***************************************************************** 12/14/06 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 14.295 ***************************************************************** 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 Alarab: Gulf Arabs signal intent to equal a nuclear Iran 2 IRIB PERSIAN NEWS: Atomic Energy Org welcome scientists 3 IRIB PERSIAN NEWS: Bushehr fuel supplies come in March 4 Asia Times Online: Russia softens stance on Iran 'smart' sanctions 5 Korea Herald: U.S. open to offering N.K. security guarantee 6 YONHAP NEWS: (LEAD) KEDO closes final deal on liquidation of N. Kore 7 washingtonpost.com: U.S. to Press North Korea For Progress in Disarm 8 AFP: Previous bid to scrap NKorea nukes winds up - 9 Guardian Unlimited: S.Korea Calls for Progress on Nuke Talks 10 [NYTr] The EU, Israel and Its Nukes 11 Malaysia Sun: Skepticism over China nuclear capability 12 Guardian Unlimited: A way out of the bunker 13 Guardian Unlimited: Bush has created a comprehensive catastrophe acr NUCLEAR REACTORS 14 The Hindu: Manmohan seeks Japan's support for India's nuclear needs 15 US: San Luis Obispo Tribune: Diablo reactor should be up and running 16 BBC: Chernobyl voices: Anatoly Rasskazov 17 US: News Journal: Governors hear talk on nuclear power 18 US: NRC: NRC Staff to Meet with TVA Officials in Alabama to Discuss 19 US: NRC: Agency Information Collection Activities: Submission for th 20 US: NRC: Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc., Pilgrim Nuclear Power Sta 21 Prague Daily Monitor: Austrian opponents of Temelin threaten to bloc 22 US: St. Petersburg Times: Hernando: It'll be a long road to a new nu 23 US: Columbus Dispatch: Perry workers shut down reactor as a precauti 24 US: Orlando Sentinel: Nuclear plants can generate Florida's future - 25 US: New London Day: NRC: Mehta Has No Case At Millstone 26 US: Arizona Republic: Officials at Palo Verde changed NUCLEAR SECURITY 27 US: thebulletin.org: Ready . . . or not | 28 thebulletin.org: Where the Bombs are, 2006 | NUCLEAR SAFETY 29 washingtonpost.com: From Russia, With Polonium - 30 AFP: France to test citizens for polonium-210 after stay in London h 31 US: NRC: NRC to Discuss Apparent Violation with Mount Laurel, N.J., 32 US: DHHS: Petition to investigate worker health at Dow Chemical NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE 33 US: Deseret News: Uranium spurs jump in mining claims 34 US: The NewStandard: EPA Shirks Court Order on Mercury Emissions - 35 US: Star-Tribune: Uranium heavyweights come to Wyoming 36 US: LA Daily News: Ordnance cleanup to start soon 37 US: Times-News: Shipment of suspended Idaho nuclear waste to resume 38 Whitehaven News: Sellafield ‘blacklist’ row steps up 39 US: Sydney Morning Herald: Labor's uranium policy 'must be changed' PEACE 40 US: Tracy Press: Developer, activist appeal bomb testing permit US DEPT. OF ENERGY 41 DOE: Secretary Bodman Tours LNG Powered City Bus in Seoul 42 Tri-City Herald: Parts of Hanford funding in doubt ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** FULL NEWS STORIES ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** 1 Alarab: Gulf Arabs signal intent to equal a nuclear Iran Fearing Shi'ite Iran is on the verge of becoming a nuclear power, Sunni Saudi Arabia and other Gulf Arab states are warning they will not hesitate to join a rumbling regional arms race, analysts say. The Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC), which groups Arab countries in the world's top oil and gas exporting region, said at a summit meeting on Sunday that it has decided to set up a nuclear energy programme for peaceful purposes. The announcement by the six countries -- Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Bahrain, Oman -- came amid concerns in the West and in the Gulf that non-Arab Iran's nuclear enrichment programme could produce an atomic bomb. Israel, which has its own nuclear reactor, has long been suspected of possessing nuclear weapons, and Israel Prime Minister Ehud Olmert appeared to admit as much for the first time in a television interview on Monday. "I think the GCC is serious," said Adel al-Harby, political editor for leading Saudi daily al-Riyadh. "It's clear from the context the region is involved in a nuclear race." Robin Hughes, deputy editor of Jane's Defence Weekly, said: "(The Saudis) said they don't want bombs, but proliferation of any kind of nuclear technology raises the spectre of some sort of nuclear arms race." While emphasising the Gulf plan was for peaceful purposes, GCC Secretary-General Abdul-Rahman al-Attiya appeared to use coded language, saying it came at an "important time". "The project comes at an important time," he told Saudi al-Ikhbariya television in an interview aired on Wednesday. "Now with this project, according to international standards and in the framework of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)... I think we've put ourselves on the right footing, especially since this is for peaceful use," he added. Saudi Arabia, a bastion of Sunni Islam with the prestige of being the world's biggest oil exporter and home to Islam's holiest shrines, is worried about the growing influence of Iran in the Arab world through Tehran's backing for Shi'ite groups in Iraq and Lebanon and its alliance with Syria. Long fearful of a resurgent Iran, Gulf countries backed Iraq against Iran during the 1980-88 Gulf war. A key U.S. ally, Riyadh signalled earlier this year that a nuclear Iran would provoke a regional arms race. So far, Sunni Pakistan is the only Islamic country with the bomb and its relations with Saudi Arabia are close. With Iran in mind, Riyadh is already boosting its military strength. Gulf officials have given no indication on whether the nuclear plan, aimed at water desalination, could involve enrichment. Diplomats at the IAEA in Vienna said that was unlikely, but that the political message was still there. "If the GCC states just want nuclear power reactors, that's no problem. No state has ever used power reactors to yield nuclear weapons," a senior diplomat close to the IAEA said. "No one can give a definitive answer on the motivation of the GCC, but I don't think it's too difficult to understand," another said. "With Iran defiant and ... Israel defiant ... it's only logical that the other states of the region would feel threatened." The IAEA believes at least six Arab countries are developing domestic nuclear power programmes to diversify energy sources, the Middle East Economic Digest reported last month. It said Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Morocco and Algeria have shown interest in developing nuclear power primarily for water desalination. Similar plans by the United Arab Emirates and Tunisia were only at an early stage. But analysts said the political hurdles facing a joint Gulf Arab energy programme, while the GCC even struggles to unite for for a planned monetary union in 2010, were still immense. "Where will it be, in Saudi Arabia or the UAE? How would they protect it? Who would get the proceeds from it?" Hughes said. -Reuters- Alarab Online. 2005 All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 2 IRIB PERSIAN NEWS: Atomic Energy Org welcome scientists 2006/12/14 Deputy Head of Iran's Atomic Energy Organization in Nuclear Fuel Production Affairs said on Wednesday that the organization is engaged in talks for discovery and exploitation of uranium mines. Hossein Faqihian made the comment at an International Conference on Status of Nuclear Fuel Cycle in Research and Development Studies, adding, "The Nuclear Energy Organization is in need of expert manpower for the purpose and is engaged in negotiations aimed at training them." He said "Discovery is the most important phase in the nuclear fuel cycle and it is in need of launching broad scale operations." Faqihian added, "The country's Atomic Energy Organization welcomes the assistance of scientists that can help us in that respect." The Deputy Head of Iran's Atomic Energy Organization referring to the success of the young Iranian scientists in mastering the entire nuclear fuel technology, added, "Achieving expertise in that field was a great national success gained despite all hardships and deficiencies." He added, "In order to take peaceful advantage of the nuclear energy in the country we still have a long and winding road ahead, and we need to adopt serious strategies in order to reach there." mk Copyright 2004, All Rights Reserved By Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting News Network Sponsored By IRIB News Computer Center. E-Mail: Info@IRIBNEWS.ir ***************************************************************** 3 IRIB PERSIAN NEWS: Bushehr fuel supplies come in March 2006/12/14 Nuclear fuel supplies to Bushehr nuclear power plant will begin in March 2007 and preliminary steps for the supplies will be taken in January 2007, according to an earlier adopted plan. The remark was made by Chief Executive Officer of Russia's Atomstroiexport Sergei Shmatko while speaking to Russian journalists after talks with Iranian Vice President and Head of the Atomic Energy Organization of the Islamic Republic Gholamreza Aqazadeh . "Preliminaries for the fuel supply will begin in January next year and they include the transportation and getting the Iranian side's permission," Shmatko added. "Under the earlier adopted plan, the fuel supply will start in March 2007," said the official. Deputy Head for marketing and information policy of the Tekhsnabexport Company Valery Govorukhin told journalists earlier that nuclear fuel of the Iranian Bushehr NPP will be delivered from Russia by air. The company officials said that nuclear fuel for Bushehr NPP that is being built by Russian specialists has already been produced and is stored at the Novosibirsk Chemical Concentrates Plant. mk Copyright 2004, All Rights Reserved By Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting News Network Sponsored By IRIB News Computer Center. E-Mail: Info@IRIBNEWS.ir ***************************************************************** 4 Asia Times Online: Russia softens stance on Iran 'smart' sanctions By Kaveh L Afrasiabi As the year winds down to a close, the United Nations Security Council's move to adopt a resolution that will impose "smart sanctions" on Iran aimed at a travel ban and freezing the assets of some 23 entities involved in Iran's nuclear program is the clearest indication yet that Iran's diplomacy is not working. Immediate measures to address the various shortcomings of this diplomacy, including the avoidable, self-inflicted wounds, are called for. Otherwise the risks to Iran's national interests will only grow. Concerning those risks, it comes as no surprise that on the day when President Mahmud Ahmadinejad addressed a conference on the Holocaust and reiterated his call for Israel to be wiped out, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert finally let the cat out of the bag by making a veiled nuclear threat in a supposed "slip" of the tongue that was more likely a calculated move on his part. Olmert stated: "Iran openly, explicitly and publicly threatens to wipe Israel off the map. Can you say that this is the same level, when you are aspiring to have nuclear weapons, as America, France, Israel, Russia?" Interestingly, while Moscow has called Olmert's comments "irresponsible", no one in Washington, London or Paris has uttered a word of criticism, focusing their energy instead on castigating Iran's president for his anti-Israel statements. This was led by British Prime Minister Tony Blair, who only last week prodded President George W Bush to engage Iran diplomatically. Expressing his disgust at the gathering of "Holocaust deniers", including an American, former Ku Klux Klan leader David Duke, in Tehran, Blair's new line is: "When I look at the region ... everything that Iran does is negative." Echoing Blair, Germany's conservative Chancellor Angela Merkel has also gone on the offensive, stating categorically that "Iran must never get the bomb ... That is why the time has come ... not just to think about, but to work on sanctions". The fact that Russia is now on board at the Security Council means that it is now just a matter of time before the preliminary sanctions are imposed on Iran. A survey of the Russian press indicates that Ahmadinejad's radical brand of politics has made it all but impossible for Russia to resist the combined US-European Union pressure to overcome its objections to sanctions on Iran. Whereas a mere six months ago Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov categorically objected to any sanctions on Iran, today that firm position has wilted considerably to a verbal objection to "blanket sanctions". Expressing his enthusiasm for the draft resolution, Lavrov told Interfax: "The new draft does not provide for blanket sanctions." Last week in Brussels, Lavrov expelled any fear that Russia would sabotage the proposed sanctions, stating that Moscow now supported a ban on deliveries of technology and material related to Iran's uranium-enrichment program: "We find it necessary to approve a proposal on the prevention of deliveries of such technology, material and services to Iran." The slow yet steady evaporation of Russia's opposition to sanctions on Iran, predicted by this author in earlier articles, was actually sealed by President Vladimir Putin and Bush last month, when both leaders instructed their respective officials to "coordinate their activities" regarding the proposed sanctions on Iran. This move was interpreted as nothing short of Russia's "betrayal" of Iran by certain pundits in Tehran, who have cited the US support for Russia's accession to the World Trade Organization as a reward for Moscow toeing the line on Iran. Be that as it may, various Russian analysts have written that Iran's own "anti-diplomacy" is partly responsible for such developments, now threatening the expensive Russian-built power plant in Bushehr, in spite or reassuring words by the head of Russia's Atomic Energy Agency (Rosatom), Sergei Kiriyenko, in his recent visit to Tehran. "Russia sees no political obstacle in the completion of the Bushehr power plant ... We shall do it as quickly as possible from the technical point of view." To many Iranians, Kiriyenko's assurance rings hollow, as they have heard it repeatedly over the past seven years, in light of the repeated delays in the completion of a project that was initially slated for grand opening in 1999. Indeed, even Lavrov has hinted that the proposed UN sanctions may hamper Iran's "legal nuclear program". Of course, there is nothing "illegal" about Iran's pursuit of an independent nuclear-fuel cycle, sanctioned under the terms of the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), but given the new alarms raised in the US about Bushehr's potential use for making plutonium bombs, there is every expectation now for further delays in Bushehr's completion. This is because of the UN-imposed restrictions on the travel of nuclear officials and scientists and the transfer of "dual purpose" technology. Since the mid-1990s, Russia has been educating Iranian scientists at the Moscow Kurchatov Institute of Nuclear Energy and training hundreds of engineers and technicians at the Novoronezh nuclear power plant. Internal opposition to Russia's nuclear cooperation with Iran is growing, however, led by the semi-official Council on Foreign and Defense Policy, which has concluded that Iran's nuclearization is "inevitable". The question of travel In the past, the Security Council has imposed travel bans on individuals in several countries, such as Iraqi officials who obstructed UN weapons inspections, Sierra Leone's rebels and their family members, leaders of the Haitian military junta, and supporters and top officials of the National Union for the Total Independence of Angola (UNITA) and their family members. As with the Haitian sanctions, which covered a vague category of people who supported the junta, the proposed travel ban on Iranian officials, scientists and nuclear deal-makers is bound to run into similar problems. This is accentuated by the fact that with Bushehr exempted, these same individuals have no legal barrier for their entry into Russia - or do they? Does Moscow have to get the Security Council's approval for the travel of any of those individuals and, indeed, can the Security Council truly carry this heavy burden with any degree of satisfaction? The Washington Post reported that the US and its allies are experiencing difficulties in developing an accurate list of targeted individuals, with the Central Intelligence Agency and the State Department at odds over information-sharing and the US government even resorting to "Googling" the names in its bid to come up with a satisfactory list. The record of UN travel sanctions is mixed. Enforcement is challenging and the intended negative impact, with respect to their isolating and legitimacy-denying effects, are hard to tabulate. If the intention is to make Iran's policy of non-compliance with regard to the UN's demands more costly and difficult to sustain, the proposed mild sanctions are unlikely to succeed. They will likely prompt a negative Iranian reaction in the form of curtailing its cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and, in the case of escalating sanctions in the future, even Iran's exit from the NPT altogether, as called for by some Iranian hardline politicians. After all, even in their current mild form, the proposed Iran sanctions at the UN follow the same traditional logic, that is, the greater the costs (political and otherwise) caused by sanctions, the higher the probability of compliance. But the exact reverse could be true in Iran's case. A German analyst at a Berlin think-tank has written: "Europeans feel that once the Security Council would agree on sanctions, the situation could escalate; Iran could expel IAEA inspectors and even withdraw from the NPT." The narrow-focused proposed sanctions can have disproportionate negative results, even paving the way to the "military option". Iran's diplomacy questioned The plethora of challenges facing Iran's diplomacy today are truly daunting. Iran's invitation of Syrian's leader to attend a regional summit went unanswered last month. Saudi Arabia is increasingly adopting a stern anti-Iran stance with respect to Iraq and Iran's nuclear program, and Germany has shelved its reticence. Russia and China are now 99% on board with UN sanctions on Iran. Add to this the negative ramifications of Ahmadinejad's crusade on the issue of the Holocaust, decried by the UN and all Western leaders as well as Russia. On Wednesday, the following statement appeared on the Russian Foreign Ministry's website: "You know that in the past we described as unacceptable the statements of the Iranian leadership that disputed the right of Israel to existence and questioned the scale of the elimination of Jews in Europe during World War II." Thus a pertinent question: What foreign-policy interest, objective or priority of Iran is served by the Holocaust conference in Tehran? Is it in Iran's interest to put itself at the forefront of a battle with nuclear-armed Israel, when the two countries are far apart from each other and Iran can, logically speaking, avoid inconveniencing itself by not locking horns with Israel? These questions aside, there is the moral question, posed several years ago by this author in an article on the "Need for public education on the Holocaust in the Middle East", perhaps worth quoting: If the future of peace in the Middle East depends in part on better Muslim-Jewish dialogue, then there is no doubt that this should entail what is clearly lacking in Iran and other Middle East countries, namely the minutest public education about the Holocaust ... This education can come about in different shapes and forms, including the cinematic medium ... The horror of Jewish extermination in Europe is an everlasting reminder of the forces of barbarianism in the midst of civilization, and the delusion of declaring them dead after the Nazis' downfall, notwithstanding the tragedy of Kosovo and the Balkans. That was written before the 2003 invasion of Iraq and, in retrospect, we must add Iraq to the list and, in light