Find
37 FIA: Nuclear Regulatory Agency Chief: There are No Grounds Claiming
38 FIA: Makfax: Bulgarian NPP Kozloduy is Record Breaker in Failures   
 
                          NUCLEAR SECURITY
 
39 US: Atlanta Journal-Constitution: Nuclear material turns up in searc
 
                          NUCLEAR SAFETY
 
40 US: [NukeNet] tritium standard and water
41 US: CBC: Tritium contamination shuts down Pembroke plant
 
                         NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE
 
42 [NukeNet] Scotland: BNFL paid union to back new nuclear power
43 NWTRB: Notice of a Meeting; Yucca Mountain, NV 9-25
44 US: ABC" Southern Nuclear: Spent nuclear fuel still missing - 
45 DOE: for the proposed Yucca Mountain repository.
 
                           PEACE
 
 
                        US DEPT. OF ENERGY
 
46 Knox News: K-25 cleanup plans change
47 KnoxNews: $1.4B SNS key to 'economic synergy'
48 islandpacket.com: Congress needs to move on SRS plutonium project 
49 Hanford News: Fluor ordered to pay whistleblower
50 Hanford News: Judge refuses to grant TRIDEC's legal fees in initiati
51 Hanford News: PNNL team discovers bacteria can make pearls of uraniu
52 DOE: Availability of Draft Strategic Plan and Request for Public 
53 DOE: Ethical conduct of employees
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
                         FULL NEWS STORIES
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
 1 [du-list] Italy: the 2000 Dull-DU proposal still unanswered by
 
Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2006 16:35:44 -0700

X-Nohoney: yes white-hard - relay H=adsl-63-203-231-61.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net (borg.energy-net.org) [63.203.231.61]
X-Sender-Host-Address: 63.203.231.61
X-Sender-Host-Name: adsl-63-203-231-61.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net
X-Spam-Class: HAM-VERY-WHITELIST

<x-flowed>
November 16, 2000

To: Angela Carroll, Contract Specialist
Phone 865-241-1658
U.S. Department of Energy
Procurement and Contract Division
DUF6 SEB
P.O. Box 2001
Oak Ridge, TN 37831

A revolutionary proposal for DU disposal from Italy

Dear Angela,

here in Italy we found a revolutionary proposal for DU disposal: DU
may be shaped as a suppository and equally distributed to volunteer
citizens, without discrimination, for interior disposal (rectum).

I know that this is quite unheard, but if we don't profit from new
and creative ideas, the world will never change.

To enforce this proposal you can set up an Internet site where to
register volunteers. To encourage the volunteers, a sort of Lotto
may be enabled: among all the volunteers an annual prize of 10
million dollars cash can be issued.

So, our solution is also economically viable, and less expensive
than other solutions forged trough the years. And it is dual-use: it
avoid AIDS spreading because anal acts may become impossible.

In this regard, I look forward to obtain the opinion of the WHO, the
World Health Organization.

If you want to buy the patent of this new revolutionary solution
[RKP, Rectum Kinetic Penetrator (c)], you can ask for me at the
below address. We can also organize an interview or a press release
if we become to a gentlemen - and/or Ladies - agreement.

Kind regards,

M. S.
Ethical Environmental Observatory

P.S. Don't worry about possible side-effects: the RAND report on
Gulf War Syndrome, is very effective in telling that no danger come
from DU penetrators. It is also possible to coat the penetrators
with Cosmoline to avoid dispersion. See below:

Boeing Company Request Concerning Depleted Uranium Counterweights

HPPOS-206 PDR-9111210356

Title:Boeing Company Request Concerning Depleted Uranium
Counterweights

See the letter from G. H. Cunningham to W. E. Morgan dated April 14,
1983, and the incoming requests from W. E. Morgan (Boeing Company)
dated March 18, 1983 and January 6, 1983. The Boeing Company's
proposal to apply a corrosive preventive compound to depleted
uranium (DU) counterweights was not considered "... chemical,
physical, or metallurgical treatment or process ..." and was
appropriate for exemption under 10 CFR 40.13 (c) (5).

The 747 airplane program utilized DU weights for mass balance of
outboard elevator and upper rudder assemblies on the first 550
aircraft built.This equates to approximately 12,000 cast parts and a
total mass of DU in excess of 200 tons.Depending upon the model,
each aircraft had either 21 or 31 weights.At each major aircraft
overhaul (about 4 to 5 years), it was anticipated that over 20% of
these weights would be corroded to where they required
reprocessing.This condition was considered to present an unnecessary
maintenance burden on the 747 operators.Aside from the high
corrosion rate, the weights were extremely difficult to transport
with only one recognized reprocessing source in the world.

In a letter dated January 6, 1983, the Boeing Company proposed
originally to apply an additional protective coating of Cosmoline
(MIL-C-11796) over the protective coating of undamaged DU
weights.They intended to require that the weights be (1) corrosion
free, (2) properly nickel and cadmium plated and painted, (3) heated
to 150-160躘, (4) dipped in MIL-C-11796 at the same temperature, and
(5) cooled to ambient temperature.The weights in question were
exempt items manufactured by NL Industries of Albany, New York.When
the weights were reinstalled on the airplane, they intended to fill
the attachment holes with MIL-G-23827 grease.Cautionary marking on
the weights would be kept free of corrosion preventative compounds.
They asked if these additional processes in any way violated the
conditions of 10 CFR 40 of the NRC rules and regulations.

It was NRC staff's view that the above processing falls within the
prohibition of 10 CFR 40.13 (c) (5) (iv).That provision states
clearly that the exemption from licensing in 10 CFR 40.13 (c) (5)
for DU weights does not authorize any treatment or processing of the
counterweights except for repair or restoration of any existing
plating or covering.This has been the regulatory position for over
20 years [see 25 FR 6427].The above proposal involved the processing
of the DU weights to add a new coating of a different material.If
the work was performed at the Washington plant, Boeing would need
(1) a license from the State of Washington authorizing the procedure
for coating the DU weights in its possession, and (2) a license from
the NRC to distribute the weights to exempt persons (i.e., the
operators of the aircraft) after being coated [see 10 CFR 40.13 (c)
(5) (i) and 150.15 (a) (6)].

In a second letter dated March 18, 1983, the Boeing Company proposed
the application of corrosion preventative compound MIL-C-16173 to DU
weights in service.This procedure would be accomplished during
operators scheduled maintenance programs.It would be required that
the weights be corrosion free and finished per drawing (nickel and
cadmium plus primer) prior to brush application of MIL-C-16173. Both
MIL-C-16173 and weights would be at ambient temperatures during
application.Attachment holes would be filled with grease (MIL-G-
23827) to eliminate water traps and cautionary markings on the
weights would be kept legible.No chemical interactions would occur
between the corrosive preventative compound (MIL-C-16173) or the
grease (MIL-G-23827) and the plating or paint because these
compounds do not contain solvents or other agents which might soften
paint.The Boeing Company believed that this process, while not as
effective in preventing corrosion as their previous proposal, would
be a significant improvement and did not violate the intentions of
10 CFR Part 40 of the NRC rules and regulations.

It was NRC staff view that the second proposal was not considered
as "... chemical, physical, or metallurgical treatment or
process ..." and was appropriate for exemption under 10 CFR 40.13
(c) (5).

Regulatory references:10 CFR 40.13

Subject codes:11.1, 11.6

Applicability:Source Material

Source:NRC http://www.nrc.gov/NRC/NMSS/HP/POS/hppos206.txt











To unsubscribe from this groups send a message to 
du-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com.  In the body of the message type 
unsubscribe and send.
*****************************************************************
 2 [NYTr] Venezuela Supports Iran's Right to Develop Nuclear Energy
 
Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2006 22:12:22 -0500 (CDT)

X-Sender-Host-Name: chumbly.math.missouri.edu
X-Spam-Class: HAM-VERY

Via NY Transfer News Collective  *  All the News that Doesn't Fit
 
Radio Havana Cuba
http://www.radiohc.cu

Venezuela Supports Iran's Right to Develop Nuclear Energy 

Caracas, August 21 (RHC)--Venezuelan Vice President Jose Vicente Rangel,
has declared that his country is against preventing the development of
Iran's nuclear program.

Speaking to reporters in Caracas, he said that Venezuela does not agree
with preventing Iran's nuclear production which is not aimed at production
of atomic bomb.

"This is while, India is involved in producing nuclear bombs with US
approval and Pakistan is developing its nuclear program," he added.

Rangel accused Washington of approaching the nuclear activities of other
countries based on its own interests. "Development of a nuclear program of
countries creates no problem if it is approved by Washington he charged,
but in the case of another country that same program will cause problems."

"Venezuela has its own foreign policy and does not intend to confront the
United States.  But we will never accept the US telling us what is right and
what is wrong," he added.

The Vice President called for expansion of multifaceted mutual ties with
Tehran and said, "Given that Iran is a developed country in the field of
advanced technologies and has achieved great progress in the automotive
industry, Venezuela will benefit from bilateral relations."

Rangel pointed to joint establishment of a tractor manufacturing plant
which he noted, is more of interest to his country.
       
                                *
================================================================
.NY Transfer News Collective    *    A Service of Blythe Systems
.          Since 1985 - Information for the Rest of Us         .
.339 Lafayette St., New York, NY 10012     http://www.blythe.org
.List Archives:   https://olm.blythe-systems.com/pipermail/nytr/
.Subscribe: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/mailman/listinfo/nytr
================================================================
*****************************************************************
 3 IRNA: South African FM: Iran's right to nuclear technology undeniable
     
Pretoria, Aug 21, IRNA

South Africa-Mottaki-Nuclear 

South African Foreign Minister Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma said on
Monday that the rights of NPT member states to support the
rights of other members -- including Iran -- to access nuclear
technology for peaceful purposes is undeniable.

 She made the remark at the inaugural ceremony of Iran-South
Africa Cooperation Commission meeting in Pretoria.

 The South African minister said that Iran's nuclear issue can
be solved within the framework of the International Atomic
Energy Organization (IAEA) through talks.

 She hoped that by full support for the attempts of IAEA Chief
Mohamed ElBaradei the remaining problems will be solved in the
immediate future and an agreement will be reached between those
involved in the issue.

 Dlamini-Zuma called on all the parties involved in the issue to
resume talks and avoid any measure leading to confrontation.

 Turning to the `great tragedy' taking place in the Middle East,
she said that the dangerous situation in the region and the
gruesome human crisis in Lebanon are the cause of deep concern
of the world community.

 The African minister stated that her country feels itself
committed to support the trend of the attempts currently
underway to promote lasting peace and justice in the Middle East.

 For his part, Mottaki, who is visiting Pretoria to attend the
two-day joint cooperation commission meeting, said that Iran is
willing to hold talks on the remaining problems associated with
its nuclear issue to achieve a final solution.

 Mottaki said that Iran has assessed the issue and is willing to
resume talks based on its rights and within the framework of NPT
to solve the matter.

 The minister pointed to talks as the best way to solve Iran's
present nuclear crisis.

 Mottaki and his accompanying political delegation arrived in
Pretoria Monday morning on an official two-day visit to hold
talks with senior South African officials.

 The 9th session of the Iran-South Africa Joint Cooperation
Commission kicked off here Monday.

 The session was chaired by the visiting Iranian foreign
minister and his South African counterpart.

 During his stay in Pretoria, the Iranian foreign minister is
scheduled to meet with Dlamini-Zuma and discuss major
developments in the Middle East as well as Iran's peaceful
nuclear activities.

 He will also hold a meeting with South African President Thabo
Mbeki and the ministers of energy and mines, industry and trade
and science and technology.
*****************************************************************
 4 IRNA: Iran committed to its stance - Elham 

Tehran, Aug 21, IRNA

Iran-Elham-Nuclear issue 

Government spokesman Gholam-Hossein Elham said here Monday that
Iran would stick to its stance despite breaches in the
Europeans' stance.

 Elham was speaking to reporters at his weekly press conference
in which he commented on a package of incentives offered to Iran
on June 6 by the five permanent UN Security Council members --
Britain, France, the United States, China and Russia -- plus
Germany (Group 5+1) in exchange for a freeze on all uranium
enrichment and related activities.

 "We believe the sides can settle this case through
negotiations," Elham said.

 Foreign Ministry spokesman Hamid-Reza Asefi said on Sunday that
Iran's review of the package is done and that it was ready to
give its response on August 22 as previously announced.

 Elham reminded that the package of incentives had not set a
deadline for Iran to respond to Europe's offer.

 "We, ourselves, set the date when we would give our response
and we will do that."

*****************************************************************
 5 Guardian Unlimited: Iran Says It Won't Stop Nuclear Program

From the Associated Press        

[UP] 

Monday August 21, 2006 1:01 PM
 	
AP Photo BEI103 
By NASSER KARIMI Associated Press Writer 

TEHRAN, Iran (AP) - Iran's supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei
said Monday that Tehran will continue to pursue nuclear
technology, despite a U.N. Security Council deadline to suspend
uranium enrichment by the end of the month or face the threat of
economic and diplomatic sanctions. 

``The Islamic Republic of Iran has made its own decision and in
the nuclear case, God willing, with patience and power, will
continue its path,'' Khamenei was quoted as saying by state
television. 

He accused the United States of putting pressure on Iran despite
Tehran's assertions that its nuclear program was peaceful.

``Arrogant powers and the U.S. are putting their utmost pressure
on Iran while knowing Iran is not pursuing nuclear weapons,'' he
said. 

Khamenei's declaration came on the eve of Iran's self-imposed
Aug. 22 deadline to respond to a Western incentives package for
it to roll back its nuclear program. 

He accused the United States of pressuring Iran despite Tehran's
assertions that it was not seeking to develop nuclear weapons,
as Washington and several of its allies have contended. 

``Arrogant powers and the U.S. are putting their utmost pressure
on Iran while knowing Iran is not pursuing nuclear weapons,'' he
said. 

Iran on Sunday said it will offer a ``multifaceted response'' to
the incentives proposal. It insisted that it won't suspend
uranium enrichment altogether. 

The U.N. Security Council passed a resolution last month
requiring the halt to enrichment under threat of economic and
diplomatic sanctions. 

Also on Monday, German Chancellor Angela Merkel pressed for a
``solid answer'' from Iran on the package. 

``I still hope that it will be positive, although some signals
have been very confused,'' said Merkel, whose country drew up
the package with the five permanent Security Council members. 

The proposal includes promises that the United States and Europe
will provide civilian nuclear technology and that Washington
will join direct talks with Iran. 

Tehran says uranium enrichment does not violate any of its
obligations under the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, and that
its nuclear program aims to produce electricity. 

Khamenei accused the West of wanting to obstruct scientific
progress in the Islamic world and called for Islamic countries
to stand together in the face of such pressure. 
		 	 	   
Guardian Unlimited � Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
 6 Guardian Unlimited: A Look at Nuclear Incentives for Iran
 
From the Associated Press        

[UP] 

Monday August 21, 2006 10:16 PM
 	
By The Associated Press 

Iran says it plans to respond Tuesday to a Western incentives
package presented in June to encourage Tehran to suspend uranium
enrichment. The package has not been made public, but some of
the incentives have been leaked including: 

- Lifting some U.S. bilateral sanctions, including a ban on
sales of Boeing passenger aircraft and related parts. 

- Receiving some nuclear technology to help build nuclear
reactors for civilian energy purposes. 

- Receiving a guaranteed supply of nuclear fuel. 

The United States and its allies accuse Iran of seeking to 
develop atomic weapons. Tehran insists its nuclear program is 
intended only to produce power, and Iranian leaders say they will 
not be pressured into stopping the program. The U.N. Security 
Council has given Iran until Aug. 31 to suspend enrichment or 
face the threat of economic and diplomatic sanctions. 
		 	 	   
Guardian Unlimited � Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
 7 Guardian Unlimited: Iran Denies Inspectors Access to Site
 
From the Associated Press        

[UP] 

Tuesday August 22, 2006 1:01 AM
 	
AP Photo XTH103 
By GEORGE JAHN and NASSER KARIMI Associated Press Writer 

TEHRAN, Iran (AP) - Iran turned away U.N. inspectors from an
underground site meant to shelter its uranium enrichment program
from attack, diplomats said Monday, while the country's supreme
leader insisted Tehran will not give up its contentious nuclear
technology. 

Ayatollah Ali Khamenei's comments came on the eve of a
self-imposed deadline to respond formally to Western incentives
aimed at curbing its atomic program, deflating hopes that Iran
will accept a U.N. Security Council demand that it freeze
enrichment by Aug. 31 or face the possibility of sanctions. 

Iran's unprecedented refusal to allow access to its underground
facility at Natanz could seriously hamper U.N. attempts to
ensure Tehran is not trying to produce nuclear weapons, and
might violate the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, diplomats and
U.N. officials told The Associated Press. 

Speaking on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of
the information, the diplomats and officials from the U.N.
nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency,
described other signs of Iranian defiance. 

They said Iran denied entry visas to two IAEA inspectors in the
last few weeks after doing the same earlier this summer for
Chris Charlier, the expert heading the U.N. agency's team to
Tehran. Additionally, they said, other inspectors were given
only single-entry visas during their visits to Iran last week,
instead of the customary multiple-entry permits. 

Iran's reported actions were likely to harden Western resolve to
punish the Tehran regime if it refuses to give up uranium
enrichment, which can be used to create the fissile core of
nuclear warheads. 

Diplomats told AP on Monday that sanctions could include a ban
on the sale of missile and nuclear technology to Tehran,
international refusal to grant entry visas to people involved in
Iran's nuclear program and a freeze of their assets, and a ban
on investment in Iran. 

IAEA head Mohamed ElBaradei is to report by Sept. 11 to the
agency's board on Iran's compliance with the Security Council
deadline on freezing enrichment and on other aspects of Tehran's
cooperation with U.N. inspectors. 

The U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, John Bolton, said
that ``nothing surprises me about how Iran treats its
obligations'' under the nonproliferation agreement. He said Iran
concealed things from inspectors in the past and alleged Tehran
also has falsified data. 

Although Bolton said he had no specific knowledge of the
reported recent blocking of U.N. inspectors, he said, ``More
obstructionism doesn't surprise me at all.'' 

IAEA officials at the agency's headquarters in Vienna, Austria,
refused to comment. 

The Islamic republic has promised to formally respond Tuesday to
an offer of economic and political rewards for it to freeze
enrichment and negotiate strengthened monitoring of its nuclear
program. 

The proposal from six world powers - the U.S., Russia, China,
Britain, France and Germany - includes promises that the United
States and Europe will provide civilian nuclear technology and
that Washington will join direct talks with Iran. 

But Iran's supreme leader again ruled out an enrichment freeze. 
``The Islamic Republic of Iran has made its own decision and in
the nuclear case, God willing, with patience and power, will
continue its path,'' Khamenei was quoted as saying Monday by
state television. 

He accused the United States of pressuring Iran despite Tehran's
assertions it is not working on nuclear weapons, as Washington
and its key allies contend. Iran says its enrichment work is
intended solely to produce fuel for nuclear reactors that will
generate electricity. 

``Arrogant powers and the U.S. are putting their utmost pressure
on Iran while knowing Iran is not pursuing nuclear weapons,''
Khamenei said. 

Iran said Sunday that it would offer a ``multifaceted response''
to the incentives proposal but already insisted a full
enrichment freeze was out of the question. 

In Washington, President Bush said Iran already was giving an
inkling of its response. ``Dates are fine,'' he said, ``but what
really matters is will. And one of the things I will continue to
remind our friends and allies is the danger of a nulear-armed
Iran.'' 

A State Department spokesman, Gonzalo Gallegos, said, ``We await
their final decision.'' 

German Chancellor Angela Merkel pressed for a ``solid answer''
from Iran. ``I still hope that it will be positive, although
some signals have been very confused,'' she said. 

Tehran says uranium enrichment does not violate any of its
obligations under the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. 

But U.N. officials suggested the refusal to allow IAEA
inspectors access to the underground nuclear site being built at
Natanz was in itself a violation of the treaty because it
contravenes Tehran's commitment to inform the agency of the
progress of such projects. 

Iranian officials have said the country intended to move toward
large-scale uranium enrichment involving 3,000 interconnected
centrifuges in underground halls at Natanz, in central Iran, by
late this year and would later expand the program to 54,000
centrifuges. 

Former U.N. nuclear inspector David Albright, president of the
Washington-based Institute for Science and International
Security, describes the site as a vast complex 75 feet
underground, covered by layers of materials. It is unclear
whether that includes concrete. 

--- 
Associated Press writers George Jahn reported this story from
Vienna, Austria, and Nasser Karimi from Tehran, Iran. 
--- 
On the Net: 
International Atomic Energy Agency: http://www.iaea.org 
		 	 	   
Guardian Unlimited � Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
 8 BBC: Iran reply may herald new confrontation
 
Last Updated: Monday, 21 August 2006
 
By Paul Reynolds 

World affairs correspondent, BBC News website   

[President Ahmadinejad of Iran]                 

President Ahmadinejad: Not afraid of confronting the West

Just as the Middle East reels from the impact of the 
Hezbollah-Israel war, a new confrontation involving Iran might be 
about to break out. 

Iran is expected to announce on Tuesday its formal reply to the 
demand by the UN Security Council that it suspend its enrichment 
of uranium, pending negotiations about Tehran's nuclear plans. 

A fairly large clue as to Iran's position came from its supreme 
leader, Ali Khamenei, who said on Monday that Iran would 
"continue on its path". 

This new potential crisis has come at a dangerous time, with 
relations between the West and the Muslim world already extremely 
sensitive and fraught. 

Iran is buoyed by what it sees as its ally Hezbollah's victory 
against Israel, and in President Ahmadinejad it has a political 
leader who appears to welcome confrontation with the West. 

It is therefore in no mood to compromise over enrichment, though 
some had hoped that it might be able to announce a so-called 
"technical pause" to allow talks to start. 

If its answer on suspension is "No", the United States will press 
for diplomatic and economic sanctions. These would need a new 
vote in the Security Council, and in the past Russia and China, 
both veto holders, have opposed sanctions. 

Possible military action 

Beyond the issue of sanctions, however, there are experts who 
fear that confrontation could in due course mean military action. 

Mark Fitzpatrick, senior fellow in non-proliferation at the 
International Institute for Strategic Studies in London, said: 
"This won't drag on for years. There are two deadlines of sorts 
at the end of 2008. That is the earliest date by which some 
people think Iran could acquire a nuclear weapon. I think the 
date is more like 2010. 

"And on November 2008, there is the US presidential election. 
President Bush will be inclined not to let this problem be passed 
on. There will be a growing mood in the US administration to take 
other action." 

Asked if Israel's problems in disarming Hezbollah showed the 
limitations of air power and might therefore make an attack on 
Iran less likely, he replied: "Israel's actions make an attack on 
Iran more likely as it removes one of Iran's retaliatory tools, 
an attack on Israel by Hezbollah. This has now been pre-empted." 

This view echoes to some extent one put forward in the New
Yorker recently by Seymour Hersh, who argued that the attack on
Hezbollah was a dry-run for one on Iran. But you do not have to
accept that theory to conclude that the military option against
Iran is not inconceivable. 

Sanctions first 

In the shorter term, however, the emphasis will be on sanctions. 

On 31 July, the Security Council (in Resolution 1696) gave Iran a 
month in which to comply with the earlier demands of the UN's 
nuclear agency, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). 

The IAEA said that Iran should suspend enrichment, reconsider the 
construction of a heavy-water nuclear reactor, ratify and 
implement a stricter inspection regime already agreed, and 
co-operate fully with the IAEA inspectors. 

Some countries can have acce to high nuclear technology, the 
others are told they can produce fruit juice and pears! 

Ali Larijani
        
The IAEA will report on Iranian compliance at the end of August. 
If there is none, then the next stage will be reached. 

Any sanctions will have to be diplomatic or economic in nature. 
This is because resolution 1696 states that they would be 
authorised under Article 41 of Chapter VII of the UN Charter. 
This says that measures cannot be ones "involving the use of 
armed force". 

The US and its allies (including the UK, and on this occasion 
probably France and Germany as well) fear that Iran will one day 
use the enrichment technology not just for nuclear fuel but for a 
nuclear bomb, though Iran says that is not its intention. 

The US will press for travel restrictions to be imposed on 
Iranians involved in the nuclear programme, and for a ban on the 
sale of goods that could be used in the nuclear field and on 
dual-use items. 

