*****************************************************************
10/12/06 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 14.242
*****************************************************************
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 IRIB PERSIAN NEWS: IRI's nuclear policy clear, peaceful
2 AFP: Israel urges Security Council action on Iran
3 AFP: Major powers fail to agree on Iran sanctions, send dossier to U
4 Guardian Unlimited: U.N. Disagrees on Sanctions Against Iran
5 IPS-English POLITICS: N. Korean Blast May Hit Indo-US Nuclear
6 Guardian Unlimited: North Korea warns of sanctions reprisals
7 INSIDE JoongAng Daily: [FOUNTAIN]If test faked, then what?
8 INSIDE JoongAng Daily: [VIEWPOINT] It's now time to move past words
9 INSIDE JoongAng Daily: [OUTLOOK] Thinking through the problem
10 INSIDE JoongAng Daily: [EDITORIALS]Don't blame the Americans
11 INSIDE JoongAng Daily: Bush calls diplomacy his choice for crisis
12 INSIDE JoongAng Daily: Assembly manages to condemn Pyongyang
13 INSIDE JoongAng Daily: [EDITORIALS] Follow UN, not China
14 AFP: US sees key issues over NKorea sanctions resolved, hopeful for
15 AFP: Bush, Chinese official agree on 'strong measures' on North Kore
16 AFP: All eyes on China as UN mulls N.Korea sanctions
17 UCS: North Korean Nuclear Test: U.S. Missile Defense Isn’t the Ans
18 IAEA: DPRK Nuclear Test
19 Guardian Unlimited: S.Korea Finds No Abnormal Radioactivity
20 Guardian Unlimited: Japan Takes Lead in Sanctioning N. Korea
21 Guardian Unlimited: Russia, China Oppose N. Korea Sanctions
22 UPI: U.S. missiles delivered in Okinawa
23 AFP: Musharraf says Pakistan didn't enable NKorea test -
24 Guardian: Comment is free: Sleepwalking towards nuclear proliferatio
25 AFP: Bush digs in over Iran, NKorea, Iraq
NUCLEAR REACTORS
26 US: York County: Nuclear reactor put back in service
27 US: [NukeNet] Action ltr to CPUC - no PG&E license renewal study
28 US: [JerseyShoreNuclearWatch] OCT1 APP "Nuclear plant critics win
29 US: FPIF News | Oil or Atoms?
30 US: NRC: NRC Proposes $60,000 Fine Against Indiana Michigan Power fo
31 Guardian Unlimited: Europe's power supply on brink
32 US: NRC: NRC Staff to Meet with TVA Officials in Rockville to Discus
33 US: newsobserver.com: Duke wants to raise rates
34 US: Platts: NRC proposes $60,000 fine for violation at Cook
35 US: NRC: NRC Chairman Directs Staff Plan for Independent Review of E
36 US: JOURNAL NEWS: Indian Point inspections reviewed
37 US: Monroenews.com: Fermi plant included in federal study
38 US: NRC: Southern Nuclear Operating Company; Notice of Hearing and
39 US: NRC: Abnormal Occurrence Reports: Implementation of Section 208
40 US: NRC: ``Demonstrating the Feasibility and Reliability of Operator
41 AFP: US gives assurances on Indian nuclear deal
42 US: Hudson Valley News: NRC chairman calls for independent safety re
NUCLEAR SECURITY
NUCLEAR SAFETY
43 US: Most US Cities Can't Evacuate In Case Of Nuclear Or Other Emerge
44 [DU-WATCH] Ann Wright and international networks join War Crimes Rep
45 The Age: Bomb clean-up 40 years on - World -
46 US: Honolulu Advertiser: Strykers keep rolling along, despite ruling
47 US: washingtonpost.com: Further Study of Chemicals Expected -
48 US: Spectrum: Thyroditis linked to fallout
49 IHT: Nuclear power stance is costly for Spain -
50 US: Deseret News: Fallout-thyroid link gets boost
NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE
51 Las Vegas SUN: Railroad route to nuclear dump in Nevada getting anot
52 reviewjournal.com: DOE to publish rail plan for Yucca
53 Las Vegas SUN: Berkley on easy street
54 US: Salt Lake Tribune: Dump expansion draws objections
55 US: Deseret News: Underground blasts were also culprits
56 US: NRC: Advisory Committee On Nuclear Waste; Procedures for Meeting
57 edie news centre: Transport of new nuclear waste is 'intolerable ris
58 US: UPI: EcoWellness: Perchlorate perils
PEACE
59 AFP: Nuclear treaty must be updated or fall obsolete - experts -
US DEPT. OF ENERGY
60 DOE: Energy Secretary Announces $13 Million to Expand Solar Energy T
61 DOE: USDA-DOE Make Available $4 Million for Biomass Genomics Researc
62 Hanford News: Hanford symposium set at WSU Tri-Cities
63 CMENO: US Department of Energy selects Westinghouse/PBMR consortium
64 lamonitor.com: Udall seeks to help
65 Oak Ridger: DOE and TEMA to sponsor Oak Ridge Regional Emergency Man
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
FULL NEWS STORIES
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
1 IRIB PERSIAN NEWS: IRI's nuclear policy clear, peaceful
2006/10/12
The IR. of Iran's Ambassador to France, Ali Ahani, stressed in
Paris on Wednesday night that Iran's nuclear policy is quite
clear and Iran has never been after acquiring an atomic bomb,
heeding its responsibilities.
In response to a reporter's question whether there is any
relation between Iran's nuclear issue and that of the North
Korea, he said, "There is absolutely no such relation. That is
because we have no atomic contract with North Korea.
He emphasized, "We are not after acquiring the atomic bomb,
because we believe nuclear arsenals cannot ensure the security
of any country."
Ahani added, "We are basically a strong promoter of nuclear
disarmament at global level and proposed it at the UN General
Assembly, but the EU did not approve the ratification of that
resolution."
The Iranian envoy who spoke in French throughout the interview,
added, "We believe all NPT members, including Iran, are entitled
to benefit the nuclear energy for peaceful purposes."
Ahani said that continuing the negotiations is the only way
towards crisis solving, adding, "The EU3, (Javier) Solana, and
the 5+1 Group have all been very serious in holding talks, and
the dossier remains open."
The Iranian Ambassador singled out two significant points in
Iran's dossier, including Iran's rights based on the NPT, and
ensuring the world that the program is entirely peaceful.
Stressing that Iran does not favor military confrontation, since
negotiations is always possible, he said, "Forwarding Iran's
isssue to the UN Security Council was neither legal, nor of
technical value, but merely politically motivated."
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
*****************************************************************
2 AFP: Israel urges Security Council action on Iran
Thu Oct 12, 5:41 AM ET
JERUSALEM (AFP) - Israel" /> has called for UN Security Council
action to stop arch-foe Iran" /> from developing its
controversial nuclear activities after a top-level meeting
chaired by Prime Minister Ehud Olmert.
"The diplomatic effort to thwart the Iranian nuclear programme
is being led by the international community," the prime
minister's office said Thursday after Olmert met cabinet
ministers and secret service chiefs to discuss Iran.
"Israel supports the steps taken by the Security Council, which
include sanctions on Iran and refusal to accept compromises that
would allow Iran to continue to develop its nuclear project," it
added in a statement.
Israel earlier this week urged that economic sanctions be
slapped on Iran, warning of possible atomic cooperation between
Tehran and North Korea" /> after Pyongyang's claimed nuclear
weapons test.
"The prime minister reiterated that the test carried out
recently by North Korea only underlines the need for urgent,
determined and united efforts by the international community,"
Olmert's office said.
Israel and the United States have spearheaded international
claims that Iranian nuclear activities are a cover for an atomic
weapons programme although Tehran insists it wants only to
generate energy.
Among those at Thursday's meeting were Foreign Minister Tzipi
Livni, Deputy Prime Minister Shimon Peres and Defence Minister
Amir Peretz.
Also in attendence were Mossad chief Meir Dagan, Yuval Diskin,
head of the Shin Beth internal security service, military
intelligence chief General Amos Yadlin and the head of the
nuclear energy commission Gideon Frank.
The five permanent UN Security Council members, Britain, China,
France, Russia and the United States, plus Germany, are expected
this week to begin discussing a resolution imposing sanctions on
Tehran if it does not halt its atomic programme.
Olmert is expected to discuss Iran when he visits Moscow next
week.
Israel views the Islamic republic as its chief enemy, alarmed by
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's call for the Jewish
state to be wiped off the map and his dismissal of the Nazi
Holocaust as a myth.
Israel is widely believed to be the only country in the Middle
East to have a nuclear arsenal, estimated at 200 warheads,
although it has never formally confirmed or denied it holds such
weapons.
Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
3 AFP: Major powers fail to agree on Iran sanctions, send dossier to UN
by David Millikin Thu Oct 12, 2:46 AM ET
WASHINGTON (AFP) - The six major powers confronting Iran" />
Iranover its nuclear program failed to agree on sanctions to
impose on Tehran and sent the dossier to their ambassadors at the
United Nations" /> United Nationsfor further talks, senior US
officials said.
Senior diplomats from the six -- Britain, China, France,
Germany, Russia and the United States -- discussed the sanctions
during a videoconference Wednesday morning, State Department
spokesman Sean McCormack told AFP.
"I think there is broad agreement on the potential sanctions
that would be included, but not yet agreement on the specific
items that would be in a resolution, that has to be worked out,"
he said.
The six have been debating for weeks over the kinds of sanctions
to slap on Iran for ignoring an August 31 UN deadline for
suspending a uranium enrichment program that Washington and
others fear will be subverted to produce fissile material for
nuclear weapons.
But China and Russia, which both wield veto power on the
Security Council, have balked at imposing the kind of punitive
measures sought by Washington, with the backing of Britain.
Undersecretary of State Nicholas Burns, who has led the
negotiations for the United States, said the process could still
drag on for days, delayed in part by more urgent consultations
about sanctions to impose on North Korea" /> North Koreaafter it
announced that it carried out its first test of the nuclear bomb
on Monday.
"It's a busy schedule at the Security Council this week," Burns
acknowledged in an address to the Council on Foreign Relations
in New York.
He admitted that discussions of sanctions against Iran that
Washington had hoped to bring to the UN at the beginning of this
week might not get underway until early next week.
Iran says its enrichment program is designed only to provide
fuel for nuclear power stations and as such is allowed under the
nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.
The five permanent Security Council members plus Germany drew up
in June a list of 15 possible punitive measures against Iran as
part of a "carrots and sticks" package that also included
economic and political rewards if Tehran agreed to suspend
uranium enrichment.
The plan, which was never officially released but was leaked to
the press, called for a graduated series of measures, firstly
targetting Iran's military programs and later, if these fail,
moving to broader political and economic sanctions.
McCormack confirmed that list being sent to the UN ambassadors
was a "subset" of the sanctions included in the earlier
document.
The broader list included an embargo on the export of goods and
technologies linked to Iran's nuclear and ballistic missile
programs, a freeze on assets related to the programs and travel
bans on nuclear and weapons scientists.
Tougher measures would prohibit financial transactions by
individuals or organizations involved in the arms programs and a
ban on investment in entities engaged in the programs.
Washington has been arguing in favor of imposing sanctions since
Iran ignored the August 31 deadline.
But under strong pressure from China and Russia, which both have
important economic ties to Iran and traditionally oppose
sanctions as a diplomatic weapon, the US agreed to several
additional weeks of negotiations aimed at convincing the
Iranians to suspend enrichment and accept the incentives
package.
European Union" /> European Unionforeign policy chief Javier
Solana, who represented the six in those talks, acknowledged
last week that they had failed, setting the stage for a
sanctions resolution.
Russia and China were still expected to try to water down the
impact of any sanctions during the drafting of a Security
Council resolution.
Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
4 Guardian Unlimited: U.N. Disagrees on Sanctions Against Iran
From the Associated Press
[UP]
Thursday October 12, 2006 1:16 AM
AP Photo XHS104A
By GEORGE JAHN
Associated Press Writer
VIENNA, Austria (AP) - The five permanent members of the U.N.
Security Council agreed Wednesday to start working on U.N.
sanctions against Iran next week, but failed to bridge
differences on how harsh the penalties should be, diplomats and
officials said.
They told The Associated Press that while the U.S. called for
broad sanctions to punish Iran's defiance in pursuing its
nuclear program, Russian and Chinese representatives at a
top-level Vienna meeting favored less severe measures.
The diplomats and government officials demanded anonymity in
exchange for discussing the confidential meeting of the five
Security Council countries and Germany - the six powers whose
repeated attempts to entice Iran to enter negotiations finally
broke down last week over Tehran's refusal to give up uranium
enrichment.
In New York, U.S. Undersecretary of State Nicholas Burns told
the Council on Foreign Relations that package of incentives
meant to persuade Iran to halt uranium enrichment remained on
the table.
But he said Iran's stance left little choice but to ``head back
to the Security Council in a couple of days, at the end of this
week or early next ... to begin the process of writing and then
passing, we hope, a sanctions resolution that will raise the
cost to the Iranians of what they are doing in the nuclear
round.''
Reflecting the importance of the meeting of the six powers,
Russia, Britain, France and Germany sent top negotiators
directly answerable to their foreign ministers, while the U.S.
and China were represented by their chief representatives to the
Vienna-based International Atomic Energy Agency. Burns
participated via video hookup.
One of the diplomats, who had been briefed on the substance of
the meeting, said that while Burns had urged broad sanctions -
such as a total ban on missile and nuclear technology sales -
the Russians and Chinese backed prohibitions of selected items
as a first step.
He also said the Chinese and Russian envoys called for renewed
negotiations with the Iranians in parallel to working on
sanctions to punish Tehran for defying a Security Council demand
that it freeze enrichment, a possible pathway to nuclear arms.
Burns told the Council on Foreign Relations that the countries
trying to stop Iran's programs ``had come to a fork in the
road.'' Despite a substantial package of incentives and an offer
of direct negotiations with the United States, Iran ``turned us
down,'' he said.
``If at any time the Iranians wish to come forward and negotiate
with the United States and these other countries, then we'll be
very happy to do so,'' Burns said.
The differences among the Security Council powers reflected
continued divisions over how harshly to penalize the Islamic
republic for ignoring a Security Council deadline to stop all
enrichment activities by the end of August. Russia and China,
which have strategic and economic interests in Iran, have
recently swung behind the Americans and Europeans in agreeing to
the need for sanctions but have publicly opposed attempts to
make them too severe.
``All agree for the need for sanctions but there are problems
with how harsh they should be,'' said one of the diplomats,
whose country is accredited to the International Atomic Energy
Agency, or IAEA.
He said the meeting did not discuss North Korea and its claim to
have tested a nuclear bomb, but all participants agreed juggling
two nuclear crises complicated international nonproliferation
efforts.
Iran, OPEC's No. 2 producer of crude, is apparently ready to
face the threat of sanctions because it is confident they will
be more symbolic than damaging because of international concerns
any tough penalties could prompt Tehran to retaliate by cutting
off oil exports.
Restating his country's defiance, Iranian President Mahmoud
Ahmadinejad was quoted by state television Wednesday as saying
``the day sanctions are imposed on Iran by its enemies would be
a day of national celebration for the Iranian nation.''
In separate comments earlier, Ahmadinejad called the prospect of
sanctions ``a hollow threat.''
``These three or four countries are bullying, they have no right
to intervene,'' he said, in reference to the United States,
France, Britain and Germany. ``The Security Council has no right
to intervene.''
The Security Council demanded a halt to enrichment after the
Iran ignored calls from the IAEA to suspend such activities
until doubts about the country's nuclear program have been
cleared. Uranium must be enriched before it can be used in
either nuclear reactors or atomic weapons. Iran says its nuclear
program is for peaceful purposes only.
Senior EU negotiator Javier Solana had met with top Iranian
negotiator Ali Larijani over the past few weeks in a new attempt
to persuade Tehran to suspend enrichment and start nuclear talks
with the six-nation alliance.
But those talks failed last week over Iran's refusal to freeze
enrichment even for a limited time.
While the representatives of five of the six nations at the
Vienna talks subsequently met with IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradei,
the Americans did not attend, said a U.N. diplomat.
There was no reason given for their absence, but one of the
diplomats speculated it could have been a show of U.S.
displeasure with ElBaradei, whom Washington in the past has
accused of being too soft on Iran.
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
5 IPS-English POLITICS: N. Korean Blast May Hit Indo-US Nuclear
Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2006 15:20:49 -0700
X-Nohoney: yes white-hard - relay H=adsl-63-203-231-61.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net (borg.energy-net.org) [63.203.231.61]
X-Sender-Host-Address: 63.203.231.61
X-Sender-Host-Name: adsl-63-203-231-61.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net
X-Spam-Class: HAM-VERY-WHITELIST
ROMAIPS AP WD NU DV=20
POLITICS: N. Korean Blast May Hit Indo-US Nuclear Deal
Analysis by Praful Bidwai
NEW DELHI, Oct 12 (IPS) - How is North Korea's atomic explosion, signifyi=
ng the latest breakout from the global nuclear restraint regime, likely t=
o affect the preceding two breakout cases, India and Pakistan?
Eight years after the two South Asian states blasted their way into the w=
orld's 'nuclear club', it seems probable that their full integration and =
=94normalisation=94 as its members will meet with more resistance than it=
did before North Korea's Oct. 9 nuclear test.
India and Pakistan are also likely to trade some hostile rhetoric over Is=
lamabad's past role in nuclear proliferation to North Korea. This is the =
South Asian sideshow to the main post-October 9 global drama, which has s=
o far seen all seven self-proclaimed nuclear weapons-states (NWSs) of the=
world barring North Korea strongly condemn its test explosion.
New Delhi was quick to respond to North Korea's blast by describing it as=
=94unfortunate=94, and violative of that country's =94international comm=
itments, [and] jeopardising peace, stability and security on the Korean p=
eninsula and in the region.=94 It also said that the test =94highlights t=
he dangers of clandestine proliferation.=94
This was widely seen, and energetically publicised in the media, as refer=
ring to Pakistan, which had secret dealings with North Korea going back t=
o the 1980s. The Pakistan-based shady A.Q. Khan network is believed to ha=
ve sold uranium enrichment technology and centrifuges to North Korea in r=
eturn for its =94Nodong=94 series of ballistic missiles.
President Gen.Pervez Musharraf in his recently released memoir, 'In the L=
ine of Fire', writes: =94Dr Khan transferred nearly two dozen P-1 and P-1=
1 centrifuges to North Korea. He also provided North Korea with a flow me=
ter, some special oils for centrifuges, and coaching on centrifuge techno=
logy....=94
Many Indian commentators harp on this admission. =94They want to use this=
as a stick to beat Pakistan with,=94 says Kamal Mitra Chenoy of the Scho=
ol of International Studies at the prestigious Jawaharlal Nehru Universit=
y here.
=94Some stridently demand that the United States should insist that Khan =
be subjected to interrogation and a full inquiry into the whole issue. Bu=
t this is a childish attitude, which exaggerates the degree of Pakistani =
involvement in North Korea and tries to settle regional scores which are =
largely extraneous to the Korean nuclear issue,=94 Chenoy added.=94
The Khan network did supply uranium enrichment technology to North Korea.=
But the material used in the test is believed to be plutonium, extracted=
by North Korea from a small research reactor built by the former Soviet =
Union in 1965. So the Indian demand for an external inquiry into Khan's a=
ctivities is unlikely to cut much ice.
Besides, the U.S. will be extremely reluctant to mount pressure on Mushar=
raf when it badly needs his help in Afghanistan and Pakistan's border are=
as. In the past, Pakistan has rejected outright all demands for Khan's in=
terrogation. He is currently under house arrest.
Pakistan's argument that its government had nothing to do with Khan's =94=
autonomous=94 operations does not sound credible.
In Pakistan, sensitive nuclear designs and materials, including heavy equ=
ipment such as 6 feet-tall metal cylinders, could not have been carried o=
ut of the Khan Laboratories premises to an airport and then by a military=
plane to Pyongyang without the government's knowledge or complicity. At =
least 18 tonnes of material was reportedly transported during the 1990s.
The U.S. was aware of Khan's activities, but chose to ignore its own inte=
lligence, especially after September 11, 2001. It is likely to do the sam=
e today.
However, if Pakistan's case that it had no role in North Korea's nuclear =
programme is weak, India's charges against Pyongyang also lack credibilit=
y. New Delhi self-righteously claims that its own 1998 tests breached no =
international obligations: it has never signed the NPT.
North Korea too did not violate any =94international commitments=94. It w=
alked out of the NPT in 2003, in keeping with its Article X. India's 1998=
tests could be legitimately considered to have jeopardised =94peace, sta=
bility and security=94 in South Asia, just as the Korean test did in Nort=
heast Asia.
The plain truth is that both India and Pakistan are behaving like the old=
er NWSs, and imitating their double standards and hypocrisy: non-members =
of the nuclear club must practise abstinence, but the members keep their =
weapons because they are =94responsible=94.
Yet, the two arrivistes are second or third-class members of the Club, no=
t in its top league. They, especially Pakistan, may come under pressure t=
o demonstrate that they have taken specific strong measures to prevent th=
e spread of nuclear or missile technology.
India will certainly find the going has got tough for Congressional appro=
val of the nuclear deal signed with the U.S. in July last year.
=94The Korean test is a setback for the process of its ratification, whic=
h already faces hurdles=94, argues M.V. Ramana, an independent nuclear af=
fairs researcher, attached to Centre for Interdisciplinary Studies in Env=
ironment and Development, Bangalore. =94October 9 delivered a seismic sho=
ck to U.S. policy-makers, and that's likely to stiffen the opposition to =
the deal. It seems almost certain that it won't be passed in the 'lame du=
ck' session of Congress, which meets in November.=94
If ratification is delayed to next year, the entire lengthy process of le=
gislation will have to be gone through all over again in the new Congress=
. The longer the delay, the higher the chances that the deal will lose mo=
mentum and new obstacles will arise.
A Bill which enables the deal's implementation is stuck in the Senate (al=
though the House has passed a similar resolution). Many Senators have hed=
ged the Bill in with conditions that restrict the scope of U.S.-India civ=
ilian nuclear cooperation, or demand guarantees that India is exercising =
nuclear restraint, including in fissile material production.
New Delhi has found some of these unacceptable or excessively restrictive=
of its sovereignty. =94The conditions could become tighter in the weeks =
to come because of the anxiety North Korea's test has provoked,=94 says R=
amana. =94Next year, another ball-game starts, although there are no prin=
cipled objections to the deal, and a lot of backing for it.=94
After the Korean test, U.S. non-proliferation experts have become more as=
sertive. They call for a less permissive, stricter approach to overlookin=
g breaches of nuclear restraint norms.
Similarly, the Democrats, now in the ascendant, will resist granting an e=
asy victory to President Bush as his ratings plummet.
Finally, there's growing fear that yet more countries, in particular Iran=
and South Korea, could draw negative lessons from the India-U.S. case an=
d consider going nuclear.
=94This could mean yet more amendments to Congressional Bills, and greate=
r delays,=94 says Ramana. =94India will now find it hard to demand that n=
uclear supplies to it should continue even if it conducts a test.=94
This is bad news for the India-U.S. deal, but probably good news for the =
cause of nuclear restraint, arms reduction and disarmament. (END/IPS/AP/W=
D/NU/DV/PB/RDR/06)
=20
=3D 10121105 ORP004
NNNN
*****************************************************************
6 Guardian Unlimited: North Korea warns of sanctions reprisals
Staff and agencies
Thursday October 12, 2006
Guardian Unlimited
South Korean protesters burn North Korea’s flag at a
demonstration in Seoul against Pyongyang’s reported nuclear
test. Photograph: Kim Kyung-Hoon/Reuters
North Korea today threatened "strong" retaliation against
Japanese sanctions as UN security council members tried to work
out a compromise deal on a response to Pyongyang's nuclear test.
"We will take strong counter-measures," Song Il Ho, North
Korea's ambassador in charge of talks with Japan, said when
asked about Tokyo's unilateral sanctions, imposed yesterday. The
measures include a ban on North Korean shipping.
In an interview with Japan's Kyodo news agency, he warned: "We
never speak empty words."
The Japanese prime minister, Shinzo Abe, pre-empted any UN
measures following North Korea's announcement of its first
nuclear test on Monday, imposing a total trade ban on the North
and denying all its ships entry to Japanese ports.
Other measures included a ban on the entry of North Koreans to
Japan, other than those with residential status.
The UN security council meets tomorrow to discuss possible
sanctions against Pyongyang. Japan is pressing for tough
sanctions, working alongside the US, with French and British
backing, but China and Russia are more cautious.
China - crucial in the agreement and implementation of sanctions
given its position as North Korea's neighbour and closest ally -
again reiterated its anger over the test.
"It is necessary to express clearly to North Korea that the
nuclear test is the wrong practice," the foreign ministry
spokesman, Liu Jianchao, told reporters in Beijing today.
However, China has yet to say definitively whether it will back
sanctions and, if it chooses to do so, which ones.
China's president, Hu Jintao, will hold talks in Beijing with
his South Korean counterpart, Roh Moo-Hyun, tomorrow to discuss
the crisis and their nations' response to it.
Meanwhile, Beijing's leading negotiator on North Korea, Wu
Dawei, has been sent to Washington and Moscow as part of a
delegation.
"We are consulting with other parties, and hope the consultation
will be conducive towards pushing forward the diplomatic
efforts," Mr Liu said.
The US president, George Bush, yesterday warned of "serious
repercussions" and promised increased military cooperation with
Washington's allies in the region, including bolstering their
ballistic missile defences.
He said he supported efforts to work towards a solution that
included more dialogue with North Korea.
However, the North Korean foreign ministry warned: "If the US
keeps pestering us and increases the pressure, we will regard it
as a declaration of war and will take a series of physical
corresponding measures."
Washington hopes the security council will pass a resolution
tomorrow, and has been circulating a draft version that does not
include the Japanese-demanded measures of a complete ban on
North Korean ships and planes arriving in all countries.
Such proposals would be likely to face strong Russian and
Chinese opposition.
Instead, the draft calls for financial sanctions and inspections
of North Korean ships leaving the country and a travel ban.
Adding to already high tensions in the region, a series of
reports in South Korea and Japan have said Pyongyang is
preparing a second nuclear test.
The South Korean newspaper Munhwa Ilbo today quoted an
unidentified source "well versed in North Koreans affairs" as
saying the test would happen within two to three days.
South Korean scientists have been carefully monitoring for signs
of abnormal radioactivity that would confirm the underground
test, but have yet to discover any.
Useful sites
North Korea virtual library
CIA factbook: North Korea
UN security council
UN nuclear non-proliferation treaty
NK news - database of North Korean propaganda
North Korea Database
North Korea Zone
[UP]
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
7 INSIDE JoongAng Daily: [FOUNTAIN]If test faked, then what?
Octorber 13, 2006 KST 13:04 (GMT+9)
In the spring of 1951, at the height of the Korean War, an
elderly Japanese named Okada turned up at the Jinhae naval base.
He claimed that he was a nuclear weapons researcher in Japan
during the Pacific War, and a naval vessel was sent to bring
him. He had a bundle of blueprints and assured officials that he
could make atomic and hydrogen bombs. President Syngman Rhee was
convinced by the claim and granted $100,000, a huge sum of money
at the time, in research funds. However, all his claims were
fabricated. He had actually been a battery technician. He
generated hydrogen from the decomposition of water and filled a
steel tank with hydrogen. He lied that he had made an atomic
bomb, and demonstrated an explosion test off Jinhae in front of
President Rhee. He claimed that the bomb was 10 volts, but if he
made a 100- volt bomb, it would be more powerful than the one
used at Hiroshima. Mr. Rhee was greatly pleased. It is only
laughable in retrospect that everyone was fooled by the fraud to
detonate a nuclear bomb in the port.
On the other hand, U.S. President Franklin D. Roosevelt
reluctantly approved the Manhattan Project. He was not
completely convinced by the claim of the scientists that a city
of several hundred thousand residents could be destroyed by a
single bomb.