of the controversy surrounding the Holocaust conference in Tehran, it is as apt as ever. Stepping back from the brink Stepping back from the promised Christmas gift of sanctions to Iran is, however, a prudent action, particularly if a deal can be somehow worked out among the parties involved, given the likely negative effect on the proposed diplomatic engagement of Iran by the Iraq Study Group. Playing brinkmanship with Iran at the UN has its limitations, after all, and the interconnectedness of nuclear and regional issues warrants this recommendation; otherwise the risks of things all around getting worse rather than better run high. Iran is required to show a greater degree of flexibility to make this happen, or it will soon have to grapple with the isolation-inducing sanctions, which will be enormously hard to reverse. Kaveh L Afrasiabi, PhD, is the author of After Khomeini: New Directions in Iran's Foreign Policy (Westview Press) and co-author of "Negotiating Iran's Nuclear Populism", Brown Journal of World Affairs, Volume XII, Issue 2, Summer 2005, with Mustafa Kibaroglu. He also wrote "Keeping Iran's nuclear potential latent", Harvard International Review, and is author of Iran's Nuclear Program: Debating Facts Versus Fiction. (Copyright 2006 Asia Times Online Ltd. All rights res All material on this Copyright 1999 - 2006 Asia Times ***************************************************************** 5 Korea Herald: U.S. open to offering N.K. security guarantee The United States is open to signing a written security guarantee for North Korea if it agrees to the preparatory stage of its nuclear dismantlement, news reports said yesterday. During a Beijing meeting last month, U.S. chief nuclear negotiator Christopher Hill emphasized Washington had no intention of attacking North Korea and said it was willing to prove it with a written security guarantee, Yonhap reported yesterday. North Korea's chief nuclear negotiator Kim Kye-gwan returned to Pyongyang with the offer, according to Yonhap. North Korea is likely to give response to the offer among others once the next round of six-party talks resumes on Monday next week. The security guarantee is a part of the incentives pledged in the Joint Statement agreed by the six parties in Sept. 2005. "The United States affirmed that it has no nuclear weapons on the Korean peninsula and has no intention to attack or invade the (North) with nuclear or conventional weapons," is the relevant clause. Whether North Korea would view the offer as a genuine pledge or a political rhetoric by the United States remains to be seen. In an effort to maximize the possibility of successful negotiations, the United States and its allies have been reminding North Korea of what it would receive in return for abandoning its nuclear programs. Other incentives dangled at North Korea include energy aid and South Korea's electricity supply, in addition to other humanitarian support that has been suspended since North Korea's Oct. 9 nuclear test. "The sequence of the incentives is adjustable," said a government official on condition of anonymity. The offer of a written guarantee at an early stage of the negotiations can also be considered a part of the allies' "flexible incentives" mentioned by South Korean Foreign Minister Song Min-soon earlier this week. He said North Korea's concrete action will be followed by flexible incentives at a weekly press briefing on Wednesday. While signing a written security guarantee would not force the United States to immediately start talking normalization of ties with the communist regime, it could be enough give North Korea a "guarantee" of good faith in the negotiations. But what is more important than the sequence of the incentives is the attitude and position of the North, experts said. "All the incentives are those that have been repeatedly put on the table since 15 years or so," said professor Yun Deok-min of the Institute of Foreign Affairs and National Security. "The key to the next round of talks is what kind of reaction the North will bring (regarding the offers) and whether the framework of the six-party talks can be maintained." He added that North Korea may be prepared to go so far as to freeze its nuclear weapons program in order to get all the incentives at the negotiation. But for the other five countries, suspension of the North's nuclear program is not enough, as the country has already detonated its nuclear device, he said. (angiely@heraldm.com) By Lee Joo-hee 2006.12.15 ***************************************************************** 6 YONHAP NEWS: (LEAD) KEDO closes final deal on liquidation of N. Korean nuclear reactor project 2006/12/14 16:05 KST SEOUL, Dec. 14 (Yonhap) -- An international energy consortium this week signed its final agreement with a South Korean firm to liquidate its 10-year project to build two light-water reactors in communist North Korea, a South Korean official said Thursday. "In a Dec. 8 meeting in New York, the executive board of the Korean Peninsula Energy Development Organization (KEDO) approved a deal with the Korea Electric Power Corporation (KEPCO)," Moon Dae-keun, an official from the Unification Ministry, told reporters. The so-called Termination Agreement made official the tentative agreement between the two sides in June that the South Korean electric company would pay the cost of liquidating the US$4.6-billion project in return for all of KEDO's tangible assets outside of the communist North, Moon said. The agreement comes as probably the last official document to be signed by the international consortium, which includes South Korea, Japan, the European Union and the United States, ministry officials said. About $1.65 billion has been spent on the now-defunct project, more than $1.14 billion of which came from South Korea, according to Moon. The government earlier estimated the liquidation to cost between $150 million to $200 million, but officials said Thursday that it would take as long as three years to accurately determine how much it would cost. A group of KEDO's subcontractors have filed claims for 37 lost contracts, worth some $73 million, as of Tuesday, the officials said, speaking on condition of anonymity. The international organization has a total of 101 outstanding contracts, according to Moon. The organization's assets to be taken over by the South Korean electric company cost some $830 million to acquire or build, according to the Unification Ministry. No estimates for their current value were available. The light-water reactors were part of a 1994 agreement between the United States and North Korea, in which the communist state agreed to freeze its nuclear activities in return for various economic incentives. The 1994 agreement, known as the Agreed Framework, became a dead letter following North Korea's withdrawal from the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty in early 2003 and its subsequent unloading of spent fuel rods from a nuclear facility for reprocessing. North Korea is believed to have created as much as 40 kilograms of weapons-grade plutonium through reprocessing, enough to make six to eight atomic bombs. bdk@yna.co.kr (END) ***************************************************************** 7 washingtonpost.com: U.S. to Press North Korea For Progress in Disarming - By Glenn KesslerWashington Post Staff Writer Thursday, December 14, 2006; Page A26 U.S. officials yesterday played down the chances of a breakthrough on North Korean disarmament talks, which will start this weekend in Beijing after a 13-month hiatus, but said they will press for tangible signs of progress. In talks last month with North Korean officials, U.S. officials laid out steps that Pyongyang could make at the outset to demonstrate progress, including suspending operations at its Yongbyon reactor, readmitting international nuclear inspectors, reporting its nuclear facilities and closing its nuclear testing site, Asian diplomats and U.S. officials said. U.S. officials also indicated they want substantial progress to be made before President Bush leaves office. "They understand that that was suggested, and we have to see some early results," a senior administration official said, speaking on the condition of anonymity. "Those would be important first steps, but that would not be all of it." In a briefing for reporters yesterday, the chief U.S. negotiator, Assistant Secretary of State Christopher R. Hill, declined to discuss specific U.S. objectives for the talks, saying that listing them would invite reporters to measure the outcome against the original goals, resulting in possible headlines like "U.S. Fails Once Again." Hill added that when he presented his suggestions at meetings with North Korean officials in November, "there were indications that the North Koreans would be prepared to deal in specifics at the coming round." Still, many U.S. officials and analysts are privately skeptical that North Korea, having tested a nuclear weapon in October and having proclaimed itself a nuclear power, will suddenly reverse course and give up its programs. But some officials believe that China'sanger at North Korea for testing the weapon is a new element at the talks that should not be discounted. The other participants in the talks are South Korea, Japanand Russia. The six nations, which began meeting episodically in 2003, joined in signing a "statement of principles" issued on Sept. 19, 2005, which listed the elements of a final agreement. But the statement did not detail which steps should take place first or what North Korea would receive in return for specific actions. Another complicating factor is Pyongyang's demand that the Treasury Department end a probe into a Macao bank linked to North Korea's illicit financial activities. Hill said he wants to move from "simply talking about pages in an agreement to talking about something that's happening on the ground." U.S. officials expect the talks to last several days before breaking for Christmas. 'We've got to give it one last try," the senior official said, adding that if North Korea does not budge, then U.S. officials will need to determine their options for dealing with Pyongyang in the coming year. Copyright 1996- The Washington Post Company ***************************************************************** 8 AFP: Previous bid to scrap NKorea nukes winds up - Thu Dec 14, 2:14 AM ET SEOUL (AFP) - Just days before a fresh international effort to dismantle North Korea " /> 's nuclear programme, officials have announced that an earlier initiative which cost 1.65 billion dollars is being formally wound up. An international energy consortium has signed a final agreement with a South Korean firm to liquidate its 10-year project to build two light-water nuclear reactors in the North, said Moon Dae-Keun of South Korea " /> 's unification ministry, which handles relations with the communist state. "In a December 8 meeting in New York, the executive board of the Korean Peninsula Energy Development Organization (KEDO) approved a deal with the Korea Electric Power Corporation," Yonhap news agency quoted Moon as saying. Moon said the agreement formalises an initial deal in June, under which the South Korean power company would bear the cost of liquidating the 4.6-billion dollar project in return for all of KEDO's tangible assets outside the North. About 1.65 billion dollars had been spent on the project, of which more than 1.14 billion came from South Korea, Moon was quoted as saying. Under a 1994 agreement between the United States and North Korea, the North agreed to freeze its nuclear activities in return for economic incentives including the light-water reactors -- which, unlike the North's existing graphite-moderated reactors, were more resistant to proliferation. KEDO, a consortium grouping South Korea, Japan, the European Union " /> and the United States, was set up to implement the deal, which also involved interim deliveries of heavy fuel oil to the North. It fell apart after the United States in October 2002 said Pyongyang had admitted running a secret uranium enrichment program in violation of the 1994 deal. North Korea never publicly admitted the uranium programme but in January 2003 announced it would quit the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. The following year it announced it had completed processing 8,000 spent nuclear fuel rods. The activity is believed to have created as much as 40 kilograms (88 pounds) of weapons-grade plutonium -- enough to make six to eight atomic bombs. Six-party talks aimed at persuading the North to scrap its programme in return for economic aid and security guarantees began in 2003. They resume Monday in Beijing after a 13-month break. Copyright 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 9 Guardian Unlimited: S.Korea Calls for Progress on Nuke Talks From the Associated Press [UP] Thursday December 14, 2006 5:16 AM AP Photo SEL106 SEOUL, South Korea (AP) - South Korea's new foreign minister called Wednesday for all sides to work for progress at upcoming talks on North Korea's nuclear weapons program, saying Seoul would play an active role in seeking to persuade Pyongyang to disarm. Abandoning its nuclear ambitions ``clearly serves North Korea's interest,'' said Song Min-soon, who became Seoul's top diplomat last month. He added that Seoul would make ``creative and active'' efforts to induce North Korea to implement a September 2005 agreement in which the North pledged to scrap its pursuit of nuclear technology in exchange for energy and aid. North Korea walked away from the talks - which also include China, Japan, Russia and the United States - 13 months ago. But they are set to resume Monday in Beijing. Song said if the North takes visible steps, the five other nations should also be prepared to make concessions. He didn't elaborate. In Washington, U.S. nuclear envoy Christopher Hill said he did not ``want to get into specific things that we'll be proposing,'' when asked if the North should shut down its nuclear reactor as a token of good faith. A South Korean newspaper reported Thursday that North Korea has said it could shut down the 5-megawatt nuclear reactor at its main nuclear complex in Yongbyon and accept U.N. inspections if Washington makes certain concessions. The newspaper, Hankook Ilbo, said the North Koreans have asked Washington, in return, to lift financial sanctions imposed because of its alleged currency counterfeiting and money-laundering. Pyongyang is also demanding energy aid, the newspaper said. South Korea's new unification minister called for ``patience'' by the participants in this month's revived talks. ``It is important to create an atmosphere in which the agreement is faithfully implemented,'' Lee Jae-joung said in a speech. In Tokyo on Wednesday, the special U.N. envoy on human rights in North Korea said a resolution of the nuclear standoff could clear the way for talks on Pyongyang's alleged human rights abuses. ``A positive development on that front will contribute to the space for humanitarian action,'' said the envoy, Vitit Muntarbhorn. ``There are many possibilities once we nurture a sense of mutual confidence to positive dialogue.'' North Korea routinely tops the lists of countries cited by activists for human rights abuses. Leader Kim Jong Il does not tolerate dissent, restricts travel and discourages religion. Economic mismanagement has, meanwhile, left most of the population in poverty and created massive food shortages. Resolving the nuclear issue and addressing human rights abuses are not incompatible goals, Muntarbhorn said. But other nations have been reluctant to press Pyongyang on human rights, fearing that doing so may undermine talks on North Korea's nuclear program. ``We know very well that the primacy at the moment of course is on the nuclear,'' Muntarbhorn said. ``But that does not rule out or negate the possibility of other entry points or other interactions.'' Guardian Unlimited Guardian News and Media Limited 2006 ***************************************************************** 10 [NYTr] The EU, Israel and Its Nukes Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2006 12:33:51 -0600 (CST) X-Sender-Host-Name: chumbly.math.missouri.edu X-DSPAM-Result: mail; result="Innocent"; class="Innocent"; probability=0.0000; confidence=1.00; signature=N/A X-Spam-Class: HAM Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit excerpted from Abunimah News - http://electronicintifada.net/cgi-bin/kebab/mail.cgi/abunimah/ * Italian PM backs racism, Jewish sectarian regime (Ynet) * Israel's EU puppets: Italian PM coached on what to say by Olmert (R) * Iran, Arabs demand UN action over Israeli nuclear arms (AFP) Ynet - 13 December 2006 http://www.ynetnews.com/Ext/Comp/ArticleLayout/CdaArticlePrintPreview/1,2506,L-3339715,00.html Prodi: Preserve Israel's Jewish character ROME - Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert expressed great satisfaction with his meeting with Italian Prime Minister Romano Prodi. During the meeting Prodi said that "Israel's Jewish character should be preserved." Olmert interpreted this sentence as Prodi's support of the Israeli stance on denying the Right of Return to Palestinian refugees. The United Nations' former Secretary General Kofi Anan expressed a similar attitude on Tuesday. At the end of the meeting Prodi and Olmert held a joint press conference in which Prodi said that he hopes a meeting between Olmert and the Palestinian president Mahmoud Abbas would take place soon. "Direct talks between the parties are utterly important," said Prodi, who even asked Olmert to try and ease the Palestinian's situation in the Authority. During the meeting between the two, Prodi also stated his contempt for the Holocaust Conference that was held in Tehran this week. At the press conference Prodi continued to express that he was absolutely outraged and appalled by the Holocaust Conference. Olmert and Prodi, a successful meeting. (Photo: AFP) Olmert thanked Prodi for his words regarding the Jewish state, and complimented the Italian prime minister on his country's participation in the international forces in Lebanon. Olmert said that the difference between Hizbullah's current abilities and their abilities a year ago is dramatic, and is due to the international force in Lebanon, which Italy is a part of. He also gave credit to the Lebanese and Israeli militaries for preventing Hizbullah from strengthening. Olmert also stressed the importance of continuing to reinforce the Lebanese government and preventing Hizbullah's taking over the country. Prodi and olmert were both very satisfied with the meeting and the good relationship between the two countries. *** Reuters - 13 December 2006 Israeli TV catches Olmert "coaching" Italy's Prodi JERUSALEM (Reuters) - Israeli pundits make much of Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's powers of persuasion, but this was one bit of proof that he might well have wanted to do without. An Israeli television station broadcast candid footage on Thursday that appeared to show Olmert, during his first official visit to Rome, coaching Italian Prime Minister Romano Prodi on what to say during their joint press conference. "It is important that you emphasize the three principles of the Quartet -- that they are not negotiated (sic). They are the basis for everything," Olmert says, referring to Western demands that Hamas Islamists who run the Palestinian government soften their views before peace talks with Israel can begin. "Please say this?" Olmert asks his nodding counterpart in English. As it happened, Prodi did deliver words to that effect. He further endorsed Israel's vision of remaining a Jewish state -- code for ruling out an influx of Palestinian refugees. This, Channel 10 television suggested, was also at Olmert's prodding. "You said something about a Jewish state (in the past). I know that," Olmert is shown telling Prodi as the two confer in what looks like a lounge in an Italian government complex. While allies coordinating their rhetoric is nothing new in international diplomacy, the unvarnished glimpse into Olmert's back-room lobbying may prove a fresh embarrassment at home. Before Rome, Olmert was in Berlin. That visit was marked by Israeli furor at a German television