If these do not get through the council, a so-called "coalition 
of the willing" might be formed by those countries wanting to go 
further. They might also consider a ban on investing in Iran's 
oil and gas industry, a restriction the US has itself imposed 
since 1979. 

Sanctions impact minimal 

Frankly, few if anyone involved in contacts with Iran over the
past few years think that sanctions will be effective. Iran has
lived with American sanctions for 27 years and these have made
no difference. 

It is true that this time, the US and the European Union have
offered incentives for Iran in the form of a lifting of some
American restrictions and for help with nuclear technology, and
even consideration of an end to the enrichment moratorium once
confidence is restored. 

But Iran seems determined to press on, resting on its rights to
enrich under the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear
Weapons (known as the NPT) and turning the whole issue into one
in which a developing nation is being forced to abandon a modern
technology by richer countries that already have it. 

In an interview with the Guardian newspaper, chief Iranian
negotiator Ali Larijani put it this way: "We don't see why we
should stop the scientific research of our country. 

"We understand why this is very sensitive. But they [the West]
are categorising countries. Some countries can have access to
high nuclear technology, the others are told they can produce
fruit juice and pears!" 
*****************************************************************
 9 IRIB PERSIAN NEWS: Inspections limit if pressure keeps 

2006/08/21   
  
An MP said Monday that in case of continued pressure and 
sanctions on IRI, the Islamic Consultative Assembly (Majlis) 
would limit the activities of the International Atomic Energy 
Agency (IAEA) in the country including inspections.
 
Alaeddin Boroujerdi, Chairman of the National Security and
Foreign Policy Commission of Majlis, made the remark while
talking to reporters on the sidelines of an open session of
Majlis.
 
"If the Europeans take hasty steps and ignore the rights of the
Iranian nation, IAEA inspections in accordance with the
non-proliferation treaty (NPT) will have no more place," he
added.
 
The Supreme National Security Council (SNSC) and its secretary,
Ali Larijani, will give its response to the package of proposals
offered by the group 5+1 (tomorrow), the MP added.
 
In case sanctions are imposed on IRI, the SNSC will probably ask
the iaea to remove its surveillance cameras from IRI's nuclear
facilities, he said, adding that such a move is under study.
 
On Canadian allegations of Iranian interference in the war in
Lebanon, Boroujerdi said that "allegations of the kind are usual
from a party that faces defeat in a military operation."
 
He stressed that the Zionist army, acknowledged to be one of
most powerful in the world, lost miserably in the war against
the Lebanese Islamic Resistance Movement, Hezbollah despite
all-out American support.
 
M/D   

  Copyright 2004, All Rights Reserved By Islamic Republic of Iran 
Broadcasting News Network Sponsored By IRIB News Computer Center. 
E-Mail: Info@IRIBNEWS.ir     
*****************************************************************
 10 IRIB PERSIAN NEWS: Iran committed to its stance: Elham 

  2006/08/21   
  
Government Spokesman Gholam-Hossein Elham said Monday that Iran 
would stick to its stance despite breaches in the Europeans' 
stance.

 Elham was speaking to reporters at his weekly press conference
in which he commented on a package of proposals offered to Iran
on June 6 by European Union.

 "We believe the sides can settle this case through
negotiations," Elham said. 

Foreign Ministry Spokesman Hamid-Reza Asefi said on Sunday that
Iran's review of the package is done and that it was ready to
give its response on August 22 as previously announced.

 Elham reminded that the package of proposals had not set a
deadline for Iran to respond to Europe's offer. 

"We, ourselves, set the date when we would give our response and
we will do that," he said.

 M.H.Z   

  Copyright 2004, All Rights Reserved By Islamic Republic of Iran 
Broadcasting News Network Sponsored By IRIB News Computer Center. 
E-Mail: Info@IRIBNEWS.ir     
*****************************************************************
 11 AFP: Iran ready to formally insist on uranium enrichment 

 by Michael Adler Mon Aug 21, 8:04 AM ET 
		 	 
VIENNA (AFP) - Iran " /> Iranhas made it clear that it will 
refuse to suspend strategic nuclear fuel work when it responds to 
an international offer for an atomic deal on Tuesday, but the 
crucial deadline comes at the end of the month, diplomats and 
analysts say. 

"We're giving them until the 31st of August to suspend uranium 
enrichment, and then the time has come to look at other 
measures," a European diplomat told AFP, alluding to possible UN 
Security Council sanctions.
 
On Tuesday, Tehran is to respond to a package of incentives
offered by major powers in return for a freeze on uranium
enrichment, amid Western fears that its nuclear power program is
a cover for a weapons program, since uranium enrichment makes
fuel for reactors but can also produce the raw material for atom
bombs.
 
Iran's supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said Monday that
his country would pursue its nuclear program "with strength."
 
For his part, Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki said during a
visit to South Africa on Monday: "We have completed our
consideration (of the incentives package) and we hope, based on
cooperation, negotiation, and respecting the rights of Iran to
have nuclear technology, to remove any questions to catch a
comprehensive solution."
 
Iranian foreign ministry spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi had said
Sunday that Tehran would not freeze its nuclear activities. "The
issue of suspension means returning to the past. It is not on
the agenda of the Islamic republic of Iran," Asefi told
reporters.
 
The Security Council has given Iran until August 31 to halt
enrichment and reprocessing activities or face possible
sanctions, and the UN watchdog International Atomic Energy Agency
" /> International Atomic Energy Agency(IAEA) is to verify
whether Iran has complied with this deadline.
 
Iran will be responding Tuesday to an offer of talks on trade,
technology and security benefits made in June by the five
permanent UN Security Council members -- Britain, China, France,
Russia and the United States -- plus Germany.
 
Asefi said: "We are in the final stage of our studies on the
package. Since the package had different dimensions, our
response will be also multi-dimensional."
 
An Asian diplomat close to the Vienna-based IAEA said the
Iranians will try to buy time with their response.
 
"They will give a wishy-washy reply. They will leave some kind
of fig leaf to have some support. They don't want to confront
the international community now," the diplomat said.
 
A negative Iranian response would set up a confrontation,
diplomats and analysts said.
 
EU foreign policy chief Javier Solana and top Iranian nuclear
negotiator Ali Larijani are open to "further contacts" about
Tehran's nuclear ambitions, Solana said Monday.
 
But Mark Fitzpatrick, a non-proliferation expert at London's
International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS), said Iran
is losing its room to maneuver.
 
"Come August 31, the IAEA will report that there is no
suspension, and then the Security Council will consider the next
step, which is considering a resolution to impose sanctions,"
Fitzpatrick said.
 
"We are heading to further escalation of the confrontation,"
Fitzpatrick said.
 
Iran has said it is ready for sanctions, which will almost
certainly be at first limited measures such as banning the
travel of Iranian nuclear scientists and officials involved in
the atomic program.
 
"It (sanctions) would be more harmful to them (the West) than
for us. We have been under informal sanctions since the 1979
Islamic revolution and we can deal with the consequences by
planning," Asefi said. 

In the meantime, Iran is preparing for any possible military
action over its nuclear activities and showed off new tactical
missiles on Sunday during nationwide war games. 

Iran test-fired a short-range missile in a demonstration of its
"readiness to respond to any threat," state television reported. 

Iran has remained defiant since a UN resolution was adopted on
July 31 after Tehran ignored a previous non-binding deadline and
failed to respond to the incentives package, although it says it
is still open to negotiations. 

Tehran, one of the world's top oil producers, insists its
nuclear programme is a peaceful effort to generate electricity
and notes that it has the right to enrich uranium as a signatory
to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.
 	 		 			
Copyright � 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
 12 AFP: Defiant Iran says will press on with nuclear work 

 by Aresu Eqbali Mon Aug 21, 8:39 AM ET 
		 	 
TEHRAN (AFP) - Iran " /> 's supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei 
has said that Tehran will press on with its nuclear work, 
suggesting it was heading for a showdown with the UN Security 
Council which has ordered a freeze. 

"The Islamic republic has made up its mind and on the nuclear 
program and other issues it will continue on its path with 
strength, with God's help," he was quoted as saying on state 
television Monday.
 
Iran is due on Tuesday to formally respond to an offer by major 
powers proposing a package of incentives in return for a freeze 
in uranium enrichment, a process that can be developed to make 
nuclear weapons.
 
The Security Council has also given Iran until August 31 to halt 
enrichment and reprocessing activities or face possible 
sanctions.
 
"Arrogant powers, led by the United States, are fearful of
progress of Islamic countries in various dimensions," Khamenei
said.
 
"Therefore, in the nuclear issue, even though they know Iran is
not seeking nuclear weapon, they are piling on the pressure to
prevent our scientific progress as an Islamic country."
 
Iran, which has faced a long investigation by the UN nuclear
watchdog the International Atomic Energy Agency
" /> over its activities, insists it has the right to nuclear
technology under the Non-Proliferation Treaty.
 
And in a further sign that Iran was not about to back down in
its standoff with the West, the country's Atomic Energy
Organisation said that suspension of uranium enrichment was "no
longer possible" ahead of the August 31 deadline.
 
"Given the technical progress of Iranian scientists, suspension
of uranium is no longer possible under the current
circumstances," the agency's deputy head, Mohammad Saeedi, was
quoted as saying by the semi-official Fars news agency.
 
He also said Tehran was planning to start operations at its
heavy water plant in Arak which will feed a nuclear reactor
under construction.
 
"The heavy water production plant of Arak will become
operational in the near future," Saeedi said.
 
Iran insists its nuclear program is for civilian purposes but
the United States and other Western countries believe the
Islamic republic is keen on developing nuclear weapons.
 
UN Secretary General Kofi Annan
" /> appealed Sunday for Iran to reply positively to a package
of incentives offered by major powers in return for a freeze in
uranium enrichment.
 
"I appeal to the Government of Iran to seize this historic
opportunity," Annan said. "Iran's reply will, I trust, be
positive and that this will be the foundation for a final,
negotiated settlement."
 
Ahead of the latest flurry of statements from Tehran, EU foreign
policy chief Javier Solana said on Monday he was to open
"further contacts" with Iranian nuclear negotiator Ali Larijani 
about Tehran's nuclear ambitions.
 
"We both agreed on our openness, under the right circumstances, 
to further contacts with the aim of re-establishing confidence in 
the purely civilian nature of the Iranian nuclear programme," he 
added after a phone call with Larijani.
 
His statement came as Iran test-fired a short-range missile 
during the second day of nationwide military exercises in a 
demonstration of its readiness to "respond to any threat," 
Iranian state television reported.
 
Copyright � 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
 13 AFP: Defiant Iran vows to press on with nuclear work - 

 by Aresu Eqbali Mon Aug 21, 1:32 PM ET 
		 	 
TEHRAN (AFP) - Iran " /> 's supreme leader has said the country 
would press on with its controversial nuclear work, paving the 
way for a likely showdown with the UN Security Council despite 
appeals for Tehran to bow to international demands. 

"The Islamic republic has made up its mind and on the nuclear 
programme and other issues it will continue on its path with 
strength, with God's help," Ayatollah Ali Khameini was quoted as 
saying on state television Monday.
 
Khamenei, who has the last word on key policy issues, made the
remarks on the eve of a Tuesday deadline for Iran to formally
respond to an offer by major powers proposing a package of
incentives in return for a suspension of uranium enrichment.
 
The comments prompted Washington to repeat a call on the United
Nations " /> to move swiftly to impose sanctions against Iran if 
it refuses to stop nuclear enrichment activities by an August 31 
deadline set by the Security Council.
 
"There must be consequences if people thumb their nose at the 
United Nations Security Council. We will work with people on the 
Security Council to achieve that objective," US President George 
W. Bush " /> said.
 
But Khameini dismissed the US position as a conspiracy against 
the Islamic world.
 
"Arrogant powers, led by the United States, are fearful of 
progress of Islamic countries in various dimensions," he said.
 
"Therefore, in the nuclear issue, even though they know Iran is 
not seeking nuclear weapons, they are piling on the pressure to 
prevent our scientific progress as an Islamic country."
 
A nuclear official said Iran would submit a "comprehensive 
written response" to the offer from the international community 
on Tuesday.
 
The proposal, backed by the five UN Security Council permanent 
members -- Britain, China, France, Russia and the United States 
-- plus Germany, offers Tehran incentives in return for a freeze 
of sensitive nuclear work.
z Iran has been flexing its muscles in nationwide war games in 
which it has testfired new missiles.
 
In a further indication it is unlikely to back down, the 
country's Atomic Energy Organisation said that suspension of 
uranium enrichment was "no longer possible" ahead of the August 
31 deadline.
 
"Given the technical progress of Iranian scientists, suspension 
of uranium is no longer possible under the current 
circumstances," deputy head Mohammad Saeedi, was quoted as saying 
by the semi-official Fars news agency.
 
But Tehran, which has faced a long investigation by the 
International Atomic Energy Agency " /> (IAEA) over its 
activities, insists it has the right to nuclear technology under 
the Non-Proliferation Treaty.
 
Saeedi said Iran was also planning to start up a plant in the 
city of Arak to produce heavy water for a research reactor due 
for completion by 2009.
z The IAEA is concerned about the risk of diversion of nuclear 
materials as the reactor could produce 8-10 kilogrammes (about 20 
pounds) of plutonium a year, enough to make at least two nuclear 
bombs.
 
UN Secretary General Kofi Annan " /> appealed Sunday for Iran to 
reply positively to the incentives package.
 
"I appeal to the government of Iran to seize this historic
opportunity," Annan said. "Iran's reply will, I trust, be
positive and that this will be the foundation for a final,
negotiated settlement." 

France too said it hoped Iran would "seize the offer made to
it". 

But a prominent member of the hardline-controlled parliament
warned that MPs would block IAEA inspections of Iranian nuclear
sites if the Security Council decided to impose sanctions. 
Ahead of the latest flurry of statements from Tehran, EU foreign
policy chief Javier Solana said he was to open "further contacts" 
with Iranian nuclear negotiator Ali Larijani. 

"We both agreed on our openness, under the right circumstances, 
to further contacts with the aim of re-establishing confidence in 
the purely civilian nature of the Iranian nuclear programme," he 
said after a phone call with Larijani. 

IAEA chief Mohammed ElBaradei is to report back to the Security 
Council on Iran's compliance with the deadline and if it is 
deemed to have failed to comply, the Security Council will 
consider adopting "appropriate measures" under Article 41 of 
Chapter Seven of the UN Charter, which sets out enforcement 
powers. 

Iran, the number two producer in the OPEC " /> oil cartel, has 
threatened to halt exports if the Security Council imposes 
sanctions and world crude prices jumped on Monday after Iran said 
it would ignore the UN deadline. 

In London, benchmark Brent North Sea crude for October delivery 
jumped 1.03 dollars to 73.18 dollars per barrel in electronic 
trade. 

New York's main contract, light sweet crude for delivery in 
September, climbed 56 cents to 71.70 dollars per barrel in pit 
trading.
 	 		 			
Copyright � 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
 14 IRNA: Iran rejects preconditions for nuclear talks 

Tehran, Aug 20, IRNA

Iran-Asefi-Nuclear Talks 

Iran on Sunday once again rejected any precondition for holding
nuclear talks.

 "It is baseless to condition the nuclear talks to implementing
the UN Security Council Resolution 1696," Asefi told reporters
at his weekly press conference.

 "The Islamic Republic of Iran believes setting preconditions
for negotiations will tighten the atmosphere for the two sides
to reach a solution," he added.

 "Why do they believe that the two parties should not negotiate
in an open atmosphere?"
 The spokesman said, "The UN Security Council's resolution was
of no legal and lawful validity. Therefore, it will be
unacceptable for Iran.

 "It is not the way that five or six persons decide on one issue
in contravention with the conventions still in force and the
others accept," he said in reference to validity of the
Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).

 Asked about Iran's response to a package of incentives offered
by the European Union, he said, "The Europeans have changed the
path.

 Instead of continuation of talks, they referred to the Security
Council and changed the positive atmosphere."
 Iran has said its response to the package would be ready by
August 22.

 "The Islamic Republic of Iran believes the nuclear case can be
settled through negotiations," Asefi said
 He expressed hope the case "would return to its main position".

 "If the Europeans' attitude is rational, the package of
incentives can settle problems. The package has still
ambiguities and questions which should be answered."

 In response to a question on the time Iran would present its
response to the package of incentives, he said, "Iran has
finished study on the proposed package and will present its
response within the next two or three other days.

 "We have told the Europeans since the beginning that August 22
will not be end of the world."

 Asefi said that Iran's nuclear case is not complicated, adding,
"There was no necessity for the case to be sent to the Security
Council. A tie that can be opened by hand should not be opened
with tooth."

 Asked about topics to be raised during an upcoming visit to
Iran of UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan, the spokesman said,
"Nuclear case will be among topics to be discussed.

 "Iran welcomes Annan's visit and is drawing plans for the visit
to take place within the next weeks.

 In talks with Annan, we will express our views on improvement
of the UN status."

 Asefi added that Lebanon and regional and international
developments would be among other issues to be discussed with
Annan.

 Pointing to Iran's cooperation with the UN and inspectors of
the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), he said, "We hold
talks with different states in this regard and do not assess it
as a complicated issue.

 "We should wait and see what decision is being made by Group
5+1 and Europe on Iran and will act in proportion with it."

 He said Iran has caused no obstacle for the IAEA inspectors,
adding, "Just in one case that the inspection was not within
frameworks of the IAEA's duties, we called for a change of
inspectors which was accepted by the agency.

 Iran will continue its cooperation with the IAEA. Currently,
all nuclear activities of the country are under the IAEA
surveillance." Asked about the possibility of imposing sanctions
against Iran, the spokesman added, "If the opposite side follows
up logic and wisdom, the possibility of sanctions is not the
question.

 "But if the case was led to complication and the issue of
sanctions is raised, the other party, the Europeans will
undoubtedly lose.

 "The Islamic Republic of Iran has been under informal sanctions
since the 1979 Islamic revolution and we can deal with
consequences of such schemes.

 "If the Europeans impose sanctions on Iran, they will damage
all bridges behind them," Asefi said.

 He added, "However, we are not pessimistic about the Europeans.

 We do not think they intend to revise all issues and destroy
all bridges behind them."

 He said Iran enjoys great potentials, adding, "If other
countries refrain from cooperating with Iran, they will sustain
more damage (than Iran).

 "The Islamic Republic of Iran reached a record position in
several fields that has no need to others."

 The spokesman stressed, "Iran decides on the basis of its
national interests and will not give up its rights of access to
peaceful nuclear energy under pressure or threats."

*****************************************************************
 15 UPI: U.N. pleased Iran to respond on nukes
     
 United Press International - Intl. Intelligence - 

8/21/2006 5:46:00 AM -0400

UNITED NATIONS, Aug. 20 (UPI) -- U.N. Secretary-General Kofi
Annan is pleased Iran will reply to proposals by the group known
as the European Union three plus three by Tuesday. 

But he may not be so pleased with the response, since the
official Iranian Republic News Agency Sunday said Tehran would
not suspend uranium enrichment. 

In a statement issued Sunday, Annan said, "I am pleased that the
Islamic Republic of Iran has indicated it will respond to the
proposal of the EU3 plus three for a comprehensive solution to
the nuclear issue on Tuesday." 

He said, "Iran's reply will, I trust, be positive and that this
will be the foundation for a final, negotiated settlement. 

"In a time of acute crisis in the Middle East, I believe that
progress on the nuclear issue is essential for the stability not
only of the region, but the international system itself," the
secretary-general said. "I am convinced that a way is now open
for setting a milestone for international (nuclear)
non-proliferation efforts." 

The EU3 plus three, of Britain, France and Germany, backed by
China, Russia and the United States, have affirmed Iran's right
to develop nuclear energy for peaceful purposes. But they want
assurances Iran's intentions are peaceful, as called for by both
the International Atomic Energy Agency and the U.N. Security
Council. 

The three-plus-three offered incentives for Iran to suspend
enrichment, which can serve military and civilian objectives. 

Iran's Foreign Ministry spokesman, Hamid Reza Asefi, said Sunday
any suspension of the nation's nuclear program should be worked
out in negotiations, IRNA said. But Asefi said it made no sense
to suspend enrichment beforehand, because Iran insists its aims
are purely civilian. 

Western diplomats say Iran must first halt uranium enrichment
before talks can start.

� Copyright 2006 United Press International, Inc. All Rights
Reserved
*****************************************************************
 16 IRNA: Venezuelan VP against preventing Iran's nuclear program

Madrid, Aug 20, IRNA

Iran-Nuclear-Venezuela 

Venezuelan Vice President Jose Vicente Rangel Sunday declared 
that his country is against preventing the development of nuclear 
program in Iran.

 Speaking to reporters in Caracas, he said that Venezuela does 
not agree with preventing Iran's nuclear production which is not 
aimed at production of atomic bomb.

 "This is while, India is involved in producing nuclear bombs 
with US approval and Pakistan is developing its nuclear program," 
he added.

 Rangel accused the US of approaching the nuclear activities of 
other countries based on its own interests.

 "Development of the nuclear program of world countries creates 
no problem if it is approved by Washington, while in case another 
country proceeds with the same, it will cause problems.

 "Venezuela has its own foreign policy and does not intend to
confront the US. But we will never accept the US telling us what
is right and what is wrong," he added.

 The vice president called for expansion of multifaceted mutual
ties and said, "Given that Iran is a developed country in the
field of advanced technologies and has achieved great progress
in the automotive industry, Venezuela will benefit from
bilateral relations." Rangel pointed to joint establishment of a
tractor manufacturing plant called Veniran, which is more to the
interest of his country.
*****************************************************************
 17 IRNA: Mottaki: Iran committed to holding talks on its nuclear issue -
     
, Aug 21, IRNA

-- 

Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki here Monday said that Iran
is willing to continue talks on the remaining issues related to
its nuclear activities for peaceful purposes to come up with a
proper solution.

 The minister made the remark at the inaugural ceremony of the
9th Iran-South Africa Cooperation Commission meeting in Pretoria.

 Mottaki said that Iran has examined the issue and is willing to
resume talks based on its rights and within the framework of NPT
to solve the matter.

 "Iran's inalienable right to access nuclear technologies for
peaceful purposes has been provided by its membership in the
nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT)," he added.

 Mottaki underlined that Iran has been transparent in its
nuclear activities, adding that it welcomed the early proposal
of the five permanent members of the United Nations Security
Council (UNSC) plus Germany (5+1 group) for holding talks in
Vienna.

 "In the middle of negotiations in Vienna and as a consequence
of the attempts of certain countries, Iran's nuclear issue was
returned to the UNSC.

 "Such a measure has created new doubts about these countries
respect for Iran's inalienable rights to nuclear technology for
peaceful purposes," he said.

 Appreciating South Africa for supporting Iran's nuclear issue,
the minister said that no party is entitled to disregard the
rights of NPT member states.

 Mottaki arrived in Pretoria Monday morning at the head of a
political delegation for an official two-day visit to hold talks
with senior South African officials.

 The 9th session of the Iran-South Africa Joint Cooperation
Commission kicked off here Monday.

 The session was chaired by the Iranian foreign minister and his
South African counterpart, Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma, who both hold
the current presidency.

 During his stay in Pretoria, the Iranian foreign minister is
scheduled to meet with Dlamini-Zuma and discuss major
developments in the Middle East as well as Iran's peaceful
nuclear activities.

 He will also hold a meeting with South African President Thabo
Mbeki and the ministers of energy and mines, industry and trade
and science and technology.

 Mottaki is to visit facilities for production of liquid fuel
from coal in the city of Secunda in South Africa's Mpumalanga
province, 130 km from the capital Pretoria on Monday.

 South Africa imported dlrs 2.3 billion worth of goods from Iran
in 2005 and exported 130-million-dollar worth of products to
Iran.
*****************************************************************
 18 IRNA: Majlis to limit IAEA inspections if pressures continues - MP -

Tehran, Aug 21, IRNA

Iran-Nuclear-Boroujerdi 

An MP said here Monday that in case of continued pressure and
sanctions on Iran, the Islamic Consultative Assembly (Majlis)
would limit the activities of the International Atomic Energy
Agency (IAEA) in the country including inspections.

 Alaeddin Boroujerdi, chairman of the National Security and
Foreign Policy Commission of Majlis, made the remark while
talking to reporters on the sidelines of an open session of
Majlis.