Having witnessed the catastrophic power of atomic bombs that
destroyed Hiroshima and Nagasaki, we have become paranoid at the
prospect of such weapons. In September 1994, Seoul fell into
chaos. After a large explosion in Yanggang Province in North
Korea, a satellite photo showed a 3.5 to 4 kilometer-radius
mushroom cloud. The Korean government made a great fuss that
there might have been a nuclear explosion. The fuss ended when
North Korean diplomats explained that the explosion had been a
blasting at the Samsu Power Plant. It is still unknown whether
the mushroom cloud was a cloud or fog. The Korean government
disgracefully revealed its poor intelligence capability.
On Oct. 9, another large explosion was detected in the North.
The force of the blast registered 3.6 on the Richter scale,
equivalent to 800 tons of TNT. This time, Pyongyang promptly
announced that it had conducted a nuclear test. However, the
blast size may have been too small for a nuclear explosion, and
no radioactive fallout such as Krypton-85 has been detected.
If the nuclear test turns out to be fake, will leftist groups
advocate an anti-nuclear program again? As long as Pyongyang
keeps on insisting, it is difficult to verify whether the test
actually took place or if it was fabricated.
by Kim Jin-kook jinkook@joongang.co.kr>
The writer is an editorial writer of the JoongAng Ilbo.
2006.10.12
Copyright by Joins.com, Inc. Terms of Use |
*****************************************************************
8 INSIDE JoongAng Daily: [VIEWPOINT] It's now time to move past words
Octorber 13, 2006 KST 13:04 (GMT+9)
President George W. Bush of the United States sent a strong
warning to North Korea on Monday by saying, "North Korea has
defied the will of the international community, and the
international community will respond." President Bush reiterated
his commitment to "a nuclear-free Korean Peninsula," and also
gave a strong warning against "nuclear proliferation" by North
Korea. However, the key part of Mr. Bush's statement was that
"threats will not lead to a brighter future for the North Korean
people."
On the same day, Christopher Hill, assistant secretary of state
for East Asia and Pacific affairs, gave a further explanation
about Mr. Bush's statement. He said the United States would do
all it could to let the North know there was no future for the
country as long as it was armed with nuclear weapons. He made it
clear that the United States would take the necessary steps to
impose pressure and put sanctions on Pyongyang so it will give
up its nuclear weapons.
In other words, the United States has decided to take the role
of erasing the future from the minds of the North Korean
leadership.
The Bush administration had already decided to impose pressure
on the North Korean regime, because the administration believes
the regime in the North has no intention of giving up its
nuclear development program.
Washington has judged that such a strategy would be an
effective way to solve the North Korean nuclear issue, a
national security issue for the United States, because for the
regime in North Korea, its security is more important than
national security due to the peculiarity of the North's
political system.
Therefore, Washington has imposed pressure on the regime's
security by raising issue with the Kim Jong-il regime's "illegal
financial activities" and "human rights violations" and trying
to induce North Korea to give up its nuclear development program
in return for compensation at the six-party talks. This strategy
remains valid even after the North's nuclear test.
Through the United Nations, Washington will try to highlight the
fact that the North Korean nuclear issue is not a bilateral
problem between the United States and North Korea, but an
international issue. The UN Security Council strongly demanded
that North Korea observe the council's resolution 1695 through
the "chairman's statement" adopted on Friday that urged the
North to abandon its plan to test nuclear devices, and made it
clear that the council would take action in accordance with its
responsibility under the UN Charter ¡ª that is, sanctions under
Chapter 7 of the UN Charter ¡ª if the North ignored the
statement.
Now that the North ignored the statement, it is highly likely
that the council will adopt a resolution that reflects Chapter 7
sooner or later. The United States has already presented a draft
resolution that demands sanctions on North Korea according to
Chapter 7.
The United States will try to maximize the effect of sanctions
by imposing a "tailored blockade" of launching intense attacks
on weak points of North Korea when a resolution is adopted at
the UN Security Council.
It will take such measures as inducing stronger financial
sanctions on North Korean financial companies, expanding the
application of the proliferation security initiative, a maritime
blockade of North Korean products and the strengthening of the
missile defense system, by stages. In the course of taking such
measures, it is important what attitudes South Korea and China
will take.
Except for the nuclear facilities at Yongbyon, it is difficult
for the United States to decide on other military targets in
North Korea in case the United States decides to take military
action.
As long as the North does not challenge the U.S. nuclear
non-proliferation policy by revealing its intention to sell
nuclear weapons to terrorist groups in the Middle East, it seems
that Washington will refrain from taking military action against
North Korea as long as possible.
But if Washington decides that the North Korean regime has been
confronted with a crisis that it can hardly resist, the
situation will change.
If the United States loses confidence that the North will not
use its last card, there is a possibility the crisis will be
amplified. The comment by Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld
that, "I think North Korea intends to sell its nuclear weapons,"
was made with the worst case scenario in mind.
Ultimately, between North Korea's nuclear weapons and the future
of the nation, South Korea must choose the latter on the basis
of watertight South Korea-U.S. cooperation, in order to make the
Korean Peninsula nuclear-free and accomplish national
unification.
Going beyond the level of sending strong warning messages to
North Korea, this is time for us to show with action why North
Korea should not possess nuclear weapons together with
international society.
* The writer is a professor at the Institute of Foreign Affairs
and National Security. Translation by the JoongAng Daily staff.
by Kim Sung-han
2006.10.12
Copyright by Joins.com, Inc. Terms of Use |
*****************************************************************
9 INSIDE JoongAng Daily: [OUTLOOK] Thinking through the problem
Octorber 13, 2006 KST 13:04 (GMT+9)
If you are upset, reason sometimes fails. We have to calm down
and watch the moves by other countries, which have quickened in
the wake of the North's nuclear test. We have to pick an
appropriate response.
President Roh Moo-hyun will meet today with China's leader, Hu
Jintao. A Chinese vice prime minister in charge of foreign
affairs is to visit the United States and Russia. U.S. Secretary
of State Condoleezza Rice's visits to Korea, China and Japan are
expected earlier than once planned. At the United Nations
Security Council, a draft resolution imposing sanctions on North
Korea is being circulated. The Security Council will adopt a
resolution for economic sanctions, with military measures under
Chapter 7 of the United Nations Charter ruled out. All of these
moves are to resolve the nuclear crisis through diplomacy.
The United States and North Korea both say they want to use the
six-party talks to end the crisis. In a press conference on
Wednesday, President George W. Bush stressed diplomacy, using
the term more than 10 times. The same day, the Foreign Ministry
of North Korea said in a statement that although it had
conducted a nuclear test because of the United States, Pyongyang
still wanted a nuclear-free Korean Peninsula. It also said its
nuclear test was an active move to implement the Sept. 19, 2005,
joint statement at the six-party talks in Beijing. This sounds
like Pyongyang wants to return to talks with Washington. Both
Washington and Pyongyang agree on the usefulness of the
six-party talks.
If the United Nations Security Council adopts a resolution
sanctioning North Korea, South Korea should implement it, under
one condition: sanctions should not block a resolution through
diplomacy. The goal is appropriate pressure on the North to
return to the situation of Sept. 19 of last year.
If a UN resolution is adopted and diplomatic efforts have been
made, a fierce debate will erupt here on joining the
Proliferation Security Initiative and providing aid to the
North. These are important matters and we must be prudent.
The Proliferation Security Initiative includes a measure to
inspect North Korean ships in international waters. But U.S. or
Norwegian naval vessels, for instance, checking North Korean
ships on the Pacific Ocean or the Indian Ocean is a different
level of risk than that of South Korean and Chinese naval or
police vessels inspecting the North's ships in Chinese or Korean
waters. South Korea should join the Proliferation Security
Initiative and yet should think carefully about what it should
or should not do in that effort.
Aid to the North should be re-examined as well. South Korea
should join the UN sanctions on the North. South Korea has
invested heavily in the North; Kaesong Industrial Park and the
Mount Kumgang tour programs have become symbols of economic
cooperation between South and North Korea and thus have now
become the major issues to think about. When implementing
economic sanctions, interpretations always vary. If a UN
resolution is adopted, South Korea should study those two major
projects in the resolution's framework.
If our goal is to bring North Korea back to the table and make
it give up its nuclear ambitions, we should put sanctions on the
North but leave the back door open for it to retreat from its
programs.
A key to resolving the problem is for North Korea to be
satisfied with talking to the United States in the framework of
the six-party talks. Although President Bush and Secretary of
State Rice oppose direct dialogue, they have never said they
oppose having talks with the North in that context. A consensus
by the six parties can be reached through multiple two-way,
three-way or four-way talks; Pyongyang-Washington talks during
the larger meeting have no less standing than independent
diplomatic meetings.
President Roh's meeting today with Mr. Hu will include
discussions of ways to deal with the new situation caused by the
North's nuclear test by broadening their common approach toward
the North. That's a part of the larger discussions, but what's
most important is cooperation between South Korea and the United
States.
To promote the better cooperation that is needed in this new
crisis, ties between South Korea and the United States must be
mended. The Roh administration's "self-reliance" diplomacy has
created problems; the administration and the Uri Party should
not assert that the United States is to blame for the North's
nuclear test. They should leave such assertions to the media and
analysts outside the government or the ruling party.
If they shout political and emotional arguments about the
Proliferation Security Initiative and aid to the North, that
does not help in resolving the problems either.
* The writer is a senior columnist of the JoongAng Ilbo.
by Kim Young-hie
2006.10.12
Copyright by Joins.com, Inc. Terms of Use |
*****************************************************************
10 INSIDE JoongAng Daily: [EDITORIALS]Don't blame the Americans
Octorber 13, 2006 KST 13:04 (GMT+9)
Former President Kim Dae-jung and the ruling party blame the
United States for the North's nuclear test. This is not true, in
short, and this irresponsible argument does not help resolve the
current security crisis. Over the past decade, it was North
Korea who broke the consensus regarding the North's nuclear
development program. In 1991, North Korea adopted a joint
statement on nonproliferation with South Korea while developing
nuclear arms behind the scenes. North Korea admitted in 2002
that it had been developing nuclear devices even since 1994,
when the United States and North Korea agreed in Geneva on
freezing the North's nuclear program. Building a light-water
reactor was delayed because North Korean submarines infiltrated
South Korea. But those who blame Washington for the North's
nuclear test are ignoring these facts.
They claim that the United States has only exerted a hard-line
policy toward North Korea. But is this true? Together with South
Korea, China and Japan, the United States promised that it would
provide a huge amount of economic assistance as well as secure
the regime if North Korea gives up its nuclear ambitions.
However, North Korea, obsessed with possessing nuclear arms,
ignored this deal and has crossed the line by conducting a
nuclear test. Those who blame Washington do not see that this is
the core of the North's nuclear crisis.
North Korea conducted its nuclear test while being placed under
financial sanctions by the United States. If this is the main
reason, the United States should lift those sanctions. But this
cannot be done because of the personality of the Bush
administration. Will it be fair if we blame only the United
States, which has no choice but to take such measures in order
to keep its financial order, without reprimanding the party that
committed the international crime? If North Korea had produced
and circulated counterfeit Korean bills, would we have done
nothing about it?
The United Nations will set stern measures against North Korea.
Apart from that, the United States and Japan are designing
separate measures. There is no chance the United States will
say, "We will lift the measures against North Korea because it
is our fault that the North carried out a nuclear test." In this
situation, if we blame Washington, South Korea will be labeled
as the same country as North Korea and will certainly be
isolated in international society. Mr. Kim and other politicians
try to blame Washington only because they want to get away from
criticism that their Sunshine Policy is a failure.
2006.10.12
Copyright by Joins.com, Inc. Terms of Use |
*****************************************************************
11 INSIDE JoongAng Daily: Bush calls diplomacy his choice for crisis
Octorber 13, 2006 KST 13:04 (GMT+9)
October 13, 2006 ¤Ñ U.S. President George W. Bush reaffirmed
Wednesday that the United States would not attack North Korea
and that diplomacy was his tool of choice in dealing with
Pyongyang. But he also continued to rule out direct bilateral
talks with the North, a policy his critics have said was the
main cause of North Korea's apparent effort to test a nuclear
device.
Speaking to reporters at the White House, Mr. Bush defended his
administration's demand that talks with North Korea be a part of
the wider negotiations with North Korea that include South
Korea, China, Russia and Japan.
"I made the decision that bilateral negotiations wouldn't work,
and the reason I made that decision is because they didn't,"
said Mr. Bush, who blamed his predecessor, Bill Clinton, for
unsuccessful efforts at bilateral diplomacy. He said Washington
"remains committed to diplomacy," but growled that all options
were open "to defend our friends and our interests in the region
against the threats from North Korea."
U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, speaking separately,
told reporters yesterday that diplomacy might work but there
were no guarantees. He contended that it was better for the
international community to put pressure on the North now, while
the threat was not imminent.
When Dr. Strangelove meets North Korea, rhetoric can get
tangled. Officials in Seoul interpreted Pyong-yang's latest
threat, to use "physical countermeasures" if Washington
continued to apply pressure on it, as a hopeful sign. One
official here said that Pyongyang's bellicose language is
customary, and noted later in the statement the assertion that
it was "ready for both dialogue and confrontation." The
reference to dialogue, the official said, was the message.
The statement, identified by the North Korean news agency as
having come from the Foreign Ministry, also said the North could
give up its nuclear weapons eventually, after the crisis was
defused and trust in the United States established.
China said yesterday that a special envoy, Tang Jiaxuan, had
left for consultations in Washington and Moscow on the North
Korean nuclear test. It gave no further details.
Japan announced Wednesday night that it would ban all imports
from North Korea and bar all North Korean ships from its ports.
The cabinet is expected to approve the measures formally
tomorrow.
The Associated Press reported from New York yesterday that the
latest draft of a proposed UN Security Council resolution on
North Korea had been softened somewhat from the initial U.S. and
Japanese proposals, but still calls the purported nuclear test a
"clear threat to international peace and security," language
that could justify an ultimate military response. The wire
service said negotiators still faced difficulties.
by Brian Lee africanu@joongang.co.kr>
Copyright by Joins.com, Inc. Terms of Use |
*****************************************************************
12 INSIDE JoongAng Daily: Assembly manages to condemn Pyongyang
Octorber 13, 2006 KST 13:04 (GMT+9)
October 13, 2006 ¤Ñ The National Assembly yesterday managed to
pass a resolution condemning North Korea's announced nuclear
test, but not until after several delays and rounds of bickering
between the two major parties in the legislature.
The final resolution "strongly deplores" the "unpardonable"
nuclear test, urges North Korea to "abandon nuclear weapons and
all related programs" and calls on Pyongyang to return to the
stalled six-party nuclear disarmament talks and to the Nuclear
Non-Proliferation Treaty. North Korea renounced the treaty in
2003 and expelled international monitors at its nuclear site in
Yongbyon, north of Pyongyang.
The resolution also calls on the Roh administration to
cooperate closely with other nations in coping with the crisis
that resulted from the nuclear test Monday.
The measure was passed by a vote of 150 in favor, 18 opposed
and 16 abstentions. Only 184 of the 299 members of the National
Assembly were present for the vote.
But before the Assembly acted, it had to overcome a series of
impasses. The conservative Grand National Party had initially
demanded that the resolution call for an end to the Mount
Kumgang tourism project and the closing of the Kaesong
Industrial Complex; President Roh Moo-hyun's Uri Party refused,
blocking committee action on the resolution Wednesday.
Yesterday afternoon, the measure arrived at the floor after
committee approval earlier in the afternoon. But another spat,
this time over a rebuke by the speaker to the Grand National
Party for coming to the Assembly chamber an hour late, further
delayed action on the measure.
But the conservatives were unrepentant. Kim Yong-kap, a
hardliner on the North, growled disgustedly, "We always make an
odd decision at the last moment." The GNP floor leader, Kim
Hyung-o, was more pragmatic. "We abandoned our pride," he said,
"considering the international community's attention."
Separately, the Democratic Labor Party's spokesman, Park
Yong-jin, announced yesterday that the party's leadership would
make a five-day trip to Pyongyang beginning Oct. 31. Mr. Park
said an invitation arrived from Pyongyang on Monday and that the
leadership decided to accept it "after a marathon session."
by Lee Ka-young, Chun Su-jin sujiney@joongang.co.kr>
Copyright by Joins.com, Inc. Terms of Use |
*****************************************************************
13 INSIDE JoongAng Daily: [EDITORIALS] Follow UN, not China
Octorber 13, 2006 KST 13:04 (GMT+9)
President Roh Moo-hyun will have a summit with Chinese
President Hu Jintao today.
After the China-Japan summit last Sunday and Mr. Roh's meeting
with Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe last Monday, this marks
the last of the summits among the three Northeast Asian nations.
And it comes at a crucial time, when the United States and Japan
are having differences with China and Russia over the degree of
possible sanctions on North Korea after its nuclear test.
We are wary about Mr. Roh's unclear stance on the issue. With
each passing day, the South Korean president is moving farther
away from his hard-line position against the nuclear test. South
Korea and China are closer in their opinions on how to handle
the aftermath of the test than any others in the region. Both
feel that military action should be avoided, economic sanctions
must be limited in their scope, and talks and negotiations will
be the key to the solution. China sent Tang Jiaxuan, Chinese
state councilor, to Washington and to Moscow as Mr. Hu's special
envoy, and that move could been seen as China's attempt to
control the level of sanctions against North Korea.
Agreement on a resolution at the United Nations Security Council
could be reached as early as today. If strong restrictions on
North Korea contrast with the tone of the South Korea-China
summit, it will present a burden on our foreign policy.
It would send the wrong message to North Korea. Since China and
South Korea account for nearly 60 percent of North Korea's
international trade, the two nations' participation in sanctions
would have a significant impact on the degree of such
restrictions. Should South Korea denounce strong sanctions
against North Korea, it may hurt our relations with our allies.
If North Korea arms itself with nuclear weapons, the United
States would have to use the nuclear umbrella in response,
unless the South itself is armed with nuclear bombs. This means
the South Korea-U.S. alliance has been rendered even more
essential.
At the South Korea-China summit, while it may be possible to
share certain ideas with China, we must be in step with the UN
resolution.
The leaders from the two countries may exchange ideas and
opinions, but it would be wise and logical to keep their
declaration from going overboard. We cannot afford to be seen as
going against the flow of international sentiment.
2006.10.12
Copyright by Joins.com, Inc. Terms of Use |
*****************************************************************
14 AFP: US sees key issues over NKorea sanctions resolved, hopeful for early UN vote -
by Gerard Aziakou Thu Oct 12, 8:20 PM ET
UNITED NATIONS, Oct 12, 2006 (AFP) - The United States narrowed
differences with China and Russia over mandatory sanctions to
punish North Korea" /> North Koreafor its nuclear test and said
it hoped a UN Security Council vote could be held by week's end.
"I don't want to say we've reached agreement yet, but many of
the significant differences have been closed, very much to our
satisfaction," US Ambassador John Bolton told reporters after
attending a private meeting of envoys of six major UN powers at
France's UN mission in New York.
Earlier Thursday, Bolton indicated that he would push for a vote
on an amended text Friday despite reticence from China and
Russia.
"I still think it's possible to have a vote before the week's
end," he later said. "We have made very substantial progress."
His Japanese counterpart Kenzo Oshima, the council president for
October, also said a vote Friday was "most unlikely."
"We've made really good progress. We are going to have informal
consultations tomorrow," Oshima said. "If we are lucky, we (will
be) ready for a vote, most likely Saturday."
Bolton and Oshima spoke after attending a round of private
consultations with their colleagues from Britain, China, France
and Russia.
Bolton said a new version of the US draft, co-sponsored by
Britain, France, Slovakia and Japan, would be circulated late
Thursday and that the council's 15 members would then relay it
to their respective capitals for clearance ahead of a vote.
That meeting followed private consultations Thursday morning by
the full 15-member council.
Meanwhile US President George W. Bush" /> President George W.
Bushmet Thursday with Chinese special envoy Tang Jiaxuan who
agreed on the need for "strong measures" against North Korea.
"I think it's a positive sign that we all agree that we need a
resolution and we need to go forward with strong measures," US
Deputy national security adviser JD Crouch said following Bush's
meeting with Tang, a State Councilor.
While there was no discussion of specific details of the US
sanctions draft, there was "a broad understanding that there
needed to be a strong response," Crouch told reporters.
Earlier Chinese Ambassador Wang Guangya cast doubt on the
prospect for a vote Friday and said Beijing still had problems
with the US draft.
While stressing that Monday's North Korean nuclear test was "an
irresponsible action" that must be "firmly opposed and
condemned," Wang said a response by the council should be "firm,
forceful and also appropriate."
"It should be helpful for leading to a solution of this issue by
peaceful means, and it should also create conditions for the
parties to once again, in negotiations, to settle this issue,"
the Chinese envoy added.
Wednesday, Wang suggested that Beijing would accept sanctions
under Article 41 of the UN Charter, which authorizes sanctions
not involving the use of force, such as economic and diplomatic
sanctions.
But Chinese officials Thursday appeared to be softening their
stance. "As to what measures to take, I think the measures
themselves are not punitive action. ... Punishment is not the
goal," foreign ministry spokesman Liu Jianchao said in Beijing.
Asked whether the Chapter Seven issue had been settled, Bolton
replied: "I think it's been very satisfactorily resolved from
our point of view, subject to our foreign ministers' agreeing to
it."
Bolton also said that few changes had been introduced to the
text.
The new draft condemns the nuclear test, calls for inspection of
all seaborne cargo to and from North Korea as well as for an
array of financial and military sanctions. It also demands that
Pyongyang scrap all of its programs involving nuclear weapons,
other weapons of mass destruction (WMD) and ballistic missiles
"in a complete, verifiable and irreversible manner."
It further calls calls on Pyongyang to return immediately to
six-party nuclear disarmament talks "without precondition" and
provides for a travel ban on senior North Korean officials
involved in the nuclear, ballistic missile and other WMD-related
programs.
The draft however dropped an earlier Japanese demand that member
states bar North Korean ships and aircraft from their airports
and seaports.
Russian Ambassador Vitaly Churkin earlier stressed the need for
more discussions before a vote, citing an ongoing flurry of
international diplomatic activity to defuse the crisis.
"The international community will easily understand if, on a
matter of this gravity and importance, the Security Council will
take a few more days to have a united response to the challenges
we face from this explosion in North Korea," Churkin said.
But Bolton said there was overwhelming support within the
council for the harsh sanctions proposed by the United States
and Japan to respond to Pyongyang's atom-bomb test in defiance
of a council resolution.
Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
15 AFP: Bush, Chinese official agree on 'strong measures' on North Korea
Thu Oct 12, 3:16 PM ET
ABOARD AIR FORCE ONE (AFP) - US President George W. Bush" /> met
with a top Chinese official who agreed on the need for "strong
measures" against North Korea" /> following Pyongyang's nuclear
test announcement, US officials said.
Traveling with the president, deputy national security adviser
JD Crouch said the Chinese agreed "strong measures" are needed
in dealing with North Korea.
"I think it's a positive sign that we all agree that we need a
resolution and we need to go forward with strong measures,"
Crouch said following Bush's meeting with Chinese State
Councilor Tang Jiaxuan.
While there was no discussion of specific details of a
resolution on North Korea's nuclear program and declared arms
test, there was "a broad understanding that there needed to be a
strong response," Crouch told reporters.
"There's a possibility of differences ... but I think it's a
very major step and a positive step, that all the major players
in this are arguing for a strong resolution," Crouch said.
China and Russia had signaled earlier that they would oppose a
US bid to force an early vote in the UN Security Council on
mandatory tough sanctions against North Korea for its nuclear
test.
Tang also met with US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice" /> to
discuss the issue of strong sanctions on Pyongyang.
"I think the Chinese clearly understand the gravity of the
situation, they clearly understand that the North Koreans, doing
this, have made the environment much less stable, much less
secure," Rice said.
"And they are working very hard (at the United Nations" /> ) in
New York, but I believe we'll get a very good resolution that
will demonstrate to the North Koreans that the international
community is very much united in its condemnation of this test,"
she said.
She said she did not know if a UN Security Council vote on
sanctions would take place Friday, "but I think it will be
soon."
As US Ambassador to the UN John Bolton formally introduced a
revised sanctions draft in the council "in preparation for a
vote tomorrow (Friday)," his Chinese and Russian colleagues made
it clear they were not happy with the text as it stood.
Asked about prospects for a vote Friday, Chinese Ambassador Wang
Guangya replied: "I'm not sure. We have to see the final text,
because there are many common grounds, but there are some
disagreements."
While stressing that Monday's announced North Korean test was
"an irresponsible action" that must be "firmly opposed and
condemned," Wang said a response by the council should be "firm,
forceful and also appropriate."
"It should be helpful for leading to a solution of this issue by
peaceful means, and it should also create conditions for the
parties to once again, in negotiations, to settle this issue,"
he added.
Russia's UN envoy Vitaly Churkin also said a vote Friday was
unlikely.
"We think there should be a strong (council) reaction, but it
has to be a cool-headed reaction," he noted.
"In this part of the world (Northeast Asia), some strong
statements made by others in the Security Council have
aggravated matters, so we do not want to repeat this on the
level of the Security Council," he added.
North Korea said Wednesday that full-scale sanctions by the
Security Council would be tantamount to a "declaration of war."
Pyongyang says its nuclear weapons program is needed to deter an
attack by the United States, which lumped the North in with
Iran" /> and pre-war Iraq" /> as an "axis of evil."
It said Monday's test was an attempt to get the United States
back to the bargaining table, an apparent call for one-on-one
talks instead of the stalled six-nation negotiations on its
nuclear ambitions.
Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
16 AFP: All eyes on China as UN mulls N.Korea sanctions
by Verna Yu Thu Oct 12, 6:41 AM ET
BEIJING (AFP) - World powers are haggling over how to punish
North Korea" /> North Koreafor its nuclear test, with all eyes on
China and whether it would back tough sanctions by the UN
Security Council.
China dispatched a high-level delegation to the United States
and Russia overnight to discuss the crisis, sparked when
Pyongyang tested an atom bomb Monday despite international
pressure to rein in its nuclear programme.
The United States put forward a revised draft resolution at the
Council that would impose tough sanctions on the North, which
again warned it would take unspecified action over any severe
new restrictions.
But it was unclear if the resolution, which the United States
said it wanted adopted by the end of the week, would get backing
from China and Russia -- traditional allies of the North that
have veto power on the Council.
China has been unusually forceful in its criticism of the North
over the test. While it has said it would support some
"punitive" measures, however, the sanctions proposed by the
United States are wide-ranging in scope.
"There are still areas of disagreement," said the US ambassador
to the United Nations" /> United Nations, John Bolton. Despite a
US desire to act quickly, lingering disputes could delay any
Council vote.
China said Wu Dawei, its top negotiator on North Korea, would be
part of the delegation sent to Washington and Moscow to address
the crisis but again refused to publicly reveal its position on
the US-proposed sanctions.
"We are consulting with other parties and hope the consultation
will be conducive towards pushing forward the diplomatic
efforts," foreign ministry spokesman Liu Jianchao said.
The 15-nation Council was to meet later in the day on the
resolution, which includes a tough requirement for the
international inspection of cargo in and out of North Korea.
Washington fears that the North, known to have supplied missiles
to nations hostile to the United States, might make sensitive
nuclear technology or other weaponry available to anti-US groups
and governments.
Japan announced its own unilateral sanctions on Pyongyang,
including a ban on all North Korean imports, which drew swift
condemnation and a sharp warning from the communist regime if
Tokyo put them into effect.
"We will take strong countermeasures," Song Il-Ho, the North's
ambassador in charge of normalizing relations with Tokyo, told
Japan's Kyodo News.
"The specific contents will become clear if you keep watching.
We never speak empty words," he said. The new Japanese sanctions
await final approval from the cabinet on Friday.
North Korea said Wednesday that full-scale sanctions by the
Security Council would be tantamount to a "declaration of war."
Pyongyang says its nuclear weapons programme is needed to deter
an attack by the United States, which lumped the North in with
Iran" /> Iranand pre-war Iraq" /> Iraqas an "axis of evil."
It said Monday's test was an attempt to get the United States
back to the bargaining table, an apparent call for one-to-one
talks instead of the stalled six-nation negotiations on its
nuclear ambitions.
But US President George W. Bush" /> President George W. Bush,
who is also trying to stop Islamic Iran from developing an atom
bomb, ruled out direct talks with the North, one of the most
impoverished and isolated nations in the world.