interview in which he seemed to confirm, in a reversal of a decades-old secrecy policy, that Israel has the Middle East's only nuclear weapons. An Olmert spokeswoman insisted he had not abandoned Israel's "ambiguity" over its assumed arsenal, but that did not stop opposition lawmakers of various political stripes from calling for his resignation. Olmert, a former lawyer and career politician, cuts a suave figure that is dramatically different to that of his predecessor, Ariel Sharon. An ex-general, Sharon was famous -- to his foes, notorious -- for often preferring action over talk. The inconclusive war against Lebanon's Hezbollah guerrillas, an intractable Palestinian revolt, and arch-foe Iran's nuclear programme have stirred resentment among many Israelis at Olmert's style, if opinion polls are anything to judge by. Olmert and Prodi aides had no immediate comment on the Channel 10 footage. (Additional reporting by Robin Pomeroy in Rome) *** Agence France Presse - 13 December 2006 Iran, Arabs demand UN action over Israeli nuclear arms CAIRO (AFP) - Iran and Arab states have seized on Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's statement implying that Israel has nuclear weapons, calling it proof of a regional threat and demanding UN action. On Monday Olmert appeared to admit -- in breach of the Jewish state's decades-long policy of ambiguity -- that Israel possessed such weapons. Iran called his comments a confession and demanded action from the United Nations. "This confession shows the real threat to security and stability in the Middle East, and it shows this regime's evil plans to carry out threats, a terror strategy and continued occupation," foreign ministry spokesman Mohammed Ali Hosseini said Wednesday. "It is extremely necessary to adopt fast and efficient solutions on the UN Security Council and the Organisation of the Islamic Conference and other regional organisations to combat these clear threats," he said. Israel, which Iran does not recognise, is Tehran's arch-foe. It has repeatedly called for UN action over Iran's nuclear programme and President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's anti-Israel comments. The Arab League urged the international community and the Security Council to exert pressure on Israel "to open its nuclear facilities in a transparent manner." "It is essential that Israel comply with international resolutions," Mohammed Sobeih, the assistant secretary general in charge of Palestinian affairs, told reporters in Cairo. The 22-member body called on "all states which offered assistance to Israel, particularly on the issues of uranium and heavy water, to speak out without delay," he said. "Everyone knows that Israel possesses weapons of mass destruction which could reach as far as 2,000 kilometres (1,240 miles), and all Arab capitals are within this range," Sobeih added. On Tuesday the Gulf Cooperation Council -- grouping Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates -- demanded that sanctions be imposed on Israel. GCC Secretary General Abderrahman al-Attiya called on the United States not to apply a policy of "double standards" and to "work for the application (against Israel) of the resolutions of international legitimacy and of Chapter VII." Chapter VII of the UN charter deals with action the Security Council might take regarding threats to the peace, breaches of the peace and acts of aggression. As a first step, it says the council may call for member states to impose sanctions, including complete or partial interruption of economic relations and the severance of diplomatic relations. If such measures fail, military action can be called for. In a Monday interview with German television, Olmert listed Israel as a country with nuclear weapons. "We never threatened any nation with annihilation," he said. "Iran openly, explicitly and publicly threatens to wipe Israel off the map. Can you say that this is the same level, when they are aspiring to have nuclear weapons, as France, America, Russia and Israel?" he asked. Olmert's spokeswoman Miri Eisin was quick to deny that the premier admitted Israel had nuclear weapons, saying "Israel will not be the first country to introduce nuclear weapons to the region." * ================================================================ .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 ================================================================ ***************************************************************** 11 Malaysia Sun: Skepticism over China nuclear capability MalaysiaSun.com Malaysia Sun Thursday 14th December, 2006 [A recent report says the US military, intelligence agencies, and think-tanks are exaggerating China's nuclear-weapons capability to justify developing a new generation of nuclear and conventional weapons. ] It is never hard to find someone worrying about China's nuclear weapons. For example, the recent annual report of the US-China Economic and Security Review Commission says, 'Beijing continues to improve its older intercontinental ballistic missiles and seeks to field increasingly mobile, accurate and survivable and therefore more credible ICBMs ... China's newer longer-range [missile] systems will reach many areas of the world ... including virtually the entire continental United States.' Yet it seems that China has more to worry about than the United States, according to another recent report. It found, just like classic 'missile gap' alarm of the Cold War, that the US military, intelligence agencies and conservative think-tanks and news organizations are exaggerating China's nuclear-weapons capability to justify developing a new generation of nuclear and conventional weapons. And in a surrealistic act of mirror-imaging, the Chinese have been citing US weapons upgrades as a rationale for modernizing theirs, locking the two nations in a dangerous action-and-reaction competition reminiscent of the Cold War, according to a report issued on November 30 by the Federation of American Scientists (FAS) and the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC). In a perverse way it actually makes sense. Ever since the crackup of the Soviet Union, various political and military figures have been desperately searching for rationales to justify hanging on to and modernizing the US nuclear arsenal. Of course, the negligible size of China's nuclear forces has made that a hard sell. As the report notes right at the start, 'The Chinese-US nuclear relationship is dramatically disproportionate in favor of the United States and will remain so for the foreseeable future.' Even the Pentagon's last annual 'Military Power of the People's Republic of China' report notes that Beijing has consistently stated its adherence to a 'no first use' nuclear doctrine, which is that China will never use nuclear weapons first against a nuclear-weapons state, nor will China use or threaten to use nuclear weapons against any non-nuclear-weapons state or nuclear-weapons-free zone. It also noted that China currently deploys about 20 silo-based, liquid-fueled ICBMs, which constitute its primary means of holding continental US targets at risk. But according to the FAS-NRDC report, the United States has more than 830 missiles - most with multiple warheads - that can reach China. By 2015, when US intelligence projects that China will have 75 missiles primarily targeted against the United States, the US force will include 780 land- and sea-based missiles. The report found that although the United States has maintained extensive nuclear-strike plans against Chinese targets for more than a half-century, China has never responded by building large nuclear forces of its own and is unlikely to do so in the future. As a result, Chinese nuclear weapons are quantitatively and qualitatively much inferior to their US counterparts. China's total stockpile numbers about 200 warheads; the United States has nearly 10,000. By 2015, after China deploys a new generation of ballistic missiles and the US has completed its planned reductions, China may have some 220 warheads and the US more than 5,000. The report's main finding is that the Pentagon and others routinely highlight specific incidents out of context that inaccurately portray a looming Chinese threat. Specifically, the report demonstrates that they have been embellishing China's submarine- and long-range-missile capabilities. US intelligence agencies warn that the Chinese will be able to target 75-100 nuclear warheads at the continental United States by 2015. But that prediction assumes China will be able to deploy 40-55 new DF-31A missiles before 2015, in addition to two other shorter-range missiles. Given that the Chinese have yet to conduct test flights of the DF-31A, the report concluded that that assumption is highly questionable. The Pentagon also has made much out of the fact that China's next-generation missiles will be mobile. But the majority of China's ballistic-missile force has always been mobile, the report points out, and the US military has targeted it as a routine matter since the 1980s. In fact, improved US targeting of Chinese missiles has played a significant role in prompting China to develop new long-range missiles. As the report makes clear, the disparity between US and Chinese nuclear capabilities is so overwhelming as to make any talk about the Chinese threat farcical. For example: None of China's long-range nuclear forces are believed to be on alert; most US ballistic missiles are on high alert, ready to launch within minutes after receiving a launch order. China's sole nuclear-ballistic-missile submarine has never gone on patrol. As a result, the crews of the new Jin-class subs currently under construction will need to start almost from scratch to develop the operational and tactical skills and procedures that are essential if a sea-based deterrent is to be militarily effective and matter strategically. China may be able to build two or three new missile subs over the next decade, but they would be highly vulnerable to anti-submarine forces; the US Navy has 14 missile-bearing subs and has moved the majority of them into the Pacific. China may have a small number of aircraft with a secondary nuclear capability, but they would be severely tested by US and allied air-defense systems or in air-to-air combat. The United States operates 72 long-range bombers assigned missions with nuclear gravity bombs and land-attack cruise missiles. China does not have nuclear-armed cruise missiles, although US intelligence suspects it might develop such a capability in the future. The United States has more than 1,000 nuclear cruise missiles for delivery by aircraft and attack submarines. Another relevant aspect of the report, especially in light of recent US experience with Iraq, details how badly US intelligence has misjudged Chinese nuclear capabilities. The report found that estimates about the size of the Chinese nuclear arsenal were grossly overstated, sometimes by several hundred percent, and timelines for when new systems would come on line were almost always much too optimistic. The reasons for these misjudgments include China's ability to keep its capabilities hidden, a tendency among some intelligence analysts to overstate their conclusions, and the Pentagon's general inclination to assume the worst. This predisposition to exaggerate the Chinese threat unfortunately remains evident today. The sad irony is that both countries point to what the other is doing as a justification to modernize. The report notes that China is about to deploy three new long-range ballistic missiles that the US says were developed in response to its own deployment of more accurate Trident sea-launched ballistic missiles in the early 1980s. Meanwhile, the US has increased its capability to target Chinese mobile missiles, and the Pentagon is arguing that the long-term outlook for China's long-range ballistic-missile force requires increased targeting of Chinese forces. (David Isenberg, a senior analyst with the Washington-based British American Security Information Council (BASIC), has a wide background in arms-control and national-security issues. The views expressed are his own). ***************************************************************** 12 Guardian Unlimited: A way out of the bunker | Comment is free | North Korea and the US will both have to face uncomfortable truths to end their nuclear standoff Mark Seddon in Pyongyang Thursday December 14, 2006 The model city that rose from the ashes of the Korean war is eerily dark at night and strangely quiet during the day. Electricity remains in short supply, while a lack of fuel leaves the roads largely empty. The talk is of a hard winter, with reduced food supplies from China and South Korea plunging some rural areas into desperate hunger. Next week's resumption of six-way talks in Beijing comes at a critical time. North Korea is as isolated now as at any time in its relatively short history. US sanctions aimed at alleged counterfeiting activities have had the unintended effect of freezing much of the country's foreign exchange, legal and illegal. Pyongyang walked out of talks to resolve the nuclear stand-off in November 2005 and exploded a prototype nuclear bomb in October this year, prompting tightening of the separate UN sanctions and a threat to intercept North Korean vessels on the high seas suspected of carrying arms. I have been in North Korea with the European parliamentarian Glyn Ford, who has been instrumental in forging an EU-Pyongyang dialogue. For the first time senior figures in the regime were prepared to talk on camera about their terms for a return to talks, and what it would take for them to give up their small nuclear arsenal. Among these was the speaker of the supreme people's assembly, Choe Thae-bok, who told us that US intransigence remained the greatest hurdle to resolution. "Many US politicians are trying to isolate the DPRK [North Korea]," he insisted. "The main cause must be removed - the hostile policy of the US. Remove it and everything will be solved." The mood in the supreme people's assembly is hardly optimistic. For the forthcoming talks to have any chance of success, North Korea will have to confront uncomfortable truths, but so too will the US. If Pyongyang is serious about achieving a lasting peace, then it will have to renounce its nuclear weapons. It comes to the conference table in a far stronger position than a year ago as a nuclear state, but Kim Jong-il's "military first" policy starved industry and agriculture of investment and, with sanctions, contributed to mass starvation in the 90s. Equally the US administration will have to acknowledge that its invasion of Iraq, President Bush's "axis of evil" speech, and the deliberate collapse of the "agreed framework" with North Korea has seen Pyongyang go nuclear on its watch. Under the agreed framework, signed in the early 90s between the Clinton administration and Kim Jong-il, the US undertook to supply Pyongyang with vitally needed heavy fuel oil and light water nuclear reactors in return for North Korea's abandonment of its nuclear programme. In truth, despite the commitment of senior Clinton figures such as the former secretary of state Madeleine Albright, others in the administration invented delay after delay in the mistaken belief that the communist regime was on the verge of collapse. The election of George Bush saw the agreement disappear without trace. All that remains of the US promise of nuclear power in return for no nuclear bombs are some very large excavated holes in the ground. Few in north Asia, save perhaps extreme rightwingers in Japan, want to see an arms race in north Asia. Even fewer believe that North Korea is on the verge of collapse, which could spell economic disaster for South Korea and China's border areas. Whether Pyongyang retreats further into its nuclear bunker and remains in a Stalinist past, or begins to open up and realise its true potential, may depend on whether the US is prepared to engage seriously for the first time since the Clinton era. Mark Seddon is UN correspondent for al-Jazeera English mark.seddon@aljazeera.net Guardian Unlimited Guardian News and Media Limited 2006. Registered in England and Wales. No. 908396 Registered office: Number 1 Scott Place, Manchester M3 3GG. Privacy Policy ***************************************************************** 13 Guardian Unlimited: Bush has created a comprehensive catastrophe across the Middle East Comment In every vital area, from Afghanistan to Egypt, his policies have made the situation worse than it was before Timothy Garton Ash Thursday December 14, 2006 What an amazing bloody catastrophe. The Bush administration's policy towards the Middle East over the five years since 9/11 is culminating in a multiple train crash. Never in the field of human conflict was so little achieved by so great a country at such vast expense. In every vital area of the wider Middle East, American policy over the last five years has taken a bad situation and made it worse. If the consequences were not so serious, one would have to laugh at a failure of such heroic proportions - rather in the spirit of Zorba the Greek who, contemplating the splintered ruins of his great project, memorably exclaimed: "Did you ever see a more splendiferous crash?" But the reckless incompetence of Zorba the Bush has resulted in the death, maiming, uprooting or impoverishment of hundreds of thousands of men, women and children - mainly Muslim Arabs but also Christian Lebanese, Israelis and American and British soldiers. By contributing to a broader alienation of Muslims it has also helped to make a world in which, as we walk the streets of London, Madrid, Jerusalem, New York or Sydney, we are all, each and every one of us, less safe. Laugh if you dare. In the beginning, there were the 9/11 attacks. It's important to stress that no one can fairly blame George Bush for them. The invasion of Afghanistan was a justified response to those attacks, which were initiated by al-Qaida from its bases in a rogue state under the tyranny of the Taliban. But if Afghanistan had to be done, it had to be done properly. It wasn't. Creating a half-way civilised order in one of the most rugged, inhospitable and tribally recalcitrant places on the planet was always going to be a huge challenge. If the available resources of the world's democracies, including those of a new, enlarged Nato, had been dedicated to that task over the last five years, we might at least have one partial success to report today. Instead Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld drove us on to Iraq, aided and abetted by Tony Blair, leaving the job in Afghanistan less than half-done. Today Osama bin Laden and his henchmen are probably still holed up in the mountains of Waziristan, just across the Afghan frontier in northern Pakistan, while the Taliban is back in force and the whole country is a bloody mess. Instead of one partial success, following a legitimate intervention, we have two burgeoning disasters, in Afghanistan and in Iraq. The United States and Britain invaded Iraq under false pretences, without proper legal authority or international legitimacy. If Saddam Hussein, a dangerous tyrant and certified international aggressor, had in fact possessed secret stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction, the intervention might have been justified; as he didn't, it wasn't. Then, through the breathtaking incompetence of the civilian armchair warriors in the Pentagon and the White House, we transformed a totalitarian state into a state of anarchy. Claiming to move Iraq forward towards Lockean liberty, we hurled it back to a Hobbesian state of nature. Iraqis - those who have not been killed - increasingly say things are worse than they were before. Who are we to tell them they are wrong? Now we are preparing to get out. After working through Basra in Operation Sinbad, a reduced number of British troops will draw back to their base at Basra airfield. We will sit in a desert and call it peace. If the White House follows the Baker-Hamilton commission's advice, US troops will do something similar, leaving embedded advisers with Iraqi forces. Three decades ago, American retreat was cloaked by "Vietnamisation"; now it will