 "If the Europeans take hasty steps and ignore the rights of the
Iranian nation, IAEA inspections in accordance with the
 Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) will have no more place," he
added.

 The Supreme National Security Council (SNSC) and its secretary,
Ali Larijani, will give its response to the package of
incentives offered by the Group 5+1 (tomorrow), the MP added.

 In case sanctions are imposed on Iran, the SNSC will probably
ask the IAEA to remove its surveillance cameras from Iran's
nuclear facilities, he said, adding that such a move is under
study.

 On Canadian allegations of Iranian interference in the war in
Lebanon, Boroujerdi said that "allegations of the kind are usual
from a party that faces defeat in a military operation."

 He stressed that the Israeli army, acknowledged to be one of
most powerful in the world, lost miserably in the war against
the Islamic resistance of Lebanon despite all-out US support.
*****************************************************************
 19 AFP: Bush asks Chinese leader to help end North Korean nuclear threat
     
 Mon Aug 21, 12:25 PM ET 
		 	 
WASHINGTON (AFP) - US President George W. Bush " /> said he had 
pressed Chinese leader Hu Jintao " /> for sustained Sino-US 
pressure on North Korea " /> 's dictator Kim Jong Il to end his 
country's nuclear weapons program. 

At the same time, Bush recommitted himself to six-country talks 
aimed at defusing the crisis and flatly rejected any easing of US 
pressure on Pyongyang over what Washington calls a campaign of 
counterfeiting US dollars.
 
"I talked to Hu Jintao this morning about the six-party talks and 
about the need for us to continue to work together to send a 
clear message to the North Korean leader that there is a better 
choice for him than to continue to develop a nuclear weapon," 
Bush told reporters.
 
"We talked about how we'll continue to collaborate and work 
together," the US president said at a hastily arranged press 
conference.
 
Asked whether US energies might be devoted more to concerns about 
North Korea's nuclear and missile programs, Bush replied: 
"Counterfeiting US dollars is an issue that every president ought 
to be concerned about."
 
"And when you catch people counterfeiting your money, you need
to do something about it," said the president.
 
White House national security spokesman Frederick Jones said the
two leaders spoke for about 21 minutes and also touched on
issues like "ways to further improve US-China economic
relations" as well as an upcoming visit to China by US Treasury
Secretary Henry Paulson.
 
Bush also "conveyed the sincere condolences of the American
people for the loss of life resulting from Typhoon Saomai,"
which left at least 441 people dead in China.
 
Copyright � 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
 20 Guardian Unlimited: Bush: Rush Peacekeeping Force to Lebanon
 
From the Associated Press        

[UP] 

Monday August 21, 2006 6:01 PM
 	
AP Photo WHRE106 By TERENCE HUNT AP White House Correspondent 

WASHINGTON (AP) - President Bush on Monday called for quick
deployment of an international force to help uphold the fragile
cease-fire in Lebanon. ``The need is urgent,'' Bush said. 

At a White House news conference, Bush also conceded that the
war in Iraq, with daily bombings and U.S. casualties now
standing at more than 2,600 was ``straining the psyche of our
country.'' 

``Sometimes I'm frustrated. Rarely surprised. Wars are not a
time of joy,'' the president said. ``These are challenging
times, and difficult times.'' He conceded that the war had
become a major issue in this year's midterm congressional
elections. 

Bush opened his news conference - his first full-scale
question-and-answer session since July 7 in Chicago - with a
statement about humanitarian aid and an international
peacekeeping force for southern Lebanon after 34 days of
fighting. 

``The international community must now designate the leadership
of this new international force, give it robust rules of
engagement and deploy it as quickly as possible to secure the
peace,'' Bush said. 

A U.N. cease-fire resolution has authorized up to 15,000 U.N.
peacekeepers to help an equal number of Lebanese troops extend
their authority into south Lebanon as Israel withdraws its
soldiers. The U.N. wants 3,500 troops on the ground by next
Monday, but so far, no European countries have stepped up with a
large contribution of forces. 

France, which commands the existing U.N. peacekeeping force in
Lebanon known as UNIFIL, had been expected to make a significant
new contribution that would form the backbone of the expanded
force. But President Jacques Chirac disappointed the U.N. and
other countries last week by merely doubling France's contingent
of 200 troops. 

``I would hope that they would put more troops in,'' Bush said
of France's commitment. 

He said the international force would help keep the militant
Hezbollah organization from acting as a ``state within a
state.'' 

``America will do our part,'' Bush said. While the U.S. does not
plan to contribute troops, it will provide logistical support,
command and control assistance and intelligence. 

He said it was ``the most effective contribution we can make at
this time.'' 

Bush also said his administration was pledging an additional
$230 million to help the Lebanese rebuild their homes and return
to their towns and communities. 

Turning to Iraq, Bush said that if the government there fails,
it could turn the country into a ``safe haven for terrorists and
extremists'' and give the insurgents revenues from oil sales. 

``I hear a lot of talk about civil war. I'm concerned about
that, of course, and I've talked to a lot of people about it.

And what I've found from my talks are that the Iraqis want a
unified country. And that the Iraqi leadership is determined to
thwart the efforts of the extremists and the radicals,'' Bush
said. 

Democrats criticized Bush's approach and said he should begin
troop withdrawals this year. ``President Bush should have given
more thought to the consequences of a failed state in Iraq
before he launched his ill-advised invasion almost 3 years
ago,'' House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi said. ``He did not
have a plan for preventing chaos in Iraq when the war started.

The mounting death toll in Baghdad and elsewhere in the country
is stark evidence that he does not have one today.'' 

On Iran, Bush said the United States is getting some inkling of
Tehran's response to international calls for it to abandon its
nuclear ambitions. A U.N. Security Council resolution passed
last month called on Tehran to suspend uranium enrichment by
Aug. 31 or face the threat of economic and diplomatic sanctions. 

Asked if he was confident the Security Council would move
quickly on sanctions if Iran refuses to comply, Bush said,
``Certainly hope so. In order for the U.N. to be effective,
there must be consequences if people thumb their nose at the
United Nations Security Council.'' 

``Dates are fine, but what really matters is will. And one of
the things I will continue to remind our friends and allies is
the danger of a nuclear-armed Iran,'' Bush said. 

Iran said Sunday that it will offer a ``multifaceted response''
Tuesday to a Western package of incentives aimed at persuading
Tehran to rein in its nuclear program, but insisted it won't
suspend uranium enrichment altogether. 

Bush said there must be ``more than one voice speaking clearly
to the Iranians.'' 

Iran's supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said Monday that
Tehran will continue to pursue nuclear technology, despite the
U.N. Security Council deadline. 

``The Islamic Republic of Iran has made its own decision and in
the nuclear case, God willing, with patience and power, will
continue its path,'' Khamenei was quoted as saying by state
television. 

Bush also said he was troubled that so many U.S. House and
Senate candidates were calling for withdrawal U.S. forces from
Iraq. 

``There are a lot of good decent people saying `get out now.
Vote for me, I'll do everything I can to cut off money...' It's
a big mistake. It would be wrong, in my judgment, to leave
before the mission is completed in Iraq.'' 

More than 3,500 Iraqis were killed last month, the highest
monthly civilian toll since the war began. 

The war was a major issue in the Aug. 8 defeat of war supporter
Sen. Joe Lieberman in Connecticut's Democratic primary. He was
defeated by newcomer Ned Lamont, who has called for a speedy
withdrawal of U.S. troops. 

``I'm going to stay out of Connecticut,'' Bush said. 

When a reporter reminded him that he was born in Connecticut,
Bush grinned and said, ``Shhhhhh.'' 

Bush also: 

- Said he talked Monday morning with Chinese President Hu Jintao
about trying to revive six-party negotiations aimed getting
North Korea to give up its nuclear ambitions. 

- Bemoaned high gasoline prices, calling them a tax taking money
out of Americans' pockets. He said that's all the more reason to
diversify away from foreign oil and fossil fuels in general. 

-Said the federal government has committed $110 billion to
Katrina relief nearly a year after the huge storm hit the Gulf
Coast area, and that the money was taking longer to get to those
who deserved it in Louisiana than in Mississippi. 

-Said he believes that a morning-after pill, known as Plan B,
ought to require a prescription for minors. Anti-abortion groups
want Bush to withdraw Dr. Andrew von Eschenbach, his nominee to
head the Food and Drug Administration, because they think he
will approve over-the-counter sales of the morning-after pill.

Democrats, meanwhile, are upset that the FDA has long delayed
settling the 3-year-old debate over whether at least some women
could buy the emergency contraceptive without a doctor's note. 
		 	 	   
Guardian Unlimited � Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
 21 Judicial Watch: Judge Saves Corrupt Govt. Contractor

www.judicialwatch.org

 Former Alabama Governor Denied Acquittal in Corruption Case

August 21, 2006
 
 
A federal judge's decision to overturn a jury verdict against a
military contractor that defrauded the U.S. Government out of
millions of dollars is enraging, especially since the judge
acknowledged ample evidence that the contractor submitted false
and fraudulently inflated invoices. 

The Fairfax Virginia-based military contractor, Custer Battles,
had been ordered by a jury to pay $10 million for defrauding the
U.S. Government during the course of a multi million-dollar Iraq
contract, marking the first civil-fraud verdict arising from the
war. 

Using federal whistleblower laws, a former Custer Battles
employee provided evidence that the company used false invoices
to vastly overstate its expenses and the company was found
guilty of violating the False Claim Act, the single most
important tool U.S. taxpayers have to recover the billions of
dollars stolen through fraud by government contractors each year.
 
But U.S. District Judge T.S. Ellis overturned the verdict,
claiming in a 23-page decisionthat the government
entity--Coalition Provisional Authority--that contracted Custer
Battles does not qualify as the U.S. Government and therefore
the False Claim Act does not apply.
 
The now defunct Coalition Provisional Authority(CPA) was formed
by the U.S. Government after the 2003 invasion to run Iraq until
a government was established. Although it was controlled and
funded by the U.S., the judge said it did not qualify as an
"instrumentality" of the U.S. Government.
 
Evidently, a lawsuit under the False Claims Act requires proof
that the defendant presented false claims against the U.S.
Treasury. In this case, U.S. Government officials as well as
military officials controlled and distributed CPA funds and
therefore fraud against the CPA is tantamount to fraudagainst
the U.S. Government. 

This case is one of many to emerge from the $21 billion Iraq
reconstruction effort as complaints of fraud and corruption
continue to emerge. The office of the special inspector general
for Iraq Reconstruction has referred more than 20 criminal cases
to the Department of Justice for prosecution. 

Posted by at August 21, 2006 12:43 PM
 
*****************************************************************
 22 AFP: US makes missile data secret again 

 Mon Aug 21, 8:40 AM ET 
		 	 
WASHINGTON (AFP) - The administration of US President George W. 
Bush " /> President George W. Bushhas reportedly begun 
reclassifying information about the numbers of US strategic 
weapons during the Cold War, even though it had been once 
provided to the Soviet Union. 

Citing a new report by the National Security Archive, the 
Washington Post said the Pentagon " /> Pentagonand the Department 
of Energy " /> Department of Energyare again treating as secret 
information about Minuteman, Titan II and other missiles, 
blacking out the information on previously public documents.
 
"It would be difficult to find more dramatic examples of 
unjustifiable secrecy than these decisions to classify the 
numbers of US strategic weapons," the paper quoted William Burr, 
a senior analyst at the archive as saying.
 
The Post said the report comes at a time when the Bush 
administration's penchant for government secrecy has troubled 
researchers and bred controversy over agency efforts to withhold 
even seemingly innocuous information.
 
Major Patrick Ryder, a Pentagon spokesman, is quoted in the 
report as saying that "the Department of Defense " /> Department 
of Defensetakes the responsibility of classifying information 
seriously."
 
"This includes classifying information at the lowest level 
possible," Ryder said.
 
Bryan Wilkes, a spokesman for the National Nuclear Security 
Administration, a division of the Energy Department, said his 
agency focused on scrubbing declassified documents for sensitive 
US nuclear weapons information that, in the wrong hands, could be 
used to harm Americans, The Post said.
 
Copyright � 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
 23 UPI: U.S. makes 1971 missile data classified
     
United Press International - NewsTrack - 

8/21/2006 10:24:00 AM -0400
 
WASHINGTON, Aug. 21 (UPI) -- Once-public documents on U.S. 
missile defenses in the 1970s have been ordered sealed from view 
by the Bush administration, The Washington Post reports. 

The newspaper said an open House Armed Services Committee heard 
in March 1971 the United States had 30 strategic bomber 
squadrons, 54 Titan intercontinental ballistic missiles and 1,000 
Minuteman missiles, But those numbers are redacted in a copy of 
the chart obtained by the National Security Archive's researchers 
in January, archives officials said. 

"It's yet another example of silly secrecy," said Thomas Blanton, 
the archive's director. 

However, Bryan Wilkes, a spokesman for the National Nuclear 
Security Administration, defended the reclassification. 

"There's no question that current classified nuclear weapons
data was out there that we had to take back," Wilkes said. "And
in today's environment, where there is a great deal of concern
about rogue nations or terrorist groups getting access to
nuclear weapons, this makes a lot of sense."

� Copyright 2006 United Press International, Inc. All Rights
Reserved
*****************************************************************
 24 UPI: UPI Energy Watch
     
United Press International - Energy - 

8/21/2006 2:07:00 PM -0400                                                                                                                       

 By ANDREA R. MIHAILESCU

 UPI Energy Correspondent

WASHINGTON, Aug. 21 (UPI) -- Ankara moves on nuclear power 
initiative 

The Turkish government is starting to look to nuclear power as
an alternative source of energy as the country's demand for
energy grows, and is the process of getting approval from the
International Atomic Energy Agency. 

Mohamed ElBaradei, IAEA head, was in Istanbul recently and said
in a statement that he gives his green light to Turkey's
application. 

Building a plant in Turkey could take at least five to seven
years before becoming operational, but Turkey's electric energy
supply is in immediate need and cannot afford to wait, Turkish
officials say. 

The Energy and Natural Resources Ministry plans to encourage
investments from the Turkish private sector to encourage
investors to invest in new power plants to meet the rising
demand, presumably on a build-and-operate basis. 

But Turkey expects to face power shortages by 2012, if not
earlier, officials said. 

Experts say a nuclear power plant of 100 megawatts has a
capacity to meet only 5 percent of Turkey's electric energy
needs. With ongoing shortages in electric power supply even at
the moment, and the country rapidly industrializing, Turkey
hopes to diversify its electric supply sources. 

Energy and Natural Resources Minister Hilmi Guler has already
invited 13 prominent Turkish private sector company CEOs to
solicit their opinions on how to build this first nuclear plant
with foreign partner collaboration. 

-0- 

Pakistan eyes private investment in nuclear sector 

Islamabad said it plans to offer additional incentives to
foreign investors willing to participate in setting up nuclear
power plants in the proposed "Designated Nuclear Power Parks"
under International Atomic Energy Agency safeguards. 

Local media reported the Private Power and Infrastructure Board
is working out fiscal and non-fiscal incentives to attract
foreign investment as the country seeks to diversify its energy
consumption. 

The government said it would provide enhanced facilities and tax
concessions to the foreign investors interested in setting up
private nuclear power plants in Pakistan. 

Pakistan is assuring the international community that its
nuclear power sector would meet IAEA safeguards to address
"proliferation concerns" of the United States and other western
countries. 

But some experts remain skeptical that attracting considerable
foreign investment in the nuclear power parks would prove
difficult owing to opposition by the United States. 

Pakistan's gas reserves are dwindling and rising oil prices
demand that the government reduce the heavy dependence on
natural gas for industry, power generation and commercial and
household use. Its natural gas reserves may begin declining by
2010 and the government is looking for a plan to meet the
situation. 

-0- 

Tehran to export gas to Europe via Turkey 

Iranian said it wants to export natural gas to Europe via
neighboring Turkey. 

Kazem Vaziri-Hamaneh, Iranian oil minister, said last week the
two sides will continue to hold talks to assess options on how
best to make this possible. 

"During this visit, Iran's gas export projects through Turkey
were clarified and will soon be finalized," local media reports
quoted him as saying Friday. "It was planned to increase the
capacity of Iran's pipeline, which is connected to the Turkish
pipeline, and export gas to Europe jointly with Turkey." 

Neither side mentioned when exports would begin. 

Turkey buys Iranian gas, which is carried through a pipeline
from the northwestern city of Tabriz to Ankara. 

"There are three options to export gas from Iran to Europe via
Turkey, of which, Nabucco Project (Turkey-Austria) and the
existing pipe are still on the agenda," Vaziri-Hamaneh said. 

Iran anticipates that some 90 of Nabucco's available capacity
will be assigned for its gas. 

-- 

Closing oil prices, Aug. 21, 3 p.m. London 

Brent crude oil: $72.30 

West Texas Intermediate crude oil: $70.90 


� Copyright 2006 United Press International, Inc. All Rights
Reserved
*****************************************************************
 25 Guardian Unlimited: Power and the people
 
Iran says it wants nuclear energy to fuel its economy. The US
says it wants to build an 'Islamic bomb'. But what do Iranians
think about the deepening crisis? Given rare access, Simon
Tisdall spoke to people on the streets of Tehran - and to the
men in charge of the country's nuclear programme 

Monday August 21, 2006

[The Iranian president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, at a press 
conference in Shanghai. Photograph: Elizabeth Dalziel/AP] The 
Iranian president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, at a press conference in 
Shanghai. Photograph: Elizabeth Dalziel/AP
 
 Tensions between Iran and the west have rarely been greater
than they are today. On the one side, President George Bush has
accused Iran of being behind the attack by Hizbullah on Israel
that sparked the Lebanon war; and both the US and Britain say
that Iran is bent on developing nuclear weapons. On the other,
Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has claimed that the Bush
administration is trampling on the rights of Muslims throughout
the world; the US is the "Global Arrogance" (the term which has
replaced the "Great Satan" in the Iranian lexicon) in which
Washington's plan for a "new Middle East" is simply a scheme to
subjugate the region to US and commercial interests.
 			 		 			 			Article continues
Just last week, an article by Seymour Hersh, the respected US 
investigative reporter, which claimed that the war against Iran's 
proxy Hizbullah was a premeditated US-directed warm-up for an 
attack on Iran itself, stoked fears in Tehran that a US air 
assault on its nuclear facilities, even regime change, are moving 
to the top of the agenda. Officials in Tehran worry that, after 
Afghanistan and Iraq, Iran is seen by Bush as "unfinished 
business" - and that, urged on by Israel, he is determined to 
destroy what both countries see as the looming threat of an 
"Islamic bomb". They hear Bush's talk of "Islamic fascists" - and 
wonder whether he will soon be gunning for them.

There is a way out. Tomorrow the Iranian government will present
its long-awaited response to the west's last-ditch compromise
offer on nuclear power. This package, belatedly backed by the
US, offers Iran a range of incentives from implicit security,
territorial guarantees and an end to sanctions, to new
commercial and technological collaborations. But first, Bush
insists, Iran must suspend all uranium enrichment operations,
which Washington believes are connected to its attempts to
acquire bomb-making capability.

So far, Iran has insisted that it will not accept any such
pre-conditions. Officials say they are willing to resume
negotiations with the west - but on equal terms. So when
Ahmadinejad delivers Iran's formal reply at a Tehran press
conference, the stage will be set for an epic clash that could
reverberate across the Middle East and far beyond. So far, the
story has mostly been reported from the outside, and from a
western perspective. But what are the prospects for war and
peace as seen from inside Iran? For the past two weeks the
Guardian has been given unprecedented access to explore what
ordinary Iranians think about the most pressing issue facing
their country - and what some of the country's most powerful men
believe will happen next.

'Diplomatic chess'

In a high-ceilinged, thick-carpeted inner sanctum of Iran's
fortress-like Supreme National Security Council building in
central Tehran, Ali Larijani patiently spells out the factors
that will play a part in Iran's decision. The CIA would dearly
love to penetrate inside these walls. Perhaps it already has;
visitors' mobile phones and other electronic devices are
confiscated.

Larijani is an important man in Iran. As secretary of the
security council and chief nuclear negotiator, it is he, and his
predecessor, Hassan Rowhani, who have by turns tantalised,
teased and infuriated the west during three years of discussions
on the nuclear dossier. Iran plays a long and astute negotiating
game, which Larijani likens to "diplomatic chess". Officials say
they learned at the feet of masters: the European powers who
exploited Persia during the 19th century "Great Game". Britain
is still referred to as the "Old Fox".

Larijani has a daunting reputation as the dour former head of
state television whose programme schedules were both morally
edifying and utterly tedious. His appointment by Ahmadinejad was
seen in the west as representing an ominous shift towards
recalcitrance. But in person he is charming and courteous.

"There are many reasons why Iran is seeking nuclear power," he
says. "The history of our nuclear activity dates back 45 years
to the time of the ex-shah's regime. But after the Islamic
revolution, some western countries condemned Iran and cancelled
their nuclear agreements with us. For example, the Americans had
concluded an agreement for a research reactor in Tehran and also
to provide the fuel. But they cancelled the agreement and did
not give back the money. The Germans did the same. So the lesson
was: we have to be self-sufficient, to provide fuel for
ourselves."

He continues: "We don't see why we should stop the scientific
research of our country. We understand why this is very
sensitive. But they (the west) are categorising countries. Some
countries can have access to high nuclear technology. The others
are told they can produce fruit juice and pears! They say:
'Don't seek a nuclear bomb.' We don't have any objection to
that. But unfortunately officials of some countries such as the
UK say, 'We don't want you to have the knowledge for nuclear
technology'. This is not logical. And we don't pay attention to
this."

The Americans' contradictory impulses are to blame for the
standoff, he says. "After September 11 2001, they faced a
problem in Afghanistan. They requested assistance from Iran and
we gave it. But after the problem ended in Afghanistan, they
called us the 'axis of evil'. This paradox has always been their
way. They want to kiss one side of our face, but at the same
time they also want to slap the other side."

Iran is still willing to negotiate, Larijani concludes, but it
will not give up its nuclear power programme. Nor will it yield
to preconditions such as Bush's demand for an immediate
suspension of uranium enrichment. "If they are going to seek an
imposed agreement by putting pressure on us, we will not accept
it. If the atmosphere is not proper, we may delay our reply. If
you try to cultivate a flower in salty land, it does not grow."
For Larijani, the bottom line is respect. And the evident lack
of it in Washington, magnified by loose talk of enforced regime
change, is one of many reasons why Iran is going nuclear.

A changing society

Tehran is a city of elegant parks. And none is more serene than
Saee Park, off Vali Asr Avenue, one of the capital's main
thoroughfares. Known as the "lovers' park", it is where young
and not-so-young couples sit at dusk beneath a canopy of
fragrant chinar, cypress and pine trees, exchanging gossip and
intimacies, sharing ice creams and swapping phone numbers.

According to Reza, 27, and his girlfriend, things are more
easy-going socially than they were 10 years ago. They attribute
the change to the presidency of Mohammad Khatami, Ahmadinejad's
reformist predecessor. Despite Ahmadinejad's conservative
instincts, the new government has been unable to put the street
culture genie back in the bottle, Reza says.

"There's more personal freedom. You don't get harassed like you
used to. The young people are changing the older people's
attitude. They have to accept it - they have no choice, so they
go with the flow." And in a country of 70m, where two-thirds of
the population is under 30, the trend appears irreversible.

The present hardline government is not popular among many
inhabitants of Saee Park. They complain about its failure to
expand and diversify an economy that is roughly 80%
state-controlled. Younger people worry about careers and jobs,
about the difficulties of foreign travel and internet
censorship, about the lack of things to do and places to meet.

Leila, 27, says she would like to go to parties, to clubs; she
would like to sing. "But they won't allow female singers, did
you know that? Female vocalists are banned. They say they are
too alluring to men. Poor men! They have weak brains!"

Yussuf, 63, has a different perspective. "I was a metallurgist
until I retired. I trained in the US during the Shah's time. I
worked all my life. But now I have to take part-time jobs
because my pension isn't enough. This government is no good,
they're all no good." Yussuf has another complaint: the
government is sending money to Hizbullah in Lebanon that would
be better spent at home, he says. "First you must look after
your own people."

His friend, Ali, agrees. He wants to know into whose pockets
Iran's record oil revenue is going. "Some of them [the governing
elite] are buying cars for $100,000. Think of that! Did they get
that money by working?"