The six-way talks -- between North and South Korea" /> South
Korea, the United States, China, Japan and Russia -- led to a
pledge last year that the North would abandon its weapons
programme in exchange for aid and security guarantees.
But Pyongyang abandoned that deal and boycotted further talks
two months later after the United States slapped sanctions on a
Macau bank that it said was laundering money for the North
Korean regime.
Those sanctions are generally believed to have had a serious
impact on the finances of the hermit state, which has repeatedly
insisted it would not return to the talks until they are lifted.
South Korea, which says the world must takes its position into
account when the international community takes action on the
North, said it wanted a firm US commitment of nuclear protection
in security talks next week.
Before those annual talks, South Korean President Roh Moo-Hyun"
/> Roh Moo-Hyunwas due to hold a summit in Beijing on Friday
with Chinese President Hu Jintao" /> Hu Jintao.
There are around 29,500 US troops alongside around 650,000 South
Korean forces in the South, who face off against 1.2 million
North Korean soldiers across one of the most heavily militarised
borders in the world.
Pyongyang on Thursday again claimed that the United States was
making plans along with Seoul for an invasion.
Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
17 UCS: North Korean Nuclear Test: U.S. Missile Defense Isn’t the Answer
October 11, 2006
Statement by Dr. David Wright, Co-Director, Global Security
Program, Union of Concerned Scientists
"U.S. missile defense is not an answer to North Korea's recent
nuclear test. The development of a long range anti-missile
systemwhich continues to consume billions of dollars per
yearcannot provide an effective defense of the United States and
amounts to a reckless squandering of defense dollars.
"Despite claims about its presumed effectiveness against a North
Korean missile, the U.S. system has never been tested under
anything approaching realistic conditions. Announced 'successes'
of the system have been in highly staged, artificial tests. Such
tests may be appropriate to the early stage of development the
system is in, but they say essentially nothing about its
effectiveness against a real attack.
"Guiding an interceptor to hit a particular object in spacewhile
technically challengingis nonetheless the easy part of missile
defense. The unsolved, and likely unsolvable, problem in a real
attack is identifying the warhead amid a cloud of decoys and
other countermeasures. UCS's technical analysis, buttressed by
that of the U.S. intelligence community, shows that effective
countermeasures could be built by any country with the ability
to develop a long-range missile or nuclear warhead. Moreover,
any country investing in long-range missiles would certainly
design countermeasures into them from the beginning.
"Despite its huge investment in the program, the Pentagon has no
idea how to solve the countermeasure problem. The most recent
missile defense testthe first successful test in nearly four
yearsdid not include a single decoy.
"Unfortunately, the Bush administration has put its faith in a
flawed anti-missile system rather than focusing on measures to
stop the threat from developing in the first place. When the
Bush administration took office, North Korea had separated only
a fraction of the plutonium it is now estimated to have and
diplomatic efforts had capped that amount: North Korea had
verifiably shut down its reactor capable of producing more
plutonium and locked up the fuel rods from that reactor and
placed them under the watch of on-site international inspectors.
It was also observing a moratorium on missile flight tests that
verifiably capped its missile capability. While important
questions arose about a North Korean uranium enrichment program,
resolving that issue should not have been allowed to undermine
these constraints. The United States was unquestionably more
secure with those caps on North Korea's plutonium stockpile and
missile program in place.
"Yet apparent deadlock within the Bush administration over its
North Korea strategy has led to a failed approach that has let
all those caps disappear. The United States cannot rely for its
security on the dream of a technical fix in the form of missile
defense. The Bush administration must develop an effective
strategy to engage North Korea and keep the potential threat
from getting worse. The fact that such engagement led to
important constraints on North Korea's military programs in the
past suggests it should be taken seriously now."
Contact
Reporters: Join our notification listto receive breaking news
from UCS.
For general media inquiries, please call our press office at
202-331-5420.
Press Contacts:
ERIC YOUNG
Press Secretary
202-331-5439
eyoung@ucsusa.org
EMILY ROBINSON
Press Secretary
202-331-5427
erobinson@ucsusa.org
RICH HAYES
Media Director
202-331-5437
rhayes@ucsusa.org
© Union of Concerned Scientists Page Last Revised: 10/11/06
*****************************************************************
18 IAEA: DPRK Nuclear Test
+ [IAEA.ORG :: Atoms for Peace]
Press Release 2006/17
DPRK Nuclear Test
Statement by IAEA Director General
9 October 2006 | IAEA Director General Mohamed ElBaradei deeply
regrets, and expresses serious concern, about the reported
carrying-out of a nuclear test earlier today by the Democratic
People´s Republic of Korea (DPRK).
This reported nuclear test threatens the nuclear
non-proliferation regime and creates serious security challenges
not only for the East Asian region but also for the
international community.
The breaking of a de-facto global moratorium on nuclear
explosive testing that has been in place for nearly a decade and
the addition of a new State with nuclear weapon capacity is a
clear setback to international commitments to move towards
nuclear disarmament, said the Director General.
Dr. ElBaradei further reiterates the urgent need - more than any
time before - for establishing a legally binding universal ban
on nuclear testing through the early entry-into-force of the
Comprehensive Nuclear-Test Ban Treaty.
Dr. ElBaradei continues to believe in the importance of finding
a negotiated solution to the current situation regarding the
DPRK nuclear issue. The Director General believes that
resumption of dialogue between all concerned parties is
indispensable and urgent.
Related Resources:
» IAEA & DPRK
Press Contacts
Melissa Fleming
Spokesperson
Division of Public Information
[43-1] 2600-21275
[43] 699-165-21275 (mobile)
Ayhan Evrensel
Press Officer
Division of Public Information
[43-1] 2600-21271
[43] 699-165-21271 (mobile)
About the IAEA
The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) serves as the
world's foremost intergovernmental forum for scientific and
technical co-operation in the peaceful use of nuclear
technology. Established as an autonomous organization under the
United Nations (UN) in 1957, the IAEA carries out programmes to
maximize the useful contribution of nuclear technology to
society while verifying its peaceful use.
NOTE TO EDITORS: For additional information visit the Press
Section of the IAEA's website
(http://www.iaea.org/Resources/Journalists/), or call the IAEA's
Division of Public Information at (431) 2600-21270.
Copyright ©, International Atomic Energy Agency, P.O. Box 100,
Wagramer Strasse 5, A-1400 Vienna, Austria
Telephone (+431) 2600-0; Facsimilie (+431) 2600-7; E-mail:
*****************************************************************
19 Guardian Unlimited: S.Korea Finds No Abnormal Radioactivity
From the Associated Press
[UP]
Thursday October 12, 2006 6:16 AM
AP Photo DCEV107
SEOUL, South Korea (AP) - South Korea said Thursday it had
detected no abnormal radioactivity levels within its borders
after a declared North Korea nuclear test blast this week.
Lee Moon-ki, the director general for nuclear energy at South
Korea's Science and Technology Ministry, said in an interview
before an announcement by his ministry that his country had also
detected no increases of radioactivity at the suspected test
site in North Korea. He later retracted that statement, saying
he misspoke.
Both his ministry and the government-affiliated Korea Institute
of Nuclear Safety announced Thursday that tests of air samples
in South Korea since Monday's declared nuclear test by the North
have shown no signs of increased radiation.
``So far, we have not detected any abnormal level of
radioactivity,'' said Han Seung-jae, an official at the nuclear
safety institute.
Han cautioned, however, that the finding doesn't indicate that
the North didn't conduct a nuclear test or that a test may have
failed.
``There had been little chance of radioactivity being blown
southward as the wind had been blowing toward north or east for
the past few days,'' he said.
After Monday's underground test, North Korea announced that
there had been no radioactivity leaks from the site.
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
20 Guardian Unlimited: Japan Takes Lead in Sanctioning N. Korea
From the Associated Press
[UP]
Friday October 13, 2006 12:31 AM
AP Photo TOK104
By ERIC TALMADGE
Associated Press Writer
SAKAIMINATO, Japan (AP) - The Yong Gwang 1, one of 24 North
Korean merchant ships docked in Japanese ports, bobs beside a
pier loaded to the gills with its prized cargo - rusty old
bicycles that can fetch a good price on the black market in the
impoverished North.
For years, this port on the Sea of Japan coast has been a
regular stop for the North Koreans. But that will end Friday
when Japan adopts the toughest sanctions by any country so far
in response to North Korea's nuclear test.
Tokyo's sanctions include the closure of all Japanese ports to
North Korean vessels, a ban on imports and exports, and a
six-month ban on travel to Japan by all North Korean government
officials.
In this quiet port town, North Korean trade has been a constant.
The ships arrive loaded with crabs, clams or ``matsutake''
mushrooms, a delicacy among Japanese gourmets.
They return home filled with used bicycles or old household
electrical appliances the Japanese might normally throw away,
but which can be sold for a good price in the North.
The sanctions, approved by Japan's ruling party on Thursday,
were to be finalized by Prime Minister Shinzo Abe's Cabinet on
Friday. Fishermen here said the North Korean crews have been
told to pack up and leave by midnight Friday.
``We will feel it here,'' said dock worker Koji Kanetsuki of the
bans. ``But the world needs to do something. Japan has been
through Hiroshima and Nagasaki. No good will come out of having
nuclear weapons.''
North Korea immediately condemned the move.
Song Il Ho, North Korea's ambassador in charge of diplomatic
normalization talks with Japan, said his country would take
``strong countermeasures'' if Japan goes through with the
sanctions, according to Japan's Kyodo News.
But Japan's action also underscores the difficulty of punishing
the already isolated regime of Kim Jong Il.
Though it is the world's second-largest economy and a regional
trade dynamo, Japan represents less than 5 percent of the total
trade with North Korea, according to the Korea Trade-Investment
Promotion Agency.
The North's most crucial trading partner by far is China, which
accounts for 38.9 percent of its imports and exports, followed
by South Korea, at 26 percent. In fact, even Thailand outstrips
Japan - accounting for 8.1 percent in 2005.
And China and South Korea aren't likely to follow Japan's
hard-line example.
Beijing, Pyongyang's closest political ally, has strongly
criticized North Korea but has stressed that while action should
be taken, it should be ``appropriate'' and not so severe that it
would topple Kim's fragile regime.
Trade between North Korea and China has actually expanded
substantially while the efforts to bring the North back to the
nuclear negotiating table have fizzled over the past year,
largely over the North's demand that the U.S. lift financial
sanctions.
China's total imports and exports with North Korea jumped 14
percent last year to $2.2 billion, according to the Commerce
Ministry in Beijing. The North is believed to rely on China for
90 percent of its oil.
North Korea has little to offer in return - Pyongyang ran a $1
billion deficit last year.
China's reluctance to slap tough sanctions on the North has
complicated talks in the United Nations, where what to do is
still being mulled in the Security Council. The United States,
Japan and their allies are pushing for stern action, but Russia
and China have yet to sign on.
South Korea, aware that its capital is well within reach of
North Korea's artillery and missile arsenal, has also been very
cautious in its response, though criticism is rising that its
strategy of engagement - the ``sunshine policy'' - has been a
failure.
Like China, South Korea's trade with the North has swelled while
the nuclear talks have stalled - climbing by more than 50
percent last year to just over $1 billion, according to the
South's Unification Ministry.
Because Japan's trade with North Korea is limited, Abe faced
little domestic opposition to cutting it off.
Tokyo already has limited sanctions in place against North
Korea, imposed after the North test-fired seven missiles into
waters between Japan and the Korean Peninsula in July. Those
measures included banning the Mangyongbong-92 - a North Korean
ferry that served as a major conduit of trade between the two
countries - from entering Japanese waters.
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
21 Guardian Unlimited: Russia, China Oppose N. Korea Sanctions
From the Associated Press
[UP]
Friday October 13, 2006 1:46 AM
AP Photo WX107
By EDITH M. LEDERER
Associated Press Writer
UNITED NATIONS (AP) - Russia and China on Thursday opposed tough
sanctions the U.S. wants to impose against North Korea this week
for its claimed nuclear test, saying they want time to work out
a more moderate response to Pyongyang's nuclear brinkmanship.
After several hours of closed-door negotiations late in the day,
Russia and China - the two Security Council nations closest to
Pyongyang - reported good progress.
The U.S. envoy was even more upbeat after the meeting of the
five permanent council ambassadors - the U.S., China, Russia,
Britain and France - and the Japanese ambassador, who is this
month's council president.
``We have made very substantial progress,'' U.S. Ambassador John
Bolton told reporters. ``I don't want to say we've reached
agreement yet, but many, many of the significant differences
have been closed, very much to our satisfaction,'' he said.
Bolton said a revised text would be sent to capitals Thursday
night so ministers can examine the changes before a full
Security Council meeting on Friday. The changes were not
immediately disclosed. Bolton said the U.S. wants a vote on
Friday but Japan's U.N. ambassador, Kenzo Oshima, said it would
``most likely'' take place Saturday.
China opposes any mention of the U.N. Charter's Chapter 7, which
authorizes punishments including economic sanctions, naval
blockades and military actions. China and Russia want to see
sanctions focus primarily on reining in North Korea's nuclear
and weapons programs.
Beijing and Moscow also object to the wide scope of financial
sanctions and a provision authorizing the inspection of cargo
going in and out of North Korea, council diplomats said,
speaking on condition of anonymity because talks are private.
There is concern among some diplomats that boarding North Korean
ships could lead to a military response from the North.
The measures to which Russia and China object were in an earlier
revised U.S. draft resolution. The U.S. circulated the draft
late Wednesday, formally introduced it in the Security Council
on Thursday. Britain, France, Japan and Slovakia signed on as
co-sponsors to the revised draft, a softer version of the
original American proposal circulated Monday.
``We're certainly in favor of keeping all the diplomatic
channels open, but we also want swift action, and we shouldn't
allow meetings, and more meetings ... to be an excuse for
inaction,'' Bolton said earlier Thursday.
But Russia's U.N. Ambassador Vitaly Churkin said the U.S. should
wait for the results of more diplomacy. China's U.N. Ambassador
Wang Guangya agreed, saying Beijing would welcome more talks so
the Security Council can send a united and forceful message to
Pyongyang condemning its claimed nuclear test.
Churkin said ``the international community will easily
understand if on the matter of this gravity and importance, the
Security Council will take a few more days to have a reasoned
and united response to the challenge we face from this explosion
in North Korea.''
``We think that there should be a strong reaction, but it has to
be a cool-headed reaction,'' he said.
Without naming the United States, Churkin appeared to take aim
at the tough U.S. policy toward Pyongyang and President Bush's
inclusion of North Korea in the so-called ``axis of evil.''
``This resolution would be a very strong statement from the
Security Council,'' Churkin said. ``And we know that in this
problem, in this part of the world, some strong statements made
by others than the Security Council have hurt the entire thing -
and have aggravated matters. So we do not want to repeat this on
the level of the Security Council.''
He said a high-level Chinese representative was en route to
Moscow for talks on Friday and Saturday, and Russia's deputy
foreign minister was in northeast Asia talking to the countries
most affected by North Korea's announcement.
A special envoy of Chinese President Hu Jintao met with Bush and
top U.S. officials in Washington on Thursday, and South Korean
President Roh Moo-hyun was due in Beijing on Friday for talks
with China's top leaders, he said.
A U.S. draft circulated earlier Thursday would condemn the
claimed nuclear test, demand that North Korea immediately return
to six-party talks on its nuclear program without precondition,
and impose sanctions for Pyongyang's ``flagrant disregard'' of
the council's appeal. It adds new words demanding that North
Korea ``not conduct any further nuclear test or launch of a
ballistic missile.''
That draft remains under Chapter 7 of the U.N. Charter. Bush has
said the United States has no intention of attacking North Korea
and Bolton stressed that any military action would require
another resolution.
The draft would require all countries to prevent the sale or
transfer of arms, luxury goods, and material and technology
which could contribute to North Korea's nuclear, ballistic
missile or other weapons of mass destruction-related programs.
The resolution would also impose a travel ban on people
supporting North Korea's nuclear, ballistic missile and other
weapons-related programs - a Japanese proposal.
The initial U.S. draft called on all states to undertake and
facilitate inspection of cargo to and from North Korea to ensure
compliance with sanctions. The second draft would allow states
to inspect cargo ``as necessary'' to ensure compliance and to
prevent illegal trafficking.
In 2002, a ship carrying a dozen Scud-type missiles believed to
originate in North Korea was intercepted in the Arabian Sea.
U.S. officials said the missiles were at least initially headed
for Yemen.
The latest U.S. proposal would still require countries to freeze
all assets related to North Korea's weapons and missile
programs, but a call to prevent ``any abuses of the
international financial system'' that could contribute to the
transfer or development of banned weapons was dropped.
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
22 UPI: U.S. missiles delivered in Okinawa
United Press International - NewsTrack -
10/11/2006 9:48:00 PM -0400
NAHA, Japan, Oct. 11 (UPI) -- Trucks believed to be carrying 24
Patriot missiles drove to a U.S. military base in southern Japan
Wednesday after being delayed because of protests.
For three days about 75 protesters held up the transfer of the
officially unidentified missile defense equipment from a ship
docked in Uruma to Kadena Air Base in Okinawa, the largest U.S.
base in Asia, Stars &Stripes newspaper reported.
Japan's NHK public television showed a convoy of trucks leaving
Uruma on Okinawa for Kadena Wednesday.
The demonstrators said the missile-defense installation would
heighten regional tensions, particularly after North Korea's
reported nuclear test. They also called on the U.S. military to
reduce its presence on the island.
A U.S. military spokeswoman would not identify what the trucks
carried, except to say the equipment supported the latest
Patriot Advanced Capability interceptors.
The PAC-3 missile is the most advanced aerial interceptor ever
developed, dedicated almost entirely to the anti-ballistic
missile mission.
© Copyright 2006 United Press International, Inc. All Rights
Reserved
*****************************************************************
23 AFP: Musharraf says Pakistan didn't enable NKorea test -
Thu Oct 12, 1:08 AM ET
ISLAMABAD (AFP) - Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf has denied
that proliferation by the country's disgraced nuclear supremo
allowed North Korea" /> North Koreato carry out its claimed
nuclear test.
He also said that Pakistan was not a "rogue state" and that
neither the government nor the army had helped scientist Abdul
Qadeer Khan, who has admitted passing nuclear secrets to North
Korea, Iran" /> Iranand Libya.
"This (North Korean) bomb is a plutonium bomb. We do not have a
plutonium bomb. That should indicate to you whether we are
responsible or not," Musharraf said when asked at a news
conference whether Pakistan was partly to blame.
North Korea's purported test on Monday has caused shockwaves
around the globe, with the US vowing that the isolated Communist
regime faces "serious repercussions".
Khan confessed on television in early 2004 to running an illegal
nuclear black market. Military ruler Musharraf pardoned him
almost immediately but he has been living under virtual house
arrest ever since.
In his recently published memoirs, Musharraf says that Khan, who
is still revered here as the father of Pakistan's atomic bomb,
gave Pyonygang around two dozen centrifuges used for processing
uranium.
Musharraf defended Pakistan's decision not to allow
international investigators to question Khan, saying that Khan's
illegal nuclear network had no state support.
"We are not a rogue state," he told reporters.
"The government and the army was not involved in proliferation,
otherwise we are a rogue country.
"Secondly we have been able to convey to them (the international
community) that our nuclear assets are under good custodial
control, the best in the world maybe."
Pakistan's foreign ministry on Monday said it deplored North
Korea's announcement that it had carried out the test and warned
that it could cause regional instability.
Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
24 Guardian: Comment is free: Sleepwalking towards nuclear proliferation
[Ian Davis]
North Korea's nuclear weapons test is another failure of US
foreign policy.
October 12, 2006 08:56 AM |
North Korea's nuclear weapons test at Hwaderi near the Chinese
border is a serious threat to international security and the
credibility of the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) . It
becomes the ninth country, and arguably the most unstable and
most dangerous, to join the club of nuclear weapons states.
Pyongyang has also broken the informal eight-year global
moratorium on nuclear testing (the last tests were made by India
and Pakistan in 1998) and it is the first Non-Nuclear Weapon
State (NNWS) signatory to the NPT to cross over to the dark
side.
Although North Korea announced its withdrawal from the treaty in
January 2003, by actually testing a weapon, if that is proven,
it has chosen to end years of ambiguity.
A nuclear-armed North Korea raises the spectre of a nuclear arms
race in East Asia with the increased possibility of a
devastating regional conflict. South Korea and Taiwan have
curtailed previous nuclear weapon programmes, in part because of
US pressure and security guarantees, and until now Japan has
refrained from the military development of its extensive civil
nuclear programme.
As well as representing a "" failure of President Bush's foreign
policy, the nuclear test can also be attributed to a double
failure of the international community to strengthen the NPT in
2005: at a review conference in May and world summit in
September. At the time, Kofi Annan that the world seems to be
"sleepwalking" down a path in which more and more states feel
obliged to obtain nuclear weapons.
It is therefore imperative that the current confrontation be
expediently resolved through diplomacy, with the ultimate aim of
verifying North Korea's nuclear disarmament and a return to the
NPT. It goes without saying that this will not be easy. But
since the Cold War, Ukraine, Belarus, Kazakhstan, South Africa
and Libya have all gone non-nuclear - so it can be done,
although North Korea is clearly the biggest challenge (alongside
Iran) to date. Before addressing how this might be achieved, it
is worth considering how we got here in the first place.
For over 10 years prior to the 1994 agreed framework with the US
Clinton administration, North Korea had been in continuous
non-compliance with its treaty obligations, blocking inspections
by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). In 1994, North
Korea accepted IAEA inspections and a "freeze" on its nuclear
weapons programme, including a halt to the reprocessing of spent
nuclear fuel to extract plutonium. In exchange, North Korea was
to receive: heavy fuel oil for heating and electricity
production; two new nuclear reactors less efficient at producing
weapon-grade plutonium; normalisation of political and economic
relations between the US and North Korea; work towards a Korean
peninsula nuclear weapon free zone; and formal US assurances
against the use or threat of nuclear weapons against the regime.
However, the agreed framework was never implemented. In 2001 the
new Bush administration reassessed the policy, and by January
the following year President Bush was labelling North Korea part
of an 'axis of evil' along with Iran and Iraq. Nine months
later, the US accused it of enriching uranium to weapon-grade
standard, which led to a serious breakdown in bilateral
relations. In December 2002, IAEA officials were expelled from
the country and a month later North Korea announced its
withdrawal from the NPT.
A process of six-party talks was established in 2003, involving
North Korea, South Korea, China, Japan, Russia and the US, with
the objective of finding a diplomatic solution to the growing
crisis. However, progress was non-existent with many obstacles
presented by the entrenched positions in Pyongyang and
Washington. In June 2004, the US put forward a detailed set of
proposals, including a "provisional" guarantee not to invade
North Korea or seek regime change and a commitment to begin
bilateral discussions with North Korea. In response, the North
Korean regime called on the US to "drop its hostile policy" and
argued that it should receive an immediate "reward" in exchange
for a freeze of its nuclear facilities. The negotiations
collapsed, however, when the United States imposed economic
restrictions on North Korea in 2005 to punish it for alleged
counterfeiting and money laundering, and later the same year
North Korea responded by boycotting the six-nation talks.
So where do we go from here? The Bush administration and leading
Republicans have been unwilling to negotiate directly because
they view concessions as a reward for unacceptable behaviour,
and do not believe the North Koreans are willing to stick by
commitments made. Hence, the demand on North Korea to satisfy
tough preconditions at the start of negotiations. But a
negotiated solution ("containment plus engagement"), however
challenging, is the only long-term means of resolving the
current confrontation. The other two options most often
discussed, military action or containment and further isolation,
offer no feasible route to a lasting resolution.
Military action is strongly opposed by US allies in the region
since targeted air strikes against North Korea's nuclear
facilities risks retaliatory strikes against South Korea and
Japan and the potential for a regional, possibly nuclear,
conflict. There will also be calls to increase the North Korean
regime's isolation in an attempt to accelerate its eventual
collapse. Tokyo and Washington, for example, are putting even
more pressure on the South Korean government to terminate its
"sunshine policy" of trade, tourism and openings to the north,
and for China and Russia to cut off the trade and oil supplies
that have been Kim Jong-il's main lifeline. But the isolation
strategy has already proved counterproductive. And North Korea
is already a failed state with the potential of mass starvation
among its 20 million people.
In addition to strong condemnation of the nuclear test
explosion, a return to high-level dialogue through the six-party
talks process is the only way forward. Complementary North-South
Korean dialogue to ease border tensions and US dialogue with
allies in the region to reinforce their nuclear abstinence are
also crucial. This may include negotiating a new basis for a US
military presence on the Korean peninsula perhaps modelled on
NATO's Partnership for Peace. In particular, it will require the
new Japanese prime minister, Shinzo Abe, to recognise that the
test has not fundamentally altered the truth in Kofi Annan's
Tokyo last year, when he held up Japan as a beacon of the
message that nuclear weapons are not essential for greatness:
"You have shown that a State does not need nuclear weapons to be
'normal.' Nor does it need to be armed to the teeth in order to
exercise influence. The sources of true greatness lie
elsewhere."
It will also require the now discredited "pre-emptive doctrine",
implemented in the , to be assigned to the dustbin of history.
For all of the public talk of going on the offensive and not
allowing additional countries to go nuclear - President Bush
drew a red line in May 2003, declaring specifically that the
United States "will not tolerate nuclear weapons in North Korea"
- this strategy has seen one country without weapons of mass
destruction torn apart on the mistaken belief that it had them
(Iraq), the one that was closest to becoming a nuclear weapon
state go on to do so (North Korea), and the third increasingly
being backed into a corner with growing pressure to follow suit
(Iran).
In many of the issues that are challenging a globalised world,
including nuclear proliferation, soft power is better
alternative to projection of hard power (economic or military).
In matters of desired regime change or change in a regime's
behaviour, patient, long-term engagement is more likely to
result in a satisfactory outcome.
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006.
Registered in England and Wales. No. 908396
Registered office: 164 Deansgate, Manchester M60 2RR
*****************************************************************
25 AFP: Bush digs in over Iran, NKorea, Iraq
by Sylvie Lanteaume Thu Oct 12, 2:40 PM ET
WASHINGTON (AFP) - On the political defensive less than a month
before mid-term elections, US President George W. Bush
President George W. Bushhas dug in his heels on the prickliest
foreign policy challenges confronting his government.
The president and his omnipresent secretary of state,
Condoleezza Rice Condoleezza Rice, hit the hustings this week
to defend their handling of triple crises involving Iraq
Iraq, North Korea North Koreaand Iran Iran-- each a more
intractable problem today than when they were singled out as the
"axis of evil" by Bush four years ago.
In a lengthy press conference Wednesday Bush notably reiterated
his administration's refusal to negotiate one-on-one with either
Iran or North Korea despite growing condemnation from across the
political spectrum of that tack.
Bush also vowed to "stay the course" in Iraq, where sectarian
and militant violence is spinning out of control
three-and-a-half years after US forces ousted the regime of
Saddam Hussein Saddam Hussein.
On North Korea, which dominated Wednesday's press conference and
a spate of television interviews given by Rice since Pyongyang
said it carried out its first nuclear test explosion Monday,
Bush said a bid at direct negotiations under the previous
administration of president Bill Clinton Bill Clintonhad
failed.
"I learned a lesson from that, and decided that the best way to
convince Kim Jong-Il (the North Korean leader) to change his
mind on a nuclear weapons program is to have others send the
same message," Bush said.
The US has for the past year been engaged in a five-nation bid
to draw North Korea back into negotiations aimed at ending its
nuclear arms program in exchange for economic and diplomatic
rewards.
"We are working with partners in the region and in the United
Nations United NationsSecurity Council to ensure there are
serious repercussions for the regime in Pyongyang" as a result
of the test, Bush said.
Bush went on to insist that while he will not rule out military
action against North Korea or Iran, "Diplomacy hasn't run its
course, and we'll continue working to give diplomacy a full
opportunity to succeed."
"I believe the commander-in-chief must try all diplomatic
efforts before we commit our military," he said.
Such responses failed to mollify Bush's questioners, who
peppered him with queries about how his administration's threats
towards North Korea could be considered credible when the
reclusive communist regime had thumbed its nose at US entreaties
for six years of his presidency.
Opinion polls show Bush's Republicans lagging far behind the
opposition Democrats ahead of mid-term congressional elections
on November 7, with the president's party in danger of losing
control of both houses of Congress.