be cloaked by Iraqisation. Meanwhile, Iraqis can go on killing each other all around, until perhaps, in the end, they cut some rough-and-ready political deals between themselves - or not, as the case may be. The theocratic dictatorship of Iran is the great winner. Five years ago, the Islamic republic had a reformist president, a substantial democratic opposition, and straitened finances because of low oil prices. The mullahs were running scared. Now the prospects of democratisation are dwindling, the regime is riding high on oil at more than $60 a barrel, and it has huge influence through its Shia brethren in Iraq and Lebanon. The likelihood of it developing nuclear weapons is correspondingly greater. We toppled the Iraqi dictator, who did not have weapons of mass destruction, and thereby increased the chances of Iran's dictators acquiring weapons of mass destruction. And this week Iran's President Ahmadinejad once again called for the destruction of the state of Israel. Those American neocons who set out to make the Middle East safe for Israel have ended up making it more dangerous for Israel. We did not need an Iraq Study Group to tell us that resolving the Arab-Israeli conflict through a two-state solution for Israel and Palestine is crucial. In its last months the Clinton administration came close to clinching the deal. Under Bush, things have gone backwards. Even the Bush-backed Ariel Sharon scenario of separation through faits accomplis has receded, with the summer war in Lebanon, Hamas ascendancy in Palestine (itself partly a by-product of the Bush-led rush to elections), and a growing disillusionment of the Israeli public. Having scored an apparent success with the "cedar revolution" in Lebanon and the withdrawal of Syrian troops, the Bush administration, by its tacit support of sustained yet ineffective Israeli military action this summer, undermined the very Lebanese government it was claiming to support. Now Hizbullah is challenging the country's western-backed velvet revolutionaries at their own game: after the cedar revolution, welcome to the cedar counter-revolution. In Egypt, supposedly a showcase for the United States' support for peaceful democratisation in the Bush second term, electoral success for Islamists (as in Palestine and Lebanon) seems to have frightened Washington away from its fresh-minted policy before the ink was even dry. On the credit side, all we have to show is Libya's renunciation of weapons of mass destruction, and a few tentative reforms in some smaller Arab states. So here's the scoresheet for Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, Israel, Palestine, Lebanon and Egypt: worse, worse, worse, worse, worse, worse and worse. With James Baker, the United States may revert from the sins of the son to the sins of the father. After all, it was Baker and George Bush Sr who left those they had encouraged to rise up against Saddam to be killed in Iraq at the end of the first Gulf war - not to mention enthusiastically continuing Washington's long-running Faustian pact with petro-autocracies such as Saudi Arabia. I'm told that Condoleezza Rice, no less, has wryly observed that the word democracy hardly features in the Baker-Hamilton report. Many a time, in these pages and elsewhere, I have warned against reflex Bush-bashing and kneejerk anti-Americanism. The United States is by no means the only culprit. Changing the Middle East for the better is one of the most difficult challenges in world politics. The people of the region bear much responsibility for their own plight. So do we Europeans, for past sins of commission and current sins of omission. But Bush must take the lion's share of the blame. There are few examples in recent history of such a comprehensive failure. Congratulations, Mr President; you have made one hell of a disaster. timothygartonash.com [UP] Guardian Unlimited Guardian News and Media Limited 2006 ***************************************************************** 14 The Hindu: Manmohan seeks Japan's support for India's nuclear needs Thursday, December 14, 2006 : 1715 Hrs Tokyo, Dec. 14 (PTI): Seeking a new partnership with Japan, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh today pressed for its support to put in place "innovative and forward-looking" approaches of the international community to meet India's growing nuclear energy needs. Addressing the Japanese Parliament (Diet), Singh advocated a strong push for economic ties saying they must be the bedrock of Indo-Japan relationship. "Like Japan, India sees nuclear power as a viable and clean energy source to meet its growing energy needs. We seek Japan's support in helping put in place innovative and forward looking approaches of the international community to make this possible," he told the members of the joint session of the House of Representatives and House of Councillors. New Delhi is looking for the support of Japan, an influential member of the 45-nation Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG), to back changes in its guidelines to allow international nuclear cooperation with India. A complex problem In his speech, the Prime Minister, who is on a four-day visit to Japan, touched on terrorism, UN reforms and the need to enhance bilateral defence and economic cooperation. Describing terrorism as a common threat to peace and harmony in open societies, he said "it is a complex problem that has many faces, many causes and respects no geographical barriers. We cannot prevail in the fight against terrorism unless we work together." Referring to joint efforts by India and Japan to revitalise and reform the UN including the Security Council to make them more relevant, Singh said "both of us have a vital stake in the enhanced effectiveness of the UN and its various organs." The two countries must intensify their cooperation for an "orderly and equitable management of the inter-dependence of nations in an increasingly globalised world we live in," he said. Software and hardware Besides energy security, both countries have an equal stake in promoting defence cooperation, including for protection of sea-lanes to secure trade and energy flows, Singh said. In the field of science and technology, the Prime Minister said there was need to accelerate the pace of cooperation in future growth sector such as nano-technologoy, bio-technology, life sciences and information and communication technologies. "We must exploit synergies in the development of India software and Japanese hardware," he said. New partnership Observing that the idea of a "new partnership" between India and Japan has "found its moment today", Singh said he was truly inspired by Japan's progress each time he visited this country. Recalling his first visit to Japan in 1992 as Finance Minister, Singh said he had then come to express gratitude for Tokyo's help in dealing with an unprecendented economic crisis in 1991. "Today, I return to Japan as the Prime Minister of a new India," Singh said, noting that the Indian economy in the past 15 years has registered an average growth rate of over six per cent per annum. In recent years, it has accelerated to over eight percent. Noting that India was now on a sustained path of high growth, Singh said "the time has come for our two ancient civilizations to build a strong contemporary relationship involving strategic and global partnership that will have great significance for Asia and the world." He said strong ties between India and Japan would be a "major factor" in building an open and inclusive Asia and in enhancing peace and stability in the region. Knowledge economy He identified knowlege economy as the most important area in which the two countries can build their partnership in the future. Underpinning the importance of greater people-to-people contacts, the Prime Minister said he would like to see more students in India learning the Japanese language. It has already been introduced as an optional foreign launguage in Indian secondary schools, he said. Promising an investment friendly economic environment, he invited Japanese companies to expand their presence in India. Singh and his Japanese counterpart Shinzo Abe will launch negotiations that will lead to a Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement to encourage greater flows of trade, investment and technology between the two countries. "Our partnership has the potential to create an arc of advantage and prosperity across Asia, laying the foundation for the creation of an Asian Economic Community," he said. The Prime Minister said both sides have agreed to establish a high-level energy dialogue and hoped such fora would be set up in many more areas, including trade and industry. Copyright 2006, The Hindu. ***************************************************************** 15 San Luis Obispo Tribune: Diablo reactor should be up and running again soon 12/14/2006 | By David Sneed and Cynthia Neff dsneed@thetribunenews.comcneff@thetribunenews.com One of Diablo Canyon's two nuclear reactors may return to operating at half-power within 48 hours, Pacific Gas and Electric Co. officials said Wednesday, one day after a loud explosion and fire at the plant. A preliminary investigation determined that a surge capacitor (similar to a surge protector for computer equipment) for one of the plant's four ocean water circulation pumps failed, causing the explosion and fire Tuesday afternoon. The fire was quickly extinguished, and no radiation was released nor was anyone injured in the incident. In response to the fire, however, one of the plant's two nuclear reactors shut down automatically. It remained shut down Wednesday as plant operators investigated the cause of the fire. The other reactor at the plant remained fully operational. Each of the plant's reactors has two pumps that circulate cooling water to condense steam that has passed through generators. The second pump in the reactor was not affected by the fire and will be put back to use, said plant spokeswoman Sharon Gavin. All four pumps are original equipment at the plant, Gavin said, and were put into service in the late 1970s. The plant performs regular maintenance and inspects the pumps to make sure they are working properly, she said. It is unknown how long it will take for the reactor to reach full power, because PG has not determined what repairs are needed for the damaged electrical components. Resident inspectors with the federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission are also investigating. No special inspections are planned by the agency, said spokesman Victor Dricks. "From what we've seen, the licensee responded properly," he said. Reaction to the incident by nuclear watchdog groups was mixed. David Rossin, a member of the Diablo Canyon Independent Safety Committee, said he would not have any comment until the panel hears the facts. Another member of the safety committee, Per Peterson, and a consultant were due to visit the plant on a previously scheduled fact-finding trip and will be briefed on the incident. "I'm sure PG is very interested in finding out what went wrong," Rossin said. Critics of nuclear power maintain that incidents such as this one are part of a pattern in which decades-old plants are beginning to fail at a quickening pace. "Our argument for a long time has been that the plant is operating with aging components," said Morgan Rafferty, an activist with the San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace. David Lochbaum, a nuclear scientist with the Union of Concerned Scientists, said it is too early to say whether aging components were the cause of the explosion. "Sometimes things just break," he said. The unit had been restarted just two days after sensors in a different pump indicated that it was overheating. Ramping the reactor back up to full power could have been a factor. "It's not uncommon for a plant to come out of an outage and encounter an additional problem," Lochbaum said. ***************************************************************** 16 BBC: Chernobyl voices: Anatoly Rasskazov Last Updated: Thursday, 14 December 2006 As Ukraine marks the 20th anniversary of the completion of the sarcophagus encasing the ruined reactor at Chernobyl, we publish the story of the first man to photograph the wreckage - on 26 April 1986, the morning after the disaster. Anatoly Rasskazov, 66 Former photographer and artist at Chernobyl nuclear power station It was a weekend. Everyone was relaxing, or preparing for the 1 May parade, when the power station was meant to receive the Order of Lenin and become a Hero of Socialist Labour. There were rumours of a minor accident at the station, but I cleaned the windows of our flat in Pripyat as usual. Then at about 9am I was summoned urgently to the station. No-one believed that something so awful could occur. MORE CHERNOBYL VOICES Hanna, zon resident Igor, thyroid surgeon Lena, irradiated mother Mikhail, evacuee Mykhailo, sick lorry driver Natalia, sociologist Oleg, Chernobyl employee Viktoria, student activist Vladimir, liquidator I went down into the bunker where the authorities were working, and I understood that they did not really know whether the active zone of the reactor was destroyed or not. They wanted pictures taken from above to see what had really happened. In the helicopter, there were two soldiers and two civilians from Atomenergo, who had flown down from Moscow. There was so much ash flying around, it was impossible to take photographs through the glass. I said, "Comrades, we have to open the window." They protested, saying it would contaminate the helicopter. They knew what it was, the material rising up from the reactor. But the window was opened. I leaned out with my camera, a wide-format Kiev-6, and a soldier held my legs to stop me falling. Then I doubled up with a Zenit. Graphite blocks When we returned I reported to the station director, Viktor Petrovich Bryukhanov, and he said, "Good, now do it from the ground." [Anatoly Ivanovich Rasskazov's picture] The reactor's glow was obscured when the picture was shown on TV I set off on foot with a radiation safety official and a dosimetrist. One of them shook his head. "Oi-oi-oi, we'll receive such a dose," he said. So we got into one of the fire engines left on the territory of the station and started it up. There was no room on the road, so we drove along the railway, bumping over the sleepers. There were some graphite blocks lying on the ground near the third reactor. I jumped out and photographed them with the Zenit, leaving the other camera in the cabin. Then we drove up to within 50 metres of the ruins of fourth reactor. I took 12 pictures with each camera, and we returned the same way as we arrived, praying to God that the engine would keep going. I develop the first film, from the Zenit, and it is black, completely burnt out by radiation - probably from the graphite block. I think, "That's it. It's all over." But the second film, from the other camera was successful, only slightly clouded. When I got to the station the First Department [security] took the prints, numbered them and took the films. "Everything you saw and heard - keep your mouth locked!" they said. From the photographs it was clear that the active zone was badly damaged. Until May, no-one else was allowed to take pictures. Radiation burn When I returned home at midnight, I was vomiting. I was all red. I had a sore on my forehead which has remained unhealed for 20 years. A radiation burn. And my whole throat was burning, because I had been inhaling this soup of radionuclides. [Anatoly Ivanovich Rasskazov] Mr Rasskazov in action at the plant Later, my job was to photograph the building of the sarcophagus. I took pictures from three sides of the reactor, and twice a week from above, in a military helicopter. This allowed the authorities to see how the sarcophagus was being built. September was the peak period, when the sarcophagus was nearing completion. In October I already began to feel bad. I went to work and an ambulance took me from there to hospital. They wrote down that I had received an emergency dose, more than 25 roentgens. In January I was taken to the 6th clinic, in Moscow. There a doctor told me, "Anatoly Ivanovich, you do not count as a case of radiation sickness - to qualify for radiation sickness you need to have been working on the night shift." So I got no special benefits. But I have had lots of illnesses, including blood diseases and cancer. My health is ruined. To begin with they did not publish my pictures. In May they showed one on central television, but it was one taken from the ground so the scale of the destruction was not visible. Later they showed one of the pictures taken from above, but they touched it up so that the ray of light emanating like a burning sun from the reactor, along with the smoke, ash and other flakes of material, was not visible. Long afterwards they were published in a book called Chernobyl Reportage, but my name did not appear. ***************************************************************** 17 News Journal: Governors hear talk on nuclear power delaware online Plants don't pollute the air, advocates say, but safety is still in question By AARON NATHANS, The News Journal Posted Thursday, December 14, 2006 Nuclear power must be considered as part of the effort to combat global warming, a panelist argued at a National Governors Association meeting in Wilmington on Wednesday. Gov. Ruth Ann Minner welcomed policy advisers from about 30 state governors' offices, as well as federal energy officials and national energy experts, gathered at the Hotel du Pont for a two-day energy forum that began Tuesday. Norris McDonald, president of the Fort Washington, Md.