All the same, Ahmadinejad's personal brand of nationalist
populism, typified by his defiant handling of the nuclear issue,
has many admirers in Saee Park and beyond. "Why don't they just
leave us alone and let us live under our own rules?" asks a
32-year-old engineer.

"Iran has the right to nuclear power," chanted a crowd in
Ardabil, in northern Iran, last week. During a series of nine
rallies addressed by Ahmadinejad, the sentiments expressed by
ordinary people are the same. Western attempts to deny Iran
nuclear technology are "an obvious attempt to keep us down, like
they want to keep all the developing countries down," says
Majid, a 30-year-old teacher in Tehran. "We don't want nuclear
weapons. But we want to build our country. What's wrong with
that?"

Iranians may be cut off from the modern western world in many
ways, but they are well versed in the long history of western
intervention in Persia. From the Treaty of Golestan in 1813, by
which Russia took control of Iran's Caucasus territories, to the
1953 CIA-led coup that toppled Iran's democratically elected
prime minister, Mohammad Mosaddeq, from the US embassy hostage
siege to the Iran-Contra scandal, a tale of national subjugation
and degradation forms the context in which Iran looks at the
west. And Iranians hear, in derogatory western talk of "mad
mullahs", an echo of a 19th-century British diplomat's sneering
reference to "incomprehensible orientals". It smacks of
disrespect.

And now, with Washington's neo-conservatives on one side and
Ahmadinejad's neo-conservatives on the other, this mutual
antagonism and misunderstanding is coming to a head. In some
analyses, it has brought the two countries to the brink of
military conflict. If the US attacks, experts say it is likely
to take the form of "precision strikes" on the four main nuclear
facilities and possibly Iranian armed forces and Revolutionary
Guard bases, too. But Pentagon planners know Iran has the
potential to retaliate, as the unexpected success of Hizbullah
in Lebanon has shown. This week the US ambassador to Iraq
highlighted what he said were Iranian attempts to push Shia
militants into attacks on coalition forces in Iraq. And Baghdad
is only one possible theatre for Iranian reprisals should the US
pull the trigger.

Mohammad Saeidi is a practical man. Sidestepping the political,
ideological and historical aspects of the nuclear dispute with
the west, the vice-president of Iran's Atomic Energy
Organisation is focused on a set of problems that must be solved
logically if the country and its people are to develop to their
full potential. "The country's oil and gas reserves will last a
maximum of another 25 or 30 years," he says. "Therefore we have
to provide other resources."

About 7,000 people work in Iran's atomic establishment -
principally in Tehran and at the Bushehr, Arak, Isfahan and
Natanz complexes. Saeidi says there are plans to build 20
nuclear power stations in all, at a cost of $24-$25bn. The
first, at Bushehr, built with Russian help, is expected to come
on stream next year. Saeidi says that in going nuclear Iran is
only following the example of other countries with growing
populations and rising energy demand. Nuclear power is cheaper,
and its raw component, naturally occurring uranium, is in
plentiful supply in Iran's central deserts.

It is the cascade of 164 centrifuges constructed at Natanz that
has drawn most international attention since Ahmadinejad
announced last April that Iran had mastered the processes for
uranium enrichment. It was Natanz that finally prompted the US
to join with European negotiators in offering the compromise
incentives package that is now on the table. But like Larijani,
Saeidi stresses the research stage nature of this work - and the
ongoing inspections of Natanz and other plants by the
International Atomic Energy Agency.

To try to divert nuclear material for bomb-making purposes
without the UN knowing would be "impossible", he says, and if a
deal is struck, Tehran would be ready to reintroduce spot
checks. But, in any case, bomb-making is not Iran's aim, Saeidi
says - even if it had the capacity, which it does not. Overall,
independent experts tend to agree that, at present, Iran does
not have the wherewithal to build a nuclear weapon. But that
does not mean it will not in future.

Saeidi denies that Iran kept its facilities at Natanz secret, as
claimed in 2003 by the Bush administration. He says there was no
legal necessity to notify the IAEA before nuclear material had
entered the plant. "Natanz is a very large factory. You cannot
hide it. It wasn't secret."

He also denies receiving help from Pakistan, now or in the past,
despite a spate of disclosures concerning the proliferation
network run by the Pakistani scientist, AQ Khan. "We don't have
any relation to Pakistan on the nuclear issue. All the equipment
and components we are using are made by Iranian companies and
factories."

Needless to say, such statements are disputed by the US and
other western governments who suspect that Iran may be running a
hidden, parallel uranium enrichment programme using more
advanced centrifuges. They worry it is also experimenting with
plutonium reprocessing. But all such claims are met with a flat
denial.

"We don't have any secret programme. We don't have any secrets,"
Saeidi says. Iran does not want the bomb, he and other officials
insist; and it has no plans to build one. What it does want is a
plentiful future supply of nuclear energy to fuel the rise of a
new, more powerful nation - and in this ambition, it will brook
no obstacles.

Ahmadinejad's vision

The man who could make all the difference is Ahmadinejad
himself. He insists that Iran's intentions were not to make a
bomb - "Iranians have mastered the complete cycle of uranium
enrichment by themselves. But we will use it for peaceful
purposes, for nuclear power. This is our right and no one can
take this right away from us." But the man best known in the
west for his desire to "wipe Israel off the map" and his
questioning of the Holocaust, this blacksmith's son who rose to
be mayor of Tehran before unexpectedly winning the presidency a
year ago this month, is a controversial figure inside Iran, too.

Many people, largely among the working class and in rural areas,
adore him. Others, particularly among the intellectual elite of
Tehran, fear his devout Islamic beliefs and his conservative
political instincts will further isolate the country.

For Iran's president is a true believer. He maintains that the
1979 revolution that overthrew the shah was besmirched and
betrayed after the death of its leader, Ayatollah Ruhollah
Khomeini, by pragmatists and corrupt mercantilists, by
pro-western compromisers and reformists. Ahmadinejad's famously
humble lifestyle, emphasised by his rumpled jackets and unkempt
beard, offers but one clue to the fundamentalist spirit that
moves him. Tehranis say his vision is a return to the ideals of
1979, including a reinvigorated social conservatism, a revived
popular piety, and a principled rejection of the Christian and
Zionist "crusader" west.

Many political moderates, western diplomats and ordinary
citizens say Ahmadinejad's vision is to turn the clock back to a
more honest and more dutiful time. And what better way to
demonstrate the uplifting virtues and potency of this religious
retrenchment than defiance of the west over the nuclear issue?

Here is a golden opportunity to re-affirm Iran's compromised
independence and dignity - and restore both the international
respect and the religious values that Ahjmadinejad believes the
revolution has squandered since 1989. This is Ahmadinejad's
chance.

It may be naive to believe that Iran's government, surrounded by
nuclear-armed neighbours and directly threatened by the US, is
not seeking to acquire a nuclear weapons capability. "The
Americans have been seeking regime change in Iran ever since the
victory of the revolution," say Larijani. Given such widespread
convictions, and the example of several other countries that
have built atomic weapons without facing serious penalties,
Iran's leaders might be thought remiss in not seeking to arm
themselves.

But more naive, perhaps, and potentially even more
destabilising, is Ahmadinejad's apparent belief that by
confronting the west over the nuclear issue, he can revive the
purist, Khomeini-era ideal of fundamentalist Islamic revolution
in a country that is changing rapidly. Most Iranians support the
government's pursuit of nuclear power. But most oppose the
intolerant theocracy that is Khomeini's legacy.

In his brilliant new book, Confronting Iran, Ali Ansari portrays
the growing "secularisation" of Iranian society as an
unstoppable force. "Fewer and fewer people show an interest in
organised religion," he writes. And in Tehran the evidence of
that is everywhere. Iran is a rich country, poorly run. Slowly
but surely its people are demanding and obtaining change. Iran
does seem destined once again to be a great regional power, but
that destiny is likely to be attained despite its religious
leadership - and despite the Bush administration's
counter-productive bullying.

Ahmadinejad, the articulate champion of Iran's national rights,
is a potent figure. But Ahmadinejad, the would-be visionary
leader of a resurgent revolution awaiting the coming of the
Hidden Imam, is living a dangerous illusion. And it is Iranians,
not the US air force, who should be allowed to shatter his dream.
 
[UP] 

Guardian Unlimited � Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
 26 RIA Novosti: Ex-minister graft case may be returned for further investigation
 
21/ 08/ 2006

MOSCOW, August 21 (RIA Novosti) - The Moscow City Court may send 
the graft case of a former nuclear energy minister, Yevgeny 
Adamov, back for further investigation, a court spokeswoman said 
Monday. 

Adamov, 67, spent 15 months in Swiss custody after being arrested 
at the request of the United States on charges of embezzling $9 
million and abuse of office. He was extradited to Russia in early 
2006, held in prison for six months, and released July 21 to 
await trial. 

"During preliminary hearings, the judge mentioned returning the 
case to prosecutors to correct errors made during the 
investigation," Anna Usacheva said. 

The court has now recessed for consultations to decide whether or 
not to return the case to prosecutors, who said the judge's 
motion was unfounded. 

"Adamov said in court that the case does not have to be returned, 
and must be addressed in its essence," Prosecutor Viktor Antipov 
said. 

Adamov's lawyer, Genri Reznik, said the charges had to be 
specified. 

"The defense would itself have requested the return of the case
to prosecutors," Reznik said. 

As to Adamov's comments, Reznik said his client "was being
ironical," and added that Adamov said nothing about his
objection to returning the case to prosecutors. 

The court is expected to decide the matter Tuesday. 

"By law, prosecutors have five days to resolve any procedural
inconsistencies," Reznik said. 

Adamov himself declined to comment. "There exists a certain
ethic standard," he said. 

The U.S. accused Adamov of misappropriating $9 million given to
Russia for nuclear safety projects. He would have faced 60 years
in prison if convicted in the U.S. 

Prosecutors said the former minister, who served from 1998 to
2001, was the leader of an organized criminal group whose
members were on an international wanted list, and that he should
be remanded in custody to prevent him from influencing
witnesses. 

� 2005 RIA Novosti   
*****************************************************************
 27 IRNA: Afghan envoy: Afghanistan attaches importance to expansion of
ties with Iran 

Tehran, Aug 20, IRNA

Iran-Afghanistan-Relations 

Afghan Ambassador to Tehran Mohammad Omar Davoudi here Sunday 
conferred with Majlis deputy Mohammad Jafar Sadat Mousavi on 
issues of mutual interests.

 At the meeting, the Afghan ambassador said expansion of mutual 
ties would lead to restoration of peace and security in the 
region.

 He said the two sides' political leaders are determined to 
broaden ties between the two countries.

 Afghan officials attach great importance to expansion of all-out 
ties with Tehran, he said, adding that they welcome Iran's 
contribution to reconstruction of the war-shattered country.

 The Iranian MP, for his part, highlighted the two sides 
cultural, religious and historical commonalties and said there is 
ample untapped grounds for expansion of mutual cooperation mainly 
in economic sector, he underlined.

 Underlining the need for expansion of political, economic and 
parliamentary relations between Iran and Afghanistan, he 
underlined the key role of parliaments in this regard and called 
for establishment of Iran-Afghanistan Parliamentary Friendship 
Group.
*****************************************************************
 28 [KOPNListeners] GNEP, Bush Plan for Plutonium Economy/Article & Radio Show
 
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 01:11:33 -0500 (CDT)

X-Sender-Host-Name: chumbly.math.missouri.edu
X-Spam-Class: HAM-VERY

Hello friends,

Many of us are deeply concerned about attempts to revive the moribund
nuclear power industry in the U.S. and around the world. While nuclear
power, in its current incarnation (light water reactors and a once-through
fuel cycle) presents daunting safety, waste, security, proliferation and
cost problems, all of these are exacerbated dramatically if the world was to
move down a path now being proposed by the Bush administration.

The so-called Global Nuclear Energy Partnership is a plan to create a
Plutonium Economy by developing and deploying very dangerous and extremely
expensive new technologies. It is incumbent upon all of us to learn more
about the proposed GNEP before more of our tax dollars are appropriated and
this initiative actually develops momentum.

Tuesday evening (6-7 p.m.) I will be having Dr. Thomas Cochran Director of
the Natural Resources Defense Council's Nuclear Program as my guest on
Evening Edition, my weekly show on KOPN (89.5 FM). I invite you to tune in,
and, if you have questions or comments, to call in. Those of you who are not
free to tune in on Tuesday evening when the show airs, will be able to
listen to it after the fact on your computers. Just go to
http://kopn.publicbroadcasting.net/archive.html scroll down to Evening
Edition and click on the show. Usually to show is put up on the website by
the day after it airs.

Below is the Summary of a report entitled "PEDDLING PLUTONIUM: Nuclear
Energy Plan Would Make the World More Dangerous" co-authored by my guest,
Dr. Thomas Cochran, and Christopher Paine. The full report can be read
on-line at: http://www.nrdc.org/nuclear/gnep/agnep.pdf

I hope you will take the time to learn more about the GNEP and make your
voice heard. I also hope you will join Missourians for Safe Energy and
others around the nation in taking action to oppose current efforts to build
new light water reactors. This is a very retrograde step in the direction of
an extremely dangerous, plutonium-fueled future.

All the best,
Mark Haim

PEDDLING PLUTONIUM:
Nuclear Energy Plan Would Make the World More Dangerous
Summary

President Bushs Global Nuclear Energy Partnership (GNEP) plan is certainly
bold. But boldness should never be mistaken for wisdom, or even as evidence
of rationality. The president wants U.S. taxpayers to foot a $100 billion
plus bill to develop, over the course of the next several decades, a global
nuclear enterprise to extract plutonium and uranium from spent fuel and
recycle it as fresh fuel, first in current light-water reactors, and then
later in a new generation of liquid-metal cooled fast burner reactors. The
arguments against this plan can be summarized as follows.

?? GNEP is an extravagant, unaffordable excursion into nuclear
state-socialism on a global scale. Implementing just the initial
demonstration phase of the GNEP will cost taxpayers $30 billion to $40
billion over the next 15 years without generating a single kilowatt of
commercially available electric power. Funding requests for plutonium
recycle related programs total more than $1 billion dollars in fiscal year
2007. The entire scheme represents a bizarre departure for a president and
party professing abhorrence of excessive federal spending and reverence for
the workings of the free market.

?? Spent-fuel reprocessing and plutonium-fueled fast reactors are
well-proven commercial disasters. The United States, Europe and Japan spent
tens of billions of dollars in the 1970s and 1980s trying to develop
plutonium fast breeder reactors (like the proposed GNEP advanced burner
reactors, but with uranium blankets added to breed more plutonium than
is consumed in the reactor). These fast reactors proved to be uneconomical,
highly unreliable, and prone to fires due to
leaking liquid sodium coolant, which burns spontaneously when it comes in
contact with air or water.

?? There is no technical silver bullet available that will appreciably
diminish the risks of widespread plutonium use in the civil sector. Contrary
to the assertions of GNEP proponents, the proposed nuclear fuel cycle will
increase the proliferation risks relative to the fuel cycle used in the
United States, in which the spent fuel is never reprocessed and the
plutonium is never re-used commercially. GNEP proponents maintain that a new
reprocessing technique, called UREX-plus, offers increased proliferation
resistance However, the technique produces a mixture of plutonium and minor
transuranic elements with a total radiation dose-rate far below the
International Atomic Energy Agencys (IAEA) threshold for self-protection
(i.e. a level of radioactivity making even short exposures to the material
very hazardous to human health). Moreover, the critical mass of the
UREX-plus mixed product is intermediate between weapon-grade plutonium and
highly-enriched
uranium, and therefore can be used in nuclear weapons.

?? Current international safeguards cannot monitor and measure the flow of
nuclear material in reprocessing and enrichment plants with the continuity
and accuracy required to promptly detect diversion from peaceful uses.
Current techniques applied to these nuclear bulk-handling facilities are
insufficient to meet the IAEAs standard for timely warning of a lost,
stolen or diverted bomb-quantity of nuclear material. Moreover, the IAEAs
thresholds for defining such significant quantities are four to eight
times higher than the technically correct minimum values, suggesting that it
is virtually impossible for the agency to determine that nuclear material is
missing from such a facility within the time period required to convert it
into a weapon.

?? By rashly launching the GNEP, President Bush is jumping the gun by a
century or more. Given the inherent complexities, massive costs,
environmental hazards, and security risks involved in plutonium recycling,
programs like GNEP should be attempted only when, and if, there is an
overwhelming economic and urgent climate-change case for doing so. That is
not the case today, when alternative nuclear and new alternative energy
technologies are available at dramatically lower
cost. Given the rapid technical and economic progress of renewable energy
technologies, distributed cogeneration and biofuels, and continuing
improvements in the efficiency and cost of uranium enrichment services for
conventional nuclear fuels, the sun may never rise on the plutonium
economy.

In sum, an energy technology that creates millions of gallons of highly
radioactive mixed wastes requiring expensive treatment and disposal, can
hardly be called clean. A plutonium fuel-cycle plagued by radiation leaks,
sodium fires, and periodic alarms about missing plutonium in its material
balance accounts, can hardly be called safe. And a global partnership
that further develops, disseminates, and trains tens of thousands of people
in the complex chemical techniques for separating long-lived weaponusable
materials, like plutonium, from self-protecting, intensely radioactive
fission byproducts such as cesium and strontium, can hardly be called
proliferation-resistant.

No doubt, the plutonium lobby will persist in ignoring these risks and
proffering its relentless forecasts of a golden era of technological
progress and declining costs, somewhere just over the rainbow. This kind of
salesmanship has been going on for more than 50 years.

The plutonium pork barrel is back again, but its more cosmopolitan this
time around. French, Russian and Japanese government agencies and
corporations (in the state-socialist plutonium economy, bureaucrats and
businessmen are often one and the same) are now part of the mix. And if news
reports are to be believed, President Bush has just promised Indian
officials that they, too, can join the GNEP, soaking up whatever the
partnership has to offer in the way of novel reprocessing and fast-reactor
technology, so they can put it to good use in their parallel civil and
military breeder-reactor programs.

One can only hope that most members of Congress will have the good sense to
stay out of the barrel this time around. For those who dont, just remember,
this pork barrel is packed with funny numbers and phony technical promises,
making the political footing a bit slippery. Legislators could wind up
wasting billions of taxpayer dollars in the likely event the GNEP scheme
proves infeasible, but even more money should the scheme succeed in
becoming the massive, money-losing government enterprise that peddling
plutonium on a global scale requires.

Mark Haim
1402 Richardson St.
Columbia, MO 65201
573-442-2360

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

 
*****************************************************************
 29 NRC: NRC Issues Safety Evaluation Report with Open Items for Oyster Creek License
Renewal Application

News Release - Region I - 2006-04 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY 
COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs, Region I 475 Allendale Road, 
King of Prussia, Pa. 19406 No. I-06-047                          
August 21, 2006 CONTACT:     Diane Screnci (610) 337-5330 Neil A. 
Sheehan (610) 337-5331                     E-mail: opa1@nrc.gov  

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff has issued its Safety
Evaluation Report with Open Items for the proposed renewal of
the operating license for the Oyster Creek nuclear power plant.
In the report, the staff concludes there are no safety concerns
that would preclude renewal of the license, provided the open
items are resolved.
 
AmerGen Energy Co., LLC, submitted an application to the NRC in
July 2005 to extend the Oyster Creek license by 20 years. The
plant, which is located in Lacey Township (Ocean County), N.J.,
is operated by AmerGen. Its current 40-year operating license is
scheduled to expire on April 19, 2009.
 
Publication of the Safety Evaluation Report with Open Items is
another milestone in the NRCs review of the application. In a
letter dated Aug. 18, Frank P. Gillespie, Director of the Office
of Nuclear Reactor Regulations Division of License Renewal,
provided AmerGen with the report and requested responses to the
Open Items identified in the document by Oct. 20.
 
All of the Open Items deal with corrosion issues involving the
plants drywell. The drywell is a steel shell shaped like an
inverted lightbulb that surrounds the reactor vessel. It is
designed to confine steam that would be released during a severe
accident and direct it downwards to a suppression pool, where it
would be cooled and condensed into water. In some cases, the NRC
staff is seeking additional information regarding the companys
efforts to mitigate corrosion on the drywell. In others, it is
asking that specific steps be taken to confirm the thickness and
integrity of the component.
 
A complete and revised Safety Evaluation Report will be issued
by Dec. 1.
 
The report and the license renewal application have also been
provided to the NRCs Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards
(ACRS), an independent body of experts that advises the NRC on
reactor safety matters. An ACRS subcommittee is expected to
discuss the Safety Evaluation Report with Open Items during a
meeting in October. The meeting, which will take place at NRC
Headquarters in Rockville, Md., will be open to the public and
will be announced on the agencys web site at
http://www.nrc.gov/public-involve/public-meetings/index.cfm. The
full ACRS will later issue a report discussing the results of
its review.
 
A copy of the Safety Evaluation Report with Open Items is
available in the NRCs Agencywide Documents Access and Management
Systems (ADAMS) under accession number ML062300330. ADAMS is
accessible via the agencys web site at:
http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. Help in using ADAMS is
available by contacting the NRCs Public Document Room at
1-800-397-4209 or 301-415-4737, or by e-mail at PDR@NRC.GOV.
 
Additional information concerning license renewal in general and
the Oyster Creek application in particular can be found at:
http://www.nrc.gov/reactors/operating/licensing/renewal.html.
   



  


 	Last revised Monday, August 21, 2006 	
*****************************************************************
 30 NRC: NRC Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards to Meet Sept. 7-9 in Rockville, Maryland
 
News Release - 2006-10 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office 
of Public Affairs     Telephone: 301/415-8200 Washington, DC 
20555-0001     E-mail: No. 06-103     August 21, 2006   
  
The Nuclear Regulatory Commissions Advisory Committee on Reactor
Safeguards (ACRS) will hold a public meeting Sept. 7-9 in
Rockville, Md., to discuss, among other items, the final review
of the license renewal application for the Monticello Nuclear
Generating Plant, in Minnesota. The committee will also be
briefed by the staff on lessons learned from reviews of the
early site permit applications for Grand Gulf, North Anna and
Clinton sites.
 
The meeting will be held in Room T-2B3 of the agencys Two White
Flint North building, at 11545 Rockville Pike. It will begin at
8:30 a.m. each day and end at 7 p.m. on Thursday and Friday and
1 p.m. on Saturday. Portions of the meeting will be closed for a
discussion on safeguards and security matters. A complete agenda
will be available on the NRCs Web site at:
http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/acrs/agenda/2006/. 

Anyone with questions or those wishing to make public statements
during the meeting should contact Sam Duraiswamy at
301-415-7364. To pursue videoconferencing services, contact
Theron Brown, at 301-415-8066.
 
The ACRS advises the Commission on licensing and operation of
nuclear power plants and related safety issues.
   



  


 	Last revised Monday, August 21, 2006 	
*****************************************************************
 31 Guardian Unlimited: Sell-off of nuclear plants faces delay
 
Terry Macalister

Tuesday August 22, 2006
The Guardian 		 

The government plans to fast-track its sale of a 
multibillion-pound stake in British Energy, with a road show for 
potential investors ready to start next month. But hopes for an 
early sell-off of British Nuclear Group are likely to be dashed 
today when the board of its parent group agrees to delay 
privatisation by up to a year.

Merrill Lynch, book runner for the BE offering, is understood to 
be finalising details of the share sale, which will see around 
half of the government's 65% holding sold off. The remaining 
shares are already listed on the London Stock Exchange since the 
government was forced to step in with loans two years ago after 
the power provider was hit by plunging wholesale prices.

BE is financially sound since its restructuring but missed out on 
around �100m of profits in the first quarter of the latest 
financial year because of unexpected losses in electricity 
output.

The share price has fallen sharply in reaction but has doubled
since the restructuring on the back of strong power prices. The
government wants to take advantage and is expected to sell
around half of its stake in BE to raise over �3bn.

Meanwhile the board of British Nuclear Fuels Ltd (BNFL) is to
meet today in reaction to mounting pressure from the Nuclear
Decommissioning Authority (NDA) to put back the privatisation of
BNG.

The NDA wants more time to prepare a �1bn-a-year clean-up
contract for the UK's main nuclear facility at Sellafield in
Cumbria. It is assumed that BNG will win the deal for a plant it
already manages.

Such a contract would provide the main value for BNG when it is
put up for sale. The original timetable called for the formal
sales process to get underway in 2007 but it is now more likely
to be 2008.