The surveys list voters' disillusionment with the war in Iraq as
among their biggest concerns, and Bush's emphasis on North Korea
in Wednesday's press conference was seen as a sign his camp
fears this week's nuclear test announcement could become another
political liability for Republicans.
On Iraq, Bush also had to parry questions about the growing
doubts being expressed by Republicans and Democrats alike
Republican Senator John Warner, a World War II veteran who
chairs the powerful Senate Armed Services Committee Senate
Armed Services Committee, complained recently that Iraq was
"drifting sideways" under Bush's policies.
And the former secretary of state to Bush's father, James Baker,
who is co-chair of a bipartisan panel tasked with assessing the
Iraq strategy, argued this week in favor of seeking
"alternatives" between the president's "stay the course" policy
and demands for a swift pullout of US troops from the country.
While Bush showed a willingness to reassess tactics in Iraq,
saying that "if it's not working: change," he refused to
consider the drawdown of forces demanded by many Democrats.
"If we were to abandon that country before the Iraqis can defend
their young democracy, the terrorists would take control of Iraq
and establish a new safe haven from which to launch new attacks
on America," he said.
Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
26 York County: Nuclear reactor put back in service
YORK COUNTY
Wednesday, October 11, 2006
BY GARRY LENTON
Of The Patriot-News
A nuclear power plant reactor in southern York County returned to
service yesterday morning after a cracked pipe in the cooling
system forced owner Exelon Nuclear to shut the reactor down
Saturday night.
The shutdown was the second at the Peach Bottom Nuclear Station
in 15 months and the third since 2003.
The reactor, which had been off line for three weeks for
refueling and maintenance, was only two hours into its restart
when an equipment operator noticed a leak in a pipe used to test
the cooling system, said April Schilpp, spokeswoman for the
plant.
The leak posed no risk to the public or plant workers and no
radiation was released, she said.
Plant shutdowns are costly for the operators because they must
buy replacement energy from other sources. But Schilpp said cost
was not a consideration in Exelon's decision to shut down.
"Our first concern is safety," she said. "If a shutdown is
required, even as a precaution, that will be our first concern."
Last month, the Union of Concerned Scientists, a national nuclear
watchdog group, called on the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
which licenses nuclear plants, to require more aggressive
preventive maintenance programs at nuclear plants to prevent
unplanned shutdowns.
The group warns that the age of the nation's commercial nuclear
fleet increases the risk of a mechanical breakdown that could
cause a radiation release. More than half of the 104 nuclear
reactors in use in the nation were built before 1979.
In a report released last month, the union said that 36 of 51
unplanned shutdowns experienced by the industry since the late
1960s were the result of weak quality assurance programs.
Industry officials agreed with the report's assertion that
maintenance was critical to plant safety, but they disagreed with
the report's conclusion that the industry is unsafe. The Nuclear
Energy Institute, which represents plant owners and operators,
said the number of unplanned outages has declined since the late
1990s.
The leaking pipe that led to Saturday's shutdown at Peach Bottom
was not on the plant's maintenance schedule because it was only
used for testing, Schilpp said.
Peach Bottom has two operating reactors. The Unit 3 reactor was
not affected by the incident and continued operating, Schilpp
said. The plant produces enough electricity to power about 2.2
million households.
Technicians were performing a test of Unit 2's safety cooling
system when the leak was discovered at about 6 p.m. Saturday.
Water was seeping from a 3- to 4-inch crack in the pipe,
according to a U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission report. The
leak was stopped by closing a valve. The pipe was repaired.
The incident prompted the plant to declare an "unusual event,"
the lowest of four emergency classifications used by the NRC.
The incident was of low significance because the cracked water
line is used only for testing and is not an active part of the
reactor cooling system, Schilpp said. But the company declared
the unusual event because the pipe connects directly to the
reactor cooling system, she said.
GARRY LENTON: 255-8264 or glenton@patriot-news.com
*****************************************************************
27 [NukeNet] Action ltr to CPUC - no PG&E license renewal study
Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2006 15:29:10 -0700
X-Nohoney: yes white-hard - relay H=adsl-63-203-231-61.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net (borg.energy-net.org) [63.203.231.61]
X-Sender-Host-Address: 63.203.231.61
X-Sender-Host-Name: adsl-63-203-231-61.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net
X-Spam-Class: HAM-VERY-WHITELIST
NukeNet Anti-Nuclear Network (nukenet@energyjustice.net)
Dear Friends,
I wanted to send you a SHORT background and ask if you could forward to
your friends, family, co-workers (anyone in PG&E service territory) to help
prevent an in-house study by PG&E of the feasibility of renewing Diablo's
license for an additional 20 years past the current expiration of 2025.
The Governor signed a very responsible planning mandate AB 1632
[Blakeslee] that will analyze the full costs, benefits and risks of relying
on aging
nuclear plants on California's seismically active coast beyond current
license terms. This is a gigantic step towards ending the production and
increasing the storage of high-level radioactive waste on our precious coast.
In the meantime PG&E has requested that the Ca. Public Utilities
Commission charge ratepayers $14 million for an in-house feasibility study of
license renewal. If granted there is NO doubt PG&E will apply for the
extension by 2010 and that by 2012 the NRC will approve the application.
More information is on our website, but below is the link to the Action
letter:
http://a4nr.org/letters/cpucltr/view
In Peace
Rochelle Becker, Executive Director
Alliance for Nuclear Responsibility
www.a4nr.org
PO 1328
San Luis Obispo, Ca 93406-1328
*****************************************************************
28 [JerseyShoreNuclearWatch] OCT1 APP "Nuclear plant critics win
Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2006 15:31:29 -0700
X-Nohoney: yes white-hard - relay H=adsl-63-203-231-61.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net (borg.energy-net.org) [63.203.231.61]
X-Sender-Host-Address: 63.203.231.61
X-Sender-Host-Name: adsl-63-203-231-61.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net
X-Spam-Class: HAM-VERY-WHITELIST
NukeNet Anti-Nuclear Network (nukenet@energyjustice.net)
Coalition for Peace and Justice; UNPLUG Salem Campaign, 321 Barr Ave,
Linwood; NJ08221; 609-601-8583
----------
From: JerseyShoreNuclearWatch@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:JerseyShoreNuclearWatch@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Edith
Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2006 12:34 PM
To: JerseyShoreNuclearWatch@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [JerseyShoreNuclearWatch] OCT1 APP "Nuclear plant critics win NRC
hearing"
Nuclear plant critics win NRC hearing
Environmentalists' questions about reactor deemed valid
Posted by the Asbury Park Press on 10/11/06
BY NICHOLAS CLUNN
STAFF WRITER
A coalition of six environmental and anti-nuclear groups opposed to the
renewal of the Oyster Creek nuclear power plant's operating license won a
federal hearing Tuesday based on contentions raised about the safety of a
steel vessel meant to contain radiation.
The hearing was granted by a three-judge panel within the U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission, which will decide whether to issue the Lacey plant a
20-year renewal.
Without the renewal, the plant would close in 2009. Oyster Creek employs
about 420 workers and provides enough electricity to power about 600,000 homes.
Lawyers for plant operator AmerGen Energy Co. opposed the coalition's
request for a hearing. In their own brief, NRC staffers supported it.
No date has been set for the hearing. Whether it will actually happen will
depend on whether AmerGen will accept the panel's decision.
"It's more than likely that AmerGen will appeal," NRC spokesman Neil
Sheehan said.
AmerGen spokeswoman Rachelle Benson said the plant's legal team will decide
whether an appeal is appropriate after the lawyers have had time to review
the 37-page order.
According to the panel, the coalition raised a valid concern in questioning
the frequency in which AmerGen plans to measure the thickness of the vessel
beyond 2009.
The vessel, called the drywell liner, is 100 feet tall and sur-rounds the
chamber in which atoms are split to make heat. During a serious accident,
the liner would contain highly radioactive steam and push it down into a
water-filled cooling pool.
Coalition members are more worried about the liner collapsing than its
performance during an emergency. They're concerned because rust on a lower
portion of the liner called the sand bed region had caused it to become
thinner during the early 1980s.
The coalition members are Sierra Club New Jersey; the New Jersey
Environmental Federation; the New Jersey Public Interest Research Group;
Grandmothers, Mothers and More for Energy Safety; Jersey Shore Nuclear
Watch and the Nuclear Information and Resource Service.
According to Benson, Tuesday's decision meant the coalition met the
threshold for a hearing. It doesn't mean the liner, or AmerGen's plan to
monitor it, is deficient, she said.
The liner is now under scrutiny by three different sections of the NRC.
Staff members have yet to decide whether to approve AmerGen's plan to
monitor the liner for aging. A committee that reviews NRC staff decisions
also is undecided. That committee met last week and asked AmerGen to
provide more information to back up the company's plan.
ON THE WEB: Visit our Web site, www.app.com, and look on our home page
under Special Reports for a link to Relicensing Oyster Creek: Is It Worth
It? for past editorials and stories, related links, an interactive graphic
that shows how the plant works, and more.
Nicholas Clunn: (732) 643-4072 or nclunn@app.com
Text Size:A+|A|A-
E-mail E-mail Printer Print Subscription Subscribe Newsletters E-mail Alerts
Related news from the Web
Latest headlines by topic:
" Nuclear Energy
Powered by Topix.net
Advertisement
Partners: Jobs: CareerBuilder.com " Cars: Cars.com " Apartments:
Apartments.com " Shopping: ShopLocal.com
Copyright © 2006 Asbury Park Press. All rights reserved.
Use of this site signifies your agreement to the Terms of Service and
Privacy Policy. (Updated June 7, 2005)
Site design by Asbury Park Press / Contact us
USA Today " USA Weekend " Gannett Co. Inc. " Gannett Foundation
__._,_.___
Messages
in this topic (1)
Reply
(via web post) |
Start
a new topic
Messages
|
Files
|
Photos
|
Links
|
Database
|
Polls
|
Members
|
Calendar
JERSEY SHORE NUCLEAR WATCH
P.O. Box 3085
Toms River, NJ 08756-3085
732-240-5107 www.jerseyshorenuclearwatch.org
gbur1@comcast.net
d1c78.jpg
Change
settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email:
Switch
delivery to Daily Digest |
Switch
format to Traditional
Visit
Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use
|
Unsubscribe
Visit
Your Group
SPONSORED LINKS
*
Environment
design
*
Environment
*
Save
the environment
*
Oyster
*
Clean
environment
Attachment Converted: d1c78.jpg: 00000001,2a951cd4,00000000,00000000
*****************************************************************
29 FPIF News | Oil or Atoms?
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2006 01:56:38 -0500 (CDT)
X-Sender-Host-Name: chumbly.math.missouri.edu
X-Spam-Class: HAM
New at FPIF
A think tank without walls
http://www.fpif.org/
Introducing the latest policy analysis from Foreign Policy In Focus
Oil or Atoms?
By Col. Daniel Smith, U.S. Army (Ret.)
The outcome of the November midterm elections in the United States may
well hinge on oil and atoms. The issue of atoms, namely Irans nuclear
ambitions, is potentially more explosive. But the price of gas, since
it hits consumers in the pocketbooks, may have the more immediate
effect.
The issues of oil and Iran are, of course, linked. Should the markets
come to believe--before the November 2006 elections--that war is
imminent, oil prices will again soar and further erode the support
among the voting public for the administrations congressional allies.
Conversely, if nothing causes alarm and sanctions continue to be
nothing more than irritants, the Iranians conceivably could master the
technical impediments and forge ahead with their nuclear program. The
question is whether they would stop enrichment at levels suitable only
for energy or press ahead to levels necessary for weapons.
Dan Smith is a military affairs analyst for Foreign Policy In Focus
(online at www.fpif.org), a retired U.S. Army colonel, and a senior
fellow on military affairs at the Friends Committee on National
Legislation. Email at dan@fcnl.org or blog The Quakers' Colonel.
See new FPIF article online at:
http://fpif.org/fpiftxt/3587
With printer-friendly pdf version at:
http://fpif.org/pdf/gac/0610atoms.pdf
For media inquiries Emily Schwartz Greco, emily@ips-dc.org,
202-297-5412
Siri Khalsa, media@irc-online.org, 505-388-0208
Produced and distributed by International Relations Center (IRC). For
more information, visit http://www.irc-online.org/. If you would like
to receive specific topic or regional material from either FPIF
(http://www.fpif.org/) or the Americas Program
(http://www.americaspolicy.org/), please email:
communications@irc-online.org, with subscribe in the subject line and
giving your area of interest.
If you would like to see IRC's variety of free ezines and listservs ,
please go to: http://www.irc-online.org/lists/.
To be removed from this list, please reply to this email with
unsubscribe.
Please consider becoming an IRC member or donor. You can join the IRC
and make a secure donation by visiting
http://www.irc-online.org/donate.php. Thank you.
International Relations Center (IRC)
http://www.irc-online.org/
Siri D. Khalsa
Outreach Coordinator
Email: communications@irc-online.org
PO Box 2178
Silver City, NM 88062
*****************************************************************
30 NRC: NRC Proposes $60,000 Fine Against Indiana Michigan Power for Emergency Plan Violation
at D. C. Cook Nuclear Plant
News Release - Region III - 2006-03 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
Office of Public Affairs, Region III No. III-06-030
October 11, 2006 CONTACT: Jan Strasma (630) 829-9663 Viktoria
Mitlyng (630) 829-9662 E-mail: opa3@nrc.gov
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff has proposed a $60,000
fine against Indiana Michigan Power Co. for making a change in
the emergency plan of the D. C. Cook Nuclear Power Station which
led to a decrease in the plans effectiveness. The plant, which
has two reactors, is located in Bridgman, Mich.
An NRC inspection identified that Cook officials made a change
to the plants emergency plan without Commission approval in
April 2003. The NRC concluded that this change decreased the
effectiveness of the emergency plan.
The licensee made a change to an emergency action level by
adding a non-conservative 30-minute criteria which could result
in a delayed emergency declaration for a radiological release to
the environment. Emergency action levels are used in emergency
plans to decide when a plant must declare an emergency and to
classify the appropriate level of the emergency. The addition of
a 30-minute delay before classifying an emergency could also
delay or prevent notification of state and local officials.
Nuclear power plants may make changes to emergency plans without
Commission approval only if the changes do not decrease the
effectiveness of the plans and that the plans continue to meet
regulatory standards.
Effective emergency plans are crucial to stabilizing the plant
and protecting the public in case of a nuclear plant emergency,
said James Caldwell, NRC Regional Administrator. It is
especially important in the current post 9/11 environment. In
notifying the utility of the fine, he acknowledged that Indiana
Michigan Power Co. had taken extensive corrective actions by
restoring the emergency plan to NRC-approved language and
training plant personnel to emphasize the importance of
maintaining the effectiveness of the plants emergency plan and
procedures.
The letter notifying Indiana Michigan Power Co. of the proposed
fine will be available from the Region III Office of Public
Affairs and on the NRC web site at:
http://www.nrc.gov/what-we-do/regulatory/enforcement/current.html
#reactor.
Indiana Michigan Power Co. has until Nov. 6 to pay the proposed
fine or to protest it. If the fine is protested and subsequently
imposed by the NRC staff, the utility may request a hearing.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
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, October 12, 2006
*****************************************************************
31 Guardian Unlimited: Europe's power supply on brink
Mark Milner
Friday October 13, 2006
The Guardian
Europe's security of electricity supply is facing a growing
threat, with generating capacity ahead of rising demand by the
lowest ever level, according to a report published today.
The average margin between supply and demand fell to 4.8% last
year, a percentage point below the previous year's, said
consulting group, Cap Gemini. "This low power margin is a
wake-up call to the energy industry, government and regulators
that security of supply in Europe is now under severe pressure."
Britain is among countries that have done most to tackle the
problem. It raised generating capacity by 13% to increase the
margin by one percentage point. The margin this winter will be
22% compared with 21% last winter, according to UK figures.
Despite Britain's relatively strong position, industry experts
underline the need for continued investment to replace coal
fired plant that does not meet new European regulations and
ageing nuclear reactors. "In this country we are looking at
£20bn worth of investment in power stations this side of 2020,"
said David Porter, chief executive of the Association of
Electricity Producers.
This week Powergen parent E.ON UK said it had applied to build
two units at its coal-fired station at Kingsnorth, Kent, which
the company says would represent a £1bn investment. Yesterday
RWE, which owns npower, said it was bringing another 500megawatt
unit at its oil-fired Fawley plant in Hampshire back into
service after being mothballed for more than a decade.
"Many of the country's older power stations are coming up to
retirement age," said npower managing director of generation and
renewables, Kevin Akhurst. "While new forms of power generation
are considered, Fawley will continue to play a vital role in
balancing supply and demand."
Useful sites
Ofgem
Energywatch
Save on your bills
Unravelit
Uswitch
[UP]
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
32 NRC: NRC Staff to Meet with TVA Officials in Rockville 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-06-042
October 12, 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. (EDT) on
Friday, Oct. 20 in Rockville, Md., 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 in the
Two White Flint North Auditorium at the agencys headquarters in
Rockville. 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 recovery efforts, including completed work activities,
schedules for future milestones, response to challenges, 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 again sometime in the first half of
2007.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
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, October 12, 2006
*****************************************************************
33 newsobserver.com: Duke wants to raise rates
October 12, 2006
Raleigh · Durham · Cary · Chapel Hill
Would pay for nuclear bid
John Murawski, Staff Writer
North Carolina's utilities want an unprecedented guarantee: that
their customers will pay for the companies' risky gamble in new
nuclear plants -- even if the new reactors don't get built.
Duke Energy has asked state regulators to let the utility raise
its rates in North Carolina to recover the $87.5 million it
expects to spend preparing the application for a federal license
for two new reactors in South Carolina. The company is asking for
the right to file a rate case at a later time, not for a specific
rate change now.
Duke Energy will also be separately seeking to recover about
$37.5 million in South Carolina. Because the nuclear plant in
Cherokee County would provide electricity to Duke Energy's
customers in the Carolinas, the company is seeking to recover
its costs in both states.
"The company is concerned about spending such large sums of
money without the assurance of adequate and timely cost
recovery," Charlotte-based Duke Energy wrote in its request to
the N.C. Utilities Commission last month.
Progress Energy, based in Raleigh, wants to recover about $60
million it expects to spend on a license application for a new
reactor at the Shearon Harris site, about 25 miles southwest of
Raleigh. But the company hasn't filed its request.
"We have the same interest as Duke, but we're just not on the
same timetable," said Bill Johnson, Progress Energy's chief
operating officer.
Both Duke and Progress already expect to recover the full costs
of any nuclear reactors they build, including the licensing and
development costs, through standard rate reviews and public
hearings.
But both companies say they also need to be able to recover the
costs of not building or abandoning unfinished plants.
This special protection is needed, they say, because of the high
cost of the plants -- Duke's twin reactors would cost between $4
billion and $6 billion -- and the risk of investing in nuclear
plants which can be derailed by a number of developments.
In its filing, Duke Energy noted that after the meltdown at
Three Mile Island in Pennsylvania in 1979 utilities to abandoned
about 60 nuclear reactors in various stages of development and
construction. Duke Energy canceled six reactors and Progress
Energy three.
Progress Energy and other utilities got a law passed this year
in Florida that guarantees them the right to raise rates to
cover capital investments, taxes, siting, licensing, design and
construction costs for nuclear plants that are abandoned.
Duke plans to go to the General Assembly for a similar law if
the N.C. Utilities Commission says it it doesn't have the legal
authority to grant the company's request.
North Carolina law doesn't allow utilities to recover up-front
investment in power plants that aren't built, said Robert
Gruber, director of the Public Staff, the consumer advocacy arm
of the commission.
Critics say that such laws make customers responsible for
billions of dollars of bad corporate decisions.
Duke Energy expects to spend about $125 million on the
application through 2007, and then plans to file for additional
costs incurred after it files its federal license application.
Utility officials say the guarantee of a rate increase would
ultimately benefit customers, by giving the utilities better
credit ratings and letting them borrow money for the plants at
lower interest rates. Nuclear operators have already received
other sweeteners to encourage new nuclear investment. Last year
Congress approved financial incentives that could award as much
as $2 billion in risk insurance and tax credits, per reactor, to
the first half-dozen utilities that build new reactors.
Duke Energy's request for cost recovery if the plants are not
built is opposed by a coalition of environmental and consumer
organizations: the N.C. Waste Awareness and Reduction Network,
N.C. Public Interest Research Group, the Nuclear Information and
Resource Service, Public Citizen and the Blue Ridge
Environmental Defense League, among others. These groups want
Duke Energy to invest more in promoting energy efficiency and
conservation, as well as solar power, wind power and other
renewables.
Gruber of the Public Staff is also skeptical of Duke Energy's
arguments.
"I'm very concerned they're trying to shift all the risk to the
rate payers," Gruber said. "The company might make a bad risk
assessment and can't get the license. Why should the rate payer
pay for it?"
The development and licensing costs for a nuclear plant are
sobering, even by the standards of a Fortune 500 corporation.
"You've got almost 20 percent of your market capitalization at
risk in one project," Progress Energy's Johnson said.
Duke Energy serves 1.6 million customers in North Carolina,
including about 115,000 in Durham County, 45,000 in Orange
County and 1,700 in Wake County. Progress Energy serves about
1.2 million in North Carolina.
Duke filed its request Sept. 20. The companies and other
interested parties have until Oct. 24 to file all their
arguments before the N.C. Utilities Commission. Staff writer
John Murawski can be reached at 829-8932 or
murawski@newsobserver.com.
© Copyright 2006, The News & Observer Publishing Company
*****************************************************************
34 Platts: NRC proposes $60,000 fine for violation at Cook
Washington (Platts)--11Oct2006
NRC is proposing a $60,000 fine against American Electric Power
for a violation at Cook, the agency said in an October 6 letter,
released October 10.
The agency said the fine is for a "non-conservative" 2003 change
the company made in its emergency plan without obtaining the
necessary NRC approval.
The agency said it is crediting the company for corrective
actions it already has taken but not for identification of the
problem since NRC, not AEP, identified it.
AEP, which operates the two-unit Cook plant through subsidiary
Indiana Michigan Power, has 30 days to contest the proposed fine.
Terms & Conditions
Copyright © 2006 - Platts, All Rights Reserved
[The McGraw-Hill Companies]
*****************************************************************
35 NRC: NRC Chairman Directs Staff Plan for Independent Review of Execution of Reactor Oversight Process
at Indian Point
News Release - 2006-12
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs
Telephone: 301/415-8200 Washington, DC 20555-0001 E-mail:
opa@nrc.gov No. 06-128 October 11, 2006
ROCKVILLE Nuclear Regulatory Commission Chairman Dale Klein
Wednesday directed the NRC staff to develop a plan for an
independent review of agency Reactor Oversight Process (ROP)
activities at the Indian Point nuclear power plant, and perhaps
others.
In a memo to Executive Director for Operations Luis Reyes, Klein
said the assessment should first be carried out at the
Entergy-owned plant in Buchanan, N.Y. because of repeated
inquiries about the adequacy of NRC oversight and licensee
performance at the two-unit site. But, he added, such an
assessment should be considered for other facilities in other
regions to the extent you believe appropriate.
He also said that consideration should also be given to any
existing international programs already in place that might
fulfil this assessment function.
Referring specifically to Indian Point, Klein said that the
agencys staff in its Region I office at King of Prussia, Pa.,
has been implementing heightened oversight of the facility,
including inspections beyond those called for by the normal
oversight process. ... Nevertheless, I believe that additional
review of our actions would be beneficial. He added that the
team should also provide its insights into licensee performance.
Klein told Reyes that the assessment must address overall
programmatic implications for the reactor oversight process, and
added that the charter prepared for assessments should describe
a team composed of members to achieve independence. Appropriate
state, local and congressional observation roles should also be
described.
Klein asked for a response for Commission review within 30 days.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
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, October 12, 2006
*****************************************************************
36 JOURNAL NEWS: Indian Point inspections reviewed
By GREG CLARY
(Original publication: October 12, 2006)
The chairman of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission yesterday
directed his staff to re-examine how the agency conducts safety
inspections and to come up with a plan to evaluate Indian Point
and possibly other locations.
Stopping short of calling for a special inspection at the
Buchanan site, NRC Chairman Dale Klein said the review should
use Indian Point as the case study because of the repeated
inquiries about the adequacy of the agency's oversight there.
Klein, who took over the agency's top spot in July, said the
NRC's regional office in King of Prussia, Pa., had been
providing additional oversight at Indian Point, including
inspections beyond what is called for by federal regulations.
"Nevertheless, I believe that additional review of our actions
would be beneficial," Klein said in a statement.
Klein asked for a response for the five-member commission to
review within 30 days.
Those who have been calling for a completely independent safety
assessment of the Indian Point plant were encouraged by Klein's
decision, but said it still falls short of bringing in outside
experts to look at everything from tritium and strontium leaks
at the plants to how secure the facility is.
"What he's calling for is not a heightened safety assessment,
but an investigation of an investigation," said Lisa Rainwater,
the Indian Point Campaign Coordinator for the environmental
group Riverkeeper. "Nothing other than an independent safety
assessment will be acceptable to Riverkeeper."
At the request of Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-N.Y., the NRC
agreed this month to carry out additional inspections at Indian
Point because of the radioactive water leak and problems with
the emergency siren system.
Entergy Nuclear Northeast, which owns and operates Indian Point,
is in the process of replacing the siren system by the end of
January and has been working to contain and clean up the leaks
since they were first discovered 14 months ago.
"I welcome NRC Chairman Klein's interest in reviewing oversight
at Indian Point, but I continue to believe that a full and
independent safety assessment is necessary to address public
concerns," Clinton said in an e-mail to the Journal News.
Sue Kelly, R-Katonah, was one of five area congressional
representatives who backed legislation to force the NRC to
increase its oversight of Indian Point in March, after a
radiated water leak from a spent fuel pool produced high levels
of strontium 90 and tritium in the groundwater at the Buchanan
site.
Kelly yesterday said she was pleased with the NRC's progress,
but wanted to see exactly what the agency came up with in the
next month.
"While this may not be everything we wanted, this is certainly a
significant step in the right direction to gain a more
independent evaluation of current safety measures and plant
operations at Indian Point," Kelly said in a statement. "I'm
cautiously optimistic that the NRC and Chairman Klein are better
hearing our concerns about ongoing safety issues at Indian
Point."
Maurice Hinchey, D-Saugerties, Nita Lowey, D-Harrison, and Eliot
Engel, D-Bronx, issued a joint statement that also said that any
security review short of a full assessment would be considered
insufficient.
Jim Steets, a spokesman for Entergy Nuclear Northeast, said the
plants have received high overall marks from the NRC for their
operations.
"I understand the possibility that this is politically
motivated," Steets said. "We don't believe this is warranted,
given the high safety performance that Indian Point has
demonstrated. But whatever is decided, we will cooperate."
Copyright 2006 The Journal News, a Gannett Co.Inc. newspaper
serving Westchester, Rockland and Putnam Counties in New York.
*****************************************************************
37 Monroenews.com: Fermi plant included in federal study
Informing Monroe County, Michigan, for more than 180 years
By: story updated October 12. 2006 11:58AM
Federal officials plan a study to determine the consequences of
a serious accident at DTE's Fermi 2 nuclear power plant and five
other reactors around the country.
Ordered by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, it will estimate
the casualties and costs of a disastrous accident in hopes of
producing a more accurate picture than what a 1982 broad-brush
study projected: 8,000 deaths, 340,000 injuries and $136 billion
in property damage.
The NRC-ordered study comes at a time when utilities are
considering building new nuclear plants and reactors
increasingly are seen as potential targets for terrorists.
"Particularly in a post 9/11 world, it's important for the NRC
and the companies that run nuclear power plants to have an
analysis that is as realistic as possible in looking at the
possible consequences of a significant incident or accident at a
nuclear power plant," said Scott Burnell, an NRC spokesman.
The NRC's so-called "state-of-the-art reactor consequence
analysis" would take at least two years.
Mr. Burnell said the 1982 study, done by Sandia National Labs in
Albuquerque, N.M., was "a very simplistic analysis" and was not
intended to be an analysis of the consequences of an incident at
a nuclear power plant.