-based African American Environmentalist Association, noted that he is an asthmatic, which makes him pay more attention to the air he breathes. He said he supports nuclear power because it can replace fuels that pollute the atmosphere. "If you're an environmental group, I don't see how you can meet your numbers without adopting nuclear power. It's emissions-free," McDonald said. Solar and wind power are good, but nuclear power can serve more customers, he said. "Don't neglect the forest for the trees." Alan Nogee, clean energy program director for the Union of Concerned Scientists, an advocacy group, said nuclear power still carries risks related to safety, security, proliferation and waste disposal. He said there are still questions about whether reactors can be operated without incident, especially after a near-meltdown at an Ohio nuclear plant in 2002. "Nuclear's strength is that the wastes are very concentrated. But that also creates the risks in managing it," Nogee said. Marilyn Kray, vice president for development for the utility Exelon Generation of Kennett Square, Pa., noted that nuclear energy makes up the largest share of electricity that does not emit greenhouse gases. Waste from burning coal and natural gas goes into the atmosphere, but with nuclear waste, "we know exactly where it is," she said. "It's a marble-sized piece of waste, compared with trainloads of coal." She noted that Exelon is a member of a consortium of utilities that are planning to make proposals to build new nuclear power plants, though not in Delaware. The last new nuclear power plant in the United States was ordered in 1978. "We want the nuclear option to be available to decision-makers when it comes time to make new investments in generation," Kray said. Twenty percent of the electricity produced in the United States is nuclear, she noted. Nogee underscored that the construction of nuclear power plants in the United States has always gone more than 200 percent over budget. He said most of the nuclear plants currently operating were built by Bechtel, the manager of the "Big Dig" highway and tunnel project in Boston, which has also gone far over budget. "Nuclear plants are large construction projects, especially compared to their competitors," Nogee said. Public confidence in nuclear energy is growing, Kray argued. "It's utilities who are making these investments. Our appetite for risk is not that high," she said. "We would like to have a number of options available to us." Contact Aaron Nathans at 324-2786 or . Copyright The News Journal. ***************************************************************** 18 NRC: NRC Staff to Meet with TVA Officials in Alabama to Discuss Unit 1 Restart at Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant News Release - Region II - 2006-04 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs, Region II No. II-06-045 December 14, 2006 CONTACT: Ken Clark (404) 562-4416 Roger D. Hannah (404) 562-4417 E-mail: opa2@nrc.gov Nuclear Regulatory Commission officials will meet with Tennessee Valley Authority officials from 1:00 until 3:00 p.m. (CST) on Monday, December 18 at Calhoun Community College near Decatur, Ala., to discuss the status of TVAs restart efforts for the Unit 1 reactor at the Browns Ferry nuclear plant. The meeting, which is open to the public, will be held at the Colleges Aerospace Training Center (Building #27). Calhoun Community College is located at 6250 U.S. Highway 31 North in the Tanner community. NRC officials will be available after the business portion of the meeting to answer questions from interested observers. The agenda for the meeting is to discuss the status of the Unit 1 restart efforts, including completed work, schedules, closure of restart items and other activities important to NRC oversight and inspection of Unit 1. All three units of the Browns Ferry plant were shut down in 1985 but retained NRC operating licenses. Unit 2 was restarted in 1991 and Unit 3 was restarted in 1995. TVA has been doing extensive work on Unit 1 and said it expects to have that unit ready to begin operating this spring. Just as with Units 2 and 3, Unit 1 cannot be restarted without NRC concurrence. ----------------------------------------------------------------- NRC news releases are available through a free list serve subscription at the following Web address: http://www.nrc.gov/public-involve/listserver.html. The NRC homepage at www.nrc.gov also offers a SUBSCRIBE link. E-mail notifications are sent to subscribers when news releases are posted to NRC's Web site. Last revised Thursday, December 14, 2006 ***************************************************************** 19 NRC: Agency Information Collection Activities: Submission for the FR Doc E6-21271 [Federal Register: December 14, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 240)] [Notices] [Page 75280] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr14de06-107] Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Review; Comment Request AGENCY: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). ACTION: Notice of the OMB review of information collection and solicitation of public comment. SUMMARY: The NRC has recently submitted to OMB for review the following proposal for the collection of information under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35). The NRC hereby informs potential respondents that an agency may not conduct or sponsor, and that a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a current valid OMB control number. 1. Type of submission, new, revision, or extension: Revision. 2. The title of the information collection: NRC Form 664, ``General Licensee Registration''. 3. The form number if applicable: NRC Form 664. 4. How often the collection is required: Annually. 5. Who is required or asked to report: General Licensees of the NRC who possess devices subject to registration under 10 CFR 31.5. 6. An estimate of the number of responses: 1,000. 7. The estimated number of annual respondents: 1,000. 8. The number of hours needed annually to complete the requirement or request: 333 hours annually (1,000 respondents x 20 minutes per form). 9. An indication of whether Section 3507(d), Pub. L. 104-13 applies: Not applicable. 10. Abstract: NRC Form 664 is used by NRC general licensees to make reports regarding certain generally licensed devices subject to registration. The registration program allows NRC to better track general licensees, so that they can be contacted or inspected as necessary, and to make sure that generally licensed devices can be identified even if lost or damaged, and to further ensure that general licensees are aware of and understand the requirements for the possession of devices containing byproducts material. Greater awareness helps to ensure that general licensees will comply with the requirements for proper handling and disposal of generally licensed devices and would reduce the potential for incidents that could result in unnecessary radiation exposure to the public and contamination of property. A copy of the final supporting statement may be viewed free of charge at the NRC Public Document Room, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Room O-1 F21, Rockville, MD 20852. OMB clearance requests are available at the NRC worldwide Web site: http://www.nrc.gov/public-involve/doc-comment/omb/index.html. The document will be available on the NRC home page site for 60 days after the signature date of this notice. Comments and questions should be directed to the OMB reviewer listed below by January 16, 2007. Comments received after this date will be considered if it is practical to do so, but assurance of consideration cannot be given to comments received after this date. OMB Desk Officer, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (3150-0198), NEOB-10202, Office of Management and Budget, Washington, DC 20503. Comments can also be submitted by telephone at (202) 395-3087. The NRC Clearance Officer is Margaret A. Janney, 301-415-7245. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 7th day of December, 2006. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Margaret A. Janney, NRC Clearance Officer, Office of the Chief Information Officer. [FR Doc. E6-21271 Filed 12-13-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P ***************************************************************** 20 NRC: Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc., Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station; FR Doc E6-21272 [Federal Register: December 14, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 240)] [Notices] [Page 75280-75281] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr14de06-108] Notice of Availability of The Draft Supplement 29 to the Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants, and Public Meeting for the License Renewal of Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station Notice is hereby given that the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC, Commission) has published a draft plant-specific supplement to the Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants (GEIS), NUREG-1437, regarding the renewal of operating license DPR-35 for an additional 20 years of operation for the Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station (Pilgrim). Pilgrim is located on the western shore of Cape Cod in the Town of Plymouth, Plymouth County, Massachusetts. It is 38 miles southeast of Boston, Massachusetts, and 44 miles east of Providence, Rhode Island. Possible alternatives to the proposed action (license renewal) include no action and reasonable alternative energy sources. The draft Supplement 29 to the GEIS is publicly available at the NRC Public Document Room (PDR), located at One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland, 20852, or from the NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS). The ADAMS Public Electronic Reading Room is accessible at http://adamswebsearch.nrc.gov/dologin.htm. The Accession Number for the draft Supplement 29 to the GEIS is ML063260173. Persons who do not have access to ADAMS, or who encounter problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS, should contact the NRC's PDR reference staff by telephone at 1-800-397-4209, or 301-415-4737, [[Page 75281]] or by e-mail at pdr@nrc.gov. In addition, the Plymouth Public Library, 132 South Street; Duxbury Free Library, 77 Alden Street; and the Kingston Public Library, 6 Green Street, has agreed to make the draft supplement to the GEIS available for public inspection. Any interested party may submit comments on the draft supplement to the GEIS for consideration by the NRC staff. To be certain of consideration, comments on the draft supplement to the GEIS and the proposed action must be received by February 28, 2007. Comments received after the due date will be considered if it is practical to do so, but the NRC staff is able to assure consideration only for comments received on or before this date. Written comments on the draft supplement to the GEIS should be sent to: Chief, Rules and Directives Branch, Division of Administrative Services, Office of Administration, Mail Stop T-6D59, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001. Comments may be hand-delivered to the NRC at 11545 Rockville Pike, Room T-6D59, Rockville, Maryland, between 7:30 a.m. and 4:15 p.m. on Federal workdays. Electronic comments may be submitted to the NRC by e- mail at PilgrimEIS@nrc.gov. All comments received by the Commission, including those made by Federal, State, local agencies, Native American Tribes, or other interested persons, will be made available electronically at the Commission's PDR in Rockville, Maryland, and through ADAMS. The NRC staff will hold a public meeting to present an overview of the draft plant-specific supplement to the GEIS and to accept public comments on the document. The public meeting will be held on January 24, 2007, at the Radisson Plymouth Harbor Ballroom, 180 Water Street, Plymouth, Massachusetts 02360. There will be two sessions to accommodate interested parties. The first session will convene at 1:30 p.m. and will continue until 4:30 p.m., as necessary. The second session will convene at 7 p.m. with a repeat of the overview portions of the meeting and will continue until 10 p.m., as necessary. Both meetings will be transcribed and will include: (1) A presentation of the contents of the draft plant-specific supplement to the GEIS, and (2) the opportunity for interested government agencies, organizations, and individuals to provide comments on the draft report. Additionally, the NRC staff will host informal discussions one hour prior to the start of each session at the same location. No comments on the draft supplement to the GEIS will be accepted during the informal discussions. To be considered, comments must be provided either at the transcribed public meeting or in writing. Persons may pre-register to attend or present oral comments at the meeting by contacting Ms. Alicia Williamson, the NRC Environmental Project Manager at 1-800-368-5642, extension 1878, or by e-mail at PilgrimEIS@nrc.gov, no later than January 17, 2007. Members of the public may also register to provide oral comments within 15 minutes of the start of each session. Individual, oral comments may be limited by the time available, depending on the number of persons who register. If special equipment or accommodations are needed to attend or present information at the public meeting, the need should be brought to Ms. Alicia Williamson attention no later than January 10, 2007, to provide the NRC staff adequate notice to determine whether the request can be accommodated. For Further Information Contact: Ms. Alicia Williamson, Environmental Branch B, Division of License Renewal, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Mail Stop O- 11F1, Washington, DC, 20555-0001. Ms. Alicia Williamson may be contacted at the aforementioned telephone number or e-mail address. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 8th day of December, 2007. For The Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Robert Schaaf, Acting Branch Chief, Environmental Branch B, Division of License Renewal, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. [FR Doc. E6-21272 Filed 12-13-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P ***************************************************************** 21 Prague Daily Monitor: Austrian opponents of Temelin threaten to block border at weekend - www.praguemonitor.com Vienna, Dec 13 (CTK) - Austrian opponents of the south Bohemian Temelin nuclear power plant have threatened to block up to six Austrian-Czech border crossings this weekend, Andreas Reimer from the Upper Austrian Stop Temelin association told CTK today. They intend to stage their protest if the Austrian parliament does not approve on Thursday a resolution calling on the Austrian government to file an international lawsuit against the Czech Republic over the Czech State Authority for Nuclear Safety´s (SUJB) recent approval of Temelin for use. Stop Temelin today issued a statement jointly with the Stop Temelin platform from Lower Austria, and the Platform against Nuclear Danger (PLAGE] from Salzburg threatening to stage border blockades this weekend, but giving no further details. "If an international complaint against the Czech Republic over its failure to observe the agreement from Melk is not approved in the parliament on Thursday, the opposition against Temelin at the border will be stepped up," the statement says. The Temelin opponents, mainly from Upper and Lower Austria, argue that the Czech Republic violated the 2001 agreement on Temelin safety as it did not implement safety adjustments at Temelin before its approval for use was issued at the beginning of November. Reimer told CTK today that in the possible protest two border crossings from the Czech Republic to Upper Austria and two to Lower Austria will be fully blocked. They are the Wullowitz/Dolni Dvoriste and Gmuend/Ceske Velenice border crossings that were also blocked by the protesters on December 3. The Wullowitz/Dolni Dvoriste was then closed to traffic for six hours. This time the blockades will last only two hours, but six border crossings simultaneously will be closed, Reimer said. The activists will exercise their right to protest regardless of the position of Austrian authorities with which they are in contact, he said. Reimer declined to give more details not to weaken the "effect of surprise." Temelin, situated 60 kilometres from the borders of Austria and Bavaria, is sharply criticised by activists in Austria, Bavaria as well as the Czech Republic who say it is not safe because it combines Soviet design and western fuel and safety technology. These doubts have been repeatedly dismissed by the Czech Republic. vv/mr/ms This story copyright 2006 CTK Czech News Agency. ***************************************************************** 22 St. Petersburg Times: Hernando: It'll be a long road to a new nuclear plant By Times Staff Writers Published December 14, 2006 Here are some reactions to Progress Energy's plan for a new nuclear plant in Levy County. DIXIE HOLLINS: The sprawling 5,000-acre site north of Crystal River where Progress Energy's nuclear plant and four coal-fired plants sit is familiar territory for Dixie Hollins. In the 1960s his family sold the land to Florida Power Corp. And his company, Citrus Mining & Timber, still owns more than 1,000 acres nearby, just north of the Cross Florida Barge Canal. On Wednesday, Hollins said he was happy to hear Progress had picked a site in Levy. "It will be a big asset to Levy County. I think it will also be a good asset to Citrus County. It will create a lot of jobs, and it will create some new industry," he said. He said Progress Energy's plans to draw water from the barge canal won't get in the way of his plans to develop his property. Hollins said his plans for Hollinswood are now on hold, but he still hopes to build a marina or "some type of industrial manufacturing" there. Hollins said he talked to Progress Energy about the possibility of building new transmission lines through his property last year. "Whatever I can do as a landowner in Citrus County to help Progress Energy, whether it's the existing plant they have or the plant they're going to build, I'm very open-minded on trying to help that industry," he said. "It's a great opportunity." JIM EYSTER: His Nature Coast Landings RV park is only a few miles south of the proposed Levy County site, said he thinks the construction of a new nuclear plant will be good for property values and sales. The 239-unit park still has 11 units available, he said. "I think there will be people who buy a site there that are anticipating being at the plant, or people buying it as an investment and renting it to people who are working at the plant," Eyster said. And he said he wasn't worried about Progress Energy's plans to draw 20-million to 25-million gallons of water daily from the barge canal - just 1,000 feet north of Nature Coast Landings. "I don't think there will be any impact. There's a lot of water up there," he said. "And I'm sure that they have standards they will have to meet. ... I'm confident that the state agencies look out for the consumers' interests." MANATEES: Advocates for the gentle giants have a few concerns. A big utility could bring increased boat traffic into the barge canal, which manatees use as a birthing area. But Helen Spivey, co-chairwoman of the Save the Manatee Club, said she doesn't expect that a new nuclear plant would necessarily attract any more manatees into the barge canal. Warm water from power plant discharges attracts manatees, which seek warm spots when gulf temperatures drop in the winter. This is why manatees flock to Citrus County's warm springs - and to the area near Progress Energy's existing power plant - at this time every year. PROTESTS? Spivey predicted that Levy residents will be concerned about the potential plant in their back yard. "Levy County had a fit when they (officials from an other utility company) were just trying to put in a little hydro-electric plant, and we haven't heard from those people yet," Spivey said. BETTY BERGER: An outspoken Inglis Town Commission member, Berger spent 10 years fighting that hydro-electric plant. But she's keeping an open mind about nuclear power. "It would be good for the tax base and we're a poor county," she said. Though she's not concerned about radioactivity, Berger said Progress Energy will have to be cautious when dealing with local water sources. She worries that running water from the barge canal to Progress' property could cause saltwater to infiltrate drinking water sources. UNION LEADER: Employees at Progress Energy's Crystal River complex officially heard the news Tuesday morning. Joe Adams, business manager of IBEW System Council U-8 in Crystal River, said most of the workers probably expected the new plant would be in Levy County. "It was no big shock," he said. "It will be good for Levy County. They'll come to love it." FEDERAL REGULATORS: Progress will need thousands of construction workers and hundreds of skilled plant workers if the company goes ahead with its plans to build a nuclear plant in Levy. But don't quit your day job yet. Tuesday's announcement was the first step in a lengthy regulatory process. Progress Energy hopes to submit an application for the plant to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission in 2008. The NRC's review alone could take more than 30 months. Florida's Public Service Commission and Levy County officials will also likely evaluate aspects of the proposal. NRC spokesman Scott Burnell said nearby residents will have a say. Once Progress Energy submits an application, Burnell said, the NRC will notify the public "that they have the opportunity to intervene." If members of the public submit legitimate objections, the NRC's Atomic Safety and Licensing Board could hold public hearings, he said. [Last modified December 13, 2006, 20:26:19] 2006 All Rights Reserved St. Petersburg Times 490 First Avenue South St. Petersburg, FL 33701 727-893-8111 Contact the Times | Privacy Policy| Standard of Accuracy| Terms, Conditions & Copyright [ /] ***************************************************************** 23 Columbus Dispatch: Perry workers shut down reactor as a precaution Associated Press Thursday, December 14, 2006 8:09 AM NORTH PERRY, Ohio (AP) Workers shut down the Perry nuclear power plant after their instruments showed a fluctuation in the system that provides water to cool the reactor, a plant spokeswoman said this morning. The workers determined the fluctuation was caused by a leak in a system that runs air-operated valves in the plant and there was no problem with the reactor, spokeswoman Jennifer Young said. The fluctuation in the feed-water system was noticed at 4:35 a.m. Wednesday, and workers shut down the reactor at the plant along Lake Erie out of an abundance of caution, she said. We're basically off line and not producing electricity, she said. The problem in the air system was fixed and other systems are now running normally, but the reactor can't be restarted until workers complete a required checklist on equipment, Young said. The reactor at the plant, owned by Akron-based FirstEnergy Corp., will be restarted this weekend, she said. 2006, The Columbus Dispatch, Reproduction prohibited ***************************************************************** 24 Orlando Sentinel: Nuclear plants can generate Florida's future - COMMENTARY Mike Thomas Published December 14, 2006 Unless we are saved by several Category 5 hurricanes, Florida is projected to add the population of New York state in the next 50 or so years. This is on top of already adding half of Cuba and sizable chunks of Mexico, New Jersey and Ohio. China, here we come. If we believe these numbers, then it seems we should consider breaking with tradition and prepare for this onslaught of humanity. This brings me to an announcement by Progress Energy that it might build a nuclear power plant out in the hinterlands of Levy County. There should be no "might" about it. This should be built as quickly as possible, then followed by five more. Gov.