Sources in the nuclear industry played down talk of a rift
between the BNFL board and the NDA saying the Sellafield
clean-up and the privatisation were complex and neither side
wanted them rushed. But there are fears inside BNFL that the
sale of BNG should not be delayed too long for fear that staff
will leave. There is a huge skills shortage in a sector that is
seeing a resurgence of activity.

Much of the government's privatisation programme has been
slipping, with the sale to Toshiba of BNFL's Westinghouse
nuclear engineering and design company taking longer to complete
than expected.

The first contract to hand over management of the Drigg
low-level waste site to private-sector companies has also
started, but somewhat behind schedule.

The atmosphere around the nuclear industry has become more
heated since Britain and various other countries agreed they may
need to proceed with a new generation of power stations.

In France yesterday the anti-atomic power lobby, Sortir du
Nucleaire (SN) promised to bring a court case against the local
power group EDF, challenging its right to build a third reactor
in the north-west of the country.

Work on the project is scheduled to begin next year but Benoist
Busson, the lawyer for the SN, said the building permit awarded
for the new European pressurised reactor at Flamanville was
wrongly granted.

"EPR will just be used as a shop window to sell reactors to
China," he argued. "We don't need to build any more reactors as
those we have can be used until 2025."

Mr Busson accepted that the French government would probably
change the law to ensure the project went ahead. The country
already has 58 reactors, which account for 80% of the nation's
power.

EDF is a major supplier of electricity in Britain and the
company is expected to be at the forefront of moves to build new
plants here.
 
Useful links
British Energy
Department of Trade and Industry
British Nuclear Fuels Ltd
Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament
Greenpeace
Come Clean WMD awareness programme
UK atomic energy authority
National Radiological Protection Board
Friends of the Earth
World Nuclear Association
World Nuclear Transport Institute

[UP] 

Guardian Unlimited � Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
 32 Charlotte Observer: NO: Nuclear power plants offer one-stop shopping for terrorists

| 08/21/2006 | 

 MATTHEW R. AUER McClatchy-Tribune News Service 

Nuclear energy is gaining converts as energy prices spiral
upward and America's reliance on Middle East oil goes unchecked.
But the swell of support has more to do with the perils of coal
than with oil. 

Coal is America's most important fuel source for electrical
power generation and is responsible for more than one-third of
the nation's carbon-dioxide emissions -- pollution that promotes
global warming. 

When it comes to emitting carbon, nuclear power is cleaner --
one of many reasons to love nuclear, its backers say. Patrick
Moore, co-founder of Greenpeace and an unlikely convert to the
nuclear cause, urges that mining uranium is much safer than in
years past, and spent nuclear fuel is not so much waste as it is
"potential energy" available for extra rounds of power
generation. What waste remains, he contends, is not nearly so
risky as commonly assumed. 

"In 40 years," Moore and former EPA Administrator Christine Todd
Whitman write in the Washington Post, "used fuel has less than
one-thousandth of the radioactivity it had when it was removed
from the reactor. ... Imagine if the ratio of coal to nuclear
were reversed so that only 20 percent of our electricity was
generated from coal and 60 percent from nuclear." 

Imagination is needed to embrace a plan that costs so much,
promises so little in clean energy, and risks so perilously the
country's national security. 

More nuclear plants in the U.S. will not alleviate the global
warming problem so long as other countries roll out new
coal-fired plants. By some estimates, China commissions a new
coal-fired power station every 10 days. 

In the U.S., hundreds of nuclear plants would be required to
replace the current supply of coal-generated electricity.
Imagine nuclear waste stored at hundreds of surface sites at new
nuclear plants around the nation. 

The likelihood of a serious accident grows as opportunities to
mishandle radioactive materials increase. More plants mean more
chances for waste to seep out of temporary storage sites.
Mistakes will be made processing, transporting or simply keeping
track of fissile materials. 

As the United States ramps up nuclear power production, thereby
generating greater amounts of reusable nuclear fuels and
radioactive wastes, nuclear proliferation risks mount. The
thousands of new jobs created to mine and process uranium,
manufacture, load and unload fuel rods, and transport and store
waste represent thousands of additional people with discretion
over potent and greatly feared forms of energy. 

A full-steam-ahead plan for nuclear energy means millions of
additional chances for radioactive products and byproducts to
end up in the wrong hands. Nuclear power plants offer one-stop
shopping for terrorists: they can be sabotaged or their contents
siphoned for weapons. 

These risks should urge us to keep developing alternatives to
nuclear -- wind energy, fuel cells, biofuels, reduced energy
demand, deep injection of carbon dioxide. None of these options,
alone, will solve the global warming problem, but nuclear power
does not belong on the option list, period. 

Matthew R. Auer is a professor of public and environmental
affairs at Indiana University in Bloomington, Ind. 
*****************************************************************
 33 Charlotte Observer: Should U.S. increase its use of nuclear power?

08/21/2006 | 

YES: If the U.S. wants abundant electricity, it needs this power
source

 LLEWELLYN KING McClatchy-Tribune News Service 

It is likely that this year, or next, the first new nuclear
plant in decades will be ordered in the United States. A return
to nuclear is not only long overdue. It is an environmental
necessity and a national security imperative. 

If the United States wants abundant electricity, essentially for
all time, it has to rediscover nuclear as the low-impact form of
electric generation. The facts are catching up with the
malicious fiction that consigned nuclear -- the high-technology,
alternative way to produce electricity -- to limbo. 

Some stubbornly hostile foreign governments are already looking
afresh at nuclear power. 

Finland, with a small population and dedicated to the
environment, realized that it could not increase its dependence
on Russian natural gas and reluctantly ordered its fifth
reactor. British Prime Minister Tony Blair, who has spared no
effort in promoting alternative power generation, has come to
realize that Britain needs nuclear power and alternatives will
not fill the gap. His only other option is gas from Russia -- a
mercurial supplier at best. 

The days of anything-but-nuclear are not over. But the demands
of the U.S. economy point to the need for a reliable electric
base that will extend 50 years into the future, not just to the
next election cycle. 

Even the environmental community is beginning to realize that if
you want a lot of electricity permanently, from known sources,
nuclear stands out as domestic and reliable. It adds nothing to
global warming. What is more, if progress continues in an
evolutionary manner, and we proceed from light water reactors to
breeder reactors, the electric future becomes infinite. 

Two new technologies suggest that the need for electricity will
increase rather than decline in the United States. 

The first is the plug-in hybrid car, and the second is the
greater use of hydrogen in the economy. Both will reduce
emissions. But if the new electric demand is met with fossil
fuels, the pollution will simply be moved from the tailpipe to
the smokestack. 

Electricity has transformed the world. It has improved the
quality of life for hundreds of millions of people. Without it,
only the rich could hope for lives of comfort. Aside from clean
water, it has no peer in the realm of human well-being. 

I believe in the benefits of electricity and have confidence in
America's ability to engineer its way out of its problems. So it
seems incomprehensible that we do not pledge ourselves
wholeheartedly to an electric future. Most of the railroads
await electrification. There is a glimmer of its possibility for
automobiles, and cities need to rediscover trolleys and trams. 

Back to the future, I say -- the nuclear electric future which
is less volatile and more reverential of the environment. 

For 30 years or more, we have talked about new technology and
meant computers. Because of social and cultural pressure, the
truly exciting technology of the atom has been shunned. 

Now we talk a lot about nanotechnology. But if we are already
using the components of matter, atoms, we should also have the
moral courage to split them for electric power. 

Llewellyn King is the publisher of White House Weekly and host
of the weekly PBS television show "White House Chronicle."

*****************************************************************
 34 NRC: Notice of Opportunity To Comment on Model Safety Evaluation on 
 
                        FR Doc E6-13715 

[Federal Register: August 21, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 161)] 
[Notices] [Page 48561-48564] From the Federal Register Online via 
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr21au06-78]                         
 
Technical Specification Improvement To Modify Requirements 
Regarding LCO 3.10.1, Inservice Leak and Hydrostatic Testing 
Operation Using the Consolidated Line Item Improvement Process 
AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
 
ACTION: Request for comment.
 
SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the staff of the Nuclear 
Regulatory Commission (NRC) has prepared a model safety 
evaluation (SE) relating to the modification of shutdown testing 
requirements in technical specifications (TS) for Boiling Water 
Reactors (BWR).
 
The NRC staff has also prepared a model 
no-significant-hazards-consideration (NSHC) determination 
relating to this matter. The purpose of these models is to permit 
the NRC to efficiently process amendments that propose to modify 
LCO 3.10.1 that would allow control rod scram time testing to be 
performed concurrently with inservice leak and hydrostatic 
testing. Licensees of nuclear power reactors to which the models 
apply could then request amendments, confirming the applicability 
of the SE and NSHC determination to their reactors. The NRC staff 
is requesting comment on the model SE and model NSHC 
determination prior to announcing their availability for 
referencing in license amendment applications.
 
 
DATES: The comment period expires September 20, 2006. Comments 
received after this date will be considered if it is practical to 
do so, but the Commission is able to ensure consideration only 
for comments received on or before this date.
 
 
ADDRESSES: Comments may be submitted either electronically or via 
U.S. mail. Submit written comments to Chief, Rules and Directives 
Branch, Division of Administrative Services, Office of 
Administration, Mail Stop: T-6 D59, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 
Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001. Hand deliver comments to: 
11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland, between 7:45 a.m. and 
4:15 p.m. on Federal workdays. Copies of comments received may be 
examined at the NRC's Public Document Room, 11555 Rockville Pike 
(Room O-1F21), Rockville, Maryland.
 
Comments may be submitted by electronic mail to NRCREP@nrc.gov. 
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tim Kobetz, Mail Stop: O-12H2, 
Division of Inspections and Regional Support, Office of Nuclear 
Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 
Washington, DC 20555- 0001, telephone 301-415-1932.
 
 
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background Regulatory Issue Summary 
2000-06, ``Consolidated Line Item Improvement Process for 
Adopting Standard Technical Specification Changes for Power 
Reactors,'' was issued on March 20, 2000. The consolidated line 
item improvement process (CLIIP) is intended to improve the 
efficiency of NRC licensing processes by processing proposed 
changes to the standard technical specifications (STS) in a 
manner that supports subsequent license amendment applications.
 
The CLIIP includes an opportunity for the public to comment on a 
proposed change to the STS after a preliminary assessment by the 
NRC staff and a finding that the change will likely be offered 
for adoption by licensees. This notice solicits comment on a 
proposal to modify LCO 3.10.1 that would allow control rod scram 
time testing to be performed concurrently with inservice leak and 
hydrostatic testing. The CLIIP directs the NRC staff to evaluate 
any comments received for a proposed change to the STS and to 
either reconsider the change or announce the availability of the 
change for adoption by licensees.
 
This notice involves the modification of LCO 3.10.1 that would 
allow control rod scram time testing to be performed concurrently 
with inservice leak and hydrostatic testing. This change was 
proposed for incorporation into the standard technical 
specifications by the owners groups participants in the Technical 
Specification Task Force (TSTF) and is designated TSTF-484. 
TSTF-484 can be viewed on the NRC's Web page utilizing the 
Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS). ADAMS 
accession numbers are ML052930102 (TSTF-484 Submittal), 
ML060970568 (NRC Request for Additional Information, RAI), and 
ML061560523 (TSTF Response to NRC RAIs).
 
 
[[Page 48562]] Applicability Licensees opting to apply for this 
TS change are responsible for reviewing the staff's evaluation, 
referencing the applicable technical justifications, and 
providing any necessary plant-specific information. Each 
amendment application made in response to the notice of 
availability will be processed and noticed in accordance with 
applicable rules and NRC procedures.
 
Public Notices This notice requests comments from interested 
members of the public within 30 days of the date of publication 
in the Federal Register. After evaluating the comments received 
as a result of this notice, the staff will either reconsider the 
proposed change or announce the availability of the change in a 
subsequent notice (perhaps with some changes to the safety 
evaluation or the proposed no significant hazards consideration 
determination as a result of public comments). If the staff 
announces the availability of the change, licensees wishing to 
adopt the change must submit an application in accordance with 
applicable rules and other regulatory requirements. For each 
application the staff will publish a notice of consideration of 
issuance of amendment to facility operating licenses, a proposed 
no significant hazards consideration determination, and a notice 
of opportunity for a hearing. The staff will also publish a 
notice of issuance of an amendment to an operating license to 
announce the modification of TS 3.10.1, Inservice Leak and 
Hydrostatic Testing, for each plant that receives the requested 
change.
 
Proposed Safety Evaluation--U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, Consolidated Line Item 
Improvement, Technical Specification Task Force (TSTF) Change 
TSTF-484, Revision 0, Use of TS 3.10.1 for Scram Time Testing 
Activities 1.0 Introduction By application dated [Date], [Name of 
Licensee] (the licensee) requested changes to the Technical 
Specifications (TS) for the [Name of Facility].
 
The proposed changes would revise LCO 3.10.1, and the associated 
Bases, to expand its scope to include provisions for temperature 
excursions greater than [200][deg]F as a consequence of inservice 
leak and hydrostatic testing, and as a consequence of scram time 
testing initiated in conjunction with an inservice leak or 
hydrostatic test, while considering operational conditions to be 
in Mode 4.
 
2.0 Regulatory Evaluation 2.1 Inservice Leak and Hydrostatic 
Testing The Reactor Coolant System (RCS) serves as a pressure 
boundary and also serves to provide a flow path for the 
circulation of coolant past the fuel. In order to maintain RCS 
integrity, Section XI of the American Society of Mechanical 
Engineers (ASME) Pressure Vessel Code requires periodic 
hydrostatic and leakage testing. Hydrostatic tests are required 
to be performed once every 10 years and Leakage tests are 
required to be performed each refueling outage. Appendix G to 10 
CFR Part 50 states that pressure tests and leak tests of the 
reactor vessel that are required by Section XI of the American 
Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Pressure Vessel Code must 
be completed before the core is critical.
 
NUREG-1433, General Electric Plants, BWR/4, Revision 3, Standard 
Technical Specifications (STS) and NUREG-1434, General Electric 
Plants, BWR/6, Revision 3, STS both currently contain LCO 3.10.1, 
Inservice Leak and Hydrostatic Testing Operation. LCO 3.10.1 was 
created to allow for hydrostatic and leakage testing to be 
conducted while in Mode 4 with average reactor coolant 
temperature greater than [200][deg]F provided certain secondary 
containment LCOs are met.
 
TSTF-484, Revision 0, Use of TS 3.10.1 for Scram Time Testing 
Activities, modifies LCO 3.10.1 to allow a licensee to implement 
LCO 3.10.1 while hydrostatic and leakage testing is being 
conducted should average reactor coolant temperature exceed 
[200][deg]F during testing. This modification does not alter 
current requirements for hydrostatic and leakage testing as 
required by Appendix G to 10 CFR part 50.
 
2.2 Control Rod Scram Time Testing Control Rods function to 
control reactor power level and to provide adequate excess 
negative reactivity to shut down the reactor from any normal 
operating or accident condition at any time during core life. The 
control rods are scrammed by using hydraulic pressure exerted by 
the Control Rod Drive (CRD) system. Criterion 10 of Appendix A to 
10 CFR part 50 states that the reactor core and associated 
coolant, control, and protection systems shall be designed with 
appropriate margin to assure that specified acceptable fuel 
limits are not exceed during any condition of normal operation, 
including the effects of anticipated operational occurrences. The 
scram reactivity used in design basis accidents (DBA) and 
transient analyses is based on an assumed control rod scram time.
 
NUREG-1433, General Electric Plants, BWR/4, Revision 3, Standard 
Technical Specifications (STS) and NUREG-1434, General Electric 
Plants, BWR/6, Revision 3, STS both currently contain 
surveillance requirements (SR) to conduct scram time testing when 
certain conditions are met in order to ensure that Criterion 10 
of Appendix A to 10 CFR part 50 is satisfied. SR 3.1.4.1 requires 
scram time testing to be conducted following a shutdown greater 
than 120 days while SR 3.1.4.4 requires scram time testing to be 
conducted following work on the CRD system or following fuel 
movement within the affected core cell. Both SR must be performed 
at reactor pressure greater than or equal to [800] psig and prior 
to initially exceeding 40% rated thermal power (RTP).
 
TSTF-484, Revision 0, Use of TS 3.10.1 for Scram Time Testing 
Activities, would modify LCO 3.10.1 to allow SR 3.1.4.1 and SR 
3.1.4.4 to be conducted in Mode 4 with average reactor coolant 
temperature greater than [200][deg]F. Scram time testing would be 
performed in accordance with LCO 3.10.4, Single Control Rod 
Withdrawal--Cold Shutdown. This modification to LCO 3.10.1 does 
not alter the means of compliance with Criterion 10 of Appendix A 
to 10 CFR part 50.
 
3.0 Technical Evaluation The existing provisions of LCO 3.10.1 
allow for hydrostatic and leakage testing to be conducted while 
in Mode 4 with average reactor coolant temperature greater than 
[200][deg]F, while imposing Mode 3 secondary containment 
requirements. Under the existing provision, LCO 3.10.1 would have 
to be implemented prior to hydrostatic and leakage testing. As a 
result, if LCO 3.10.1 was not implemented prior to hydrostatic 
and leakage testing, hydrostatic and leakage testing would have 
to be terminated if average reactor coolant temperature exceeded 
[200][deg]F during the conduct of the hydrostatic and leakage 
test. TSTF-484, Revision 0, Use of TS 3.10.1 for Scram Time 
Testing Activities, modifies LCO 3.10.1 to allow a licensee to 
implement LCO 3.10.1 while hydrostatic and leakage testing is 
being conducted should average reactor coolant temperature exceed 
[200][deg]F during testing. The modification will allow 
completion of testing without the potential for interrupting the 
test in order to reduce reactor vessel pressure, cool the RCS, 
and restart the test below
 
[[Page 48563]] [200][deg]F. Since the current LCO 3.10.1 allows 
testing to be conducted while in Mode 4 with average reactor 
coolant temperature greater than [200][deg]F, the proposed change 
does not introduce any new operational conditions beyond those 
currently allowed.
 
Surveillance Requirements (SR) 3.1.4.1 and SR 3.1.4.4 require 
that control rod scram time be tested at reactor pressure greater 
than or equal to [800] psig and before exceeding 40% rated 
thermal power (RTP). Performance of control rod scram time 
testing is typically scheduled concurrent with inservice leak or 
hydrostatic testing while the reactor coolant system (RCS) is 
pressurized. Because of the number of control rods that must be 
tested, it is possible for the inservice leak or hydrostatic test 
to be completed prior to completing the scram time test. Under 
existing provisions, if scram time testing can not be completed 
during the LCO 3.10.1 inservice leak or hydrostatic test, scram 
time testing must be suspended. Additionally, if LCO 3.10.1 is 
not implemented and average reactor coolant temperature exceeds 
[200][deg]F while performing the scram time test, scram time 
testing must also be suspended. In both situations, scram time 
testing is resumed during startup prior to exceeding 40% RTP. 
TSTF-484, Revision 0, Use of TS 3.10.1 for Scram Time Testing 
Activities, modifies LCO 3.10.1 to allow a licensee to complete 
scram time testing initiated during inservice leak or hydrostatic 
testing. As stated earlier, since the current LCO 3.10.1 allows 
testing to be conducted while in Mode 4 with average reactor 
coolant temperature greater than [200][deg]F, the proposed change 
does not introduce any new operational conditions beyond those 
currently allowed. Completion of scram time testing prior to 
reactor criticality and power operations results in a more 
conservative operating philosophy with attendant potential safety 
benefits.
 
It is acceptable to perform other testing concurrent with the 
inservice leak or hydrostatic test provided that this testing can 
be performed safely and does not interfere with the leak or 
hydrostatic test. However, it is not permissible to remain in TS 
3.10.1 solely to complete such testing following the completion 
of inservice leak or hydrostatic testing and scram time testing.
 
Since the tests are performed with the reactor pressure vessel 
(RPV) nearly water solid, at low decay heat values, and near Mode 
4 conditions, the stored energy in the reactor core will be very 
low. Small leaks from the RCS would be detected by inspections 
before a significant loss of inventory occurred. In addition, two 
low pressure emergency core cooling systems (ECCS) 
injection/spray subsystems are required to be operable in Mode 4 
by TS 3.5.2, ECCS-Shutdown. In the event of a large RCS leak, the 
RPV would rapidly depressurize and allow operation of the low 
pressure ECCS. The capability of the low pressure ECCS would be 
adequate to maintain the fuel covered under the low decay heat 
conditions during these tests. Also, LCO 3.10.1 requires that 
secondary containment and standby gas treatment system be 
operable and capable of handling any airborne radioactivity or 
steam leaks that may occur during performance of testing.
 
The protection provided by the normally required Mode 4 
applicable LCOs, in addition to the secondary containment 
requirements required to be met by LCO 3.10.1, minimizes 
potential consequences in the event of any postulated abnormal 
event during testing. In addition, the requested modification to 
LCO 3.10.1 does not create any new modes of operation or 
operating conditions that are not currently allowed.
 
4.0 State Consultation In accordance with the Commission's 
regulations, the [Name of State] State official was notified of 
the proposed issuance of the amendment. The State official had 
[no] comments. [If comments were provided, they should be 
addressed here].
 
5.0 Environmental Consideration The amendment changes a 
requirement with respect to installation or use of a facility 
component located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR 
part 20. The NRC staff has determined that the amendment involves 
no significant increase in the amounts, and no significant change 
in the types, of any effluents that may be released offsite, and 
that there is no significant increase in individual or cumulative 
occupational radiation exposure. A significant hazards 
consideration is attached and is available for public comment.
 
The amendment meets the eligibility criteria for categorical 
exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9). Pursuant to 10 CFR 
51.22(b) no environmental impact statement or environmental 
assessment need be prepared in connection with the issuance of 
the amendment.
 
6.0 Conclusion The Commission has concluded, based on the 
considerations discussed above, that: (1) There is reasonable 
assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be 
endangered by operation in the proposed manner, (2) such 
activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's 
regulations, and (3) the issuance of the amendments will not be 
inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and 
safety of the public.
 
7.0 References 1. NUREG-1433, ``General Electric Plants, BWR/4, 
Revision 3, Standard Technical Specifications (STS)'', August 31, 
2003.
 
2. NUREG-1434, General Electric Plants, BWR/6, Revision 3, 
Standard Technical Specifications (STS)'', August 31, 2003.
 
3. Request for Additional Information (RAI) Regarding TSTF-484, 
April, 7, 2006, ADAMS accession number ML060970568.
 
4. Response to NRC RAIs Regarding TSTF-484, June 5, 2006, ADAMS 
accession number ML061560523.
 
5. TSTF-484 Revision 0, ``Use of TS 3.10.1 for Scram Times 
Testing Activities'', May 5, 2005, ADAMS accession number 
ML052930102.
 
Model No Significant Hazards Determination Description of 
Amendment Request: The proposed changes would revise LCO 3.10.1, 
and the associated Bases, to expand its scope to include 
provisions for temperature excursions greater than [200][deg]F as 
a consequence of inservice leak and hydrostatic testing, and as a 
consequence of scram time testing initiated in conjunction with 
an inservice leak or hydrostatic test, while considering 
operational conditions to be in Mode 4.
 
Basis for No Significant Hazards Determination: As required by 10 
CFR 50.91 (a), an analysis of the issue of no significant hazards 
consideration is presented below: Criterion 1: The proposed 
change does not involve a significant increase in the probability 
or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
 
Technical Specifications currently allow for operation at greater 
than [200][deg]F while imposing MODE 4 requirements in addition 
to the secondary containment requirements required to be met. 
Extending the activities that can apply this allowance will not 
adversely impact the probability or consequences of an accident 
previously evaluated. Therefore, the proposed change does not 
involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences 
of an accident previously evaluated.
 
Criterion 2: The proposed change does not create the possibility 
of a new or different kind of accident from any accident 
previously evaluated.
 
Technical Specifications currently allow for operation at greater 
than
 
[[Page 48564]] [200][deg]F while imposing MODE 4 requirements in 
addition to the secondary containment requirements required to be 
met. No new operational conditions beyond those currently allowed 
by LCO 3.10.1 are introduced. The changes do not involve a 
physical alteration of the plant (i.e., no new or different type 
of equipment will be installed) or a change in the methods 
governing normal plant operation. In addition, the changes do not 
impose any new or different requirements or eliminate any 
existing requirements. The changes do not alter assumptions made 
in the safety analysis. The proposed changes are consistent with 
the safety analysis assumptions and current plant operating 
practice. Therefore, the proposed change does not create the 
possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any 
accident previously evaluated.
 