The NRC is preparing contracts for the work, which probably will
be done by research organizations. Mr. Burnell said he wasn't
sure how much the study would cost.
Fermi and two other boiling water reactors, Duane Arnold near
Palo, Iowa, and Peach Bottom in York County, Pa., will be
analyzed, as well as three pressurized water reactors, Salem
Creek at Salem, N.J.; Diablo Canyon at San Luis Obispo, Calif.,
and Seabrook at Portsmouth, N.H. Mr. Burnell said the plants
were chosen to provide a range of population densities and the
boiling water reactors each have General Electric Mark I
containment systems. Safety questions have long surrounded the
Mark I.
DTE officials said they didn't know the Fermi plant would be
included in the federal study.
Michael Keegan of Monroe, a longtime nuclear industry critic,
said the study probably isn't a bad idea. "Certainly, in the 20
years that have gone by, the population patterns have shifted."
But he said he believes it's a preliminary step to DTE's plan to
build another nuclear plant.
"The idea that the study will inform utilities that are
considering new plants has some merit, but the designs the
utilities are looking at are meant to have an enhanced ability
to both prevent and respond to any incidents at the plants,"
said the NRC's Mr. Burnell. "Whatever numbers the current study
will come up with certainly be helpful to utilities looking to
do plants, but they'll have to do their own analysis based on
the specific designs they're looking at."
Mr. Keegan also said a new study might low-ball estimates just
as past studies didn't really consider a worst-case accident.
"There were critics of these as not being maximum credible
accidents," he said.
Though Sandia might not be involved in the new study, last year
the labs were criticized by the Department of Energy for
understating the risks to the public if there was an accident at
its own research reactor near Albuquerque.
Mr. Burnell said contracts only now are being drawn up to for
agencies interested in doing the new study.
"My understanding is that the analyses are going to look at a
range of initiating events whether internal or external to the
plant and carry it through to its eventual conclusion, whether
that leads to systems in the plant being able to stop the
progression or whether it leads to a release to the
environment," Mr. Burnell said. "The analysis will be designed
to be as realistic as possible." He also said it would "take
into account the sorts of emergency planning that is already in
place."
Mitch Yudasz, director of Monroe County's emergency management
division, said he hadn't yet heard of the planned federal study,
but it probably would have beneficial fallout for emergency
planning purposes.
"That's what's beneficial about having a nuclear facility in
your jurisdiction. The amount of emergency planning and
attention going into it is so much greater than in those
communities that don't have a plant," he said.
Monroe Publishing Company. All Rights Reserved Contact us Terms
October 12, 2006 [ /]
*****************************************************************
38 NRC: Southern Nuclear Operating Company; Notice of Hearing and
FR Doc E6-16868
[Federal Register: October 12, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 197)]
[Notices] [Page 60195-60196] From the Federal Register Online via
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr12oc06-89]
Opportunity to Petition for Leave to Intervene on An Early Site
Permit for the Vogtle ESP Site Pursuant to the Atomic Energy Act
of 1954, as amended (the Act), and the regulations in Title 10 of
the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 50, Domestic Licensing of
Production and Utilization Facilities, Part 52, Early Site
Permits, Standard Design Certifications, and Combined Licenses
for Nuclear Power Plants, and Part 2, Rules of Practice for
Domestic Licensing Proceedings and Issuance of Orders, notice is
hereby given that a hearing will be held, at a time and place to
be set in the future by the United States Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC, the Commission) or designated Atomic Safety and
Licensing Board (Board). The hearing will consider the
application dated August 14, 2006, filed by Southern Nuclear
Operating Company (SNC), pursuant to Subpart A of 10 CFR part 52
for an early site permit (ESP). The application which was
supplemented by letters dated August 17, September 6 (two
letters), and September 13, 2006 requests approval of a site
located in eastern Georgia (near Waynesboro, Georgia) identified
as the Vogtle ESP site, for one or more new nuclear reactors that
would, if authorized for construction and operation in a separate
licensing proceeding under subpart C of 10 CFR part 52 or under
10 CFR part 50, have a capacity of no more than 6800 Megawatts
(thermal) additional for the site. The application was accepted
for docketing on September 19, 2006. The docket number
established for this application is 52-011.
The hearing will be conducted by a Board which will be designated
by the Chairman of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel or
by the Commission. Notice as to the membership of the Board will
be published in the Federal Register at a later date.
The NRC staff will complete a detailed technical review of the
application and will document its findings in a safety evaluation
report (SER) and an environmental impact statement (EIS). In
addition, the Commission will refer a copy of the application to
the Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards (ACRS) in accordance
with 10 CFR 52.23, and the ACRS will report on those portions of
the application that concern safety. Upon receipt of the ACRS
report and completion of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC)
staff's SER and EIS, the Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor
Regulation, NRC, will propose findings on the following issues:
Issues Pursuant to the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as Amended (1)
Whether the issuance of an ESP will be inimical to the common
defense and security or to the health and safety of the public
(Safety Issue 1); and (2) whether, taking into consideration the
site criteria contained in 10 CFR part 100, a reactor, or
reactors, having characteristics that fall within the parameters
for the site, can be constructed and operated without undue risk
to the health and safety of the public (Safety Issue 2).
Issue Pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of
1969, as Amended Whether, in accordance with the requirements of
subpart A of 10 CFR part 51, the ESP should be issued as
proposed.
The Board will conduct the hearing in accordance with 10 CFR part
2. If the hearing is contested as defined by 10 CFR 2.4, the
Board will consider Safety Issues 1 and 2 and the issue pursuant
to NEPA set forth above.
If the hearing is not a contested proceeding as defined in 10 CFR
2.4, the Board will determine without conducting a de novo
review: Whether the application and the record of the proceeding
contain sufficient information, and the review of the application
by the Commission's staff has been adequate to support a negative
finding on Safety Issue 1 above, and an affirmative finding on
Safety Issue 2 above, as proposed to be made by the Director,
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation; and whether the review
conducted by the Commission pursuant to NEPA has been adequate.
Regardless of whether the proceeding is contested or uncontested,
the Board will: (1) Determine whether the requirements of Section
102(2)(A), (C), and (E) of NEPA and subpart A of 10 CFR part 51
have been complied with in the proceeding; (2) independently
consider the final balance among the conflicting factors
contained in the record of the proceeding with a view to
determining the appropriate action to be taken; and (3)
determine, after considering reasonable alternatives, whether the
ESP should be issued, denied, or appropriately conditioned to
protect environmental values.
In accordance with 10 CFR 2.309, any person whose interest may be
affected
[[Page 60196]] by this proceeding and who desires to participate
as a party must file a written petition for leave to intervene
and must specify the contentions which the person seeks to have
litigated in the hearing. A petition for leave to intervene shall
set forth with particularity the interest of the petitioner in
the proceeding, and how that interest may be affected by the
results of the proceeding. The petition must specifically state:
(1) The name, address and telephone number of the petitioner; (2)
the nature of the petitioner's right under the Act to be made a
party to the proceeding; (3) the nature and extent of the
petitioner's property, financial or other interest in the
proceeding; and (4) the possible effect of any decision or order
that may be issued in the proceeding on the petitioner's
interest.
Each contention must contain a specific statement of the issue of
law or fact to be raised or controverted. A petitioner must also
provide the following information with respect to each
contention: (1) A brief explanation of the basis for the
contention; (2) a concise statement of the alleged facts or
expert opinions which support the petitioner's position on the
issue and on which the petitioner intends to rely at hearing,
together with references to the specific sources and documents on
which the petitioner intends to rely to support its position on
the issue; and (3) sufficient information to show that a genuine
dispute exists with the applicant/licensee on a material issue of
law or fact. This information must include references to specific
portions of the application (including the applicant's
environmental report and safety report) that the petitioner
disputes and the supporting reasons for each dispute, or, if the
petitioner believes that the application fails to contain
information on a relevant matter as required by law, the
identification of each failure and the supporting reasons for the
petitioner's belief. For each contention, the petition must
demonstrate that the issue raised in the contention is within the
scope of this proceeding and that the issue raised in the
contention is material to the findings the NRC must make to
support the action that is involved in this proceeding. A
petitioner who fails to satisfy these requirements with respect
to at least one contention will not be permitted to participate
as a party.
All such petitions must be filed no later than 60 days from the
date of publication of this notice in the Federal Register.
Non-timely filings will not be entertained absent a determination
by the Commission, or the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board
designated to rule on the petition, that the petition should be
granted based upon a balancing of the factors specified in 10 CFR
2.309(c)(i)-(viii). A petition for leave to intervene must be
filed by: (1) First class mail addressed to the Office of the
Secretary of the Commission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attention: Rulemaking and
Adjudications Staff; (2) courier, express mail, and expedited
delivery services: Office of the Secretary, Sixteenth Floor, One
White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland
20852, Attention: Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff; (3) E-mail
addressed to the Office of the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, ; or (4) facsimile transmission addressed to the
Office of the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC, Attention: Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff at
(301) 415-1101, verification number is (301) 415-1966. A copy of
the request for hearing and petition for leave to intervene
should also be sent to the Office of the General Counsel, U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, and it
is requested that copies be transmitted either by means of
facsimile transmission to (301) 415-3725 or by e-mail to . A copy
of the request for hearing and petition for leave to intervene
should also be sent to the attorneys for the licensee: Bentina C.
Terry, Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc., Bin B-022, P.O.
Box 1295, Birmingham, Alabama 35201-1295, and Stanford M.
Blanton, Esq., Balch and Bingham, P.O. Box 306, Birmingham,
Alabama 35201. All petitions must be accompanied by proof of
service upon all parties to the proceeding or their attorneys of
record.
A person who is not a party may, in the discretion of the
presiding officer, be permitted to make a limited appearance by
making an oral or written statement of his position on the issues
at any session of the hearing or any prehearing conference within
such limits and on such conditions as may be fixed by the
presiding officer, but may not otherwise participate in the
proceeding.
A copy of the SNC ESP application is available for public
inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room, located at
One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor),
Rockville, Maryland. Publicly available records are accessible
from the Agencywide Documents Access and Management System
(ADAMS) Public Electronic Reading Room on the Internet at the NRC
Web site, .
The accession number for the application is ML062290248. The
accession numbers for the supplements to the application are
ML062340398, ML062510149, ML062510145, and ML062580074. Persons
who do not have access to ADAMS, or who encounter problems in
accessing the documents located in ADAMS, should contact the NRC
Public Document Room staff by telephone at 1-800-397-4209, (301)
415-4737 or by e-mail to .
The application is also available to local residents at the Burke
County Library in Waynesboro, Georgia, and is available on the
NRC Web page at .
Dated at Rockville, Maryland this 5th day of October, 2006.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Annette L. Vietti-Cook, Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. E6-16868 Filed 10-11-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
*****************************************************************
39 NRC: Abnormal Occurrence Reports: Implementation of Section 208 of
FR Doc E6-16871
[Federal Register: October 12, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 197)]
[Notices] [Page 60198-60200] From the Federal Register Online via
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr12oc06-91]
the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974; Revised Policy Statement
AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Issuance of Revised Policy Statement on Abnormal
Occurrence Criteria.
SUMMARY: This policy statement presents the revised abnormal
occurrence (AO) criteria the Commission uses for selecting AO's
for the annual report to Congress as required by Section 208 of
the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974 (Pub. L. 93-438). Section
208 of the act defines an AO as an unscheduled incident or event
which the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) determines to
be significant from the standpoint of public health or safety.
The AO criteria have been amended to ensure that the criteria are
consistent with the NRC's Strategic Plan for Fiscal Year (FY)
2004-2009 and the NRC rulemaking on Title 10, Part 35, of the
Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR Part 35), ``Medical Use of
Byproduct Material.'' Additionally, risk-informed criteria based
on the NRC Accident Sequence Precursor (ASP) Program and Reactor
Oversight Process (ROP) have been added for selecting abnormal
occurrences at commercial nuclear power plants for the report to
Congress. The ASP program assesses the risk significance of
issues and events. The ROP is a risk-informed, tiered approach to
ensuring the safety of nuclear power plants. The ROP is a process
for collecting information about licensee performance, assessing
the safety significance of the information, taking appropriate
actions, and ensuring that licensees correct deficiencies. Some
sections of the AO criteria have been restructured. The
restructuring accommodates the changes in the criteria and
minimizes duplication.
DATES: Effective Date: All revisions included in this publication
are complete and accurate as of September 21, 2006.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sheryl A. Burrows, telephone:
(301) 415-6086; e-mail: SAB2@nrc.gov; USNRC, Office of Nuclear
Regulatory Research, Mail Stop T9-F31, Washington, DC 20555-0001.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background Section 208 of the
Energy Reorganization Act of 1974 (Pub.
L. 93- 438) defines an abnormal occurrence (AO) as an unscheduled
incident or event which the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
(NRC) determines to be significant from the standpoint of public
health or safety.
The Federal Reports Elimination and Sunset Act of 1995 (Public
Law 104-66) requires that AOs be reported to Congress annually.
Section 208 requires that the discussion of each event include
the date and place, the nature and probable consequences, the
cause or causes, and the action taken to prevent recurrence. The
Commission must also widely disseminate the AO report to the
public within 15 days of sending it to Congress.
Abnormal Occurrence Reporting The AO policy statement has been
developed to comply with Section 208 of the Energy Reorganization
Act of 1974, as amended. The intent of the act is to keep
Congress and the public informed of unscheduled incidents or
events which the Commission considers significant from the
standpoint of public health and safety. The policy reflects a
range of health and safety concerns and applies to incidents and
events involving a single individual, as well as those having
overall impact on the general public. The AO criteria results in
reports to Congress only for those events considered significant
from the standpoint of public health and safety.
Licensee Reports This general policy statement will not change
the reporting requirements for NRC licensees in Commission
regulations, license conditions, or technical specifications
(TS). NRC licensees will continue to submit required reports on a
wide range of events, including instrument malfunctions and
deviations from normal operating procedures that are not
significant from the standpoint of the public health and safety
but provide data useful to the Commission in monitoring operating
trends at licensed facilities and in comparing the actual
performance of the facilities with their design and/or licensing
basis.
Applicability Implementation of Section 208 of the Energy
Reorganization Act of 1974, as amended, ``Abnormal Occurrence
Reports'', involves the conduct of Commission business and does
not impose requirements on licensees or certified facilities. The
reports cover certain unscheduled incidents or events related to
the manufacture, construction, or operation of a facility or
conduct of an activity subject to the requirements of Parts 20,
30 through 36, 39, 40, 50, 61, 70, 71, 72 or 76 of Chapter I of
Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR).
Agreement States provide information to the NRC on incidents and
events involving applicable nuclear materials in their States.
Events reported by Agreements States that reach the threshold for
reporting as AOs are also published in the ``Report to Congress
on Abnormal Occurrences.'' Abnormal Occurrence General Statement
of Policy The Commission will apply the following policy in
determining whether an incident or event at a facility or
involving an activity that is licensed or otherwise regulated by
the Commission is an AO.
An incident or event is considered an AO if it involves a major
reduction in the protection of public health or safety. The
incident or event has a moderate or severe impact on public
health or safety and could include, but need not be limited to,
the following: (1) Moderate exposure to, or release of,
radioactive material licensed or otherwise regulated by the
Commission, (2) Major degradation of essential safety-related
equipment, or (3) Major deficiencies in the design, construction,
or use of management controls for facilities or radioactive
material.
The criteria for determining whether to consider an incident or
event for reporting as an AO are set forth in Appendix A of this
policy statement.
Commission Dissemination of AO Information The Commission widely
disseminates the AO reports to the public. The Commission submits
an annual report to Congress on AOs at or associated with any
facility or activity which is licensed or otherwise regulated
pursuant to the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, or the
Energy Reorganization Act of 1974, as amended. This report gives
the date, place, nature, and probable consequences of each AO,
the cause or causes of each AO, and any actions taken to prevent
recurrence.
[[Page 60199]] Appendix A: Abnormal Occurrence Criteria The
following criteria are used to determine whether to consider
events for reporting as AOs: I. For All Licensees A. Human
Exposure to Radiation from Licensed Material 1. Any unintended
radiation exposure to an adult (any individual 18 years of age or
older) resulting in an annual total effective dose equivalent
(TEDE) of 250 mSv (25 rem) or more; or an annual sum of the deep
dose equivalent (external dose) and committed dose equivalent
(intake of radioactive material) to any individual organ other
than the lens of the eye, the bone marrow, and the gonads of
2,500 mSv (250 rem) or more; or an annual dose equivalent to the
lens of the eye of 1 Sv (100 rem) or more; or an annual sum of
the deep dose equivalent and committed dose equivalent to the
bone marrow of 1 Sv (100 rem) or more; or a committed dose
equivalent to the gonads of 2,500 mSv (250 rem) or more; or an
annual shallow-dose equivalent to the skin or extremities of
2,500 mSv (250 rem) or more.
2. Any unintended radiation exposure to any minor (an individual
less than 18 years of age) resulting in an annual TEDE of 50 mSv
(5 rem) or more, or to an embryo/fetus resulting in a dose
equivalent of 50 mSv (5 rem) or more.
3. Any radiation exposure that has resulted in unintended
permanent functional damage to an organ or a physiological system
as determined by a physician.
B. Discharge or dispersal of radioactive material from its
intended place of confinement which results in the release of
radioactive material to an unrestricted area in concentrations
which, if averaged over a period of 24 hours, exceeds 5,000 times
the values specified in Table 2 of Appendix B to 10 CFR Part 20,
unless the licensee has demonstrated compliance with Sec.
20.1301 using Sec. 20.1302(b)(1) or Sec. 20.1302(b)(2)(ii). This
criterion does not apply to transportation events.
C. Theft, Diversion, or Loss of Licensed Material, or Sabotage or
Security Breach1 2
-----------------------------------------------------------------
---------- \1\ Information pertaining to certain incidents may be
either classified or under consideration for classification
because of national security implications. Classified information
will be withheld when formally reporting these incidents in
accordance with Section 208 of the ERA of 1974, as amended. Any
classified details regarding these incidents would be available
to the Congress, upon request, under appropriate security
arrangements.
\2\ Due to increased terrorist activities worldwide, the AO
report would not disclose specific classified information and
sensitive information, the details of which are considered useful
to a potential terrorist. Classified information is defined as
information that would harm national security if disclosed in an
unauthorized manner.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
---------- 1. Any unrecovered lost, stolen, or abandoned sources
that exceed the values listed in Appendix P to Part 110, ``High
Risk Radioactive Material, Category 2.'' Excluded from reporting
under this criterion are those events involving sources that are
lost, stolen, or abandoned under the following conditions:
sources abandoned in accordance with the requirements of 10 CFR
39.77(c); sealed sources contained in labeled, rugged source
housings; recovered sources with sufficient indication that doses
in excess of the reporting thresholds specified in AO criteria
I.A.1 and I.A.2 did not occur while the source was missing; and
unrecoverable sources (sources that have been lost and for which
a reasonable attempt at recovery has been made without success)
lost under such conditions that doses in excess of the reporting
thresholds specified in AO criteria I.A.1 and I.A.2 are not known
to have occurred and the agency has determined that the risk of
theft or diversion is acceptably low.
2. A substantiated \3\ case of actual theft or diversion of
licensed, risk-significant radioactive sources or a formula
quantity \4\ of special nuclear material; or act that results in
radiological sabotage.\5\
-----------------------------------------------------------------
---------- \3\ ``Substantiated'' means a situation where an
indication of loss, theft, or unlawful diversion such as: an
allegation of diversion, report of lost or stolen material,
statistical processing difference, or other indication of loss of
material control or accountability cannot be refuted following an
investigation; and requires further action on the part of the
Agency or other proper authorities.
\4\ A formula quantity of special nuclear material is defined in
10 CFR 70.4. \5\ Radiological sabotage is defined in 10 CFR 73.2.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
---------- 3. Any substantiated \3\ loss of a formula quantity
\4\ of special nuclear material or a substantiated \3\ inventory
discrepancy of a formula quantity \4\ of special nuclear material
that is judged to be caused by theft or diversion or by a
substantial breakdown \6\ of the accountability system.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
---------- \6\ A substantial breakdown is defined as a red
finding in the security inspection program, or any plant or
facility determined to have overall unacceptable performance, or
in a shutdown condition (inimical to the effective functioning of
the nation's critical infrastructure) as a result of significant
performance problems and/ or operational events.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
---------- 4. Any substantial breakdown \6\ of physical security
or material control (i.e., access control containment or
accountability systems) that significantly weakened the
protection against theft, diversion, or sabotage.
5. Any significant unauthorized disclosures (loss, theft, and/or
deliberate) of classified information that harms national
security or safeguards information that harms the public health
and safety.
D. Initiation of High-Level NRC Team Inspections \7\
-----------------------------------------------------------------
---------- \7\ Initiation of any Incident Investigation Teams, as
described in NRC Management Directive (MD) 8.3, ``NRC Incident
Investigation Program,'' or initiation of any Accident Review
Groups, as described in MD 8.9, ``Accident Investigation.''
-----------------------------------------------------------------
---------- II. For Commercial Nuclear Power Plant Licensees A.
Malfunction of Facility, Structures, or Equipment 1. Exceeding a
safety limit of license technical specification (TS) [10 CFR
50.36(c)]. 2. Serious degradation of fuel integrity, primary
coolant pressure boundary, or primary containment boundary.
3. Loss of plant capability to perform essential safety functions
so that a release of radioactive materials which could result in
exceeding the dose limits of 10 CFR Part 100 or 5 times the dose
limits of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix A, General Design Criterion
(GDC) 19, could occur from a postulated transient or accident
(e.g., loss of emergency core cooling system, loss of control rod
system).
B. Design or Safety Analysis Deficiency, Personnel Error, or
Procedural or Administrative Inadequacy 1. Discovery of a major
condition not specifically considered in the safety analysis
report (SAR) or TS that requires immediate remedial action.
2. Personnel error or procedural deficiencies that result in loss
of plant capability to perform essential safety functions so that
a release of radioactive materials which could result in
exceeding the dose limits of 10 CFR Part 100 or 5 times the dose
limits of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix A, GDC 19, could occur from a
postulated transient or accident (e.g., loss of emergency core
cooling system, loss of control rod drive mechanism).
C. Any reactor events or conditions that are determined to be of
high safety significance.\8\
-----------------------------------------------------------------
---------- \8\ The NRC ROP uses four colors to describe the
safety significance of licensee performance. As defined in NRC
Management Directive 8.13, ``Reactor Oversight Process,'' green
is used for very low safety significance, white is used for low
to moderate safety significance, yellow is used for substantial
safety significance, and red is used for high safety
significance.
Reactor conditions or performance indicators evaluated to be red
are considered Abnormal Occurrences. Additionally, Criterion II.C
also includes any events or conditions evaluated by the NRC ASP
program to have a conditional core damage probability (CCDP) or
change in core damage probability (CDP) of greater than 1x10-3.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
----------
[[Page 60200]] D. Any operating reactor plants that are
determined to have overall unacceptable performance or that are
in a shutdown condition as a result of significant performance
problems and/or operational event(s).\9\
-----------------------------------------------------------------
---------- \9\ Any plants assessed by the ROP to be in the
unacceptable performance column, as described in NRC Inspection
Manual Chapter 0305, ``Operating Reactor Assessment Program.''
This assessment of safety performance is based on the number and
significance of NRC inspection findings and licensee performance
indicators.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
---------- III. Events at Facilities Other Than Nuclear Power
Plants and All Transportation Events A. Events Involving Design,
Analysis, Construction, Testing, Operation, Transport, Use, or
Disposal of Licensed Facilities or Regulated Materials 1. An
accidental criticality [10 CFR 70.52(a)]. 2. A major deficiency
in design, construction, control, or operation having significant
safety implications that require immediate remedial action.
3. A serious safety-significant deficiency in management or
procedural controls.
4. A series of events (in which the individual events are not of
major importance), recurring incidents, or incidents with
implications for similar facilities (generic incidents) that
raise a major safety concern.
B. For Fuel Cycle Facilities 1. Absence or failure of all
safety-related or security-related controls (engineered and
human) for an NRC-regulated lethal hazard (radiological or
chemical) while the lethal hazard is present.
2. An NRC-ordered safety-related or security-related immediate
remedial action.
C. For Medical Licensees A medical event that: 1. Results in a
dose that is a. Equal to or greater than 1Gy (100 rad) to a major
portion of the bone marrow or to the lens of the eye; or equal or
greater than 2.5 Gy (250 rad) to the gonads; or b. Equal to or
greater than 10 Gy (1,000 rad) to any other organ or tissue; and
2. Represents either a. A dose or dosage that is at least 50
percent greater than that prescribed, or b. A prescribed dose or
dosage that (i) Uses the wrong radiopharmaceutical or unsealed
byproduct material; or (ii) Is delivered by the wrong route of
administration; or (iii) Is delivered to the wrong treatment
site; or (iv) Is delivered by the wrong treatment mode; or (v) Is
from a leaking source or sources; or (vi) Is delivered to the
wrong individual or human research subject.
IV. Other Events of Interest The Commission may determine that
events other than AOs may be of interest to Congress and the
public and should be included in an appendix to the AO report as
``Other Events of Interest.'' Such events may include, but are
not necessarily limited to, events that do not meet the AO
criteria but that have been perceived by Congress or the public
to be of high health and safety significance, have received
significant media coverage, or have caused the NRC to increase
its attention to or oversight of a program area, or a group of
similar events that have resulted in licensed materials entering
the public domain in an uncontrolled manner.
5 U.S.C. 552(a)] Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 5th day of
October 2006.
For the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Annette L.
Vietti-Cook, Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. E6-16871 Filed 10-11-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
*****************************************************************
40 NRC: ``Demonstrating the Feasibility and Reliability of Operator
FR Doc E6-16872
[Federal Register: October 12, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 197)]
[Notices] [Page 60200-60201] From the Federal Register Online via
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr12oc06-92]
Manual Actions in Response to Fire, Draft Report for Comment''
AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Notice of availability of NUREG-1852, ``Demonstrating the
Feasibility and Reliability of Operator Manual Actions in
Response to Fire, Draft Report For Comment,'' and request for
public comment.
SUMMARY: The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is announcing
the availability of and is seeking comments on NUREG-1852,
``Demonstrating the Feasibility and Reliability of Operator
Manual Actions in Response to Fire, Draft Report For Comment.''
DATES: Comments on this document should be submitted by November
6, 2006. Comments received after that date will be considered to
the extent practical. To ensure efficient and complete comment
resolution, comments should include references to the section,
page, and line numbers of the document to which the comment
applies, if possible.
ADDRESSES: Members of the public are invited and encouraged to
submit written comments to Michael Lesar, Chief, Rulemaking,
Directives, and Editing Branch, Office of Administration, Mail
Stop T6-D59, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC
20555-0001.
Hand-deliver comments attention to Michael Lesar, 11545 Rockville
Pike, Rockville, MD, between 7:30 a.m. and 4:15 p.m. on Federal
workdays. Comments may also be sent electronically to
NRCREP@nrc.gov. This document, NUREG-1852, is available at the
Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) Public
Electronic Reading Room on the Internet at the NRC Web site at
http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html under Accession No.
ML062350285; on the NRC Web site http://
http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/nuregs/docs4comment
.html; and at the NRC Public Document Room, 11555 Rockville Pike,
Rockville, MD. The PDR's mailing address is USNRC PDR,
Washington, DC 20555; telephone (301) 415-4737 or (800) 397-4205;
fax (301) 415-3548; e-mail
PDR@NRC.GOV. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, CONTACT: Erasmia Lois,
Human Factors and Reliability Branch, Office of Nuclear
Regulatory Research, telephone (301) 415-6560, e-mail
exl1@nrc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: NUREG-1852, ``Demonstrating the
Feasibility and Reliability of Operator Manual Actions in
Response to Fire, Draft Report For Comment,'' September 2006 This
NUREG provides criteria that licensees may use to demonstrate the
feasibility and reliability of operator manual actions in
response to fire. This NUREG does not clarify circumstances under
which licensees may use operator manual actions in lieu of fire
barriers. Licensees should refer to 10 CFR 50.48 and their
license bases to determine applicable regulatory requirements
with respect to operator manual actions in fire protection.
Additional guidance on regulatory requirements pertaining to
operator manual actions are provided in Regulatory Issue Summary
2006-10, ``Regulatory Expectations with
[[Page 60201]] Appendix R, Paragraph III.G.2 Operator Manual
Actions,'' dated June 2006.