-elect Charlie Crist needs to make this a priority. He should set up a nuclear energy division to pinpoint future plant locations and streamline the regulatory process to get them approved. The hurdles to building them should be lowered to the same level as the hurdles that natural gas plants face. Hopefully, this coincides with a national push to come up with a basic, reliable design that can be cloned so each utility isn't reinventing the reactor with each new plant. Then we can throw them up as needed. Florida can become that shining, well-lighted beacon on the hill for other states to follow. When I explained this to one of my liberal editors, he started moaning about radioactive waste plaguing mankind for thousands of years. Actually, nuclear power forces us to confront our waste in a neatly condensed, glowing brick. We can't just shoot it up the chimney and forget about it. There is too much pollution for dilution to continue being a solution. The globe is getting too hot. The seas are rising too fast. The hurricanes are getting too strong. And all of the above have a disproportionate negative impact on Florida. What kind of high ground will we have in blocking offshore drilling for natural gas when we are a leading consumer of it? This is an economic necessity as much as an environmental one. Florida's energy use will grow by 30 percent in the next decade. Like the rest of the country, our plan is to meet the demand by building more plants that burn natural gas. These are the cheapest to build because they don't require the elaborate scrubbers put on coal plant smokestacks to clean pollutants. They are the easiest plants to get through the regulatory process. We are repeating the same mistake we made with oil. Once, we could produce enough to meet demand, but those days are over. As it happened with oil, we are getting tapped out. Our natural gas production has flat-lined while usage goes up. This means we will become more dependent on foreign providers. The biggest reserves are in the Middle East and in and around the former Soviet Union. Let's become more dependent on tyrants so we'll get sucked into more wars to protect our economy. We also will be vulnerable to shortages and wild price fluctuations, like those that hit after Hurricane Katrina. The only reason for this foolishness is an outdated, hysterical fear of nuclear energy. It's time to get over it. Mike Thomas can be reached at 407-420-5525 or mthomas@orlandosentinel.com. ***************************************************************** 25 New London Day: NRC: Mehta Has No Case At Millstone theday.com Commission won't elaborate on how it reached its decision By Patricia Daddona Day Staff Writer\, Millstone\/business trends E-mail: p.daddona@theday.com Phone No.: (860) 701 - 4324 Published on 12/14/2006 in Region Region News Investigators for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission have found Dominion did not discriminate against the whistleblower at Millstone Power Station who alleged retaliation. In a one-page letter dated Tuesday and released to the public Wednesday, the federal agency's Office of Investigations reported its findings to the company, which owns Millstone Power Station, stating it found insufficient evidence of discrimination. Whistleblower Sham Mehta of East Lyme alleged last year that Dominion had retaliated against him by eliminating his job after he reported a security concern  that the intruder alert system at Millstone was routinely turned off because of false alarms. As a worker in the Employee Concerns department, it was his job to report to management such issues. NRC Spokesman Neil Sheehan refused to elaborate on the agency's decision or how it was reached, but described the investigative process as a mix of interviews with Mehta, other company employees and an examination of relevant agency and company records. NRC's investigators do whatever is necessary to ... determine what the facts of the case are, said Sheehan. Neither Dominion Spokesman Pete Hyde nor Mehta's lawyer, Hank Murray, would comment. Sheehan also refused to comment on any security implications the NRC may have investigated in relation to the concerns Mehta raised, except to note, We follow up on any security issues that come our way. The NRC does not comment on security matters, he said. The NRC has been monitoring the outcome of a similar case pending before the U.S. Labor Department, which this week authorized a confidential settlement between the parties. Mehta has lodged a third complaint before the state Department of Public Utility Control, and that case is still pending. An interim finding has called for a full investigation and reinstated Mehta in a different job at Millstone pending the outcome of that case. The NRC has a standing relationship with the Department of Labor that requires monitoring of nuclear complex cases there, but has no such responsibility to oversee the state agency, Sheehan added. Privacy Policy | Contact Us at 1 (860) 442-2200 | New London, CT | © 1998-2006 The Day Publishing Co. [Beacon Locator] ~ 02 ~ ***************************************************************** 26 Arizona Republic: Officials at Palo Verde changed Shake-up designed to hike performance Max Jarman The Arizona Republic Dec. 14, 2006 12:00 AM Arizona Public Service Co. announced a management shake-up Wednesday aimed at improving performance at its troubled Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station 50 miles west of Phoenix. The company said that Jim Levine, 57, is retiring as the company's chief nuclear officer and will be replaced after the first of the year. Donald Brandt, chief financial officer of APS and its parent, Pinnacle West Capital Corp., has been named president of the state's largest electric utility, replacing Jack Davis, who will continue as CEO and head of power generation. Brandt and the new chief nuclear officer will report to Davis, who will also focus on correcting the problems at the 20-year-old Palo Verde. After years of stellar operation, a series of equipment failures and a safety violation at the nation's largest nuclear power plant have led to a downgrade of its operating status and increased supervision by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Company officials are expected to meet with the NRC on Jan. 16 to discuss the findings of a recent probe into the failure of one of the plant's emergency generators. Anything more serious than a "green" finding of the lowest level of safety concern could result in NRC supervision being increased at Palo Verde to a level shared by only one other plant, the Perry Nuclear Generating Station in Ohio. "Palo Verde has not been operating up to its former standards and we intend to correct that," APS spokesman Jim McDonald said. Part of that will be the implementation of a plan developed by Levine aimed at improving its performance. "We appreciate (Levine's) many important contributions to the company during his tenure," Davis said. "Always putting nuclear safety first has been a hallmark of Jim's career." Levine joined APS in 1989 as Palo Verde's vice president of nuclear production and assumed additional responsibility for overall power generation in 1999. He took over responsibility for Palo Verde's day-to-day operations in September 2005 after plant Manager Gregg Overbeck retired. jarman@arizonarepublic.com. Copyright 2006, azcentral.com. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 27 thebulletin.org: Ready . . . or not | [Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists] [Doomsday Clock] When you need accurate disaster information, who ya gonna call? Not Homeland Security. By Josh Schollmeyer November/December 2006 pp. 9-10 (vol. 62, no. 6) 2006 Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists [O] bscured beneath a stock photograph of a smiling, disaster-ready American family of four and the green check marks that dot every branded component on the Department of Homeland Security's Ready.gov main page exists a link to a disclaimer. "We are not responsible if information we make available on this site is not accurate, complete, or current," the disclaimer warns visitors, ostensibly the American public. "The materials on this site are provided for general information only, and any reliance upon the material found on this site will be at your own risk." Sadly, it may represent one of the few clear, accurate statements on Ready.gov, Homeland Security's supposed go-to source for all things preparedness. "The average user visiting the government site comes away flummoxed, without any additional help on how to think about the problem," says Ivan Oelrich, the Federation of American Scientists's (FAS) vice president of strategic security. "Plus, many of the instructions are plain wrong." Three years and one digital face-lift after its February 2003 unveiling, Ready.gov continues to receive the same criticism and ridicule consistently directed at the government agency that created it. Parodies of the site's disaster advice abound on the internet, mocking its simplified graphics and often generic advice. A favorite target: An icon in Ready.gov's chemical threat visual guide that features a drawing of three overlapping dead fish and a lifeless bird with the accompanying warning, "Many sick or dead birds, fish, or small animals are also cause for suspicion." "If every time someone who saw a dead fish in the Hudson River thought we were experiencing a chemical weapons attack, Manhattan would be permanently closed," Oelrich quips. "Ready.gov has a real problem with false alarm signals." In the spirit of scientific accuracy, this summer Oelrich and Michael Stebbins, director of biology policy at FAS, decided to craft ReallyReady (www.fas.org/reallyready), a website that both addresses their problems with Ready.gov and offers what they view as more factually correct, concise, and sensible preparedness material. What's more, Oelrich and Stebbins built the site in nine weeks, for the price of a domain name, and with a 20-year-old University of Virginia student at the helm, further demonstrating how easily and inexpensively Homeland Security could improve Ready.gov's content. The effort also came with a promise: If Homeland Security amended Ready.gov (with or without FAS's help) by September, which the agency dubbed "National Preparedness Month," FAS would take down ReallyReady immediately. "We don't want to embarrass them," Stebbins says. "But if they won't provide a good place to go for information, we will." Thus far, however, Homeland Security has only rebuked ReallyReady through the media, claiming on CNN that the site is "counterproductive" and "woefully uninformed." Their direct response to FAS consisted of a legal complaint alleging FAS infringed on the use of the department's ubiquitous green check marks. "They've already spent more money on their cease-and-desist letter than we did on the entire site," Stebbins notes. (To ensure that the discussion stays focused on the quality of information and not legal matters, FAS made minor cosmetic changes to ReallyReady in early September.) As National Preparedness Month ends and Ready.gov more or less remains the same--despite a recent "important news update" announcing "two new areas!"--Stebbins hopes Homeland Security will still revamp its content in the near future. If they do, the offer to remove ReallyReady stands. "We've gotten requests from all over," he says. "People are asking, 'Can you do a section for seniors or a section for farmers?' They aren't looking to Homeland Security anymore, they're looking to us. We don't want that to happen. We want Homeland Security to fix its site." Josh Schollmeyer is the Bulletin's associate editor. November/December 2006 pp. 9-10 (vol. 62, no. 6) 2006 Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists ***************************************************************** 28 thebulletin.org: Where the Bombs are, 2006 | NRDC: Nuclear Notebook By Robert S. Norris and Hans M. Kristensen November/December 2006 pp. 57-58 (vol. 62, no. 6) 2006 Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists [K] atharine Lee Bates, the author of "America the Beautiful," could not have been referring to the expanse of the U.S. nuclear arsenal when she penned the lyric "from sea to shining sea," but it is fitting. Though it is the smallest it has been since 1958, the U.S. nuclear arsenal continues to sprawl across the country, with thousands of weapons deployed from the coast of Washington State to the coast of Georgia and beyond. In total, we estimate that the United States deploys and stores nearly 10,000 nuclear weapons at 18 facilities in 12 states and six European countries (see below). The Pentagon developed this extensive network of installations over the past six decades in order to ensure the survivability of its nuclear arsenal. Post-Cold War base closures and arms reductions led to the consolidation of weapons at the current facilities; the number of weapons and their locations will change as the Pentagon implements the June 2004 Nuclear Weapons Stockpile Plan and the "New Triad." Pinpointing the whereabouts of all U.S. nuclear weapons, and especially the numbers stored at specific locations, is fraught with many uncertainties due to the highly classified nature of nuclear weapons information. Declassified documents, leaks, official statements, news reports, and conversations with current and former officials provide many clues, as do high-resolution satellite images of many of these facilities. Such images are available to anyone with a computer and internet access, thanks to Google Earth and commercial satellite imaging companies such as DigitalGlobe. This development introduces important new tools for research and advances citizen verification. The statistics contained in this article represent our best estimates, based on many years of closely following nuclear issues. The nuclear weapons network shrank during the past decade, with the Pentagon removing nuclear weapons from three states (California, Virginia, and South Dakota) and the size of the stockpile decreasing from about 12,500 warheads to nearly 10,000. Consolidation slowed considerably compared with the period between 1992 and 1997, when the Pentagon withdrew nuclear weapons from 10 states and several European bases, and the total stockpile decreased from 18,290 to 12,500 warheads. (For a detailed accounting of the location and distribution of U.S. nuclear weapons in the 1990s, see September 1992 Bulletin; and September/October 1997 Bulletin.) Approximately 62 percent of the current stockpile belongs to the air force and is stored at seven bases in the United States and eight bases in six European countries; the navy stores its weapons at two submarine bases, one on each coast. None of the other services possesses nuclear weapons. The ballistic missile submarine base at Bangor, Washington, contains nearly 24 percent of the entire stockpile, or some 2,364 warheads, the largest contingent. The Bangor installation is home to a majority (nine) of the navy's nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarines and a large number of surplus W76 warheads that will eventually be retired and disassembled. Its counterpart on the Atlantic coast, Kings Bay Submarine Base in Georgia, is the third-largest contingent, with some 1,364 warheads. Each base stores approximately 150 nuclear sea-launched cruise missiles. Minot Air Force Base (AFB) in North Dakota, with more than 800 bombs and cruise missiles for its B-52 bombers and more than 400 warheads for its Minuteman III intercontinental ballistic missile wing, has the largest number of active air force weapons. The other B-52 wing at Barksdale AFB in Louisiana has more than 900 warheads, and Whiteman AFB in Missouri has more than 130 bombs for its B-2 bombers. The large underground facility at Kirtland AFB in Albuquerque, New Mexico, stores more than 1,900 warheads that are either part of the inactive/reserve stockpile or awaiting shipment across Interstate 40 to the Pantex Plant outside of Amarillo, Texas, for dismantlement. The 970-acre facility at Nellis AFB, Nevada, northeast of Las Vegas, performs a similar function, storing approximately 900 warheads in 75 igloos--"one of the largest stockpiles in the free world," according to the air force. During the Cold War, the United States deployed a large percentage (up to one-third) of its nuclear weapons in other countries and at sea. At its peak arsenal size in the late 1960s, the United States stored weapons in 17 different countries. By the mid-1980s, there were about 14,000 weapons in 26 U.S. states, 6,000 more at overseas U.S. and NATO bases, and another 4,000 on ships at sea. The United States terminated many nuclear missions after the end of the Cold War and retired the weapons. It withdrew all of its nuclear weapons from South Korea in 1991 and thousands more from Europe by 1993. The army and Marine Corps denuclearized in the early 1990s, and in 1992 the navy swiftly off-loaded all nuclear weapons from aircraft carriers and other surface vessels. By 1994, the navy had eliminated these ships' nuclear capability, and many air force, navy, and army bases and storage depots closed overseas as a result. Today, perhaps as many as 400 bombs remain at eight facilities in six European countries, the last remnant of a bygone era (see November/December 2004 Bulletin). Nuclear Notebook is prepared by Robert S. Norris of the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) and Hans M. Kristensen of the Federation of American Scientists. Inquiries should be directed to NRDC, 1200 New York Avenue, N.W., Suite 400, Washington, D.C., 20005; 202-289-6868. November/December 2006 pp. 57-58 (vol. 62, no. 6) 2006 Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists Locations of U.S. nuclear weapons, 2006 (Weapon) B61-7 bombs 439 35 at Whiteman AFB, MO (B-2); 210 at Barksdale AFB, LA (B-52H); 194 at Minot AFB, ND (B-52H) B61-11 bombs 41 Whiteman AFB, MO (B-2) B83-1, -0 bombs* 626 60 at Whiteman AFB, MO (B-2); 130 at Barksdale AFB, LA (B-52H); 130 at Minot AFB, ND (B-52H); 306 at Nellis AFB, NM (storage) W80-1/ALCM 1,411 500 at Barksdale AFB, LA (B-52H); 200 at Minot AFB, ND (B-52H); 711 at Kirtland AFB, NM (storage) W80-1/ACM 400 100 at Barksdale AFB, LA (B-52H); 300 at Minot AFB, ND (B-52H) SLBMs W76/Trident II D5 1,712 1,100 at Bangor, WA; 612 at Kings Bay, GA W76/Trident I C4 1,318 850 inactive at Bangor, WA; 468 inactive at Kings Bay, GA W88/Trident II D5 404 264 at Bangor, WA; 140 at Kings Bay, GA ICBMs W62/Minuteman III 580 46 warheads in 46 Warren AFB silos, CO; 85 warheads in 85 Warren AFB silos, NE; 19 warheads in 19 Warren AFB silos, WY; 20 spare warheads in Warren AFB, WY; 150 warheads in 50 Malmstrom AFB silos, MT; 10 spare warheads in Malmstrom AFB, MT; 250 warheads in storage at Kirtland