Criterion 3: The proposed change does not involve a significant 
reduction in a margin of safety.
 
Technical Specifications currently allow for operation at greater 
than [200][deg]F while imposing MODE 4 requirements in addition 
to the secondary containment requirements required to be met. 
Extending the activities that can apply this allowance will not 
adversely impact any margin of safety. Allowing completion of 
inspections and testing and supporting completion of scram time 
testing initiated in conjunction with an inservice leak or 
hydrostatic test prior to power operation results in enhanced 
safe operations by eliminating unnecessary maneuvers to control 
reactor temperature and pressure.
 
Therefore, the proposed change does not involve a significant 
reduction in a margin of safety.
 
Based on the above, the NRC concludes that the proposed change 
presents no significant hazards consideration under the standards 
set forth in 10 CFR 50.92(c), and, accordingly, a finding of no 
significant hazards consideration is justified.
 
Principal Contributor: Aron Lewin.
 
Dated at Rockville, Maryland this 15th day of August 2006.
 
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
 
Timothy Kobetz, Branch Chief, Technical Specifications Branch, 
Division of Inspections and Regional Support, Office of Nuclear 
Reactor Regulation.
 
[FR Doc. E6-13715 Filed 8-18-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P

 
*****************************************************************
 35 NRC: Tennessee Valley Authority; Notice of Withdrawal of Application 
 
                        FR Doc E6-13716 
[Federal Register: August 21, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 161)] 
[Notices] [Page 48560] From the Federal Register Online via GPO 
Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr21au06-76]                         
 
for Amendment to Facility Operating License The U.S. Nuclear 
Regulatory Commission (the Commission) has granted the request of 
the Tennessee Valley Authority (the licensee) to withdraw its 
September 23, 2004, application for proposed amendment to 
Facility Operating License No. NPF-90 for the Watts Bar Nuclear 
Plant, Unit No. 1, located in Rhea County, Tennessee. The 
proposed amendment would have revised Technical Specification 
Table 3.3.2-1, ``Engineered Safety Feature Actuation System 
Instrumentation,'' to allow the auxiliary feedwater start signal 
upon trip of all main feedwater pumps to be required only when 
one or more of the turbine driven main feedwater pumps are 
operating.
 
The Commission had previously issued a Notice of Consideration of 
Issuance of Amendment published in the Federal Register on 
December 7, 2004 (69 FR 70722). However, by letter dated July 28, 
2006, the licensee withdrew the proposed change.
 
For further details with respect to this action, see the 
application for amendment dated September 23, 2004, as 
supplemented by letter dated May 25, 2006, and the licensee's 
letter dated July 28, 2006, which withdrew the application for 
license amendment.
 
Documents may be examined, and/or copied for a fee, at the NRC's 
Public Document Room (PDR), located at One White Flint North, 
Public File Area O1 F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), 
Rockville, Maryland.
 
Publicly available records will be accessible electronically from 
the Agencywide Documents Access and Management Systems (ADAMS) 
Public Electronic Reading Room on the Internet at the NRC Web 
site, http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm.html. Persons who do not have 
access to ADAMS or who encounter problems in accessing the 
documents located in ADAMS should contact the NRC PDR Reference 
staff by telephone at 1-800-397-4209, or 301-415-4737 or by 
e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 8th day 
of August, 2006.
 
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
 
Douglas V. Pickett, Senior Project Manager, Plant Licensing 
Branch II-2, Division of Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of 
Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
 
[FR Doc. E6-13716 Filed 8-18-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P

 
*****************************************************************
 36 NRC: Notice of Availability of Environmental Assessment and Finding
 
                        FR Doc E6-13718 
[Federal Register: August 21, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 161)] 
[Notices] [Page 48560-48561] From the Federal Register Online via 
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr21au06-77]                         
 
of No Significant Impact for License Termination for Michigan 
Biotechnology Institute, Lansing, MI AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory 
Commission.
 
ACTION: Notice of availability.
 
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Peter J. Lee, 
Decommissioning Branch, Division of Nuclear Materials Safety, 
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Region III, 2443 Warrenville 
Road, Lisle, Illinois 60532- 4352. Telephone: 630-829-9870; fax 
number: 630-515-1259; e-mail:

 
pjl2@nrc.gov.
 
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Introduction The U.S. Nuclear 
Regulatory Commission (NRC) is considering issuing a license 
termination of Material License No. 21-24836-01 issued to 
Michigan Biotechnology Institute (the licensee), to authorize 
release of its Lansing facility for unrestricted use.
 
The NRC staff has prepared an Environmental Assessment (EA) in 
support of this amendment in accordance with the requirements of 
10 CFR part 51. Based on the EA, the NRC has concluded that a 
Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) is appropriate. The 
amendment will be issued following the publication of this 
Notice.
 
II. EA Summary The purpose of the proposed action is to terminate 
Byproduct Material License No. 21-24836-01 issued to Michigan 
Biotechnology Institute, and release its Lansing, Michigan 
facility for unrestricted use. The NRC's license authorized the 
licensee to use labeled compounds such as hydrogen-3, carbon-14, 
phosphorus-32, sulfur-35, etc.
 
for research and development. On March 7, 2006, the licensee 
submitted a license termination request to release its Lansing 
facility for unrestricted use. The licensee has conducted surveys 
of the facility and provided information to the NRC to 
demonstrate that the site meets
 
[[Page 48561]] the license termination criteria in 10 CFR 
20.1402, ``Radiological Criteria for Unrestricted Use.'' The 
staff has examined the licensee's request and the information 
provided in support of its request, including the surveys 
performed to demonstrate compliance with the release criteria. 
The staff has found that the radiological environmental impacts 
from the proposed action are bounded by the impacts evaluated in 
the ``Generic Environmental Impact Statement in Support of 
Rulemaking on Radiological Criteria for License Termination of 
NRC-Licensed Facilities'' (NUREG-1496). Additionally, no 
non-radiological or cumulative impacts were identified. Based on 
its review, the staff has determined that there are no additional 
remediation activities necessary to complete the proposed action 
and a Finding of No Significant Impact is appropriate.
 
III. Finding of No Significant Impact On the basis of the EA, the 
NRC concluded that there are no significant environmental impacts 
from the proposed amendment and determined not to prepare an 
environmental impact statement.
 
IV. Further Information Documents related to this action, 
including the application for amendment and supporting 
documentation, are available electronically at the NRC's 
electronic Reading Room at 
http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. From this site, you can 
access the NRC's Agencywide Document Access and Management System 
(ADAMS), which provides text and image files of NRC's public 
documents. The ADAMS accession numbers for the documents related 
to this notice are: ML060690446 for the March 7, 2006, license 
termination request, ML061980294 for the July 11, 2006, 
additional information to the amendment request, and ML062190210 
for the EA summarized above. If you do not have access to ADAMS 
or if there are problems in accessing the documents located in 
ADAMS, contact the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR) Reference 
staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by e-mail to 
pdr@nrc.gov. These documents may also be viewed electronically on 
the public computers located at the NRC's PDR, O 1 F21, One White 
Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852. The PDR 
reproduction contractor will copy documents for a fee.
 
Dated at Lisle, Illinois, this 10th day of August 2006.
 
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
 
Jamnes L. Cameron, Chief, Decommissioning Branch, Division of 
Nuclear Materials Safety, Region III.
 
[FR Doc. E6-13718 Filed 8-18-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P

 
*****************************************************************
 37 FIA: Nuclear Regulatory Agency Chief: There are No Grounds Claiming
that NPP Kozloduy is Record Breaker in Failures   

FOCUS Information Agency

www.focus-radio.net -->     www.focus-radio.net 
      
21 August 2006 | 14:08 | FOCUS News Agency   
    
  Sofia. 孏here are no grounds claiming that NPP Kozloduy is
record breaker in failures and emissions of radioactive
materials�, was the comment for FOCUS Agency of the Director of
Nuclear Regulatory Agency (NRA) Sergey Tsochev in connection
with the publication by the Macedonian agency Makfax. The agency
cites the Deputy Chairman of Ecoglasnost Petar Penchev who
claimed that the NPP was a 𡤧hampion on letting nuclear
emissions into the air�. 

Sergey Tsochev made it clear that NRA many times answered to
questions asked by Penchev although he had never asked the
agency directly but had written to institutions and diplomats.
The director of NRA commented that the mentioned incident on 1st
March has no connection whatsoever with the radioactive waste
since there was just 弌 failure of a system wasn㦙 necessary to
be used and there were no real consequences from such thing.� He
added that the NPP was on a medium European level of safety and
there was no way it could be a record breaker in failures. 
  
Focus Information Agency � 2006   
*****************************************************************
 38 FIA: Makfax: Bulgarian NPP Kozloduy is Record Breaker in Failures   

FOCUS Information Agency

  21 August 2006 | 12:34 | FOCUS News Agency   
    
  Skopje. Bulgarian NPP Kozloduy is holding teh record in the
number of nuclear emissions it has released into the air, Deputy
Chairman of Ecoglasnost movement Petar Penchev has said, cited
by the Macedonian Makfax. 

According to ecologists the failure of NPP Kozloduy on 1st March
this year was quite dangerous and the Minister of Energy Rumen
Ovcharov was deluding society. 

T he EU has several times demanded from Bulgaria to close down 
the plant but Bulgarians claim that it provides 40% from the 
needed electricity in the country, Makfax reports.   
    




      Focus Information Agency � 2006   
*****************************************************************
 39 Atlanta Journal-Constitution: Nuclear material turns up in search 

ajc.com

Southern Co. finds almost all of waste
 		 	
By MARGARET NEWKIRK The Atlanta Journal-Constitution

Published on: 08/22/06                                                                                                                                                                                  
	 	
Southern Co. has found all but 18 inches of the more than 5 feet
of spent nuclear rods reported missing last fall from its Plant
Hatch nuclear reactors near Baxley.
 
The discovery concludes Southern's efforts to locate the spent
rods, which are about the diameter of a pencil.

The company told federal regulators Monday that it believes most
of the still-unaccounted-for waste is safely stored at its
on-site fuel pools, but in pieces too small to be seen.
 
In November, Southern reported that it couldn't account for 5
feet and 8 inches of the rod, after taking part in a first-time
nationwide inventory ordered earlier that year by the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission.
 
Most of the original missing material was found in the spent
fuel pool at Plant Hatch, which was where it was supposed to be.
The material was in bits and pieces, though, which was why it
didn't show up in Southern's first inventory sweep.
 
The company said the fragments were the result of a corrosive
water problem at Plant Hatch that broke down fuel rod casings
for a period in the 1980s, allowing the fuel rod pieces to fall
out.
 
The company didn't have the water problem at its other nuclear
facilities. Fuel inventory checks at Plant Vogtle, in
Waynesboro, and Plant Farley, in Alabama, both matched company
records.
 
The company said it has long since corrected the water problem
that led to the casing corrosion at Hatch. On Monday, the
company said it believes that most of the remaining 18 inches of
spent fuel is in Plant Hatch's pool but tucked out of sight of
the company's cameras.
 
Some of the remaining 18 inches may have been inadvertently
shipped to a licensed waste disposal site, the company said  but
not much of it. The shipments are scanned for radiation, and
only a very small amount of the material could have been missed,
Georgia Power spokeswoman Carol Boatwright said.
 
The company said it will take the extra fuel into account as it
moves forward with waste disposal, and that the missing fuel
will be retrieved when Plant Hatch is finally decommissioned.
 
Both Southern and the government have consistently downplayed
the possibility that the material was stolen: Highly
radioactive, it's too dangerous to steal. Spent fuel rods are
moved to the pool from reactor cores mechanically and
underwater. Water is a radiation barrier. The rods sit
vertically on the pool's bottom, propped up by a grid, like
umbrellas in a rack.
 
The spent rods have to be moved elsewhere after the pools are
full.
 
The long-term storage of nuclear waste remains an unsolved
problem, even as the power industry is moving toward building
new reactors for the first time in 30 years.
 
Southern Co. is among the utility companies considering building
new reactors. The company filed an initial permit application
with the NRC a week ago, for two new reactors at Plant Vogtle.
 
� 2006 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
*****************************************************************
 40 [NukeNet] tritium standard and water
 
Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2006 16:37:14 -0700

Hi, colleagues -- IMPORTANT TRITIUM UPDATE --the State of CA just
promulgated a new PUBLIC HEALTH GOAL for tritium contamination in water.

The CA state and our federal regulatory limit is a concentration of 20,000
picocuries per liter, as noted on this list serv. This is 5,000 times
higher than the new CA Public Health Goal of 400 picocuries per liter.

This new PHG was published in March 2006, and it opens up the door to
talking to the state and federal government (specifically CalEPA and
federal EPA) about making the rgulatory limit more strict.

For additional detail, check Tri-Valley CAREs website at
www.trivalleycares.org and go to a talk I gave on tritium -- it is on the
right hand side of the web site under the recent press releases section --
specifically under the media advisory we sent out for the event. Just click
-- it is a Word doc.

Also, you might Google or go to the State of CA web site directly. I'm not
at the office and so don't remember the exact web address -- can someone
else post it, please?

This is a truly historic opportunity to get the regs changed.

I invite you all to spend a bit of time on this!!!!

Peace,
Marylia

Marylia Kelley
Executive Director
Tri-Valley CAREs
(Communities Against a Radioactive Environment)
2582 Old First Street
Livermore, CA USA 94551

<http://www.trivalleycares.org> - is our web site address. Please visit us
there!

(925) 443-7148 - is our phone
(925) 443-0177 - is our fax

</x-flowed>
*****************************************************************
 41 CBC: Tritium contamination shuts down Pembroke plant

Last Updated: Monday, August 21, 2006 | 10:18 AM ET 
                
CBC News                                                                                                                                                                                                 

A Pembroke, Ont., company has been ordered to cease production 
after nuclear regulators found abnormally high levels of 
radioactive tritium in the local soil and groundwater.
 
But SRB Technologies said it faces financial ruin and the loss of 
40 jobs unless Canada's Nuclear Safety Commission allows it to 
resume business.
 
SRB Technologies uses tritium gas �碍蟵 radioactive isotope of 
hydrogen �� to make lights and glow-in-the-dark signs. They are 
used on road signs, at airports and other places where signs are 
needed after dark, and electric power is difficult to get.
 
The company has made them for years, with the approval of the 
nuclear safety commission, the group that inspects all companies 
that use radioactive materials.
 
But recent inspections have shown �� and the company's own 
studies have confirmed �� that the groundwater and soil 
immediately around the plant is heavily contaminated by 
radioactive tritium, in some cases at 80 times the recommended 
levels.
 
The tritium seems to be coming from the company's smokestack,
and then falling back to earth.
 
The safety commission told CBC News there's no sign that either
workers or neighbours of the plant have been exposed to danger.
But the commission issued a cease-and-desist order because it
said SRB Technologies hasn't taken all reasonable steps to
prevent contamination and protect the environment.
 
There may be an issue with tritium affecting plants and
vegetables grown near the plant, and the smokestack plume may be
carrying tritium contamination an unknown distance.
 
SRB president Stephane Levesque told CBC News that the company
has made improvements in recent months. And it is hoping to get
a new hearing as soon as possible.
 
In the meantime, SRB is trying to keep its 40 employees on the
job assembling products that have already been manufactured.
 
Copyright � CBC 2006                                     
*****************************************************************
 42 [NukeNet] Scotland: BNFL paid union to back new nuclear power
 
Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2006 16:34:20 -0700

<http://www.sundayherald.com/57437>http://www.sundayherald.com/57437

Sunday Herald - 20 August 2006

BNFL paid union to back new nuclear power stations

By Rob Edwards, Environment Editor

---------- TRADE unionists have been given thousands of pounds by 
their government company bosses to campaign in favour of Tony 
Blair𠏋 new nuclear power programme.

Funding from state-owned British Nuclear Fuels (BNFL) paid for 
airfares, hotels, dinners and 𩂈efreshments� for union members 
from nuclear plants to lobby delegates at Labour and TUC 
conferences in Brighton last autumn.

BNFL has been accused of using taxpayers� money to create a 
pro-nuclear 𡜻ront� organisation, while the trade unionists 
involved have been attacked by fellow unionists for 孄etting into 
bed with the employer�.

But this is denied by the nuclear trade unions, who insist that 
they are 𡞫efending our jobs, our livelihoods and our 
communities� from attack.

Documents obtained by the Sunday Herald reveal that �15,050 was 
claimed in expenses from BNFL for 幞uklear21 union meetings� in 
2005-06.

Nuklear21 is a campaign group that brings together workers from 
five trade unions at nuclear plants across the UK to lobby for 
new reactors.

Included in the expenses was �3311 for activists to attend the 
annual Labour and TUC conferences in Brighton in September 2005. 
There, they were able to lobby ministers, MPs and trade union 
leaders in support of nuclear power.

Copies of the expense claims filed on behalf of Nuklear21 show 
that �2050 was spent on hotels, �343 on air travel from Newcastle 
and �275.77 on dinners.

The five unions involved in Nuklear21 are GMB, Amicus, Prospect, 
TGWU and UCATT. It is led by workers from nuclear plants at 
Sellafield in Cumbria, Capenhurst in Cheshire and Chapelcross in 
Dumfries and Galloway and has been lobbying politicians at 
Westminster and Holyrood to back nuclear power.

But their activities have drawn fierce fire from within the trade 
union movement. 𨧻f somebody gets into bed with the employer, 
they are totally compromised,� said Ronnie Waugh, a member of the 
GMB national executive, speaking in a personal capacity. 孏heir 
independence is eroded. And they don㦙 mention within the GMB 
that they are subsidised by the employer.�

Jean McSorley, from the anti-nuclear group Greenpeace, pointed 
out that if trade unions wanted a political fighting fund they 
could levy their members. 焅or them to go cap-in-hand to their 
employers is just appalling,� she said.

孏hey have a legitimate right to fight for their jobs, but they 
are using illegitimate means � taxpayers� money.�

Nuklear21𠏋 expense claims were released to the Sunday Herald by 
BNFL in response to an appeal under the Freedom of Information 
Act. The company had initially claimed that it did not hold any 
information about the group𠏋 funding.

But this was overturned after a review by BNFL𠏋 head of 
taxation, David Canfield. He said the company𠏋 initial attempts 
to trace documents about Nuklear21 funding were 婫vidently not 
sufficient�.

BNFL said last week that it had paid out �15,050 𧗽n support of 
trade union activities in general�, suggesting that not all the 
money was spent by Nuklear21. Accredited trade union 
representatives, it has argued, 蘔ave a legitimate role in 
promoting and defending employment in the nuclear industry�.

Nuklear21𠏋 national secretary Howard Rooms, who works at 
Sellafield, said: 㜁e𠆫e doing the work of trade unionists in 
defending our jobs, our livelihoods and our communities.�

孏he company has no say in what we lobby for and who we lobby.� 
There was no conflict in accepting expenses from BNFL while 
representing its workers on pay and conditions, he argued.

Rooms pointed out that it would be difficult to distinguish 
between payments for Nuklear21 and for other activities because 
expense claims were mostly just made for 懀rade union duties�. He 
brushed aside criticism of BNFL paying for dinners out in 
Brighton. 㜁e𠐔e got to eat, haven㦙 we?� he said.


----------

Copyright � 2006 smg sunday newspapers ltd. no.176088 
<http://www.sundayherald.com/print57437javascript:history.back()>Back 
*****************************************************************
 43 NWTRB: Notice of a Meeting; Yucca Mountain, NV 9-25

                         FR Doc 06-7049 

[Federal Register: August 21, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 161)] 
[Notices] [Page 48564] From the Federal Register Online via GPO 
Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr21au06-79]                         

NUCLEAR WASTE TECHNICAL REVIEW BOARD
 

    Workshop: September 25-26, 2006--Las Vegas, Nevada; The U.S. 
Nuclear Waste Technical Review board will host a workshop on the 
potential for localized corrosion of Alloy-22, the material that 
has been proposed for waste packages in which spent nuclear fuel 
and high- level radioactive waste will be disposed of inside the 
proposed Yucca Mountain repository.

    Pursuant to its authority under section 5051 of Public Law 
100-203, Nuclear Waste Policy Amendments Act of 1987, the U.S. 
Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board will host a workshop on 
localized corrosion in Las Vegas, Nevada. The focus of the 
workshop will be the potential for localized corrosion of 
Alloy-22 under aqueous conditions that might exist in a proposed 
Yucca Mountain repository. Alloy-22 is a material that has been 
proposed for waste packages in which spent nuclear fuel and 
high-level radioactive waste will be disposed of inside the 
proposed repository. Among the workshop topics will be results of 
recent and ongoing testing related to evolution of aqueous 
environments in the repository and the potential initiation, 
propagation, cessation, and consequences of localized corrosion 
of Alloy-22. The Board was charged in the Nuclear Waste 
Amendments Act of 1987 with conducting an independent review of 
the technical and scientific validity of U.S. Department of 
Energy (DOE) activities related to disposing, packaging, and 
transporting of spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive 
waste.

    The workshop agenda will be available on the Board's Web site 
http://www.nwtrb.gov) approximately one week before the date of 
the workshop. The agenda also may be obtained by telephone 
request at that time. The workshop will be open to the public, 
and opportunities for public comment will be provided. 
Transcripts of the workshop proceedings and overheads from 
workshop presentations will be available on the Board's Web site 
approximately three weeks after the workshop date.

    The workshop will be held at the Las Vegas Marriott Suites; 
325 Convention Center Drive; Las Vegas, Nevada 89109; telephone 
702-650- 2000; fax 702-650-9466.

    The workshop will begin Monday afternoon with introductions 
of the participants; presentations of the ground rules; and a 
discussion of possible waste package environments, including data 
obtained from current and ongoing tests, interpretation of the 
data, and modeling used to project possible waste package 
environments.

    On Tuesday morning, the workshop will reconvene, and 
discussions will focus on testing related to the potential for 
localized corrosion of the Alloy-22 waste packages. The 
discussions will continue until late afternoon, when the workshop 
will adjourn.

    Time will be set aside during the workshop for public 
comments. Those wanting to speak are encouraged to sign the 
``Public Comment Register'' at the check-in-table. A time limit 
may have to be set on individual remarks, but written comments of 
any length may be submitted for the record.

    Transcripts of the workshop will be available on the Board's 
Web site, by e-mail, on computer disk, and on a library-loan 
basis in paper format from Davonya Barnes of the Board's staff no 
later than October 19, 2006.

    A block of rooms has been reserved for workshop attendees and 
participants at the Las Vegas Marriott Suites. When making a 
reservation, please state that you will be attending the Nuclear 
Waste Technical Review Board workshop. Reservations should be 
made by September 1, 2006, to ensure receiving the workshop rate.

    For more information, contact Karyn Severson, NWTRB External 
Affairs; 2300 Clarendon Boulevard, Suite 1300; Arlington, VA 
22201- 3367; 703-235-4473; fax 703-235-4495.

    Dated: August 16, 2006. William D. Barnard, Executive 
Director, Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board. [FR Doc. 06-7049 
Filed 8-18-06; 8:45am] BILLING CODE 6820-AM-M
 
*****************************************************************
 44 ABC" Southern Nuclear: Spent nuclear fuel still missing - 

Atlanta Business Chronicle

still can't find about one-fourth of a cup of spent nuclear fuel 
at its plant in Baxley, Ga., according to a report to the (NRC) 
Aug. 21. 

Southern Nuclear, a subsidiary of Atlanta-based Southern Co. 
(NYSE: SO), told the NRC it has completed its reconciliation of 
the physical inventory of spent nuclear fuel with its special 
nuclear material inventory records at the Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear 
Plant . 

The results showed fuel material equivalent to about 18 inches
remains unaccounted for, Southern Nuclear said. That amount is
less that 1.5 fluid ounces -- or less than one-fourth of a cup.
The fuel inventory at Plant Hatch totals more than 77 million
inches. 

While small portions of the 18 inches may have been
inadvertently shipped to a licensed waste disposal facility,
Southern Nuclear said it believes the balance of the unaccounted
for material remains in the spent fuel pools in areas that are
either unobservable by camera or otherwise inaccessible. Future
plant activities and preparations for low-level waste shipments
will take into account the possibility of the material's
presence in the pools, and any residual amount will be retrieved
when the plant is decommissioned, Southern Nuclear said. 