Section 9.5.1, ``Fire Protection Program,'' of the Standard
Review Plan, NUREG-0800, will be revised to incorporate the
guidance provided by RIS 2006-10 and NUREG-1852.
The NRC is seeking public comment in order to receive feedback
from the widest range of interested parties and to ensure that
all information relevant to developing this document is available
to the NRC staff. This document is issued for comment only and is
not intended for interim use. The NRC will review public comments
received on the document, incorporate suggested changes as
necessary, and issue the final NUREG-1852 for use.
Dated at Rockville, MD, this 11th day of September, 2006.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Farouk Eltawila, Director, Division of Risk Assessment and
Special Projects, Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research.
[FR Doc. E6-16872 Filed 10-11-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
*****************************************************************
41 AFP: US gives assurances on Indian nuclear deal
NEW DELHI (AFP) - A top US official has given assurances that
the United States wants to go ahead with a key civilian nuclear
deal with India, easing fears for the agreement raised by North
Korea" /> 's atomic test.
US Under Secretary of State Nicholas Burns said in an interview
that Washington was "determined" to implement the deal.
"We are determined to fulfil the commitments we made to the
Indian government," Burns told NDTV.
Burns said he had been in touch with Indian officials to "assure
that the US wants to go forward on all of the definite
initiatives that President (George) Bush and Prime Minister
(Manmohan) Singh talked in March."
The accord -- reached during Bush's March visit -- aims to give
New Delhi access to previously forbidden nuclear technology to
generate electricity to fuel its rapid economic growth.
Under the terms of the deal, India -- which conducted nuclear
tests in 1974 and 1998 and has not signed the Nuclear
Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) -- will separate its civilian and
military plants and put the former under international
safeguards.
Washington for its part agreed to amend its 1954 Atomic Energy
Act to allow nuclear commerce and trade in technology with a
non-NPT signatory.
The US Congress gave its thumbs-up to the deal in July but a
vote has been delayed in the Republican-controlled Senate that
will shortly hold polls to elect new members.
North Korea's announcement earlier this week that it had
conducted a nuclear test had however given rise to doubts about
whether US lawmakers opposed to the deal would allow it to go
through.
Burns however said Congressmen and Senators were aware of the
"world of difference between India and North Korea."
"India is a peaceful, democratic, law-abiding leader of the
international community. North Korea is the reverse of all
that," he told NDTV.
"There is great trust that the commitments the Indian government
has made to us will be fulfilled and we are very confident that
the India deal will be approved by a substantial margin, at
least we hope it will.
"We have been encouraged by the great number of senators,
Democrats and Republicans, who have come out to support the
agreement," Burns added.
Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
42 Hudson Valley News: NRC chairman calls for independent safety review of Indian Point
Thursday, October 12, 2006
Rockville, MD Nuclear Regulatory Commission Chairman Dale Klein
Wednesday directed the NRC staff to develop a plan for an
independent review of agency Reactor Oversight Process
activities at the Indian Point nuclear power plant, and possibly
others.
In a memo to Executive Director for Operations Luis Reyes, Klein
said the assessment should first be carried out at the
Entergy-owned plant in Buchanan, N.Y. because of repeated
inquiries about the adequacy of NRC oversight and licensee
performance at the two-unit site. He added, though, that such an
assessment should be considered for other facilities in other
regions to the extent you believe appropriate. He also said that
consideration should also be given to any existing international
programs already in place that might fulfill this assessment
function.
Congresswoman Sue Kelly, who has been pushing for the review,
said she is cautiously optimistic. Around here I dont take the
NRC at face value; Im skeptical. I think weve got a step in the
right direction, she said. Well wait and see how they are going
to implement what theyve said.
Kelly is a Republican. House Members Maurice Hinchey, Nita Lowey
and Eliot Engel are all Democrats. They said that any security
review short of a full independent safety assessment conducted
by the NRC would be considered insufficient.
Lowey said the NRC continues to blow smoke when it comes to
performing a complete and independent safety analysis at Indian
Point.
Klein asked for a response for Commission review within 30 days.
HEAR today's news on MidHudsonRadio.com, the Hudson Valley's
only Internet radio news report.
*****************************************************************
43 Most US Cities Can't Evacuate In Case Of Nuclear Or Other Emergency
Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2006 19:16:13 -0400
X-Sender-Host-Name: elasmtp-junco.atl.sa.earthlink.net
X-Spam-Class: HAM-VERY-WHITELIST
These stats [human beings] and lots more since
this study was commissioned and human population
has rose stand in the way of
harm/death/cancer/genetic pathology by nuclear
terrorists like the NRC and the utilities that run
these stationary nuclear radiological weapons.
This report was mandated by NRC and carried out by
Sandia Labs:
http://www.mothersalert.org/crac.html
----- Original Message -----
From: "Anna Aurilio"
To: "Sent: Thursday, October 12, 2006 5:27 PM
Subject: [nuclearshutdown] Major cities can't
evacuate
From today's congressdaily
Transportation. The majority of America's urban
areas received a failing
grade on their ability to evacuate citizens in the
event of a disaster,
according to study released today by the American
Highway Users Alliance. It
graded 37 of the largest urban areas in the
country with more than 1 million
people, and found that 25 would have greater
problems evacuating their
citizens than New Orleans did during Hurricane
Katrina. They failed on three
criteria -- internal traffic flow, capacity of
major exit routes and
accessibility to automobile transportation. The
Homeland Security Department
has expressed concern over "significant weakness"
in evacuation planning,
the report said.
While data shows that the vast majority of
Americans have access to
automobiles, those without cars also rely on
highways, because buses are
their most important means of evacuation. The
study urged Homeland Security
to establish national standards and a reporting
system for evacuation plans.
Kansas City was the only city to receive an "A."
Among those urban areas
getting failing grades were Boston, Philadelphia,
Washington, Seattle,
Chicago, Los Angeles and New York.
DISCUSSION GROUP TO ORGANIZE NUCLEAR SHUTDOWN
CONFERENCE
*****************************************************************
44 [DU-WATCH] Ann Wright and international networks join War Crimes Report
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2006 01:51:07 -0500 (CDT)
X-Sender-Host-Name: chumbly.math.missouri.edu
X-Spam-Class: HAM
(The report includes a section on illegal weapons, such as uranium
weapons.)
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
October 12, 2006
CONTACT: Consumers for Peace, http://www.consumersforpeace.org
Nick Mottern nickmottern@earthlink.net
Ann Wright joins endorsers of War Crimes Report
International Anti-Occupation Network and Stop the War Coalition (UK)
join report publishers
"The War Crimes Report is an extraordinarily comprehensive and
important presentation of international law that governs the conduct
of nations and their military forces. The Report documents the
blatant violations of international and domestic law by the Bush
administration and US military forces including the use of illegal
military tactics and illegal weapons." - Ann Wright
Retired U.S. Colonel and diplomat Ann Wright today endorsed a new
report on U.S. war crimes in Iraq, which was released yesterday, the
same day of the publication of the study, by Johns Hopkins and Al
Mustansiriya universities (in cooperation with the Center for
International Studies/MIT), that found that approximately 600,000
people have been killed in the invasion and occupation of Iraq.
U.S. War Crimes in Iraq and Mechanisms for Accountability
documents U.S. war crimes in Iraq and calls on U.S. public to demand
investigation and prosecution of violations of international law by
military and civilian leaders.
The report is being published internationally on the internet
organizations listed below, and has gained international support
today from the International Anti-Occupation Network (which is
publishing the report through The BRussells Tribunal) and the Stop
the War Coalition (UK).
The report was prepared by Consumers for Peace.org with the advice of
Karen Parker, noted lawyer in human rights and humanitarian law. Ms.
Parker is President of the San-Francisco-based Association of
Humanitarian Lawyers and Chief Delegate to the United Nations for the
Los Angeles-based International Educational Development/Humanitarian
Law Project (IED/AHL), an accredited non-governmental organization on
the U.N. Secretary-Generals list.
Ann Wright's full statement
Ann Wright, 29-year US Army veteran who retired as a Colonel and
US diplomat who resigned in March, 2003 in opposition to the war in
Iraq commented on the War Crimes Report:
"While in the US Army at Ft Bragg, NC, I taught to US military
officers and noncommissioned officers the responsibilities of
military forces under the Geneva Convention and the Law of Land
Warfare, as well as the obligations of an Occupying Power.
"The War Crimes Report is an extraordinarily comprehensive and
important presentation of international law that governs the conduct
of nations and their military forces. The Report documents the
blatant violations of international and domestic law by the Bush
administration and US military forces including the use of illegal
military tactics and illegal weapons.
"Because of a huge media failure in the United States, many Americans
do not realize how many times the Bush administration has violated
international law. But, the rest of the world knows very well the
extent of these crimes.
"As a retired military officer, I know that accountability is one of
the foundation elements of the US military. The Bush administration
has undercut the professionalism of our military forces by
encouraging and condoning the violation of international and domestic
war in treatment of detainees, torture and use of illegal tactics and
weapons. For the sake of our own military we must demand
accountability from civilian leaders, as well as our military forces.
This report provides specific mechanisms for much-needed
accountability of criminal behaviour by Bush administration policy
makers and by US military forces."
International Publishing Group for War Crimes Report
Consumers for Peace
http://www.consumersforpeace.org
Association of Humanitarian Lawyers
http://www.humanlaw.org
Traprock Peace Center
http://www.traprockpeace.org
Voices for Creative Nonviolence
http://www.vcnv.org
Uruknet
http://www.uruknet.info
Information Clearing House
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info
AfterDowningStreet.org
http://www.afterdowningstreet.org
Socialist Worker weekly newspaper
http://www.socialistworker.org
The Brussells Tribunal (for International Anti-Occupation Network)
http:/www.brusselstribunal.org
Stop the War Coalition (UK)
http://www.stopthewar.co.uk
Ann Wright joined other individuals with extensive knowledge of Iraq
in endorsing the report:
Dahr Jamail, noted independent journalist who spent more than
eight months reporting from occupied Iraq, writes the following :
I cannot endorse strongly enough this report prepared by Karen
Parker regarding U.S. war crimes in Iraq. Having witnessed much of
what is so well documented in this report, it is a clear and
encompassing indictment of the Bush Administration for the war crimes
they are directly responsible for in Iraq. Until evidence such as
this begins to see the light of day in a court of law and the
perpetrators brought to justice, the world remains unsafe and
unstable from an administration determined to rule the world. After
witnessing what they are capable of in Iraq, I have no doubt these
people will not stop in their quest for world domination. Instead,
they must be stopped. And the only way to do that is bring the
guilty to justice. This document will help achieve that goal.
Kathy Kelly, co-coordinator of Voices for Creative Non-Violence,
three-time nominee for the Noble Peace Prize, who has visited Iraq 28
times in the last 15 years, writes:
After spending four days in the fortified and secure Green Zone,
in Iraq, during September 06, former Secretary of State James Baker
III assured that the investigative panel he led had not spent any
time wringing our hands over what mistakes might or might not have
been created in the past. (NYT, September 20, 2006). The Consumers
for Peace report on war crimes committed in Iraq helps us understand
our responsibility not to wring our hands but rather to demand
accountability from elected representatives by delivering this report
to them and to local media. How many people killed? How many
families torn apart? How many homes destroyed? How many livelihoods
gone? How many lives ruined? How many cities sacrificed? We bear
responsibility to end the war in Iraq, insist on just reparations for
suffering caused, and promote careful, legal scrutiny of the crimes
committed. This report beckons all who read it to stop collaborating
with illegal, immoral warmongers who recklessly afflict Iraq.
Neil MacKay, multi-award winning Home Affairs and Investigations
Editor of the Sunday Herald (Scotland), writes:
"What has happened in Iraq is a great sin and a great crime. The
invasion and occupation have stained the concepts of democracy,
freedom and liberty; and disgraced the good name of the people of
both the United States of America and Great Britain. As a journalist
who has investigated the roots of this war, and the on-going horror
of what is happening in Iraq, I fully commend this report to readers.
It is an important reminder of the blood which is on the hands of our
leaders, and the shame that the governments of the UK and the USA
have brought to the British and American people by perpetrating a
criminal war in our name."
####
Charles Jenks
Chair of Advisory Board
Traprock Peace Center
103 Keets Road
Deerfield, MA 01342
http://www.traprockpeace.org
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[Brought to you by HTTP://WWW.STOPNATO.ORG.UK]
*****************************************************************
45 The Age: Bomb clean-up 40 years on - World -
www.theage.com.au
Madrid
October 12, 2006 - 7:00PM
The discovery of radioactive snails at a site in south-eastern
Spain where three US hydrogen bombs fell by accident 40 years
ago may trigger a new joint US-Spanish clean-up operation.
The hydrogen bombs fell near the fishing village of Palomares
in 1966 after a mid-air collision between a bomber and a
refuelling craft, in which seven of 11 crewmen died.
Hundreds of tonnes of soil were removed from the Palomares area
and shipped to the US after high explosive igniters on two bombs
detonated on impact, spreading plutonium dust-bearing clouds
across nearby fields.
Spanish authorities say the appearance of higher than normal
levels of radiation in snails and other creatures shows there
may be dangerous levels of plutonium and uranium below ground,
and a further clean-up could be necessary.
"We have to study the dirt, we have to look underground," said
Juan Antonio Rubio, director general of Spain's energy research
agency CIEMAT, which is carrying out an investigation with the
US Department of Energy.
"We don't know what's down there."
The US and Spain have agreed to share the cost of the initial
investigation, which is set to begin in November.
REUTERS
Copyright © 2006. The Age Company Ltd.
*****************************************************************
46 Honolulu Advertiser: Strykers keep rolling along, despite ruling -
Posted on: Thursday, October 12, 2006
Video: Strykers in residential Wahiawa
By Advertiser Military Writer
Stryker armored vehicles pass by homes in Wahiawa on their way
down a dirt road at Schofield Barracks' East Range training area.
The fence in the foreground marks the end of Leilehua Road.
Wahiawa resident Duane Tamura, standing at the gate that
separates the Army's East Range from Leilehua Road, says he is
often awakened at night by convoys of Stryker armored vehicles.
Army training with its 19-ton Stryker vehicles is going forward
— at least for now — despite a federal appeals court decision
last week that the Army violated environmental law in planning
for the arrival of the fast-strike unit.
"Training continues as we continue to evaluate our options in
regard to the decision by the 9th Circuit Court (of Appeals),"
said Stretch Rodney, a spokesman for U.S. Army Pacific at Fort
Shafter.
The legal friction is part of the continuing clash of cultures
that exists in Hawai'i between its sizable military and
strategic location in the Pacific, and those who oppose the
military.
David Henkin, an Earthjustice attorney representing three
Hawaiian groups in their suit against the Army, said if
negotiations between the groups and the Army fail to produce an
agreement soon, he will seek a temporary restraining order or
equivalent to halt all Stryker training and work.
"I've been talking with the Army," Henkin said. The attorney
said he could not reveal what was discussed, but said it could
be "not long" before a stoppage is sought.
Henkin and the Army disagree over whether the service can
continue with the project based on an earlier court agreement.
Henkin said the Army shouldn't continue, while the Army believes
it can, he said.
KICKING UP DUST
In a 2-1 decision last Thursday, the San Francisco-based appeals
court said the Army must complete a supplementary environmental
analysis to consider alternatives to basing a Stryker brigade in
the Islands.
Wahiawa residents saw the armored vehicles back on East Range
Tuesday and yesterday for the first time since last week's court
decision. About a month after the first round of driver training
sessions for the Stryker vehicles got under way in mid-July,
area residents concerned about the dust kicked up by the
vehicles turned to the state Department of Health.
"Before we did some calls, the dust that they kicked up was so
bad the (Health Department) was called in," said Duane Tamura,
who lives off Leilehua Road in Wahiawa.
The eight-wheeled Stryker vehicles pass by homes in the area on
an adjacent dirt road within the Schofield Barracks East Range
training area.
"The issue was addressed pretty much immediately by taking water
trucks out there and doing two-a-day runs along the fence line
to (reduce the dust)," said Rodney. The Army also told the
Health Department it plans to create a new access road several
hundred feet away from the fence line and homes.
An approximately 3,000-page Environmental Impact Statement
produced by the Army said that 1,736 tons of dust would be
generated by the Strykers on O'ahu and the Big Island, an
increase of 81 percent.
The Army also concluded there would be significant effects on
cultural and biological resources, but that mitigation efforts
could reduce them.2004 Lawsuit
Three groups — Ilio'ulaokalani Coalition, Na 'Imi Pono and
Kipuka — filed a lawsuit in 2004 alleging that the project will
damage Native Hawaiian cultural sites and harm endangered
species and their habitats.
At the time the lawsuit was filed, the Army said it was going
ahead with the Stryker brigade because it is "critical to
achieving current and future national security objectives in
U.S. Pacific Command's area of responsibility."
The Army is in the process of bringing 328 Stryker armored
vehicles to O'ahu, where they will be part of a $1.5 billion
unit — one of seven the Army is creating to rapidly transport
troops to the battlefield. The Strykers will also provide more
protection for soldiers, compared with Humvees.
The brigade of 3,900 soldiers is designed to be transported on
new C-17 cargo aircraft based at Hickam Air Force Base. More
than $700 million in construction projects are under way or
planned for the unit, including 71 miles of private trails on
O'ahu and the Big Island.
An Army official said the new Stryker brigade is expected to
deploy to Iraq next summer, but the completion of a new training
range on Schofield for Strykers has been delayed.
Schofield spokesman Ken-drick Washington recently said official
word has not been received that the Stryker brigade is going
anywhere. "Of course there are rumors out there about
everything," he said, "but nothing definitive has come down."
Concerns tied to Hawaiian cultural sites halted work in July for
about a month on unexploded ordnance cleanup at the planned
"Battle Area Complex" for Stryker training after a work crew
bulldozed across a buffer protecting the Hale'au'au heiau,
cultural monitors said.
ALTERNATIVE LOCATIONS
It wasn't the first or only setback for the Stryker vehicle
driving and firing range.
In January, the Army said depleted uranium was found from 15
training rounds used in the 1960s.
A month later, the Army said chemical weapons that included
chloropicrin, an asphyxiator used in World War I, were located
at the site.
The majority opinion of the 9th Circuit reached last week said
the Army violated the National Environmental Policy Act when it
chose Hawai'i for a Stryker brigade by failing to examine
alternative locations in the "programmatic" or "site-specific"
environmental impact statement.
In April 2005, Hawai'i Chief U.S. District Court Judge David
Ezra had ruled against the three Hawaiian groups in the case,
saying the organizations raised their objections too late. He
also said the Army had properly notified the public and had
adequately considered what impacts the project might have on the
environment.
But Henkin said he warned the Army since 2002 it needed to
adequately consider alternative locations for the Stryker
brigade, and letting the service continue the development of the
unit while the court case ticks on would turn the "whole
(environmental impact) process into a sham."
The Army can seek a rehearing either from the three-member panel
or a 15-judge appeals court panel and has 45 days from last
week's decision to do so, Henkin said. The Army also has 90 days
to decide if it wants to seek review before the U.S. Supreme
Court, he said.
Reach William Cole at .
*****************************************************************
47 washingtonpost.com: Further Study of Chemicals Expected -
Health Analysis In Spring Valley
By Susan LevineWashington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, October 12, 2006; Page DZ03
The Johns Hopkins University professor heading a review of the
health hazards linked to World War I-era munitions in Spring
Valley says more assessment of the Northwest neighborhood likely
will be needed to determine whether the materials affected
residents' well-being.
Thomas A. Burke, one of the directors of the Johns Hopkins Risk
Sciences and Public Policy Institute, briefed the restoration
advisory board to the multimillion-dollar federal and local
cleanup project Tuesday night. His team expects to complete the
review in March but likely will recommend additional study.
Although the D.C. Council's original intent was a comprehensive
study of residents' health, stemming from problems blamed on
contamination on a former weapons-testing site there, the
Hopkins team decided it had to embark first on a "scoping study"
before drawing any conclusions. Burke likened much of the
scoping work to "filling in the gaps," determining the extent of
material used at the site, past and current exposure levels that
would be a risk to human health, and the incidence and location
of suspect diseases in the community.
Only then will the experts and officials know whether to proceed
with a true health study, either through ongoing surveillance or
an epidemiological survey, Burke said. Residents have long
suggested a connection between the area's history and health
concerns, including troubling numbers of unusual cancers, blood
disorders and neurological ailments.
"There's really a lot more work to be done . . . to see if a
health study is really appropriate," Burke said.
There is no question the American University Experiment Station
used hazardous substances and compounds 90 years ago. After the
war, the government left pits and trenches with the detritus of
chemical warfare agents, which contaminated soil with arsenic
and lead and possibly groundwater with perchlorate, a compound
once used in tests with mustard agent.
Eighteen months ago, the D.C. Council authorized $250,000 for
the review. Health Department officials contacted the Johns
Hopkins School of Public Health and Burke, whose background
includes top state health and environmental protection posts in
New Jersey.
Work officially started in March with outreach to the community,
tours through the area and interviews with dozens of people.
"It's a tough challenge," Burke said.
The 661-acre site contains several embassies, about 1,200 houses
and American University and Wesley Seminary. Excavation and
cleanup has been underway in two phases since the first items
were discovered in 1993, with soil removed from nearly
five-dozen properties since 2002. That work is expected to last
until 2009.
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, which is heading the federal
and local remediation effort, considers Spring Valley an
extremely complex project because of the lack of documentation
of material dumped there nearly a century ago and the extensive
property changes and development that have taken place. The
trenches and pits were covered over, ordnance rounds buried and
forgotten.
Last month, soil where a glass fragment was unearthed between
two halls on the AU campus tested positive for arsenic
concentration of 106,000 parts per million -- the cleanup
threshold is 20 -- and elevated levels of zinc, mercury and lead.
The corps will continue installing wells for groundwater
monitoring this month. Though no community residents use
groundwater for drinking, cooking or bathing, the concern is
that any contamination could reach the Dalecarlia Reservoir that
supplies drinking water to more than 1 million people in the
Washington region. Officials continue to say the system's
drinking water is safe.
Monitoring results from more than two-dozen wells installed
since 2005 have been mixed, with one location near the reservoir
showing an elevated level of perchlorate. The next round of well
data is due before the end of the year, according to the corps.
Print This ArticleE-Mail This ArticleRSS FeedPermission to
Republish
+ dl#inform-results dd.attribution a { text-indent: -2000px;
display: block; background: #fff
url(http://feeds.inform.com/resources/images/inform.gif)
no-repeat 0 100%; width: 155px; height: 28px; } Related Articles
+ Disabled Transit Accidents Increase
+ Steele Takes a Head-On Jab at His Party: Republican Faults 'No
Child' Law in Ad as Cardin Tries to Link Him to Bush
+ For Warner Supporters, a No-Win Situation
+ MONGTOMERY SCHOOLS: Boy, 12, Charged Over Made-Up Story of Gun
Threat
+ Gallaudet Closed for a Second Day: Students Demand to Meet
with Incoming President
copy; Copyright 1996- The Washington Post Company
*****************************************************************
48 Spectrum: Thyroditis linked to fallout
St. George - UT www.thespectrum.com -
By PATRICE ST. GERMAIN patrices@thespectrum.com
HURRICANE - A study conducted by several agencies and
researchers, including University of Utah professor Joseph L.
Lyon, indicates a much stronger association than previously
believed between fallout from testing at the Nevada Test Site
during the 1950s and thyroid conditions.
The conclusion to the study, which will be published in the Nov.
1 journal "Epidemiology," indicates that persons exposed to
radioactive iodine as children have an increased risk of thyroid
neoplasms and autoimmune thyroiditis up to 30 years after
exposure.
What was surprising to Lyon was that benign neoplasms, a
precursor for cancerous lesions, was elevated in this group, but
unfortunately, he said, the government halted testing last year.
Thyroiditis strikes about 1 percent of the population, Lyon said.
"There were about 10,000 people in Washington County in 1950,
and you would affect hundreds," Lyon said. "The only problem we
are looking at is the risk can occur over a lifetime, unlike
leukemia where children died within 10 years of the testing.
Here, it's still developing so it would be hard to say how many
hundreds of people exposed would have been affected."
The report didn't come as a surprise to St. George resident and
downwinder Michelle Thomas who participated in thyroid studies
for decades.
"Many children (who are) now adults had thyroid nodules and
thyroids removed and some have been on thyroid medicine for
years," Thomas said. "For those of us who were part of the
study, we didn't need to wait for any study to tell us something
we already knew. We are living, breathing evidence."
Lyon said the recent study was a follow-up of one done in 1985
and 1986. However, after the last round of examinations the
government halted the testing.
"Basically, the government decided they didn't want to know any
more information," Lyon said. "Our government is spending money
in Russia to follow kids after Chernobyl, yet they are not
interested in finding anything out about their own citizens."
Lyon said one group in the United States received the same
exposure as Chernobyl. There were 3,500 people in his test
group. Lyon said he needed another three to four years of
testing because there may be other risks that have not yet been
anticipated.
Thyroiditis, Lyon said, is treatable. Those diagnosed are
prescribed a daily medication that they need to take for the
rest of their lives.
Although some people develop an enlarged thyroid, Lyon said
other symptoms include fatigue.
The presence of neoplasm, although non-cancerous, placed persons
at a much higher risk of developing cancer.
"Stopping the funding (for testing) doesn't make sense,
especially since we are funding studies in Russia," Lyon said.
"In terms of the United States, there is no political interest
in knowing and it was virtually the same exposure."
During the Cold War, the United States and some of its allies
tested nuclear weapons at the Nevada Test Site, just northwest
of Las Vegas. Radiation, in the form of fallout, drifted
downwind of the test site and eventually spread throughout the
contiguous United States.
Thousands of Utahns who subsequently suffered from a variety of
cancers became known as Downwinders.
There has been contention over the years as to the extent of the
physical ailments that can be attributed to nuclear fallout.
Diseases of the thyroid, however, have long been considered a
result of exposure to radiation. The breadth of the infections
is still undetermined.
Originally published October 12, 2006 Print this article
Copyright ©2006 The Spectrum.
*****************************************************************
49 IHT: Nuclear power stance is costly for Spain -
- International Herald Tribune
By Kristian Rix and Juan Pablo Spinetto Bloomberg
THURSDAY, OCTOBER 12, 2006
MADRID Prime Minister José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero of Spain is a
self- proclaimed antinuclear warrior.
When the aging José Cabrera nuclear reactor, about 100
kilometers, or 62 miles, east of Madrid, was shuttered in April,
Zapatero refused to consider a new atomic plant. Instead, the
reactor will be replaced with a generator that burns natural gas
from North Africa. Zapatero pledged last month to announce a plan
to phase out all nuclear reactors.
Four decades after the dictatorship of General Francisco Franco
bet on nuclear power to reduce dependence on foreign energy,
Spain is the fastest-growing importer of natural gas in Western
Europe. The shift has come with a steep price tag: The cost of
energy imports rose 66 percent in two years to ¬32.1 billion, or
$40.3 billion, in 2005, the National Statistics Office said.
"We are putting ourselves at the mercy of gas," Pedro Rivero, the
chairman of Unesa, a trade group of utilities in Madrid, said
last month.
Gas-fed generators produce power for about ¬35 a megawatt-hour
compared with ¬14 for nuclear plants, according to Unión Fenosa,
owner of the José Cabrera plant. Spain gets 75 percent of its
energy from fossil fuels, more than the average of 50 percent for
the European Union. Zapatero is bucking the trend in much of
Europe. France and Finland are building nuclear reactors to
replace aging ones.
In July, Prime Minister Tony Blair of Britain supported building
a new generation of nuclear power plants. Germany, which has a
law designed to shut all nuclear power plants by the early
2020s, has increasingly turned to nonfossil fuel sources like
solar power and wind. Spain abandoned new construction of
nuclear power stations in the 1980s, because of opposition from
the Socialists. In 1984, a Socialist government led by Prime
Minister Felipe González scrapped three almost-finished plants.
The decision was made five years after the accident at Three Mile
Island in Pennsylvania. More countries followed suit after the
Chernobyl accident in 1986. "We don't need nuclear power," said
Lawrence Sudlow, a spokesman for Friends of the Earth in Spain.