AFB, NM W78/Minuteman III 805 200 warheads in 100 Malmstrom AFB silos, MT; 150 warheads in 50 Malmstrom AFB silos, MT; 25 spare warheads at Malmstrom AFB, MT; 300 warheads in 100 Minot AFB silos, ND; 100 warheads in 50 Minot AFB silos, ND; 30 spare warheads at Minot AFB, ND W87/MX 553 553 warheads in storage at Kirtland AFB, NM [ height=] NONSTRATEGIC FORCES** B61-3 386 200 in Europe; 186 at Nellis AFB, NV B61-4 404 200 in Europe; 204 at Nellis AFB, NV B61-10* 206 206 at Nellis AFB, NV W80-0/SLCM 294 150 at Bangor, WA; 144 at Kings Bay, GA [ height=] WARHEADS IN RESERVE W84/ GLCM 383 383 in reserve at Kirtland AFB, NM [ height=] RETIRED WARHEADS AWAITING DISMANTLEMENT Several types of warheads await dismantlement; schedule unknown [ height=] Total 9,962 ACM: advanced cruise missile; AFB: air force base; ALCM: air-launched cruise missile; ICBM: intercontinental ballistic missile; GLCM: ground-launched cruise missile; SLBM: submarine-launched ballistic missile; SLCM: submarine-launched cruise missile * All B61-10 and 83-0 bombs are inactive. ** Presidential Decision Directive 74 of November 29, 2000, authorized deployment of 480 (+/- 10 percent) B61 bombs in Europe. Whether the full number was deployed is unclear. Since 2000, the United States withdrew weapons from two former nuclear bases (Araxos in Greece and Memmingen in Germany) and placed all B61-10s in the inactive stockpile Locations of U.S. nuclear weapons overseas Belgium Germany Italy Netherlands Turkey Britain Where they were Alaska* Canada Chichi Jima Cuba France Greece Greenland Guam Hawaii* Iwo Jima Japan (non-nuclear) Johnston Island Kwajalein Atoll Midway Islands Morocco Okinawa Philippines Puerto Rico South Korea Spain Taiwan * Deployed prior to 1959 statehood ***************************************************************** 29 washingtonpost.com: From Russia, With Polonium - A London poisoning case suggests a dangerous leakage of nuclear materials. Thursday, December 14, 2006; Page A30 IT'S STILL not known how the former Russian KGB agent Alexander Litvinenko came to ingest the deadly dose of polonium-210 that killed him in London last month. But thanks to the radioactive trail left behind by the isotope, some important conclusions about the case are now possible. First, the polonium was smuggled into Britain from Russia, where most of the known global supply of the intensely toxic substance is produced. Second, the dose was almost certainly carried by one or both of the former Russian security operatives -- one of them also a KGB alumnus -- whom Mr. Litvinenko met at a London hotel Nov. 1. Finally, the government of Vladimir Putin is making it difficult for British and German investigators to question the suspects, who are now sequestered in Moscow hospitals. Does this mean that Mr. Putin or the FSB agency -- successor to the KGB -- is responsible for the death of Mr. Litvinenko? Not necessarily: It's conceivable, as Russian and some Western investigators have lately begun suggesting, that he was a victim of a botched attempt to smuggle nuclear materials out of Russia for some other purpose. Still, Mr. Litvinenko is one of a number of opponents of Mr. Putin who have fallen victim to poisonings in the past several years; he himself charged that the FSB maintained a poisons laboratory, and he accused Mr. Putin of ordering his assassination. The Russian president retorted that enemies based abroad are staging operations to discredit him. But why, then, did the instrument of Mr. Litvinenko's death come from Moscow? And why are Russian authorities shielding the two men implicated in the smuggling? Mr. Litvinenko's case, like that of the murdered journalist Anna Politkovskaya, may never be solved. But what is already known should cause Western governments, including the Bush administration, to insist on some answers from Mr. Putin. How did a toxic dose of polonium, a substance reportedly produced and held by only three Russian government entities and one private company, come into the hands of people who could smuggle it into Britain? Polonium can be used not only to poison someone; it can trigger a nuclear weapon or fuel a "dirty bomb" that could wreak havoc in a major city. The leakage of such materials is a serious threat -- and not just to enemies of Mr. Putin. The Washington Post Company: ***************************************************************** 30 AFP: France to test citizens for polonium-210 after stay in London hotel - Thu Dec 14, 7:28 AM ET PARIS (AFP) - France is to run polonium-210 tests on 25 citizens who stayed in the same London hotel as former Russian spy Alexander Litvinenko, who died last month after being poisoned by the radioactive substance. The state Nuclear Safety Authority (ASN) has said in a statement Thursday that the tests were to be carried out as a "precaution" amid suspicions that dozens of people who stayed or worked at the Millennium Hotel had been contaminated. British authorities had supplied a list of names of the 25 French nationals who were at the address "in the period considered potentially at risk in terms of radioactive exposure," the agency said. The ASN said it would inform each of the 25 of the situation "and examine the risks of exposure". If deemed necessary, they would be referred to the French Institute for Radioprotection and Nuclear Safety (IRSN) which would handle their medical conditions. Litvinenko, a critic of Russian President Vladimir Putin " /> , died in a London hospital on November 23 after weeks of agonising illness. He fell ill on November 1, just after meeting three men in the Millennium Hotel. According to British health authorities, some 620 people have been identified as having passed through zones believed to have been at risk from polonium contamination, including 204 in the Pine Bar of the hotel. Copyright 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 31 NRC: NRC to Discuss Apparent Violation with Mount Laurel, N.J., Company News Release - Region I - 2006-06 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs, Region I No. I-06-063 December 13, 2006 CONTACT: Diane Screnci (610) 337-5330 Neil A. Sheehan (610) 337-5331 E-mail: Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff will meet with representatives of a Mount Laurel, N.J., engineering firm on Wednesday, Dec. 20, to discuss an apparent violation of agency requirements involving the control of portable nuclear gauges. The apparent violation, which stems from the loss of a gauge, was identified during an NRC special inspection performed in September. The predecisional enforcement conference with SITE-Blauvelt Engineering, Inc., is scheduled to begin at 1 p.m. in the Public Meeting Room at the NRC Region I Office, at 475 Allendale Road in King of Prussia, Pa., and will be open to the public. If necessary, portions of the meeting may be closed to the public to discuss sensitive security aspects of the apparent violation. Attendees will have an opportunity to ask questions of NRC staff prior to the meetings adjournment. The NRC conducted a special inspection on Sept. 6 at the companys Mount Laurel office and at a storage location used by the company in Stroudsburg (Monroe County), Pa. The apparent violation identified as a result of that review involves a failure to use a minimum of two independent physical controls to prevent unauthorized removal of a licensed nuclear gauge when the device is not under the direct control and constant surveillance of a company employee(s). Despite the requirement, a portable nuclear gauges was stored by SITE-Blauvelt at a temporary job site in Stroudsburg on Aug. 30 with only one tangible barrier securing it from unauthorized removal. Specifically, the only barrier preventing the gauges unauthorized removal was a locked toolshed door. The gauge was stolen and has not been recovered. The company has offered a reward for information leading to the return of the device. Such gauges contain small amounts of radioactive material and are used for such industrial purposes as measuring the density of soil at construction sites. As long as the radioactive material remains properly shielded inside its container, it would not pose a hazard to members of the public coming in contact with a gauge. If the radioactive material was removed from the gauge, an individual who remained in close proximity to it for an extended period of time could receive an overexposure to radiation. The purpose of the Dec. 20th meeting is to obtain information to enable the NRC to determine what, if any, enforcement action is warranted. There will be an effort to come to a common understanding of the facts and discussion of root causes of the event and corrective actions undertaken by the company. No decision will be made by the NRC staff at the session. Rather, NRC management will render a decision sometime in the near future. ----------------------------------------------------------------- NRC news releases are available through a free list serve subscription at the following Web address: http://www.nrc.gov/public-involve/listserver.html. The NRC homepage at www.nrc.gov also offers a SUBSCRIBE link. E-mail notifications are sent to subscribers when news releases are posted to NRC's Web site. Last revised Thursday, December 14, 2006 ***************************************************************** 32 DHHS: Petition to investigate worker health at Dow Chemical FR Doc 06-9668 [Federal Register: December 14, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 240)] [Notices] [Page 75258] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr14de06-66] DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Decision To Evaluate a Petition To Designate a Class of Employees at Dow Chemical Company, Madison, IL, To Be Included in the Special Exposure Cohort AGENCY: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) gives notice as required by 42 CFR Sec. 83.12(e) of a decision to evaluate a petition to designate a class of employees at Dow Chemical Company, Madison, Illinois, to be included in the Special Exposure Cohort under the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act of 2000. The initial proposed definition for the class being evaluated, subject to revision as warranted by the evaluation, is as follows: Facility: Dow Chemical Company. Location: Madison, Illinois. Job Titles and/or Job Duties: All Atomic Weapons Employer employees who were monitored, or should have been monitored, for exposure to ionizing radiation while working for a number of work days aggregating at least 250 work days, either solely under this employment or in combination with work days within the parameters established for one or more other classes of employees in the Special Exposure Cohort. Period of Employment: January 1, 1957 through December 21, 1960. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Larry Elliott, Director, Office of Compensation Analysis and Support, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, 4676 Columbia Parkway, MS C-46, Cincinnati, OH 45226, Telephone 513-533-6800 (this is not a toll-free number). Information requests can also be submitted by e-mail to OCAS@CDC.GOV. Dated: December 7, 2006. John Howard, Director, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. [FR Doc. 06-9668 Filed 12-13-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4163-19-M ***************************************************************** 33 Deseret News: Uranium spurs jump in mining claims [deseretnews.com] Thursday, December 14, 2006 Renewed interest in N-energy affects fed lands in West By Mary Clare Jalonick Associated Press WASHINGTON Metal mining claims on federal lands in the West have increased almost 50 percent in the past four years, in large part because a resurgence in nuclear power has led to a renewed interest in uranium exploration. An advocacy and research organization said Thursday its review of Bureau of Land Management records found that the number of metal mining claims jumped from 220,000 at the end of 2002 to almost 325,000 this September. Nevada had almost 90,000 new claims, more than any other state, and a 55 percent increase from 2002. Wyoming was second, with almost 20,000 new claims, or a 97 percent increase. The Environmental Working Group said its review covered gold, silver, copper and uranium claims. The organization said uranium mining interests are some of the largest claimholders in seven states Arizona, Colorado, New Mexico, Oregon, South Dakota, Utah and Wyoming. No uranium interests were among the largest Western claimholders when the group last analyzed mining records, in 2004. Uranium prices have risen as nuclear power has rebounded as a relatively cheap, reliable and emissions-free source of energy. Many new nuclear power plants are planned around the world. The increase in prices and construction has led to an increase in mining claims. Wyoming is thought to be the largest producer of uranium and has the largest reserve base, according to the National Mining Association. The Environmental Working Group said it released the statistics to bring attention to the nation's antiquated mining laws. Metals mining companies pay no royalties for extraction on public lands, unlike the oil and gas industries. Dusty Horwitt, an analyst for the group, described metals mining as "one of the world's most destructive industries." "Because most mines operate far from public view, the ugly scars on the landscape, dangerous chemicals and mountains of toxic waste that contaminate soil, water and air are the industry's dirty secret," Horwitt said. The group is advocating legislation to require metals mining companies to pay royalties and create funds for abandoned mines cleanup. Carol Raulston, a spokeswoman for the National Mining Association, says many of the new claims will not move forward, and several are in areas that previously have been mined. She says all metals mines are subject to federal oversight under the Clean Water Act and hazardous waste laws. "All of these mines are regulated under all of the major state and federal environmental statutes," she said. 2006 Deseret News Publishing ***************************************************************** 34 The NewStandard: EPA Shirks Court Order on Mercury Emissions - by Shreema Mehta Dec. 13 After a federal court ordered the EPA to set limits on mercury pollution from cement kilns, the EPA signed a rule last week that fails to impose them. In 2000, the US appeals court in Washington, DC ordered the EPA to impose limits on mercury and other air pollutants. The EPA said that since individual cement kilns operate differently and use different raw materials, imposing specific methods to limit mercury emissions is useless. Pollution depends more on inputs than on the control used, the EPA argued. But according to James Pew, a staff attorney with environmental law organization Earthjustice, that argument does not justify defying the court order. Earthjustice represents Sierra Club, which filed the lawsuit that led to the court order. "There are a number of measures out there to control mercury," Pew said. "How they get to their best performance doesn’t make the slightest difference [to the] law." According to EPA spokesperson John Millett, cement kilns release a total of 6.6 tons of mercury per year. That estimate is based on companies’ self-reporting along with EPA monitoring. Mercury can impair neurological development in children and babies and damage cognitive function. A Government Accountability Office report released this June found that the EPA has failed to properly control the release of toxic chemicals into the air as mandated by the 1990 Clean Air Act. While the EPA has made some progress in enacting Clean Air requirements for large sources of emissions such as industrial sites, it missed the deadline for most of them. The Agency has failed to meet most of the requirements for small sources of emissions such as gas stations or dry cleaners, which account for most toxic emissions, the report said. 2006 . All rights reserved. The NewStandard is a non-profit publisher that encourages noncommercial reproduction of its content. Reprints must prominently attribute the author and The NewStandard, hyperlink to http://newstandardnews.net (online) or display newstandardnews.net (print), and carry this notice. For more information or commercial reprint rights, please see the TNS . ***************************************************************** 35 Star-Tribune: Uranium heavyweights come to Wyoming By DUSTIN BLEIZEFFFER energy reporter Thursday, December 14, 2006 --> GILLETTE -- Peabody Energy, Arch Coal Inc. and Rio Tinto may be the kings of coal in Wyoming, but they're not the only mining giants in the state any more. Recent uranium claims span some 83,000 acres of federal lands throughout Wyoming, setting the stage for one of the most active uranium mining industries in the nation. A recent inventory of uranium claims by the Environmental Working Group found that 94 mining plans have been submitted to federal regulators, along with 141 mining plan notices covering some 83,600 acres in Wyoming. The report identifies some of the biggest uranium players in Wyoming. Here's a look at the top three: * Energy Metals Corp., a Canadian-based company, has amassed more than 200,000 acres in the Western United States, including some 10,500 acres in Wyoming, and specifically seeks out "politically favorable and mining-friendly jurisdictions in the United States," according to the company's Web site. EMC has filed the most uranium mining claims in Wyoming in recent years, with some 2,823 claims on record, according to the study by the Environmental Working Group. Most of the company's new claims are located in south-central Wyoming. EMC is 100 percent owner of the Moore Ranch Uranium Project in southwest Campbell County, and has identified some 5.88 million pounds of uranium ore. The Moore Ranch project was extensively explored in the 1970s and '80s by Conoco Minerals Corp., which drilled some 2,500 exploratory wells. EMC is now in the process of confirming Conoco's earlier findings and is expanding exploration at the site. Through the end of October, EMC had drilled an additional 65 exploratory wells. To learn more about Energy Metals Corp. (NYSE Arca:EMU), go to the company's Web site at www.energymetalscorp.com. * Cameco Corp. is the world's top uranium producer, mining 20 million pounds of uranium ore in 2005. The Saskatoon, Saskatchewan-based company is the second most active in uranium claims in Wyoming with 2,583, according to the Environmental Working Group. More than half of its recent claims are in Converse County. Cameco owns and operates Wyoming only active uranium mine, the Smith Ranch-Highland in-situ mine in Converse County, which is also the largest active uranium mine in the United States. The mine, which employs some 80 workers, produced 1.3 million pounds of uranium ore in 2005, but has a capacity to mine 4 million pounds annually, according to the company. Cameco also owns and operates the Crow Butte uranium mine in Nebraska. The company also holds significant claims in five other Wyoming counties, including 323 claims in Fremont County and 195 claims in Campbell County, according to the Environmental Working Group. To learn more about Cameco Corp. visit the company's Web site at www.cameco.com. * High Plains Uranium Inc., based in Cheyenne, is listed as the third most active claims-staker in Wyoming, but that company is set to be acquired by Energy Metals Corp. That deal is set to be completed in January. As High Plains, the company focused its claims activity in Converse County, but also picked up some 543 claims on federal lands in Sweetwater County, according to the Environmental Working Group. The company raised $11.7 million last year to finance its U.S. operations, including its Allemand Ross exploratory project in the Powder River Basin where it planned to spend some $1 million this year, according to the company's Web site. High Plains (TSX:HPU) is also actively exploring uranium reserves in the Red Desert, Gas Hills and Shirley Basin. To find out more about the company, go to www.hpur.com. Click here for related article 'Mining claims jump in Wyo'. Energy reporter Dustin Bleizeffer can be reached at (307) 