Southern Nuclear also noted theft or diversion is "not
plausible" because of plant defense in depth provided by various
physical barriers, procedures and measures such as sophisticated
radiation monitoring instrumentation, extensive security, and
the size and type of container required for transporting the
nuclear material. 

The Monday announcement concludes an inventory that was a
follow-up to a November 2005 of a discrepancy of about 68 inches
of unaccounted for special nuclear material. 

Southern Nuclear said it continued its extensive search and
retrieval program, using specialized equipment and cameras to
visually inspect and retrieve additional material in the spent
fuel pools. The retrieved material consists of fuel rod
segments, fragments, chips, and small granules resulting from
rod breakage which occurred in the early-1980s as a result of
unanticipated corrosion of fuel cladding -- the material
surrounding the fuel pellets. This corrosion issue, affecting
only boiling water reactor fuel, has been resolved and has not
recurred since at Plant Hatch. 

� 2006 American City Business Journals, Inc. and its licensors.
*****************************************************************
 45 DOE: for the proposed Yucca Mountain repository.
 
                         FR Doc 06-7050 
[Federal Register: August 21, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 161)] 
[Notices] [Page 48564-48565] From the Federal Register Online via 
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr21au06-80]                         
 
Pursuant to its authority under section 5051 of Public Law 
100-203, Nuclear Waste Policy Amendments Act of 1987, the U.S. 
Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board will meet in Amargosa 
Valley, Nevada, on Wednesday, September 27, 2006, to
 
[[Page 48565]] review the Department of Energy's (DOE) efforts to 
develop and articulate a safety case for a proposed geologic 
repository for the disposal of spent nuclear fuel and high-level 
radioactive waste at Yucca Mountain in Nevada. The Board was 
charged in the Nuclear Waste Policy Amendments Act of 1987 with 
conducting an independent review of the technical and scientific 
validity of DOE activities related to implementing the Nuclear 
Waste Policy Act.
 
A final meeting agenda will be available on the Board's Web site 
(http://www.nwtrb.gov) approximately one week before the meeting 
date. The agenda also may be obtained by telephone request at 
that time. The meeting will be open to the public, and 
opportunities for public comment will be provided.
 
The meeting will be held at the Longstreet Inn and Casino; 
Stateline and Highway 373; Amargosa Valley, Nevada 89020; 
telephone 775-372-1777; fax 775-372-1280.
 
The meeting will begin at 8 a.m. with an overview of the Yucca 
Mountain program. Presentations on DOE's safety case will 
continue throughout the day.
 
Time will be set aside at the end of the day for public comments. 
Those wanting to speak are encouraged to sign the ``Public 
Comment Register'' at the check-in table. A time limit may have 
to be set on individual remarks, but written comments of any 
length may be submitted for the record.
 
Transcripts of the meeting will be available on the Board's Web 
site, by e-mail, on computer disk, and on a library-loan basis in 
paper format from Davonya Barnes of the Board's staff no later 
than October 23, 2006.
 
For more information, contact Karyn Severson, NWTRB External 
Affairs; 2300 Clarendon Boulevard, Suite 1300; Arlington, VA 
22201- 3367; 703-235-4473; fax 703-235-4495.
 
Dated: August 16, 2006.
 
William D. Barnard, Executive Director, Nuclear Waste Technical 
Review Board.
 
[FR Doc. 06-7050 Filed 8-18-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6820-AM-M

 
*****************************************************************
 46 Knox News: K-25 cleanup plans change

New policies increase safety measures; Trice named project 
manager 

By FRANK MUNGER, munger@knews.com 

August 21, 2006 

OAK RIDGE - Kelly Trice once managed the cleanup of "the most 
dangerous building in America," a plutonium-laden facility at the 
Rocky Flats warhead plant in Colorado. Now he's tackling 
something bigger: the K-25 plant in Oak Ridge. 
			 			
Trice will oversee the dismantling of the mile-long,
U-shaped structure built during World War II to process uranium
for atomic bombs. At the time of its construction, K-25 was the
world's largest building under one roof. Sixty years later, it's
just a big mess. 

The nuclear behemoth was shut down in the 1960s and largely
neglected since then. It is loaded with deposits of fissile
U-235 and fraught with potential pitfalls. 

Trice's assignment as project manager comes as Bechtel Jacobs
Co., the Department of Energy's cleanup contractor, revamps its
strategy at K-25 to bolster safety. The changes were prompted by
an accident earlier this year when a sheet-metal worker fell
through a weakened floor at the old building. 

"We've had the concerns for some time, but that led us to do a
better analysis," Trice said. 

The 43-year-old engineer, with a background in the Navy's
nuclear submarine program, joined Bechtel a couple of years ago
and came to Oak Ridge last year as a vice president with Bechtel
Jacobs. He has a reputation as a cleanup troubleshooter. 

"This is my 13th DOE site," he said, including the
aforementioned Building 771 at Rocky Flats. 

Under the revised K-25 plan, machines will replace humans in a
major way. The cleanup work force, once expected to reach 1,200,
will now peak at about 600-700, Trice said. 

Instead of using workers to physically dismantle much of the 100
miles of piping and associated components within the maze of
uranium-enrichment equipment, Bechtel Jacobs plans to bulldoze
it into a manageable heap - along with tons and tons of
construction rubble. 

The key to this strategy will be locating potentially dangerous
deposits of highly enriched uranium so sections of equipment can
be removed before the demolition begins. Those high-risk
sections will be taken to "segmentation shops," where the U-235
can be removed and transported to the Y-12 nuclear weapons plant
for safekeeping. 

The concern is that if deposits of highly enriched uranium are
left in place during demolition, it could create unsafe
conditions and possibly cause a criticality accident - an
unplanned, uncontrolled nuclear chain reaction and release of
radiation. 

Therefore, an exhaustive effort will be made to locate and
remove any significant quantities of fissionable uranium, Trice
said. About five different methods will be used in the nuclear
treasure hunt, including snakelike cameras to view the innards
of pipes, he said. 

John Owsley, who oversees the Oak Ridge cleanup operations for
the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation, said
environmental regulators have not yet given their approval to
the revised strategy. 

He said the biggest issue is whether DOE and its contractors can
properly track and verify the waste contents - including the
amount of uranium - when mixing the contaminated processing
equipment and construction rubble. 

"They have to be able to document any anomalies," Owsley said,
noting the possibility of uranium deposits being masked by
chunks of concrete and other debris. So far, state officials
have not received enough assurances, he said. 

Bechtel Jacobs officials would not release an estimate of how
much U-235 remains lodged inside the K-25 equipment, apparently
because that information is classified. They confirmed that
previous campaigns undertaken years ago identified and removed
some of the larger deposits. 

Much of the processing equipment will be injected with foam to
stabilize the contamination before the demolition takes place. 
Because of the January accident, which underscored the
building's deterioration - especially concrete panels on the
second floor - very few workers will be allowed upstairs. Also,
a series of nets and barriers will protect downstairs workers
from falling debris. 

The change in cleanup strategy requires Bechtel Jacobs or
subcontractors to install a new criticality alarm system, and
there will be a huge investment in heavy machinery armed with an
array of shears and grapples, loaders and misters. Redundant
machines may be required at as many as seven different
demolition areas at a time once work gets fully charged. 

The new investments, however, are offset by an overall reduction
of 1.3 million hours in labor costs, according to Trice. 

The estimated cost of the K-25 project, which includes the
demolition of the nearby K-27 building, has declined slightly
from $501.6 million to $493.7 million, Bechtel Jacobs said. 

If the new plan enhances worker safety, improves efficiency and
still saves money, why wasn't that strategy chosen in the first
place? 

"I don't know. I can't answer that," Trice said. "Given the
deteriorating of the building and the safety we're trying to
attain, this is the best approach now." 

Demolition work on the west side of the K-25 building is
scheduled to begin in April 2007. Work is to be completed in
August 2009, based on the latest planning documents. 

Bechtel Jacobs was originally scheduled to have the K-25 project
completed by October 2008. The federal contractor stands to lose
millions of dollars in fees for the delays, but Trice said that
would not affect the decision-making. 

"Right now we're interested in doing this as efficiently and
safely as we can," he said. "We've got a very hard task to do.
It's definitely a challenge for our workers." 

Senior writer Frank Munger may be reached at 865-342-6329.
 					
BECHTEL JACOBS CO. 				
 				
Government contractors are changing the strategy for dismantling 
and demolishing the mile-long, U-shaped K-25 building and its 
sister uranium enrichment plant, K-27, in the foreground. The 
revised plan will rely more on heavy machinery to enhance worker 
safety.                                                                                                                                                                               

 JEFF ADKINS NEWS SENTINEL                           
 				
Kelly Trice, project manager for Bechtel Jacobs Co., stands in 
front of the K-25 plant, which will be dismantled over the next 
three years. The federal contractor is working on a revised 
strategy to enhance worker safety while tearing down the 
deteriorated structure. Trice has managed 12 other big cleanups 
at Department of Energy sites.                                                                                                                                                                                  

 2006 - Knoxville News Sentinel
*****************************************************************
 47 KnoxNews: $1.4B SNS key to 'economic synergy'
                                                                                                        
By FRANK MUNGER, munger@knews.com 

August 21, 2006

Despina Louca, a physics professor at the University of Virginia, 
has traveled the world to find the best neutrons for materials 
research. So has Angus Wilkinson, a chemistry professor at the 
Georgia Institute of Technology. Now they've got their sights set 
on Oak Ridge. 

After seven years of construction, the $1.4 billion Spallation 
Neutron Source is ready for business. The first experiments are 
scheduled for this fall, although it may be two years before the 
full research capabilities are realized. 

"The user community is very excited because the instrumentation
is going to be state of the art, with some new capabilities,"
Louca said. 

Louca and Wilkinson both serve on a committee that will evaluate
proposals for research at SNS or the High Flux Isotope Reactor,
Oak Ridge National Laboratory's other world-class source of
neutrons. 

They also plan to do their own neutron-scattering experiments,
using beams of radiation to explore the structure and properties
of materials. 

It's estimated that a couple of thousand scientists will visit
Oak Ridge annually just to spend time at the neutron-making
facilities, and that should translate into big bucks for the
regional economy. 

Wilkinson said a typical research visit lasts three days to a
week, includes air flights in and out of town, a rental car,
hotel accommodations and a few meals at local restaurants. 
That's sort of a minimum investment. 

A senior researcher or faculty member may bring along a couple
of graduate students or other associates, and the scientists may
decide to spend some extra time in East Tennessee after their
SNS work is done. 

"My guess is that most people will likely not hang around much
beyond their measurements, but some are going to go to the
Smokies or do other things," Wilkinson said. "For foreign
visitors, it's more attractive to hang around. If you've come
such a long way, it's not that much more expensive." 

When he was a doctoral student in England, Wilkinson often
arranged Alpine skiing trips to coincide with his research time
at the Institut Laue-Langevin near Grenoble, France. 

It's not unusual for scientists to visit a neutron source
regularly, maybe four or five times a year, to do follow-up
measurements and fine-tune their research results. A science lab
can become a second home, and researchers look for some of the
same creature comforts. 

Wilkinson said he has a list of favorite restaurants in the
Chicago area because of frequent visits to Argonne National
Laboratory. He doesn't have a list in the Knoxville-Oak Ridge
area - yet - but he may after he has a few years of SNS visits
under his belt. 

A reason for scientists to meet According to statistics provided
by ORNL, the anticipated 2,000 visits to SNS will boost the
lab's total number of scientific visits to about 5,000 annually. 
"Most of those visitors will arrive by air, with the

commensurate increase in air travel into McGhee Tyson Airport,"
the lab said. "The 2,000 visitors on their three- to four-day
stays will require up to 8,000 hotel occupancies and a projected
16,000 meals (although researchers doing experiments tend to
snack)." 

Besides being a research base, the Spallation Neutron Source is
expected to be a magnet for scientific conferences. 

The Knoxville Convention Center in 2005 hosted an international
Particle Accelerator Conference with about 1,400 attendees, and
the SNS was the featured attraction. 

Earlier this year, the American Physical Society had a meeting
of its Division of Atomic, Molecular and Optical Physics, and
there were nearly 1,000 in attendance - a big increase over the
previous year's conference held in Lincoln, Neb. The happenings
in Oak Ridge again were one of the reasons for the excitement. 

Another APS-sponsored conference, this one on linear
accelerators, is coming to town this month, and it's likely to
draw about 350 researchers. 

With Knoxville's bolstered convention capacity and the SNS
coming online, more of the same is expected in years ahead. 

A 'linchpin' for economic expansion Not all of the benefits of
the SNS are direct or obvious. 

The $1.4 billion project was completed on schedule and within
its budget, and that has created a reputation for good work at
ORNL. It was an important factor in the Oak Ridge lab acquiring
the first of the government-funded nanoscience centers, and the
Center for Nanophase Materials Sciences is now a sister facility
adjacent to the SNS. 

"I think the SNS is a linchpin for a lot of stuff that's going
to happen economically in Oak Ridge," said Parker Hardy,
president of the Oak Ridge Chamber of the Commerce for the past
dozen years. 

Hardy said the coming of the SNS no doubt played a role in many
positive developments in recent years: construction of three new
hotels; the city's first new upscale apartment complex in 20
years; a $55 million modernization of Oak Ridge High School; a
$44 million renovation and expansion of Methodist Medical
Center; and several new shopping complexes. 

"It definitely doesn't all point back to SNS, but there's a lot
of economic synergy going on, and SNS is a linchpin," Hardy
said. 

There are 6,000 new homes in the pipeline over the next 10
years, half as many as currently exist, he said. 

"The scientists are looking for a minimum of $250,000 and up,
and there's quite a bit of stock in that," said Linda Brown of
Linda Brown Realty. 

"Our local market has been extremely good for the last two or
three years," she said, citing the SNS as one of the reasons. 

The growth of programs and facilities at ORNL and the
modernization program under way at the Y-12 National Security
Complex have made a strong statement that the government's
missions in Oak Ridge are here to stay, Hardy said. 

Companies that in the past might have overlooked Oak Ridge are
now taking a second look and expressing interest in locating
there, the chamber chief said. 

"It's a very positive time to be in Oak Ridge," he said. 

Almost $400 million spent in state Some benefits of the SNS have
been visible every day on Chestnut Ridge - where scientific
facilities are spread across 90 acres - for the past seven
years. 

During the design, procurement and construction of the Oak Ridge
project, $397,277,519 was spent in Tennessee, and most of that
went to East Tennessee vendors, ORNL said. California received
the next-highest amount with $38 million, the lab said. 

At its peak, the construction workforce was about 750. 

Through July 2005, the project had a payroll totaling $196
million, with Knox County's share at $85.1 million and Anderson
County's share $50.8 million. 

About 500 people, a mix of scientists, professional and
technical support staff, and craft and maintenance workers, will
work at the SNS on a full-time basis. 

The annual operations budget is supposed to be around $160
million. 

The SNS has its own power substation, built by TVA, with a
capacity of 42 megawatts. At projected rates, TVA's annual power
revenue from the Oak Ridge facilities is expected to be about
$12 million. 


Knox firm a force in SNS construction Blaine Construction helped
build the largest scientific project of this era, and the
Knoxville-based company will surely have the SNS in a prominent
spot on its corporate resume. 

Blaine won awards for its safety efforts and for the challenging
construction tasks, some by itself and some in conjunction with
Caddell Construction of Alabama, its longtime partner on big
projects. The revenues were significant. 

"It was a tremendous project for us to be involved in, starting
in April 2001," said Dorman Blaine, the company's president. 

Blaine won contracts valued at about $32 million early on and
then shared with Caddell a couple of major projects, all told
bringing in more than $100 million in work over a four-year
period. 

"That probably represented a third of our volume over those
years," Blaine said. "It had a big impact for us, and it kept us
local." Normally, Blaine does about half of its work in the
local area. During that time period, however, it did 90 percent
of it here. 

Blaine built the concrete structures for the Front End Building
and the linac tunnel, which houses the super-powerful linear
accelerator with a particle beam that reaches 90 percent the
speed of light. 

The top achievement, however, was the Caddell-Blaine partnership
on the Target Building, the ultra-sophisticated research hub of
the SNS where a beam of protons will come crashing into a source
of mercury - releasing and channeling zillions of neutrons for
researchers to use for experiments. 

The construction challenges were almost as great as the science
itself, requiring exacting tolerances in the installation of
mechanical and electrical systems and high-technology equipment. 

The Spallation Neutron Source is a unique research facility, and
it required creativity and perseverance. 

"We had over 1,000 lifts with a crane in excess of 20,000
pounds, 100 lifts in excess of 50,000 pounds, and 50 lifts in
excess of 100,000 pounds without a single incident or problem,"
Blaine said. 

Super-heavy concrete was imported from Brazil - weighing 260
pounds per cubic yard - for use in some parts of the Target
Building, and it was a lot harder to pour. Workers could haul
only four cubic yards at a time, instead of the normal 10. 

Steel components weighing as much as 80,000 pounds were imbedded
into the structure within 1/1,000th of an inch of the design. 

"Some things we had never done before," Blaine said. "It was a
feather in our cap." 

There also were goals for small-business subcontracting (40
percent) and use of women-owned and minority-owned companies.

"We subcontracted to a lot of people outside the area, but it
wasn't because of that, it was the specialty nature of the
work," Blaine said. 

Will the president bless the SNS? The SNS delivered its first
neutrons at 2:04 p.m. on April 28, indicating that, yes, the
monstrously complicated and incredibly large operations would
work as hoped. 

The next big date will probably come sometime in October, when
ORNL and five other collaborating labs will stage a
grand-opening celebration that's expected to be quite a shindig. 

There are high hopes that President Bush will be in attendance,
perhaps in conjunction with a political visit to Tennessee at
the height of campaign season, and that's why there is no date
yet set for the SNS event. 

"We were advised by the Department of Energy that there's still
a good chance the president may want to come this fall, so the
prudent thing to do is wait," ORNL spokesman Billy Stair said. 
Senior writer Frank Munger may be reached at 865-342-6329.
                                    
The Spallation Neutron Source is expected to play host to 2,000 
scientists a year, likely pumping millions into the region𠏋 
economy.                                                                                                                                                                                                                         

� 2006 - Knoxville News Sentinel
*****************************************************************
 48 islandpacket.com: Congress needs to move on SRS plutonium project 

Hilton Head Island - Bluffton, SC
 		
Monday, August 21, 2006

South Carolina should not get stuck with highly radioactive 

material Published Monday, August 21, 2006

Add Comment At the Savannah River Site, the K Reactor is being 
put to a new purpose. It is storing weapons-grade plutonium. 
Thirty-four tons of the highly radioactive substance is on its 
way there from around the country.
 
The reactor was not built to be used as a large storage facility, 
and this role is no long-term answer.
 
Unless Congress gets its act together, however, that accumulating 
plutonium will be a long-term problem for South Carolina. If that 
happens, no excuse from Washington will be sufficient.
 
South Carolina agreed, amid much debate, to take on the tough job 
of reprocessing this substance, which otherwise would be lethal 
for thousands of years. The federal government pledged to build 
at SRS a facility for transforming the weapons material into 
mixed-oxide fuel that could produce nuclear power. In effect, the 
stuff of nuclear bombs would become light and heat for homes and 
businesses in the Southeast.
 
The project has been under way since 2002: More than $500
million has been spent, and design work on the reprocessing
facility is almost complete. The plutonium has been coming in
from across the United States. A bad time to stop and rethink
the whole project? You might think so, but you're not Congress.
 
A U.S. House budget bill has a big zero in it for the MOX
project. The Senate has indicated its support for continuing the
project -- as have the White House and the Department of Energy.
But unsightly things can happen when Congress tries to compile a
final budget in a hurry, as it is likely to do after Election
Day this year. When the congressional break ends in September,
the South Carolina delegation needs to step forward to ensure
that the MOX project continues.
 
One of the reasons cited for the budget cut is concern over a
Russian parallel project for plutonium reprocessing that seems
to be stalled. That should not bring the work at SRS to a halt.
The Russians have reiterated their pledge to put 34 tons of
weapons-grade plutonium to use. The disagreement is over how to
proceed and not about the goal. However the Russian end of the
arrangement works out, the project in South Carolina should
proceed.
 
There's a lot at stake here. About a half-billion dollars has
been spent already. The plutonium is piling up in a building
that is not any kind of long-term storage facility, and it can't
just be left there for centuries. "Doing nothing is not an
option with weapons-grade plutonium," says Rep. John Spratt,
D-5th, who has worked to remind colleagues of the need to keep
MOX going.
 
At stake here, too, is the word of the U.S. government. If the
Energy Department's past assurances are blown away by
congressional whim, the respect accorded to the federal
government, often in short supply already, will be further
diminished.
 
Right now, many members of the congressional delegation are
meeting with constituents across the state. They need to be
assuring the public that on this vital South Carolina project,
they will keep their eye on the ball during the coming budget
battle. And voters need to tell them to go back and make sure
the MOX project is given the funding it needs, for the sake of
South Carolina, the nation and the world.
 
-- The (Columbia) State
 
*****************************************************************
 49 Hanford News: Fluor ordered to pay whistleblower
 
This story was published Saturday, August 19th, 2006 

By Annette Cary, Herald staff writer 

Fluor Hanford retaliated against a worker who raised safety 
concerns at Hanford's K Basins, a Washington administrative judge 
has ruled. 

Richard Cecil was laid off after he challenged a 2003 management 
decision to operate a crane moving radioactive spent fuel despite 
a warning its brakes might be faulty, according to testimony in 
the case. 

Fluor has been ordered to pay Cecil $13,391 in back pay, plus 
interest. It also must post findings of the violation of the 
employee protection provision for 60 days on all bulletin boards 
at Hanford where Fluor's official documents are posted, the 
Department of Labor judge directed. 

Cecil, who started work at Hanford in 1988, was working as 
field-work supervisor at the K Basins in February 2003. While 
looking for the source of an unusual noise in the crane, workers 
found uneven brake wear that could tilt the cask and spill 
radioactively contaminated water, according to Cecil. 

He refused to sign the work order to return the crane to service
until engineers certified it was safe. At a meeting to discuss
the issue, Cecil and two millwrights ordered to put the brakes
back together said the brakes needed to be reinstalled and a
load test conducted before the crane was returned to operation. 

Managers at the meeting pushed to restart the crane quickly and
"expressed displeasure with those who slowed this progress,"
according to the ruling. When the crane was not operating, the
transfer of fuel out of the K East Basin stopped, and production
goals could not be met. 

One manager confirmed that possible disciplinary action against
one of the millwrights was discussed at the meeting when that
millwright objected to reassembling the brakes, according to the
ruling. 

In addition, two millwrights testified they believed their jobs
were in jeopardy because a Fluor human resource officer who
usually attended disciplinary actions attended the meeting on
the crane's brakes after his regular working hours. 

The brakes were reinstalled, rather than replaced, and a load
test performed. 

A few weeks later, Cecil was transferred to another job with
less responsibility and little work to do. Less than two months
later, Cecil was given an evaluation with reduced performance
ratings, then laid off, according to the ruling. 

Cecil applied for several jobs beginning in May 2003, but was
not rehired until the end of September. 

Administrative Law Judge William Dorsey wrote that the presence
of a human resource officer at the brake safety meeting outside
his regular working hours "was a deliberate management strategy
to pressure the millwrights to get the crane back in operation
as soon as possible, regardless of their misgivings." 

The judge also found a probable connection between the drop in
Cecil's performance rating and evidence "that management
harbored resentment toward him for slowing down the crane's
production with his safety concerns." 

Two co-workers testified that managers said Cecil was laid off
because he did not "keep his mouth shut." The judge said he was
inclined to believe the workers, despite management denials. 

"The plaintiff has shown that Fluor retaliated against him for
whistleblowing," the judge concluded. 

Cecil has 20 days to file for attorney fees. 

The ruling follows a September 2005 jury verdict awarding 11
Fluor Federal Services pipefitters $4.76 million in damages,
noted the Government Accountability Project, which represented
Cecil. The workers lost their jobs after they complained about
safety problems or supported those who did. 