"People here fight against it to stop the lunacy which creates
waste for thousands of years."
Only 4 percent of Spaniards say they want more nuclear power, the
second- lowest percentage among the 25-country EU, after Greece.
Gas-fueled stations passed nuclear plants this year as the
second-largest source of power in Spain, supplying 25 percent of
the country's electricity, up from 6 percent in 2003. Nuclear
supplies 23 percent and coal 27 percent, according to Red
Eléctrica de España, the network operator. About 75 gas-fed
plants are set to dot the country by 2011.
Power demand in Spain is forecast to outstrip the average EU
growth in 2006 for the 13th consecutive year, and remain
above-average through 2011. The government expects annual demand
to increase to 3.8 percent from 3.5 percent until then.
"Dependence on gas is not going to fall anytime soon," Rafael
Villaseca, chief executive of Gas Natural, the largest Spanish
supplier of natural gas, said at a conference in Madrid in May.
"Nuclear power, with all its drawbacks, could provide a solution
to this problem."
Spain imported 70 percent of its natural gas from Nigeria and
North Africa last year, at a time when prices rose 70 percent.
Atomic energy may be the simplest way to reduce Spain's
dependence on natural gas imports, said José Carlos Diez, chief
economist at Intermoney, a brokerage firm and fund manager in
Madrid.
"Nuclear power seems the least bad solution to the problem," he
said.
Spain began its push into nuclear energy in 1965, 10 years before
Franco died. Three nuclear plants were built by 1971, with seven
more completed in the next 16 years. The José Cabrera plant was
Spain's smallest, with an installed capacity of 166 megawatts. It
is the second to be closed; the Vandellós-1 unit was destroyed by
fire in 1989.
The 466-megwatt Santa María de Garoña operating license expires
in 2009. Endesa and Iberdrola, the plant's operators, have asked
Spain's nuclear regulator to extend the permit until 2019. The
Industry Ministry declined to comment. Economic growth will
suffer without nuclear power, said Loyola de Palacio, who was the
EU energy commissioner until November 2004.
She campaigned for the use of nuclear power to curb European
reliance on natural gas from Russia and North Africa. She is now
the foreign affairs spokeswoman for the opposition, Partido
Popular. Rising energy costs "will undoubtedly knock a few tenths
of a percentage point from growth" this year, she said during an
interview. Growing dependence on natural gas is also
contributing to rising emissions of carbon dioxide. Spain, the
fastest- growing air polluter in Europe, produced 5 percent more
carbon dioxide last year than allowed under permits granted
through an EU emissions program, the government has said.
Zapatero said last month that his Socialist government would
prepare a plan before the end of the parliamentary term in 2008
to phase out atomic plants. He said that he wants renewable
sources like wind parks to make up about 13 percent of
electricity demand by 2012, up from 5.7 percent last year. "We
are betting on a progressive reduction of the weight of nuclear
power in our energy mix," Zapatero said.
"We want a more responsible, more sustainable use of energy."
Juan Pablo Spinetto reported from London.
Herald Tribune All rights reserved [IHT]
*****************************************************************
50 Deseret News: Fallout-thyroid link gets boost
[deseretnews.com]
Thursday, October 12, 2006
New downwind study headed by U. professor
By Joe Bauman
Deseret Morning News
A new study by 15 scientists, statisticians and other experts
concludes that more downwind residents suffered thyroid damage
from nuclear testing than earlier believed. Also, it says damage
was still showing up 30 years after the blasts.
The study's lead author is the University of Utah's Dr.
Joseph L. Lyon, who has been pursuing the issue for many years.
In March 2005, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention, based in Atlanta, abruptly canceled a study headed
by Lyon that involved checking thyroid glands of downwind
residents, looking for abnormities.
Thyroid glands accumulated radioactive iodine from milk
from grazing cows. Children were most vulnerable.
Four studies have been launched: an examination in
1965-66 of schoolchildren exposed to fallout; an update 30 years
after exposure and published in 1993; an attempted 50-year
update canceled by the CDC after years of work and millions of
dollars; and the new study, which is a re-evaluation of the 1993
report.
The latest is to be published in "Epidemiology," a
peer-reviewed scientific journal that is the official
publication of the International Society for Environmental
Epidemiology. The study is to be published in the Nov. 1 issue,
but an abstract is already online at the journal's Web site,
www.epidem.com/pt/re/epidemiologyunder "Epi Fast-Track."
The title of the article is "Thyroid Disease Associated
With Exposure to the Nevada Nuclear Weapons Test Site Radiation:
A Re-evaluation Based on Corrected Dosimetry and Examination
Data."
The 1993 report concluded there was a connection between
radiation from the Test Site and abnormal thyroid growth such as
tumors.
In the latest effort, the team, which included
radiobiologists, re-examined the data in the 1993 study,
correcting mistakes that crept into the original effort. They
found an even stronger connection between thyroid abnormalities
and fallout.
Errors crept into the study published in 1993 because
"there were a lot of uncertainties (about) what people were
eating and where they lived and where they moved," Lyon said
Wednesday.
Also, problems with the earlier computer system required
reconstructing the system. Radiation doses were recalculated.
Two computer programmers independently rewrote the algorithm,
rechecking each step, Lyon said.
"It took them months," he said.
The re-examination also reviewed all the diagnoses that
were reported.
Some diagnoses were changed and others were dropped as
not sufficiently documented. This step was more conservative
than in the 1993 study.
"We set up very rigid criteria," he said. "What we came
up with was a much stronger association with thyroid neoplasms
(growths, including tumors). It more than doubled."
The risk ratio for people with the highest exposure to
fallout, compared with those with the least exposure, jumped
from 3.4 times as likely to develop neoplasms to the new study's
7.5 times as likely.
For thyroiditis, an inflammation that is the most common
form of thyroid disorder, the figures also are compelling. Those
from heavily hit areas had been thought to be 1.1 times as
likely to have the disorder. The new study places the risk ratio
at 2.7 times.
"We think that's fairly persuasive that thyroiditis is
associated" with fallout exposure, Lyon said. The illness is "a
very, very common disease," he added, and the disease is not one
the government will make payments for under the Radiation
Exposure Compensation Act.
Owen Hoffman, a Ph.D. researcher who heads the SENES Oak
Ridge Inc. center for risk analysis at Oak Ridge, Tenn. — one of
the report's authors — said that in the 1993 report, only
neoplasms of the thyroid were found to be statistically related
to fallout doses.
"All other diseases were found to be statistically
insignificant" in the earlier study, he said in a telephone
interview.
The re-evaluation, Hoffman said, "has found increasing
risk with respect to exposure to fallout exposure."
It not only confirmed a link to neoplasms, but showed "a
link between fallout exposure and thyroiditis."
This is among the first published reports "of a strong
link between fallout exposure and an increased incidence of
thyroiditis," Hoffman added.
J Truman, originally from southern Utah and now a
resident of Malad, Idaho, was among the group of children first
tested in the early 1960s and then retested.
"As a participant in that study since its beginning I
can't say it's comforting to see the final verdict," he said in
an e-mail. "Far from it. There's only anger."
He is angry about the endless government repetitions of
"there is no danger" as fallout was coming down.
Truman also feels anger about the federal government
pulling the funding on the next follow-up tests, "when the new
links (between fallout and disease) started emerging."
E-mail: bau@desnews.com
© 2006 Deseret News Publishing Company
*****************************************************************
51 Las Vegas SUN: Railroad route to nuclear dump in Nevada getting another look
Today: October 12, 2006 at 7:25:13 PDT
ASSOCIATED PRESS
LAS VEGAS (AP) - The Energy Department is reconsidering building
a rail line through western Nevada to the site of a proposed
national nuclear waste repository at Yucca Mountain, officials
said.
The north-south route dubbed the Mina Corridor was examined in
the 1990s but shelved after the Walker River Paiute Indians
refused access to their reservation. The tribe reconsidered this
year.
The Energy Department has said it favored plans to build a
319-mile east-west rail line from Caliente, near the Utah
border, across rural Nevada to the nuclear dump site, 90 miles
northwest of Las Vegas. The so-called Caliente Corridor route
could cost $2 billion.
Department officials notified state and local leaders and
members of Congress that the plan to take another look at the
Mina route would be published Friday in the Federal Register in
Washington, D.C.
"The Mina corridor appears to offer potential advantages to the
extent it would cross fewer mountain ranges, utilize existing
rail bed and also be a shorter distance," the department said in
a draft notice obtained by the Las Vegas Review-Journal.
"These potential advantages would simplify design and
construction," the report said.
The Mina route would be 280 miles long and include an existing
rail line between the towns of Wabuska and Hawthorne. A cost
estimate has not been made public.
The Energy Department plans to continue preparing an
environmental impact statement on the Caliente corridor, with
informational meetings about the rail plans planned in November
in several Nevada towns.
Draft versions of both studies would be released by the summer,
department and Yucca Mountain project spokesman Allen Benson
said in Las Vegas.
Walker River Indian tribal leaders reversed policy and agreed in
May to let the government map a new rail line through their
reservation. The tribal chairwoman said the tribe was reserving
a final decision on allowing nuclear waste shipments.
The state of Nevada opposes the repository plan. However, Bob
Halstead, a transportation consultant for the state, said a
north-south corridor appeared to make more sense and could cost
less than the Caliente route.
The Energy Department also was set to announce plans for an
environmental impact statement of a redesigned industrial
complex where nuclear waste would arrive and be managed at Yucca
Mountain before being placed underground.
There currently is no rail line to the Yucca site, which
Congress and the Bush administration picked in 2002 as the place
to entomb 77,000 tons of radioactive waste now being stored at
nuclear reactors in 39 states. The project has been stalled by
funding shortfalls and questions about quality control work
during site selection.
Information from: Las Vegas Review-Journal, http://www.lvrj.com
All contents copyright 2005 Las Vegas SUN, Inc.
*****************************************************************
52 reviewjournal.com: DOE to publish rail plan for Yucca
Oct. 12, 2006
Advantages cited for using Mina corridor
By STEVE TETREAULT STEPHENS WASHINGTON BUREAU
Graphic by Mike Johnson.
WASHINGTON -- The Energy Department is preparing to reopen its
plans for a rail line to Yucca Mountain, adding a new route to be
scrutinized as a possible path to the proposed nuclear waste
repository.
The DOE is poised to announce detailed studies of a north-south
rail corridor through western Nevada. The alignment was examined
in the 1990s but shelved when the Walker River Paiute Indians
refused access to their reservation. The tribe reconsidered this
year.
The department's intentions are scheduled to be published Friday
in the Federal Register, according to DOE officials. State and
local leaders and members of Congress were notified on
Wednesday.
Also Friday, the department will announce plans to prepare an
environmental impact statement of a redesigned industrial
complex at the Yucca site, 100 miles northwest of Las Vegas,
where nuclear waste would arrive and be managed before being
placed underground, officials said.
The published notice about the railroad amounts to the DOE's
formal acknowledgment that it is intrigued with what has become
known as the Mina route to Yucca Mountain.
"Based on DOE's preliminary analysis, in comparison with other
rail corridors, the Mina corridor appears to offer potential
advantages to the extent it would cross fewer mountain ranges,
utilize existing rail bed and also be a shorter distance," the
department said in a draft notice obtained Wednesday.
"These potential advantages would simplify design and
construction, and therefore would be less costly to construct,"
DOE reported in the draft. "The Mina corridor also would appear
to have fewer land use conflicts, and would involve less land
disturbance."
The department has identified a 319-mile corridor from Caliente
across rural Nevada to the repository, a route that carries an
estimated $2 billion price tag.
The Mina corridor is 280 miles. DOE officials say new
construction would be necessary on 240 to 259 miles because the
corridor includes an existing rail line from Wabuska to
Hawthorne.
The Energy Department will continue to prepare an environmental
impact statement of the Caliente corridor. Draft versions of
both studies would be released by the summer, DOE spokesman
Allen Benson said.
The public will be invited to comment on both proposals and the
new repository surface designs at scoping meetings in Amargosa
Valley, Caliente, Goldfield, Hawthorne, Las Vegas and Fallon in
November.
Within the Caliente corridor, the DOE plans new analyses of
alternative alignments in several areas, including Caliente and
Eccles, through Garden Valley, near the Reveille Range, near
Goldfield and the ghost town of Bonnie Claire, and in Oasis
Valley, according to the draft notice.
While some industry officials have promoted the Mina route,
David Blee, a nuclear waste shipping consultant, said the full
picture will emerge only after detailed studies.
"The verdict still is very much out on the ultimate decision,"
said Blee, a spokesman for the U.S. Transport Council. "There
are things other than cost that will have to be evaluated," such
as the chances of obtaining rights of way through the Walker
River Indian Reservation.
Tribal leaders reversed policy and agreed in May to allow the
government to map a new rail line through their reservation. The
tribal chairwoman said the tribe is reserving a final decision
on allowing nuclear waste shipments.
Bob Halstead, a transportation consultant to the state of
Nevada, said the federal Bureau of Indian Affairs might also
become involved in the matter. That could pose a wild card, he
said, because the agency played a role in rejecting a lease for
the Private Fuel Storage nuclear site on the Goshute Indian
Reservation in Utah.
While the state continues to oppose the repository, Halstead
said, a north-south corridor to Yucca Mountain would be "the
least bad way" because it stays within valleys rather than
crossing multiple ranges.
"We have told (DOE) from the beginning the Caliente route was
probably not feasible and might be too expensive to build,"
Halstead said.
Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal, 1997 - 2006
Stephens Media GroupPrivacy Statement
*****************************************************************
53 Las Vegas SUN: Berkley on easy street
Photos: Rep. Berkley meeting with voters | Rep. Berkley talking
Today: October 12, 2006 at 7:23:19 PDT
Challenger has little hope against charismatic incumbent
By Michael J. Mishak Las Vegas Sun
Like the Las Vegas-area district she represents, Shelley Berkley
is electric.
On Monday, at a candidates' fair in Bally's grand ballroom,
Berkley, a Democratic congresswoman seeking a fifth term in the
House, attracted attention like a neon sign.
Dressed in a bright red suit and wearing a pair of
stars-and-stripes high heels, complete with matching handbag,
Berkley demonstrated the fine art of schmooze, working a
perpetual circle of supporters for the better part of an hour.
It was an easy task for the one-time cocktail waitress and keno
runner turned lawyer.
She shook hands, exchanged hugs, posed for photographs and
traded words on everything from the Nevada Test Site to dog
purses - that is to say, purses shaped like dogs.
"All politics is personal," Berkley said, taking a break. "I
always run my races as if they were the most difficult of my
career - no matter who's on the other side."
Still, it doesn't take a political scientist to see that Berkley
is coasting to re-election on the power of incumbency, which
brings with it big money and big name recognition, two things
that her Republican challenger, Kenneth Wegner, clearly doesn't
have.
In fact, despite her protests to the contrary, this may be the
easiest campaign of Berkley's career.
First, there's her financial advantage.
As of July 26, the end of the last federal campaign finance
reporting period, she had more than $1.3 million in cash on
hand, much of it coming from Nevada's gaming industry and labor
unions.
Wegner, on the other hand, has refused contributions from
political action committees and special-interest groups, instead
bankrolling the bulk of his campaign with his own money, as a
matter of principle. He said he has taken out a second mortgage
on his home and expects to spend an additional $20,000 in
personal savings, plus whatever he gets from selling his
Harley-Davidson motorcycle.
Then, there's the demographics.
Nevada's 1st Congressional District is the very definition of
safe. Democrats hold a 48 percent to 33 percent registration
edge - 38,000 more possible voters - over Republicans. Those
numbers help explain why both the national and state Republican
parties have all but abandoned Wegner's candidacy.
Narrowly elected to the House in 1998, when Republican John
Ensign gave up the seat to run for the Senate, Berkley has since
fended off two strong challenges, the first of which came in
2000 from then-state Sen. Jon Porter. She won by 8 percentage
points that year, and her margin of victory has grown in the
last two election cycles. In 2004, she cruised to a fourth term
with 66 percent of the vote.
"I'm not anticipating a certain percentage this year," she said
in an interview. "I'm going to wake up Nov. 8 knowing I worked
as hard as I can."
In the nearly four weeks before Election Day, Berkley's
political work - limited though it is, with fewer than a dozen
events on her public schedule during that period - will involve
campaigning on her legislative record, often as it relates to a
number of incendiary issues this election cycle.
Immigration has taken center stage in this campaign, if for no
reason other than Wegner has put it there, taking to the
airwaves with radio ads that attack Berkley for supporting
"amnesty" for illegal immigrants.
Berkley voted against last year's tough House bill to tighten
the borders and to make felons of anyone living in this country
illegally or any U.S. citizen who helps an illegal immigrant
here. She faulted Republicans, including her Nevada colleagues,
Republican Reps. Jim Gibbons and Porter (who rebounded from his
2000 loss to Berkley to join her in Congress in 2003 from
Nevada's new 3rd Congressional District), charging that their
support for the legislation showed a lack of leadership.
Berkley said that while she favors a comprehensive approach to
immigration - one that includes both a guest-worker program and
a path to citizenship for those living here illegally - the GOP
leadership in the House has stymied discussion, advancing only
piecemeal legislation.
Nevertheless, she voted for a House bill last month that
authorizes the building of a 700-mile fence along the border.
"There's no sovereign nation on the planet that could survive if
they didn't have control of their border," she said afterward.
Berkley also has pushed to enforce existing immigration laws,
supported hiring more Border Patrol agents and fought - without
success - to toughen the country's visa program.
"I don't think you can be tougher than I have been," Berkley
said. "If (Wegner's) got a problem with the proposal in Congress
he ought to talk to his own party and the president (who)
proposed it."
As in other campaigns across the country, the war in Iraq also
is a central issue in the 1st District race.
A hawk on defense, Berkley has called for the ouster of Defense
Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and says Congress was misled by the
Bush administration when it asked for authority to use military
force against Iraq in 2002.
The war in Iraq, she said, has been a "deadly diversion" from
the global war on terrorism, siphoning critical resources from
Afghanistan.
Breaking with prominent Democrats, Berkley, who sits on the
House International Relations Committee, opposes the idea of
setting a timetable for troop withdrawal. The best way to
correct the nation's course in Iraq, she argues, would be for
voters to elect Democratic majorities in both the House and
Senate next month.
"The Bush administration has got to level with the American
people," she said. "We deserve an honest assessment of where
things stand on the ground. How many lives will it take to be
victorious? And what is the definition of victorious?"
Until recently, Democrats have failed in their responsibility to
hold the administration accountable, Berkley said. "I think the
Democratic Party has found its voice," she said. "And the timing
couldn't be better."
If Democrats retake Congress, Berkley said lawmakers would
aggressively pursue an agenda that has been blocked by the
Republican leadership.
Among their priorities: increasing the minimum wage, fully
implementing the 9/11 Commission's recommendations, giving the
government authority to negotiate prices for the new Medicare
prescription drug program and repealing last year's energy bill.
For Berkley, the energy legislation, which awarded billions in
oil and gas subsidies as those industries recorded record
profits, is a sticking point.
"With an oil man sitting in the White House and a Republican
Congress that doesn't know how to say anything but 'Yes, sir,'
we're never going to have energy independence in this country,"
she said.
She introduced her own energy bill in August that would
eliminate tax credits to the nuclear and fossil-fuel industries,
instead directing those resources to the research and
development of renewable energy sources, including solar, wind
and geothermal power. The legislation also would raise average
fuel economy standards, from the current 27 miles to the gallon
to 33 mpg by 2015.
Then there's Nevada's perennial issue - Yucca Mountain.
Berkley has been perhaps the loudest opponent of the proposed
nuclear waste repository about 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas.
Unable to convince her House colleagues to vote against funding
for the project, she pledged to put her own life on the line to
block the project earlier this year.
"I will lie in front of any train that attempts to send nuclear
waste to Nevada," Berkley said from the House floor. "Nuclear
waste will come to Yucca Mountain, Nevada, over my dead body, I
promise you that."
Important as those issues are, however, at the end of the day,
Berkley said, political success depends on constituent service.
"It takes more than money," Berkley said. "Legislation is
important. And votes can be forgiven. But not returning that
phone call can lose you an election."
As of July, the Greenspun family, owners of the Sun, and
Greenspun Corporation executives had contributed $18,100 to
Berkley's campaign. Michael J. Mishak can be reached at 259-2347
or at michael.mishak@lasvegassun.com.
All contents copyright 2005 Las Vegas SUN, Inc.
*****************************************************************
54 Salt Lake Tribune: Dump expansion draws objections
By Judy Fahys
The Salt Lake Tribune
Article Last Updated:10/12/2006 01:03:02 AM
People were down Wednesday on EnergySolutions' plans to
expand upward.
At the first of two hearings on the expansion, more than two
dozen critics stepped to the microphone to attack the company's
proposal to increase capacity at its Tooele County radioactive
landfill and plans by the state regulators to approve it.
"I am one of those who opposes the expansion of waste in
Utah," said Anna Clare Shepherd, a mother of eight from Salt
Lake County.
The afternoon hearing took place at the Department of
Environmental Quality headquarters in Salt Lake City. A second
hearing was slated for Wednesday night in Tooele. Public
comments to the DEQ will be taken through Nov. 10.
Under the proposal before the Utah Division of Radiation
Control, EnergySolutions would patch together two existing
"cells" for radioactive waste and raise their height to 83 feet
above ground, which is about twice the existing height. With
this new "Supercell," the total capacity of EnergySolutions
would grow by 49.2 percent, from 8.8 million cubic yards to 13.1
million cubic yards.
According to critics, an expansion of this scale ought to
trigger the provision of a 1990 law requiring such significant
license changes to be approved by the Legislature and the
governor. But the company and state regulators say no such
approval is needed for any growth within the site's current
mile-square disposal area.
Under this interpretation of the law, EnergySolutions could put
nearly 30 million cubic yards of waste on the site before the
1990 provision would come into play.
Tye Rogers, the company's vice president for safety and
compliance, defended the company's proposal as an efficient use
of the mile-square site and said the new "Supercell" had
undergone a "rigorous technical evaluation" that showed it will
be safe.
"EnergySolutions is not and never has been in violation of
this rule," he said at the hearing.
Charles Judd, who was president of the company when it was
called Envirocare of Utah, said the law was intended to ensure
lawmakers scrutinized significant expansions. He also said it
was "doubtful" the Supercell can be safe in light of studies
done while he was with the company.
Another critic, the Healthy Environment Alliance of Utah,
said at least two previous expansions should have been reviewed
by the governor and the Legislature. But regulators, who have
approved 80 amendments in the past 18 years, have not applied
the law, said Christopher Thomas, the group's policy director.
As a result, Thomas said: "Utah is the premier destination
for radioactive waste today."
A Snyderville man questioned regulators' sincerity in
carrying out the agency's promise "to safeguard human health and
the environment," which was stamped into a plaque he'd read on
the way into the hearing. "Is this the best you can do?" he
asked the hearing officer.
Marci Kearl brought her children Mia and Dylan, ages 5 and
4, to the witness table and asked the officer to consider them
while deciding the issue. "Because, in Utah, our children are
our greatest asset."
fahys@sltrib.com
Government
guidelines
State law requires a full-bore license approval process for
waste sites like the EnergySolutions facility in Tooele County,
including consent of the Legislature and governor, if a new
application or amendment:
* ''would cost 50% or more of the cost of construction of
the original radioactive waste facility''
* ''or the modification would result in an increase in
capacity . . . of a cumulative total of 50% of the total
capacity . . .. ''
* A complication: Neither lawmakers nor regulators have ever
determined baseline numbers from which increases could be
judged.
Source: Utah Code 19-3-105
*****************************************************************
55 Deseret News: Underground blasts were also culprits
[deseretnews.com]
Thursday, October 12, 2006
'96 report says that radiation detected off Nevada Test Site
By Joe Bauman
Deseret Morning News
Fallout researchers have focused their attention on above-ground
nuclear testing at the Nevada Test Site from the 1950s through
the early '60s. However, a 1996 report says hundreds of
underground tests also spewed radiation.
Besides the danger to workers at the NTS, more than 50 of
the tests released enough radioactive material that some made
its way off the sprawling test site.
The report is "Radiological Effluents Released From U.S.
Continental Tests 1961 through 1992," produced by the U.S.
Department of Energy in August 1996 and available at a DOE Web
site, .
U.S. above-ground testing ended in 1962. However, since
1961, radioactive material escaped from 433 tests, "some of
which have simultaneous detonations" where several explosions
would go off at once, the report says.
"However, only 52 of these are designated as having
offsite releases," according to the report.
The "Palanquin" test of April 14, 1965, blew radiation
out of a crater, and 23,000 picocuries of gross beta activity
per cubic meter of air was detected offsite at the populated
community of Clark Station, Nev., the report says. At Highway 6,
an uninhabited location offsite, eight miles east of the Tonapah
Test Range Road, the reading was 87,000 picocuries per cubit
meter of air.
Stone Cabin Ranch, Nev., also off the Nevada Test Site,
had the greatest gamma radiation exposure, at 3 milliroentgens
per hour. The report adds that the highest radioactive iodine
concentration in milk was "11,000 picocuries per liter at Martin
Ranch near Eureka, Nev.; no children present."
Fallout at 0.03 milliroentgens per hour was detected as
far as Council, Idaho, about 500 miles away.
In the Baneberry test of Dec. 18, 1970, "gross fission
products" blew out of the underground test and were detected off
the Nevada Test Site.
Part of the fallout cloud drifted over Nevada, Utah and
Wyoming, while "another fraction (of the cloud) moved toward
California."
Maximum radioactivity detected offsite was 3,400
picocuries of Iodine-133 per cubic meter of air at Stone Cabin
Ranch, Nev. Maximum iodine level detected offsite was 810
picocuries of radioactive I-131 per liter of milk at the McCurdy
Ranch near Beatty, Nev., it says.
"Venting occurred from a fissure near surface ground
zero" 3 1/2 minutes after the blast, says the report. "The
effluent venting rate steadily decreased with time, but visible
vapor continued to emanate from the fissure for 24 hours after
the detonation."
© 2006 Deseret News Publishing Company [
*****************************************************************
56 NRC: Advisory Committee On Nuclear Waste; Procedures for Meetings
FR Doc E6-16870
[Federal Register: October 12, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 197)]
[Notices] [Page 60196-60198] From the Federal Register Online via
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr12oc06-90]
Background This notice describes procedures to be followed with
respect to meetings conducted pursuant to the Federal Advisory
Committee Act (FACA) by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's
(NRC's) Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste (ACNW). These
procedures are set forth so that they may be incorporated by
reference in future notices for individual meetings.
The ACNW meetings are conducted in accordance with FACA. The ACNW
advises the NRC on technical issues related to nuclear materials
and waste management. The bases of ACNW reviews include 10 CFR
parts 20, 60, 61, 63, 70, 71, and 72 and other applicable
regulations and legislative mandates, such as the Nuclear Waste
Policy Act as amended, the Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Act
as amended, and the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act,
as amended. The Committee's reports become a part of the public
record.
The ACNW meetings are normally open to the public and provide
opportunities for oral or written statements from members of the
public to be considered as part of the Committee's information
gathering process. The meetings are not adjudicatory hearings
such as those
[[Page 60197]] conducted by the NRC's Atomic Safety and Licensing
Board Panel as part of the Commission's licensing process. ACNW
meetings are conducted in accordance with the Federal Advisory
Committee Act.
General Rules Regarding ACNW Meetings An agenda is published in
the Federal Register for each full Committee meeting and is
available on the Internet at .
There may be a need to make adjustments to the agenda to
facilitate the conduct of the meeting. The Chairman of the
Committee is empowered to make such adjustments to conduct the
meeting in a manner that, in his judgment, will facilitate the
orderly conduct of business, including making provisions to
continue the discussion of matters not completed on the scheduled
day during another meeting. Persons planning to attend a meeting
may contact the Designated Federal Official (DFO) specified in
the individual Federal Register Notice prior to the meeting to be
advised of any changes to the agenda that may have occurred.
The following requirements shall apply to public participation in
ACNW meetings: (a) Persons who plan to submit written comments at
the meeting should provide 35 copies to the DFO at the beginning
of the meeting. Persons who cannot attend the meeting but wish to
submit written comments regarding the agenda items may do so by
sending a readily reproducible copy addressed to the DFO
specified in the Federal Register Notice, care of the Advisory
Committee on Nuclear Waste, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC 20555-0001.