682-3388 or dustin.bleizeffer@casperstartribune.net. ***************************************************************** 36 LA Daily News: Ordnance cleanup to start soon BY ALEX DOBUZINSKIS, Staff Writer Article Last Updated:12/13/2006 08:13:52 PM PST VALENCIA - Clearance of unexploded ordnance soon will start on the Whittaker-Bermite property, as cleanup of the former weapons manufacturing site continues to ready it for eventual development. "I expect we'll find an odd item here and there, but I don't believe we'll find a large quantity" of ordnance, said John Naginis, a geologist with the state Department of Toxic Substances Control. Naginis was speaking Tuesday at a community meeting to provide an update on cleanup of the 996-acre Whittaker-Bermite site, which is located in the center of Santa Clarita. Officials think only 20 acres to 30 acres of the property could hold unexploded ordnance, but if they find indications the problem is more widespread, they'll expand their clearance sweep. The ordnance clearing will begin soon after Jan.1, Naginis said. City Councilman Frank Ferry urged the private companies involved in the ordnance cleanup to take an exhaustive approach to the problem. "Be liberal, I really want people to have a comfort level," he said. Meanwhile, the cleanup project's main focus of eliminating perchlorate and volatile organic compounds continues on the site. Officials see perchlorate, a rocket fuel component, as a threat to groundwater supplies. Whittaker-Bermite and the state DTSC have been working together on a plan for removing perchlorate from groundwater on the site itself. To remove perchlorate that has migrated from the site, the Castaic Lake Water Agency next year will choose a company to build pipelines and a treatment facility for a $10million project to clean water from two wells. At a regular multiagency meeting on Whittaker-Bermite, developer SunCal Companies and Cherokee Investment Services Inc. on Tuesday provided a joint update on site remediation for the first time since development of the project was awarded to the companies from another company that went bankrupt. "We're pleased to see them here," Councilman Bob Kellar said. alex.dobuzinskis@dailynews.com (661) 257-5253 Los Angeles Newspaper Group ***************************************************************** 37 Times-News: Shipment of suspended Idaho nuclear waste to resume Magicvalley.com, Twin Falls, ID magicvalley.com on Thursday, December 14, 2006 CARLSBAD, N.M. - The U.S. Department of Energy has authorized the Idaho National Laboratory to resume shipments of certain radioactive waste to the federal government's underground repository in southeastern New Mexico. The DOE halted the shipments Nov. 26 after liquid was found in what was supposed to be a dry drum. The problem was discovered while waste drums were being prepared for shipment to the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant near Carlsbad. WIPP is not allowed to accept any liquid waste because of the risks of leaks or potentially explosive materials. According to the Carlsbad Current-Argus, officials said an investigation found that the problem was isolated to a single drum and that no other deficiencies were found. "On the basis of satisfactory completion of our corrective action plan and its independent verification, we have authorized the restart of shipments from that (waste) stream," said Dave Moody, DOE Carlsbad field office manager. A waste stream involves similar types of waste from similar types of processes. Officials said there are 20 different waste streams at the Idaho lab, which is in the process of sending 23,000 drums of waste to WIPP. The suspension affected only one of the waste streams. Moody said investigators checked 34 drums that had already been shipped to WIPP. A total of 193 drums in the waste stream were examined and no more liquid was found. The drum in question had been cleared to be shipped after an X-ray showed it was liquid-free. The liquid was spotted after workers double-checked the X-ray under a new confirmation procedure the state of New Mexico began requiring last month. Kerry Watson, senior technical adviser to the Carlsbad field office, said the qualifications of the X-ray operator were pulled. To be reinstated, the operator will have to undergo training and a full qualification process. "One of the objectives under radiography is to verify that there is no liquid in excess of the allowable limit," Watson said. "This operator failed to meet that requirement for this drum." Information from: Carlsbad Current-Argus, http://www.currentargus.com A service of the Associated Press(AP) Copyright 2006, Lee Publications Inc. Magicvalley.com is an on-line division of The Times-News, published daily at 132 W. Fairfield St., Twin Falls, Idaho 83301 by Lee Publications, Inc., a subsidiary of . ***************************************************************** 38 Whitehaven News: Sellafield ‘blacklist’ row steps up Published on 14/12/2006 By Karl Connor THREE Sellafield workers whose names were on an alleged blacklist have been moved off the job. Hertel workers contacted The Whitehaven News furious that some of their colleagues have been “redeployed” against their will. Last month 220 of the companies workers walked off site after a blacklist containing 16 names was circulated. The workers are all on the Sellafield Product and Residue Store (SPRS) project. A source said: “The morale is at an all-time low – the lads are all talking about packing in. “When the blacklist subject first came up there was outrage and we all walked off site, but we were promised that the situation would be investigated. “At first Carillion and Nuttalls both denied that there was a blacklist, but now we have been told that the list was made by a named supervisor and that he has been moved off site. “But none of the lads from any of the companies on site has heard of him – it is a ghost name they have invented to try and take the heat off. Our lads are gutted. “They have moved three of our lads to another job on site and another one is about to be moved. Those on the blacklist are being moved one by one.” The list contained 16 names that the unnamed author says should be removed from the job. There are no reasons or justifications why the men, working for Hertel on the Sellafield Product and Residue Store, should have been singled out. Hertel is providing scaffolding services. A spokeswoman for Sellafield site operator British Nuclear Group, said: “Clearly we do not condone the use of a blacklist and we have launched an investigation to get to the bottom of this. “That is ongoing, and we are not expecting an outcome until the new year. “We cannot comment on the name [of the supervisor alleged to have created the list] – that is a matter for Nuttall’s. “We are aware that two workers have been re-deployed onto the Calder Hall project, to meet operational needs.” A spokeswoman for Nuttall’s said; “We cannot comment on this.” ***************************************************************** 39 Sydney Morning Herald: Labor's uranium policy 'must be changed' www.smh.com.au December 14, 2006 - 4:16PM Labor's uranium policy must be changed, Opposition Leader Kevin Rudd says. Mr Rudd said the ALP's no new uranium mines policy needed modernising. "The existing three mines policy or no new mines policy needs to be modernised, needs to be changed," Mr Rudd told reporters in Adelaide on Thursday. "Obviously this will be debated within our party at the national conference come next year." Mr Rudd said Labor would offer a clear alternative on uranium to the Howard government. "When it comes to Australia's future, do you want to vote for a government which says that you can have a nuclear reactor in your backyard," Mr Rudd said. "People are asking this question because (Prime Minister) Mr (John) Howard has opened the door and said 'maybe we need up to 25 nuclear reactors in this country'. "If you want to run the risk of getting a nuclear reactor in your backyard, vote for Mr Howard. "Labor's policy when it comes to nuclear reactors is that we will not have them at all." 2006 AAP Brought to you by [aap] When news happens:send photos, videos &tip-offs to 0424 SMS SMH (+61 424 767 764), or us. ***************************************************************** 40 Tracy Press: Developer, activist appeal bomb testing permit John Upton/Tracy Press Thursday, 14 December 2006 The developer of the Tracy Hills project and a local shoe-shop owner have filed objections to planned explosives tests expected to contain depleted uranium at Site 300. Site 300 operators refused this week to assure the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District that radioactive material would be kept out of the planned blasts, which may be up to more than three times the size of any other local test explosion in at least 13 years. The refusal prompted Sarvey Shoes owner Bob Sarvey to appeal an air district permit issued that was issued Nov. 13 to allow the blasts. Ill probably lose, as usual, Sarvey said, but Ive got to give it a chance, because I dont want radiation blown all over Tracy. Wind blows from Site 300 over the city of Tracy 45 percent of the time, according to a 1994 report commissioned by Site 300 operators. Radioactive material isnt regulated by the air district, but California law commits public agencies to study the environmental impacts of projects they approve. Sarvey, in a letter to the air district, accused Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory of filing a misleading permit application because it said Site 300 is at a remote location 10 miles from the city. Tracys city limits were moved within a mile of Site 300 during the 1990s real estate boom to accommodate the 5,500-home Tracy Hills project. A hill separates Site 300 from the planned homes, the construction of which has been delayed, in part, by the citys slow-growth law. Tracy Hills LLC, which is owned by Angelo Tsakopoulos AKT Investments, called for a hearing to appeal the permit, in part because of concerns about noise and emissions. Sarveys letter said the district failed to consider health impacts from radioactive material or from other explosive tests. The letter also said the district failed to consider noise impacts on residents or the impacts on endangered species. But Sarvey said in the letter that he had yet to thoroughly review the labs permit application or engineering analysis, because the district failed to warn locals about it. Sarvey said he first learned of the permit through a Tracy Press article, published last week just two business days before the cut-off date for appeals. Air district permit director Dave Warner said the permit allows the lab to emit up to 1,440 pounds of particulate matter up to 10 microns in diameter per year well below the 20,000-pound limit that requires public notification. A Lawrence Livermore spokeswoman defended the lab against charges by Sarvey and Tri-Valley Communities Against a Radioactive Environment that it had been secretive about the planned blasts. We are not bound to do a public notice for every permit we request, Lynda Seaver said by e-mail. We worked directly with the local air quality board and our various regulators. Seaver pointed to the labs environmental impact statement to show that the public had been told of the planned blasts. A 794-page preliminary report published in February 2004 stated on a table on Page 338 that 350-pound blasts would be the largest blasts possible at the site. But the report didnt say this would represent an increase relative to existing tests, which have been capped at 100 pounds by air district rules since the district was formed in 1992. The table was repeated in the final report published 13 months later, and 1,429 pages of appendices mentioned the 350-pound limit four times. The limit was not mentioned in the 50-plus page summaries of the preliminary or final reports. The lab held community meetings to discuss the report, but no written public comments mentioned the limit. The draft and final reports did not state that energy in outdoor blasts could increase eight-fold annually to the equivalent of 8,000 pounds of TNT, as allowed under the new permit. An air district board is expected to consider the appeals of Tracy Hills and Sarvey at its Jan. 3 meeting in Modesto. San Joaquin County Supervisor Jack Sieglock is the only air district board member from this county. All 11 board members hold elected positions with county and city governments. The lab spokewoman said the planned explosions would not be nuclear explosions. She said there has never been a nuclear weapons test at Site 300. The uranium used in any Site 300 test is depleted and, therefore, can never achieve fission, Seaver said. The same is true of the tritium. The 300-pound tests will not contain tritium. Seaver said the majority of outdoor tests at Site 300 would be 100 pounds or smaller. n To reach reporter John Upton, call 830-4274 ***************************************************************** 41 DOE: Secretary Bodman Tours LNG Powered City Bus in Seoul December 13, 2006 Joins Secretary Gutierrez to Highlight Cooperation in Developing and Deploying Clean Energy Technologies SEOUL, KOREA  U.S. Secretary of Energy Samuel W. Bodman today joined U.S. Commerce Secretary Carlos Gutierrez in Seoul, Korea to view a city bus and industrial equipment powered by liquefied natural gas (LNG) built with U.S. technology. Secretaries Bodman and Gutierrez and senior Korean government officials highlighted the importance of diversifying to clean and efficient energy sources to increase global energy security. South Korea and the United States are allies in advancing the use of cleaner, safer, and healthier clean energy technologies, Secretary Bodman said. To advance our energy security and economic growth, we must continue our joint efforts to develop and deploy new technologies, diversify our energy supplies and suppliers, and encourage the further development of energy resources around the world. Secretaries Bodman and Gutierrez highlighted the tremendous progress made by Seoul city buses using U.S. technology to eliminate pollution and promote clean energy. Seoul city buses have gone through a dramatic transformation from polluting diesel engines to high efficiency natural gas vehicles. The key technology enabling the efficient and clean use of LNG comes from Woodward Corporation of Rockford, Illinois and the buses are manufactured in Fort Collins, Colorado. While in Korea Secretary Bodman met with Korean Minister of Commerce, Industry, and Energy Chung Sye-kyun to stress the importance of cooperation to increase our mutual energy security and advance new clean energy technologies to reduce reliance on imported energy products. Secretary Bodman encouraged the Asia-Pacific nations to work together to promote a stable and transparent investment climate in resource-rich nations. Secretary Bodman and Minister Chung Sye-kyun are expected to participate in the Five Party Energy Ministerial in Beijing on Saturday, December 16, 2006 where Secretary Bodman will highlight the importance of diversification of supplies and suppliers, improved energy efficiency, and the responsible use of strategic oil reserves in the Asia-Pacific region. Secretary Bodman also met with Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Science and Technology Kim Woo-sik to discuss the nations cooperation on the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER) and FutureGen Initiative, which Korea signed earlier this year and pledged $10 million for construction of this first in the world zero-emission coal power plant. Secretary Bodman highlighted the importance of continued cooperation through ongoing multilateral partnerships including the Asia Pacific Partnership on Clean Development and Climate (APP), International Partnership for a Hydrogen Economy, Carbon Sequestration Leadership Forum, and Generation IV International Forum. Secretary Bodman arrived in Korea today after visiting Japan yesterday to hold bilateral discussions with senior Japanese officials and tour the Tokyo Electric Power Company Museum. Secretary Bodman will travel later today to Beijing to take part in the U.S.-China Strategic Economic Dialogue on Thursday and Friday, December 14-15 and the Five-Party Energy Ministerial on Saturday, December 16. Media contact(s): Anne Womack Kolton, (202) 586-4940 [ ] U.S. Department of Energy | 1000 Independence Ave., SW | Washington, DC 20585 1-800-dial-DOE | f/202-586-4403 ***************************************************************** 42 Tri-City Herald: Parts of Hanford funding in doubt Published Thursday, December 14th, 2006 By Annette Cary, Herald staff writer Congressional Democrats plan to skip work on passage of a new Hanford budget for the 2007 fiscal year that began in October and move on to the 2008 budget. Congress adjourned for the year last week without Senate action on the bill that includes the Hanford budget, the energy and water appropriations bill, and eight others. Instead, a continuing resolution was passed to keep the government operating until mid-February, more than a third of the way through the fiscal year 2007, at current funding levels. Democrats are blaming Republicans for not passing nine appropriations bills for fiscal year 2007, which began in October. The chairmen who will lead the Senate and House Appropriations Committees next year under new Democratic majorities announced this week that they will "dispose of the Republican budget leftovers by passing a yearlong joint resolution." "Clearly, it's not an ideal situation," said Alex Glass, spokeswoman for Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash. While details of the continuing resolution proposed to pay for Hanford and other government programs through September 2007 have yet to be worked out, some Hanford funding is likely to be in jeopardy. The continuing resolution set funding at the fiscal year 2006 level or the amount set in the budget passed by the House, whichever is less. The House had approved a $600 million budget for the vitrification plant under construction at Hanford and the Senate budget, which did not make it to the full Senate, set it at $690 million. For the vitrification plant, that means operating under an annual budget of $526 million. When construction began on the $12.2 billion plant to treat some of Hanford's worst waste, plans were based on steady funding of $690 million a year. The details of the yearlong continuing resolution proposed by Sen. Robert Byrd, D-Va., and Rep. Dave Obey, D-Wis., are not yet known. "We will do our best to make whatever limited adjustments are possible within the confines of the Republican budget to address the nation's most important policy concerns," they said in a joint statement. Congress will start work on the new continuing resolutions after the 110th Congress convenes in January, Glass said. Last week Murray criticized Republicans for refusing to move the energy and water bill forward before adjourning. She said that would lead to funding delays at Hanford and will mean that cleanup will take longer and cost more. The office of Rep. Doc Hastings, R-Wash., responded by pointing out that the Republican-led House passed all but one of its funding bills. Hastings believes continuing resolutions are a poor way of doing business, said Todd Young, his chief of staff. Although the Senate Hanford budget that was not voted on included more money for the vitrification plant than the House budget, it included less money for some other projects. The House budget would have increased money to build replacement laboratories at Pacific Northwest National Laboratory. In addition, it included more money for technologies to clean up contaminated ground water at Hanford and for the bulk vitrification test project. Although the details of the yearlong continuing resolution are unknown, the Department of Energy likely will have some discretion on how it spends budgeted money. 2006 Tri-City Herald, Associated Press &Other Wire Services ***************************************************************** 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: *****************************************************************