In addition, Fluor agreed to pay a $415,000 settlement out of
court in July to a worker who lost his job after accusing Fluor
of releasing hexavalent chromium into the ground in the 100 H
Area in the early 2000s during cleanup work, said Tom Carpenter,
GAP nuclear oversight director. Fluor released a statement
saying there was no finding of liability in the case. 

"Mr. Cecil is just the latest victim in a campaign by Fluor
Hanford against workers who voice safety concerns," Carpenter
said. 

Fluor issued a statement saying there is room for improving the
way safety concerns are raised and addressed, but, "Our general
experience over the past 10 years is that Fluor Hanford
employees who raise concerns are supported without retaliation. 

"Each employee has a right and a responsibility to stop work
until concerns can be addressed," the company said. 

� 2006 Tri-City Herald. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 50 Hanford News: Judge refuses to grant TRIDEC's legal fees in initiative fight
 
This story was published Saturday, August 19th, 2006 

By Annette Cary, Herald staff writer 

A judge has refused to grant attorney fees to the Tri-City 
Industrial Development Council after it successfully argued that 
Initiative 297 is unconstitutional. 

TRIDEC had asked for $170,019 in legal costs after it was the 
only party in the federal lawsuit to argue that the initiative 
violates the Contract Clause of the U.S. Constitution. 

U.S. District Court Judge Alan McDonald ruled in June that the 
Hanford waste initiative violated not only the Contract Clause, 
but also the Supremacy and Commerce clauses of the Constitution. 

However, McDonald has denied TRIDEC's motion for attorney fees. 
He found that because the state had not enacted the initiative as 
law or enforced it, TRIDEC does not legally qualify for relief. 

Voters in 2004 passed the law to bar the federal government from 
sending more radioactive waste to the Hanford nuclear reservation 
before waste already there is cleaned up. The site is massively 
contaminated from more than 40 years production of plutonium for 
the nation's nuclear weapons program. 

But the federal government sued the state shortly before the
initiative would have become law and the court agreed to issue a
temporary restraining order. The state then agreed not to enact
the initiative as law until the court made its June summary
judgment ruling. 

TRIDEC has not decided whether to appeal the decision on legal
fees, said Gary Petersen, TRIDEC vice president for Hanford
programs. It was under a tight deadline to file the original
motion for legal fees or miss any future opportunity to raise
the issue in the appeals process. 

The state has filed an appeal of McDonald's constitutionality
rulings and that issue may not be decided until next summer or
later. 

TRIDEC is a nonprofit corporation and the legal bill for
fighting the initiative must be paid by its members, Petersen
said. Although the initiative would directly affect a few of its
members, it did not affect all 368 members. 

The court agreed the initiative would have inhibited Battelle's
ability to import necessary materials to conduct prostate cancer
research and would have prevented Areva NP from important
materials necessary for its production of nuclear fuel. The
court said other existing contracts also likely would be
impaired. 

TRIDEC would have preferred to seek attorney fees from Heart of
America Northwest, which drafted the initiative, but legally
could seek them only from the state, which was the plaintiff in
the lawsuit, Petersen said. 

TRIDEC fought passage of the initiative, saying it could slow
cleanup. In addition, DOE plans to ship more radioactive waste
to other states for disposal than to Hanford, TRIDEC pointed
out. The initiative could mean that Hanford waste might be left
there if other states pursued similar legal action, it said. 

TRIDEC also questioned less-publicized sections of the
initiative, including one that it said called for $300,000 to $3
million in tax revenue annually to be distributed to
environmental advocacy groups, potentially including those
supporting the initiative. 

In other news: 

Supporters of the initiative are joining the state in appealing
the district court ruling that the initiative is
unconstitutional to the 9th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals. 

Yes on I-297, the Government Accountability Project, Heart of
America Northwest, Washington Public Interest Research Group and
other supporters have notified the court they are appealing the
ruling. 

The state announced in July that it planned to appeal, believing
the court ruling was unnecessarily broad. 

� 2006 Tri-City Herald. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 51 Hanford News: PNNL team discovers bacteria can make pearls of uranium
 
This story was published Monday, August 21st, 2006 

By John Trumbo, Herald staff writer 

Pacific Northwest National Laboratory scientists have discovered 
Shewanella oneidensis bacteria's dirty little secret. 

It oozes goo loaded with pearls of uraninite, said Jim
Frederickson, chief scientist on the research project. 

Shewanella bacteria have the remarkable ability to oxidize heavy
metal uranium, converting the deadly byproduct of nuclear age
processes at Hanford into less harmful uranium dioxide, or
uraninite. Shewanella bacteria have the ability to "breathe," or
reduce, metals the way human beings process oxygen. 

When oxygen is unavailable, Shewanella can pass excess energy
during respiration in the form of electrons to metal and alter
the metal's chemistry in the bargain - for instance, turning
soluble uranium into solid, insoluble uraninite (uranium
dioxide). 

Researchers have known for 10 years that Shewanella microbes can
do all this, but they haven't been able to figure out how, until
now. 

Fredrickson's team has observed that Shewanella microbes secrete
a slime, or extracellular polymeric substance, that contains the
pearls of solid uraninite. And because it is slime, the
uraninite tends to stick in the soil rather than flow. 

Fredrickson said this is a new direction for the research
because it focuses on how the bacterium gets rid of the
uraninite, almost as an intentional excretion. 

"It is an extension of the cell itself, kind of like growing a
new appendage and then decorating it with these deposits," he
said. 

"This may represent some kind of disposal mechanism for the
cell," he added. 

Fredrickson and colleague Matthew Marshall are intrigued by why
the Shewanella bacteria do this. If researchers can understand
why the microbes convert the heavy metal uranium into uraninite,
it could open new areas for how to use bacteria in cleaning up
soil contaminated with radioactive waste. 

The U.S. Department of Energy estimates that uranium
contaminates more than 2,500 billion liters of ground water
nationwide. The agency has supported research for over a decade
on the ability of naturally occurring microbes like Shewanella
to slow or stop the underground migration of contaminates from
streams, rivers and lakes. 

"The future is to work backwards and think like a bacterium,"
Fredrickson said. 

Lab scientists want to know why the uraninite pearls are no
larger than five nanometers in size. "There has to be some kind
of biological control going on," Fredrickson said. 

Marshall noted that uranium is very soluble and diffusible in
water, which is why there is concern about the radioactive
uranium plume at Hanford working its way to the Columbia River. 

But once the hot waste meets the Shewanella bacteria and changes
into uraninite, it is much less soluble. Even more interesting
is that the particles get enmeshed in the microbial slime, and
become stuck in a "bacto-glue," Fredrickson said. 

"This stuff is sticky and goopy," he said. 

Marshall and Fredrickson used high resolution micropscopy to
analyze the bacteria's proteins, which are suspected of being
the key to understanding the processes. PNNL's team also
collaborated with the Argonne National Laboratory to discover
metal-reducing proteins in the uraninite that had become locked
up in the slime. 

"The data Argonne gathered for us cemented our story," said
Fredrickson. 

Most of the research at PNNL about Shewanella and the uraninite
pearls was done in the 300 Area building, which is essentially
right over the radioactive plume that is heading to the river. 

The research was funded by DOE's Office of Biological and
Environmental Research, Environmental Remediation Sciences
Program and Genomics: Genomes to Life. Part of this research was
performed as a bio-geochemistry grand challenge at the W.R.
Wiley Environmental Molecular Sciences Laboratory, a DOE
national user facility located at PNNL, said lab spokesman Bill
Cannon. 

� 2006 Tri-City Herald. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 52 DOE: Availability of Draft Strategic Plan and Request for Public 
 
                        FR Doc E6-13735 
[Federal Register: August 21, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 161)] 
[Notices] [Page 48544] From the Federal Register Online via GPO 
Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr21au06-59]                         
 
Comment AGENCY: Office of the Chief Financial Officer, Department 
of Energy.
 
ACTION: Notice of availability of DOE Draft Strategic Plan and 
request for comment.
 
SUMMARY: This notice announces the availability of the Department 
of Energy's draft Strategic Plan. The Government Performance and 
Results Act of 1993 requires that Federal agencies update their 
strategic plans every three years and, in doing so, solicit the 
views and suggestions of those entities potentially affected by 
or interested in the plan. Therefore, the Department is 
interested in receiving comments on our draft Strategic Plan.
 
 
DATES: Comments are due by September 7, 2006. If comments are 
received late, we will consider them to the extent practicable.
 
 
ADDRESSES: To access the draft strategic plan, go to 
http://www.energy.gov , on the left side of the Department's 
homepage under ``Quick Reference'' select the ``Strategic 
Plan--Public Comment'' icon. You can provide your comments 
on-line through the Web site or by e-mail to 
StrategicPlan@hq.doe.gov. If you wish to send written comments or 
have any questions, please direct them to: David Abercrombie, 
U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Program Analysis and 
Evaluation, CF-20, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 
20585. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David Abercrombie (202) 
586-8664.
 
 
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Government Performance and Results 
Act requires that each Federal agency update their strategic plan 
every three years, (5 U.S.C. 306), and submit their plan to the 
Congress. This draft Strategic Plan describes our mission, 
strategic goals, and strategies to achieve those goals.
 
Public Participation Policy It is the policy of the Department to 
ensure that public participation is an integral and effective 
part of DOE activities and that decisions are made with the 
benefit of significant public perspectives. The Department 
recognizes the many benefits to be derived from public 
participation for both stakeholders and DOE. Public participation 
provides a means for DOE to gather a diverse collection of 
opinions, perspectives, and values from the broadest spectrum 
possible, enabling the Department to make more informed 
decisions. Likewise, public participation benefits stakeholders 
by creating an opportunity to provide input on decisions that 
affect their communities and our nation.
 
We anticipate publishing the final Strategic Plan on September 
30, 2006 and making it available on the Internet at that time.
 
Issued in Washington, DC, on August 15, 2006.
 
James T. Campbell, Acting Chief Financial Officer.
 
[FR Doc. E6-13735 Filed 8-18-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P

 
*****************************************************************
 53 DOE: Ethical conduct of employees

                        FR Doc E6-13736 

[Federal Register: August 21, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 161)] 
[Rules and Regulations] [Page 48447-48449] From the Federal 
Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] 
[DOCID:fr21au06-1]                         

Rules and Regulations Federal Register

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory 
documents having general applicability and legal effect, most of 
which are keyed to and codified in the Code of Federal 
Regulations, which is published under 50 titles pursuant to 44 
U.S.C. 1510. The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the 
Superintendent of Documents. Prices of new books are listed in 
the first FEDERAL REGISTER issue of each week.

[[Page 48447]]

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 5 CFR Part 3301 10 CFR Part 1010 RINs 
1990-AA19 and 3209-AA15
 
Supplemental Standards of Ethical Conduct for Employees of the 
Department of Energy and Residual Department Standards Regulation 
AGENCY: Department of Energy.

ACTION: Final rule.

------

SUMMARY: The Department of Energy (Department or DOE), with the 
concurrence of the Office of Government Ethics (OGE), published 
an interim final rule on July 5, 1996, to establish standards of 
ethical conduct, applicable to employees of the Department, that 
supplement the Standards of Ethical Conduct for Employees of the 
Executive Branch issued by the Office of Government Ethics, and 
to revise the Department's residual standards regulation. The 
rule requires Department employees to document notices of 
disqualification and withdrawals of such notices in writing. It 
also requires that Department employees obtain the written 
approval of their immediate supervisor and the Department's 
designated agency ethics official or such official's designee 
prior to engaging in certain outside employment. The Department 
now discusses comments received in response to the interim final 
rule, and adopts that rule as final with certain changes to the 
Department's residual standards previously issued.

DATES: This final rule is effective September 20, 2006.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sue E. Wadel, Deputy Assistant 
General Counsel for Standards of Conduct, Office of the Assistant 
General Counsel for General Law, GC-77, U.S. Department of 
Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585, 
telephone 202-586-1522.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Rulemaking History

    On August 7, 1992, the Office of Government Ethics published 
the Standards of Ethical Conduct for Employees of the Executive 
Branch (Standards) (57 FR 35006). The Standards, codified at 5 
CFR Part 2635 and effective February 3, 1993, establish uniform 
standards of ethical conduct applicable to all executive branch 
personnel.

    With the concurrence of OGE, 5 CFR 2635.105 authorizes 
executive agencies to publish agency-specific supplemental 
regulations that the agency determines are necessary and 
appropriate, in view of its programs and operations, to fulfill 
the purposes of the Standards.

    The interim final rule published for comment on July 5, 1996 
(61 FR 35085) by the Department, with OGE concurrence, 
established supplemental DOE regulations under 5 CFR 2635.105, 
and the Department, in the same rulemaking document, revised its 
residual standards regulation at 10 CFR part 1010. The Department 
determined that the supplemental rule was a necessary supplement 
to the Standards because it addressed ethical issues unique to 
the Department, and was therefore necessary and appropriate to 
fulfill the purposes of the Standards. The rule, codified in new 
chapter XXIII of 5 CFR, consisting of part 3301, provided a 
60-day comment period and invited comments by agencies and the 
public. Comments were received from two (2) sources. In a 
separate rulemaking action, on June 3, 1998 (63 FR 30109), the 
Department published a final rule that revised the part 1010 
authority citation, amended Sec.  1010.102, and deleted old Sec.  
1010.105. The final rulemaking today makes no further changes to 
the current regulations at 10 CFR part 1010 and 5 CFR part 3301.

    On March 1, 2000, the National Nuclear Security 
Administration (NNSA) was established as a separately organized 
entity within the Department of Energy. This rule applies to all 
Department employees, including those of NNSA.

II. Summary of Comments

    Both sets of comments concerned 5 CFR 3301.103, which 
requires that Department employees obtain the written approval of 
their immediate supervisor and the Department's designated agency 
ethics official or that official's designee (ethics counselor) 
prior to engaging in certain outside employment. The comments 
addressed the prior approval requirement (Sec.  3301.103(a)) and 
the definition of ``employment'' (Sec.  3301.103(c)). No comments 
were received on Sec.  3301.102 requiring Department employees to 
document notices of disqualification and withdrawals of such 
notices in writing. Additionally, no comments were received on 
the revisions to the Department's residual part 1010 standards 
regulation in its own CFR title and the addition of cross- 
references to the new provisions. Section 3301.103(a) Prior 
Approval Requirement

    The comments suggested the rule is overly broad and 
unenforceable. It was specifically stated that: (a) The rule 
should cover only those employees in ``sensitive'' positions 
because they are the only employees whom the rule affects, thus 
preventing an otherwise unwarranted invasion of privacy; (b) the 
rule should not apply to unpaid employment because unpaid 
employment would not ``prejudice'' an employee; (c) the rule, 
interpreted broadly, would encompass many types of employment 
that are not the type the rule seeks to prohibit; and (d) the 
rule is unenforceable because there would be no way of ensuring 
compliance with the rule.

    The Department has determined that it would not be prudent to 
narrow the scope of the rule and that, in light of the purpose of 
the rule, the fear it would be unenforceable is not valid. The 
rule is designed to help ensure that Department employees do not 
inadvertently violate the criminal statutes and Federal 
regulations governing outside activities of Federal employees. 
Determining whether certain outside employment is prohibited is 
very fact-specific, and does not depend upon an employee's 
position or on whether outside employment is unpaid. The 
Department does not believe it is possible to craft a 
straightforward regulation that would plainly address, in 
advance, the myriad of situations which could be considered to be 
employment and to identify which of those situations would be 
prohibited

[[Page 48448]]

or in conflict with the Standards. It is the Department's view 
that whatever burden the prior approval requirement may impose 
upon some employees, it is more than compensated for by the 
prevention of violations of the applicable statutes and Federal 
regulations. It should be noted that the prior approval 
requirement is not designed to arbitrarily deny Department 
employees permission to engage in outside employment. In fact, 
the regulation makes clear that a request for approval will be 
granted unless it is determined that the outside employment 
involves conduct prohibited by statute or regulation. See 5 CFR 
3301.103(b). In practice, since the interim final regulation has 
been promulgated, the vast majority of requests for approval to 
engage in outside employment have been routinely granted.

    The comments also maintained that the approval process 
contained in the rule, requiring approval to be in writing and 
obtained from an employee's immediate supervisor and ethics 
counselor, is unduly burdensome. It was specifically recommended 
that an employee's immediate supervisor be authorized to provide 
the necessary approval, and that verbal approval be allowed.

    The Department has not adopted these recommendations. DOE's 
ethics counselors are uniquely qualified to analyze, interpret, 
and apply the relevant statutes and regulations. Supervisors 
generally will not be able to make determinations regarding 
whether a specific fact situation may violate a statute or 
regulation. Further, the involvement of Department ethics 
counselors helps to ensure consistency in the interpretation and 
application of those statutes and Federal regulations. Written 
approval is the most effective way of documenting the approval 
process and it protects both the Department and the employee. 
Written approval can, as a practical matter, be more effectively 
relied upon by the Department in the event an employee seeks 
clarification about advice provided to him or her regarding 
outside employment, and by the employee in the event there is a 
dispute concerning the legality of an employee's outside 
employment activities. Disciplinary action for violating the 
Standards or these supplemental regulations will not be taken 
against an employee who has in good faith relied upon the advice 
of an ethics counselor, provided the employee, in seeking such 
advice, has made full disclosure of all relevant facts and 
circumstances. Where the employee's conduct violates a criminal 
statute, reliance on the advice of an ethics counselor cannot 
ensure that the employee will not be prosecuted under that 
statute; however, good faith reliance on the advice of an ethics 
counselor is a factor that may be taken into account by the 
Department of Justice in the selection of cases for prosecution. 
See 5 CFR 2635.107(b).

    Finally, one of the comments noted professional employees are 
governed by professional ethics rules and, therefore, the 
imposition of additional limitations is unnecessary and likely to 
result in conflicting ethical regulations. All employees of the 
executive branch, whether or not professional, must comply with 
the Standards and any other applicable statutes and regulations. 
Professional ethical obligations an employee may be subject to 
may be considered by the employee in addition to the applicable 
statutes and regulations, but shall not, under any circumstances, 
relieve an employee of his or her obligations under applicable 
statutes and regulations. Section 3301.103(c) Definition of 
Employment

    The regulation defines ``employment'' to exclude 
``participating in the activities of a nonprofit, charitable, 
religious, public service or civic organization, unless such 
activities involve the provision of professional services or are 
for compensation.'' One set of comments objected to the exclusion 
of ``professional services'' from this exception to the 
definition of ``employment'' for the following reasons: (a) It 
would ``automatically eliminate all of our professional workers 
from all public service work,'' creating a socially undesirable 
outcome; (b) it ``constitutes an unfair labor practice, for, 
without any negotiation, it bars the union from using its 
professional members for standard collective bargaining 
activities;'' and (c) it is ``unnecessary'' because 
``professional service provided by DOE professionals to public 
organizations is not related at all to their positions as 
government employees.''

    Comments (a) and (b) exhibit a clear misunderstanding of the 
language of the rule. The definition of employment does not 
prohibit professionals from engaging in public service work or 
bar the union from using its professional members for standard 
collective bargaining activities; rather, it simply states that 
if an employee's involvement in public service work includes the 
provision of professional services, or is for compensation, then 
the employee may not rely on the exception and must, as is 
required for any other type of outside employment, receive prior 
written approval. Further, determining whether certain outside 
employment is prohibited is very fact-specific and does not 
necessarily depend upon the relationship between an employee's 
position and an employee's outside activity.

III. Matters of Regulatory Procedure

Review Under Executive Order 12866

    Today's regulatory action has been determined not to be a 
significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866, 
Regulatory Planning and Review (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), as 
amended by Executive Order 13258, Amending Executive Order 12866 
on Regulatory Planning and Review (67 FR 9385, February 28, 
2002). Accordingly, today's action was not subject to review 
under the Executive Order by the Office of Information and 
Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget. Review Under 
Executive Order 12988

    Section 3 of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, (61 
FR 4729, February 7, 1996) instructs each agency to adhere to 
certain requirements in promulgating new regulations. These 
requirements, set forth in section 3(a) and (b), include 
eliminating drafting errors and needless ambiguity, drafting the 
regulations to minimize litigation, providing clear and certain 
legal standards for affected legal conduct, and promoting 
simplification and burden reduction. Agencies are also instructed 
to make every reasonable effort to ensure that regulations 
describe any administrative proceeding to be available prior to 
judicial review and any provisions for the exhaustion of 
administrative remedies. The Department has determined that 
today's regulatory action meets the requirements of section 3(a) 
and (b) of Executive Order 12988. Review Under Executive Order 
13132

    Executive Order on Federalism 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 
1999) imposes certain requirements on agencies formulating and 
implementing policies or regulations that preempt State law or 
that have federalism implications. Agencies are required to 
examine the constitutional and statutory authority supporting any 
action that would limit the policymaking discretion of the States 
and carefully assess the necessity for such actions. DOE has 
examined this rule and has determined that it would not preempt 
State law and would not have a substantial direct effect on the 
States, on the relationship between the national government and 
the States, or

[[Page 48449]]

on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the 
various levels of government. No further action is required by 
Executive Order 13132. Review Under Executive Order 13084

    Under Executive Order 13084 on Consultation and Coordination 
with Indian Tribal Governments (63 FR 27655, May 19, 1998), DOE 
may not issue a discretionary rule that significantly or uniquely 
affects Indian tribal governments and imposes substantial direct 
compliance costs. This rule would not have such effects. 
Accordingly, Executive Order 13084 does not apply to this 
rulemaking. Review Under the Administrative Procedure Act and the 
Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The authorizing legislation for this rulemaking does not 
require notice and comment rulemaking. Moreover, this final rule 
relates solely to internal agency organization, management, or 
personnel, and as such, is not subject to the requirement for a 
general notice of proposed rulemaking under the Administrative 
Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 553). Consequently, this rulemaking is 
exempt from the requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 
U.S.C. 603). Review Under the National Environmental Policy Act

    This final rule adopts as final the Department's interim 
regulations on standards of conduct. It will not change the 
environmental effects of the regulations being amended. The 
Department has therefore determined that the rule is covered 
under the Categorical Exclusion found at paragraph A.5 of 
appendix A to subpart D, 10 CFR part 1021, which applies to 
rulemakings interpreting or amending an existing rule that do not 
change the environmental effect thereof. Accordingly, neither an 
environmental assessment nor an environmental impact statement is 
required. Review Under the Treasury and General Government 
Appropriations Act, 2001

    The Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act, 2001 
(44 U.S.C. 3516, note) provides for executive agencies to review 
most disseminations of information to the public under guidelines 
established by each agency pursuant to general guidelines issued 
by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). OMB's guidelines 
were published at 67 FR 8452 (February 22, 2002), and DOE's 
guidelines were published at 67 FR 62446 (October 7, 2002). DOE 
has reviewed today's final rule under the OMB and DOE guidelines, 
and has concluded that it is consistent with applicable policies 
in those guidelines. Review Under the Paperwork Reduction Act

    This final rule does not impose a ``collection of 
information'' requirement, as defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(3). 
Review Under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

    Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 requires 
each Agency to assess the effects of Federal regulatory action on 
State, local, and tribal governments and the private sector. The 
Department has determined that today's regulatory action does not 
impose a Federal mandate on State, local, or tribal governments 
or on the private sector.

Congressional Notification

    The Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 
1996 requires agencies to report to Congress on the promulgation 
of certain final rules prior to their effective dates. 5 U.S.C. 
801. That reporting requirement does not apply to this final rule 
because it falls within a statutory exception for rules relating 
to agency management or personnel. 5 U.S.C. 804(3)(B). List of 
Subjects 5 CFR Part 3301

    Conduct standards, Conflicts of interests, Ethical conduct, 
Government employees. 10 CFR Part 1010

    Conduct standards, Conflicts of interests, Ethical conduct, 
Government employees.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on August 2, 2006. David R. Hill, 
General Counsel, Department of Energy.

    Approved: August 10, 2006. Robert I. Cusick, Director, Office 
of Government Ethics. 0 Accordingly, the interim final rule 
adding 5 CFR part 3301 and revising 10 CFR part 1010, that was 
published at 61 FR 35085 on July 5, 1996, is adopted as a final 
rule with the changes published at 63 FR 30109 on June 3, 1998. 
[FR Doc. E6-13736 Filed 8-18-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
 
    
*****************************************************************

NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 this 
material is distributed without profit or payment to those who 
have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for 
non-profit research and educational purposes only. For more 
information go to: 
<http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml> 
    
*****************************************************************