Comments should be in the possession of the DFO prior to the
meeting to allow time for reproduction and distribution. Comments
should be limited to topics being considered by the Committee.
(b) Persons desiring to make oral statements at the meeting
should make a request to do so to the DFO. If possible, the
request should be made five days before the meeting, identifying
the topic(s) to be discussed and the amount of time needed for
presentation so that orderly arrangements can be made. The
Committee will hear oral statements on topics being reviewed at
an appropriate time during the meeting as scheduled by the
Chairman.
(c) Information regarding topics to be discussed, changes to the
agenda, whether the meeting has been canceled or rescheduled, and
the time allotted to present oral statements can be obtained by
contacting the DFO.
(d) The use of still, motion picture, and television cameras may
be limited to selected portions of the meeting as determined by
the Chairman and subject to the condition that the use of such
equipment will not interfere with the conduct of the meeting. The
DFO will have to be notified prior to the meeting and will
authorize the installation or use of such equipment after
consultation with the Chairman.
The use of such equipment will be restricted as is necessary to
protect proprietary or privileged information that may be present
in the meeting room. Electronic recordings will be permitted only
during those portions of the meeting that are open to the public.
(e) A transcript is kept for certain open portions of the meeting
and will be available in the NRC Public Document Room (PDR), One
White Flint North, Room O-1F21, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville,
MD 20852- 2738. A copy of the certified minutes of the meeting
will be available at the same location up to three months
following the meeting.
Copies may be obtained upon payment of appropriate reproduction
charges. ACNW meeting agenda, transcripts, and letter reports are
available through the NRC Public Document Room at , by calling
the PDR at 1- 800-394-4209, or from the Publicly Available
Records System (PARS) component of NRC's document system (ADAMS)
which is accessible from the NRC Web site at or (ACNW schedules
and agendas).
CNW schedules and agendas).
sessions of ACNW meetings. Those wishing to use this service for
observing ACNW meetings should contact Mr. Theron Brown, ACNW
Audio Visual Technician, (301-415-8066) between 7:30 a.m. and
3:45 p.m. Eastern Time at least 10 days before the meeting to
ensure the availability of this service. Individuals or
organizations requesting this service will be responsible for
telephone line charges and for providing the equipment and
facilities that they use to establish the video teleconferencing
link. The availability of video teleconferencing services is not
guaranteed.
ACNW Working Group Meetings From time to time the ACNW may
sponsor an in-depth meeting on a specific technical issue to
understand staff expectations and review work in progress. Such
meetings are called Working Group meetings. These Working Group
meetings will also be conducted in accordance with the procedures
noted above for the ACNW meeting, as appropriate.
When Working Group meetings are held at locations other than at
NRC facilities, reproduction facilities may not be available at a
reasonable cost. Accordingly, 50 copies of the materials to be
used during the meeting should be provided for distribution at
such meetings.
ACNW Ad Hoc Subcommittee Meetings In accordance with the revised
FACA, the agency is no longer required to apply the FACA
requirements to meetings conducted by the Subcommittees of the
NRC Advisory Committees, if the Subcommittee's recommendations
would be independently reviewed by its parent Committee.
The ACNW, however, chose to conduct its Subcommittee meetings in
accordance with the procedures noted above for ACNW full
Committee meetings, as appropriate, to facilitate public
participation, and to provide a forum for stakeholders to express
their views on regulatory matters being considered by the ACNW.
When Subcommittee meetings are held at locations other than at
NRC facilities, reproduction facilities may not be available at a
reasonable cost. Accordingly, 50 copies of the materials to be
used during the meeting should be provided for distribution at
such meetings.
Special Provisions When Proprietary Sessions are To be Held If it
is necessary to hold closed sessions for the purpose of
discussing matters involving proprietary information, persons
with agreements permitting access to such information may attend
those portions of the ACNW meetings where this material is being
discussed upon confirmation that such agreements are effective
and related to the material being discussed.
The DFO should be informed of such an agreement at least five
working days prior to the meeting so that it can be confirmed,
and a determination can be made regarding the applicability of
the agreement to the material that will be discussed during the
meeting. The minimum information provided should include
information regarding the date of the agreement, the scope of
material included in the agreement, the project or projects
involved, and the names and titles of the persons signing the
agreement. Additional information may be requested to identify
the specific
[[Page 60198]] agreement involved. A copy of the executed
agreement should be provided to the DFO prior to the beginning of
the meeting for admittance to the closed session.
Dated: October 5, 2006.
Andrew L. Bates, Advisory Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. E6-16870 Filed 10-11-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
*****************************************************************
57 edie news centre: Transport of new nuclear waste is 'intolerable risk' to London
(13 October 2006)
Nuclear waste from a new generation of atomic power stations
poses an 'intolerable' health and safety risk to the capital, a
report commissioned by the Mayor of London has found.
If the Government goes ahead with plans for new nuclear power
stations, sites in South East England could be chosen as the
sites for two of them, increasing the frequency and volumes of
nuclear waste transport through the capital.
The type of nuclear fuel used in new nuclear build is also likely
to be much more highly radioactive than that existing plants are
run on, the report from Large and Associates found.
The report considers the way the outcomes of the Energy Review
will impact the capital's nuclear safety, particularly through
the transportation of spent nuclear fuel and other radioactive
materials, and finds 'an additional risk of intolerable levels
of health injury' to those who live or work near rail routes
transporting the material.
London Mayor Ken Livingstone said: "This report shows that a new
generation of nuclear power plants could result in a significant
increase of radioactive waste being transported through London,
the most densely populated area of the UK.
"These findings confirm my belief that more nuclear power is
unsafe and expensive which will also lead to additional
associated risks, not least the disposal of radioactive waste.
"There is a widespread opposition amongst Londoners to nuclear
power and the movement of waste around the capital. This report
demonstrates that these concerns are justified, underpinning the
case against a new generation of nuclear
power plants.
"Nuclear power will not provide the solution to climate change.
"There is no need for nuclear if we simply wasted less of the
current energy we generate," he said.
The report also raised concerns over the proposed radioactive
waste repository, which may aggravate the risks further
depending on its location - yet to be revealed.
The report can be accessed here.
Goska Romanowicz
© Faversham House Group Ltd 2006. edie news articles may be
*****************************************************************
58 UPI: EcoWellness: Perchlorate perils
United Press International - Consumer Health -
10/12/2006 6:13:00 PM -0400
By CHRISTINE DELL'AMORE UPI Consumer Health Correspondent
WASHINGTON, Oct. 12 (UPI) -- The most definitive study to date
on the health effects of perchlorate, a chemical used in rocket
fuel, has shown the substance is more dangerous than previously
thought, experts said.
A federally funded study, published in the October issue of
Environmental Health Perspectives, found for the first time that
low-level, everyday exposures to perchlorate in drinking water
can reduce thyroid function in women, particularly those with
low levels of iodine.
The fact such regular exposures in an average American can harm
the thyroid is "a big finding," said study author Dr. James
Pirkle, deputy director for science at the Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention's environmental health laboratory.
Previous research had shown high levels of perchlorate impairs
thyroid function, and scientists believed low levels of exposure
brought about only a trivial effect.
Not true, said Pirkle. The study found even small amounts of
exposure to the chemical can create smal-to moderate-sized
effects on the thyroid.
The researchers studied urine and blood samples of 1,118 men and
1,111 women, aged 12 and older, who were 2001 to 2002
participants in an ongoing, federal National Health and
Nutrition Examination Survey, called NHANES. The team tested for
two hormones: the thyroid-stimulating hormone, or TSH, and total
thyroxine, or T4.
Statistical analyses revealed the thyroids of women with low
amounts of iodine had trouble circulating these two hormones.
Thus, perchlorate was a strong predictor of reduced thyroid
function in women; the researchers found no similar effect in
men.
The thyroid, an organ in the throat that produces hormones
essential for growth and development in childhood, also needs
iodine to work efficiently. But about 36 percent of women in the
United States -- and 15 percent of women among childbearing age
-- have iodine deficiencies.
It's possible women aren't getting the iodine they need because
they eat processed foods that do not contain the element. Table
salt, seafood and some multi-vitamins are the best sources.
Perchlorate inhibits the thyroid from picking up iodine.
Normally, a transporter protein on the cell membranes of the
thyroid acts as a shuttle, transporting iodine from the blood
into the thyroid.
But perchlorate steals the seat on that transporter protein that
would normally be taken by iodine, said Cal Baier-Anderson, an
assistant professor of epidemiology and preventive medicine at
the University of Maryland at Baltimore. Baier-Anderson
co-authored a paper on perchlorate with Benjamin Blout, lead
author of the Environmental Health Perspectives study.
Impairment of this thyroid function could eventually lead to
hypothyroidism, a condition where a person does not produce
enough thyroid hormones. This study suggests even low levels of
perchlorate are enough to "push (women) over the threshold" into
hypothyroidism, Pirkle said.
Hypothyroidism degrades health across the lifespan, from
abnormal development during gestation and infancy to subtle
cognitive deficits in children to metabolic problems in adults.
Severe hypothyrodisim due to lack of iodine in utero is also a
cause of cretinism, a condition characterized by severely
stunted physical and mental growth.
Perchlorate is an oxidizer used in rocket fuel, explosives and
road flares, and it also occurs naturally in the atmosphere.
Since the 1950s, unused amounts of the chemical have been dumped
into unlined pits throughout the United States, where it has
seeped into water supplies. The chemical is highly mobile and
soluble in water, aiding its dispersion through the environment.
It wasn't until 1997 that scientists realized perchlorate had
contaminated water sources nationwide.
As of November 2005, perchlorate was detected in community
drinking water in 26 states, the study noted. A 2005 report by
the National Academies of Science suggested more than 11 million
people had perchlorate in their drinking water supplies.
Scientists have also found perchlorate in milk, vegetables such
as lettuce, grain and breast milk.
Because the study is cross-sectional -- the data was analyzed at
one point in time -- it's too early to say for sure that low
exposure to perchlorate causes reduced thyroid function. It also
may not have clinical significance, the test of whether an
exposure actually leads to disease outcomes in the real world,
Baier-Anderson said.
Even so, science has "established with high confidence" that
perchlorate in high doses leads to reduced thyroid function,
Pirkle said. Their next study will involve measuring another
thyroid hormone, free T4, to see if perchlorate affects that
hormone.
The study was able to "cut through the murkiness" and really
focus on a key population: women, said Jennifer Sass, a
toxicologist and senior scientist in the Natural Resource
Defense Council's health and environment program.
The potential impact of perchlorate on pregnant women, and the
developmental impact on their unborn children is "lifetime and
irreversible," Sass said.
"Anything that's a developmental neurotoxin, and impairs early
development, is really damaging," she said. "This is not the
kind of thing that makes you sick, or you can deal with
medically. This (happens) before we can begin medical
intervention."
And from a policy standpoint, Baier-Anderson said, there is
enough information to act now. "If you have a chemical that is
having a statistically significant impact on thyroid hormones,
that's unacceptable," she said.
© Copyright 2006 United Press International, Inc. All Rights
Reserved
*****************************************************************
59 AFP: Nuclear treaty must be updated or fall obsolete - experts -
Thursday October 12, 06:58 PM
[Barrels containing high level radioactive nuclear waste are
stored in a pool]
BRUSSELS (AFP) - The nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) has
been ridiculed by North Korea and possibly flouted by Iran and
risks becoming obsolete if it is not urgently revised, experts
warned.
"North Korea's nuclear test has dealt it a heavy blow. The NPT
is in agony," said Georges Le Guelte, head of research at the
Institute of Strategic and International Relations (IRIS) in
Paris.
On Wednesday, European Union foreign policy chief Javier Solana
told EU lawmakers that he shared concerns (Advertisement)
[Click Here!] [ src=] about "the failure, in the last analysis,
of the non-proliferation treaty."
He said the text, concluded in 1968 and which entered into force
two years later, "has gone through five revisions already and
none of the five revisions has been able to face the
difficulties and the holes that it has."
"This regime should be adapted to the realities of today and not
the realities of yesterday," he said, following North Korea's
claim Monday that it had tested a nuclear weapon, sparking
worldwide outrage.
Signed by 189 countries -- North Korea pulled out in 2003 -- the
treaty is the only multilateral agreement designed to stop
atomic weapons from spreading, and it also offers a framework
for the development of civilian technology.
The signatories acknowledged that the United States, Russia,
China, France and Britain had the bomb but the five powers also
made a commitment in it to disarm at some undetermined time in
the future.
India, Pakistan and Israel did not sign and are now nuclear
powers, although the latter refuses to confirm that it has such
weapons.
The NPT appears unable to contain the nuclear ambitions of
Pyongyang and those suspected in Tehran, although the Islamic
republic denies the allegations, yet some blame the nuclear
powers themselves for the problem.
"You can't say that the treaty cannot be applied, only that the
major powers who are its guarantors have not done a lot to
ensure that it is respected," said Le Guelte.
According to Dominique David, executive director of the French
Institute for International Relations (IFRI), the NPT must,
above all, be reinforced.
"If it turns out that the test by North Korea really was a
nuclear one, it would mean that a country that had committed
itself in writing not to build a bomb would have definitively
violated the NPT," he said.
He said that Pyongyang's duplicity is self-evident but hard to
sanction.
"The problem is that there is no way of sanctioning a country
suspected of violating the treaty, when that country pulls out
of it at the last minute, just before it acquires a nuclear
weapon," he said.
Shannon Kile, senior researcher at the Stockholm-based peace
research institute SIPRI, proposed that the treaty be beefed up
to deal with such cases.
"In case a country withdraws, it has to give up all its nuclear
infrastructures that it has acquired under the NPT," for
example, he said.
He pointed out that the document has two main weaknesses.
"The nuclear technology is inherently dual use: the
infrastructure for making the fuel for the nuclear plants is the
same for nuclear weapons -- that's the central dilemma since the
NPT's founding," he said.
"The other weakness is how can you stop a state that is
determined to cheat. North Korea was clearly cheating," he went
on.
"In the future, the five nuclear powers have to make serious
commitments towards disarmament," he warned. "Double standards
are not possible anymore."
AFP
*****************************************************************
60 DOE: Energy Secretary Announces $13 Million to Expand Solar Energy Technologies
October 12, 2006
ST. LOUIS, MO - U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Secretary Samuel
W. Bodman today announced more than $13 million to fund new
research in solar technologies. This funding, part of President
Bush's $148 million Solar America Initiative, will support the
development of more efficient solar panels, known as
photovoltaic devices.
"This investment is a major step in our mission to bring clean,
renewable solar power to the nation," Secretary Bodman said.
"If we are able to harness more of the sun's power and use it to
provide energy to homes and businesses, we can increase our
energy diversity and strengthen our nation's energy security."
A pillar of President Bush's Advanced Energy Initiative, the
Solar America Initiative aims to make solar power cost
competitive with conventional electricity sources by 2015, by
developing materials that convert sunlight directly to
electricity.
In his 2006 State of the Union address, President Bush announced
the Advanced Energy Initiative (AEI), which seeks to reduce our
dependence on foreign sources of energy. To achieve this
objective, the AEI includes a 22-percent increase in funding for
clean energy technology research at DOE. The President's FY
2007 $148 million request for the Solar America Initiative is a
$65 million (78%) increase over the current appropriation, to
accelerate the development of semiconductor materials that
convert sunlight directly to electricity.
The $13 million in funding, including about $4.5 million to be
awarded for Fiscal Year 2007, will support a number of projects,
including:
+ Solar Codes and Standards Working Group Leadership: This
project will create and operate a national working group to
manage solar codes and standards. Sample work includes
recommendation or development of model codes and standards and
assistance in their implementation, development of codes and
standards studies, and the monitoring of emerging codes and
standards issues. The project is to last five years, with $1.2
million in FY 2007 funding and $750,000 in future years, for a
total project value of $4.2 million. One or two selections are
expected.
+ National Voluntary Photovoltaic (PV) Module Performance
Rating System: This project focuses on the creation of a
national voluntary PV (photovoltaic) module rating standard,
including performance, reliability, safety, anticipated
degradations and operational limits, as well as the
establishment of testing procedures and protocols for the
standard's use. The project is planned to last three years, at
$1 million per year, for a total project value of $3 million.
One or two selections are expected.
+ City Strategic Partnerships: Through City Strategic
Partnerships, DOE will work to accelerate the adoption of solar
technology at the local level by engaging city governments and
users of electricity. The cost-shared project is two years in
duration and has a total project value of $3.2 million. In
addition to financial assistance, DOE will also offer technical
assistance to partner cities. Six to ten selections are
expected.
+ State Strategic Partnerships: Under this project, the
Department will enlist the assistance of select state membership
organizations as strategic partners on solar issues. Recipients
will foster strong relationships with targeted state partners to
promote solar energy technology adoption. The cost-shared
project is three years in duration, at $450,000 per year, for a
total project value of $1.35 million. Three to six selections
are expected.
+ Utility Strategic Partnerships: Under the Utility Strategic
Partnerships DOE will enlist the assistance of select utility
membership organizations as strategic partners to deliver key
assistance to utilities to enable the success of the SAI.
Sample recipient work includes providing utilities with current
models for incorporating solar technologies into business plans
and responding to utility inquiries as to the technical
characteristics and capabilities of solar technologies. The
cost-shared project is three years in duration, at $450,000 per
year, for a total project value of $1.35 million. One or two
selections are expected.
More information on the solicitation and facts about the Solar
America Initiative can be found at: .
In addition to the President's goal of reducing our dependence
on foreign oil through AEI, the Energy Policy Act of 2005
(EPAct), signed by the President nearly a year ago, provides
incentives for purchasing and using solar equipment equal to 30
percent of qualifying expenditures for purchase of commercial
solar installations, with no cap on the total credit allowed.
EPAct also provides a 30 percent tax credit for qualified PV
property and solar water heating property used exclusively for
purposes other than heating swimming pools and hot tubs.
Private property owners are allowed a credit up to $2,000 for
either property, with a maximum of $4,000 allowed, if both
photovoltaic and solar hot water properties are installed.
Media contact(s): Craig Stevens, (202) 586-4940 [ ]
U.S. Department of Energy | 1000 Independence Ave., SW |
Washington, DC 20585 1-800-dial-DOE | f/202-586-4403
*****************************************************************
61 DOE: USDA-DOE Make Available $4 Million for Biomass Genomics Research
October 12, 2006
ST. LOUIS, MO -- The U.S. Departments of Energy and Agriculture
(DOE and USDA) today announced $4 million for bio-based fuels
research that will accelerate the development of alternative
fuels. The departments issued a solicitation for research
proposals for new plant feedstock genomics research projects.
Dr. Raymond L. Orbach, DOE Under Secretary for Science, made the
announcement at Advancing Renewable Energy: An American Rural
Renaissance, a conference jointly hosted by the two agencies in
St. Louis.
We are seeking to accelerate research breakthroughs that
contribute towards making biofuels a cost-effective alternative
to fossil fuels, with a goal of replacing 30 percent of
transportation fuels with biofuels by 2030. Close and effective
cooperation on research between the Departments of Energy and
Agriculture will be an important element for the success of this
effort, Under Secretary Orbach said.
This joint research initiative shows a commitment to acquiring
new alternative energy resources and improving the efficiency
with which biomass and plant feedstocks are used to produce
renewable fuels such as ethanol, Under Secretary of Agriculture
Tom Dorr said.
The new funding continues a commitment, begun in 2006, to
conduct a fundamental research program in biomass genomics, to
provide the scientific foundation to facilitate the use of woody
plant tissue, specifically lignocellulosic materials, for
bioenergy and biofuels. Developing lignocellulosic crops for
energy fuels could use less intensive production techniques and
poorer quality land, thereby avoiding competition with food
production on better quality land.
The program will take advantage of significant advances in
breeding, molecular genetics and genomic technologies and build
upon the existing knowledge base of plant biology to enable
researchers to confidently predict and manipulate plants
biological function for bioenergy resources.
In 2006, DOEs Office of Biological and Environmental Research
(OBER) and the USDA Cooperative State Research, Education, and
Extension Service (CSREES) National Research Initiative began
the joint competitive grants program. The program focused on
fundamental research on plants that will improve biomass
characteristics and yield or that will facilitate
lignocellulosic degradation. In August 2006, the agencies
awarded nine research grants totaling $5.7 million spanning
three years.
Information about the joint research program, the current
solicitation and currently funded projects is available at .
The solicitation is posted on .
CSREES advances knowledge for agriculture, the environment,
human health and well-being, and communities by supporting
research, education and extension programs in the Land-Grant
University System and other partner organizations. Visit for
more information.
OBER manages a diverse portfolio of research to develop
fundamental biological information and to advance technology in
support of DOEs missions in biology, medicine and the
environment. Visit for more information.
The St. Louis conference was designed to get the best minds
together key stakeholders in biofuels, wind and solar energy
to discuss and ultimately help accelerate the research,
development and deployment of alternative energy sources, the
crux of President Bushs Advanced Energy Initiative.
Media contact(s): USDA: Kristin Scuderi, (202) 720-4623 DOE: Jeff
Sherwood, (202) 586-5806 [ ]
U.S. Department of Energy | 1000 Independence Ave., SW |
Washington, DC 20585 1-800-dial-DOE | f/202-586-4403
*****************************************************************
62 Hanford News: Hanford symposium set at WSU Tri-Cities
This story was published Thursday, October 12th, 2006
By Annette Cary, Herald staff writer
Tom Grumbly, a Department of Energy undersecretary during the
Clinton administration, will visit the Tri-Cities to discuss
Hanford and its future Oct. 25.
He's one of the speakers for the 20th anniversary Public Lecture
of the Herbert M. Parker Foundation to be held at Washington
State University Tri-Cities. This year's lecture will cover
past, present and future cleanup activities at the Hanford
nuclear reservation, where plutonium was produced for the
nation's nuclear weapons program.
Grumbly will give an overview of DOE strategies and challenges
in cleaning up contamination of its weapons complex. He'll also
discuss the current Hanford cleanup mission and its future.
Mike Lawrence, the former Hanford director for DOE and now
deputy laboratory director for Pacific Northwest National
Laboratory, will discuss how Hanford facilities were used and
the extent of waste and contamination at the nuclear
reservation. He'll also discuss the establishment of the
Tri-Party Agreement that sets legally binding cleanup standards
and deadlines at Hanford.
Ron Kathren, WSU professor emeritus, will discuss the
contributions Herbert Parker made to health, safety and
environmental protection at Hanford. He developed a technique
for clinical radiation therapy that is still in use today, then
came to Hanford to establish the site's health physics program
during World War II.
A panel discussion also is planned with the symposium speakers:
Rep. Doc Hastings, R-Wash., and Wanda Munn, a member of the
Presidential Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health.
The event will begin at 3:30 p.m. with a multimedia presentation
of oral histories collected from Hanford pioneers, and the
lecture will follow at 4 p.m. at the East Building Auditorium.
© 2006 Tri-City Herald. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
63 CMENO: US Department of Energy selects Westinghouse/PBMR consortium
for reactor project
Creamer Media's Engineering News Online, South African Industry
Americas Department of Energy (DoE) has embarked on the first
stage of a programme that could result in the construction of a
South African-designed pebble-bed modular reactor (PBMR) in the
US.
This step took the form of a $3-million contract awarded on the
last day of September by the DoE to a US-South African
consortium, for first-phase engineering work for Americas Next
Generation Nuclear Plant (NGNP) at the Idaho National Laboratory.
The South African members of the consortium are PBMR (Pty) Ltd,
the company responsible for the development of the PBMR
technology, and M-Tech Industrial, of Potchefstroom.
The Americans are looking at building a proto- type nuclear
plant for process heat production, and not only for electricity
generation, as a first step towards the creation of a hydrogen
economy, explains PBMR (Pty) Ltd CEO Jaco Kriek.
Although the US project is still in its pre- conceptual phase,
this is a huge signal that South Africas PBMR is world-class,
he affirms.
There are quite a few other competing nuclear reactor
technologies, yet they went for ours this is very
significant, he points out.
Moreover, the prototype PBMR plant to be built in South Africa
will be purely a power generation unit.
Thus, the US programme could see the construction of the process
heat prototype using American and not South African money and
the PBMR company believes that process heat applications will be
as big a market for their reactor as electricity generation, if
not bigger (see Engineering News March 31, 2006).
Further, PBMR is hopeful that involvement in this project will
assist in the licensing of its reactor in the US.
We are already working with the US Nuclear Regulatory
Commission to this end, he assures.
We are in this consortium and this project not only because we
have the PBMR design, but because that design has been converted
into components we have manufactured engineering designs and
some components are already being made, explains Kriek.
No one else can say this, not even the Chinese, he asserts.
(China has operated a small 10 MW pebble-bed research plant
in Beijing for some years now; the Chinese and South Africans
have a memorandum of understanding which allows them to exchange
experiences and knowledge about PBMR technology.) Rival
fourth-generation nuclear reactor technologies are not as
advan-ced as the South African PBMR.
But we are also in this project because of our design and
modelling experience and capability, he highlights.
The US members of the consortium are Westinghouse Electric
Company (the consortium leader); Shaw, Stone & Webster (based in
Boston, Massachusetts); Technology Insights (San Diego,
California); Air Products & Chemicals (Allentown, Pennsylvania);
Nuclear Fuel Services (Erwin, Tennessee); and Kadak Associates
(Providence, Rhode Island).
Westinghouse owns 15% of the PBMR company.
The contract awarded to the Westinghouse/PBMR consortium is one
of three awarded by the DoE, with a total value of $8-million,
all involving engineering studies and preconceptual design for
the NGNP.
The other two contracts were awarded to General Atomics of the
US and Areva of France.
These contracts are for complementary engineering studies; our
contract is the main contract, clarifies Kriek.
This contract will run for 12 months and is intended to be just
the first phase in the multi-phase programme which, if all goes
well, will result in the construction of a prototype process
heat PBMR at the Idaho National Laboratory.
This programme is part of the DoEs Gen-eration IV nuclear
energy systems initiative which seeks to develop
next-generation reactor technologies.
This initiative, in turn, is authorised by the Energy Policy Act
passed by the US Congress last year.
Published: 2006/10/13 Printer friendly: [View this article
Author: Keith Campbell
Portfolio: Senior Contributing Editor
E-mail: newsdesk@engineeringnews.co.za
Copyright © Creamer Media (Pty) Ltd
*****************************************************************
64 lamonitor.com: Udall seeks to help
The Online News Source for Los Alamos
CAROL A. CLARK Monitor Senior Reporter
In his effort to assist local subcontractors facing work loss
and project cancellations at Los Alamos National Laboratory,
Rep. Tom Udall, D-NM, returned to the Hill for another meeting
on Wednesday.
The champion of the subcontractors listened to nearly 25 of them
as they voiced their most recent concerns.
"They were steamed up and angry and I can't blame them," Udall
said. "They are not happy with how LANS has put the small
business portion of the management contract on hold while they
meet with DOE to re-negotiate. We want to know how the cuts will
impact the commitment LANS made in their LANL management
proposal to bring $625 million to small business concerns in
FY-07."
Six months ago the subcontractors were happy but now they have
strong concerns, he said.
"By listening to the contractors this morning, I concluded that
we should ask additional questions in a supplemental letter,"
Udall said. "I'm going to return to Washington, D.C. in November
to try to work on the appropriations side of this and see if we
can't have a discussion to find additional money to help the
local small businesses."
Udall added that he is going to push very hard to get a quick
resolution to the small business portion of the contract put on
hold while LANS and DOE (NNSA) re-negotiate what LANS is going
to do for small business.
"I want them to quickly resolve this and put out to the
subcontractors what they are going to do," Udall said. "I
believe this will help settle things down."
In a Sept. 30 news release, Udall demanded answers, quick action
and increased funding for contract employees.
"More answers are needed about the contract employee cuts and
the impact both at the lab and in the surrounding community," he
said in the release. "We know NNSA has opted to cut
approximately 10 percent of the contract labor force, but we
have not yet received enough information to determine who and
what essential operations will be affected. There is a lot of
uncertainty in the LANL community right now and at this point
more information is needed to properly address the problem."
Udall told subcontractors Wednesday that he joined the chairman
and ranking member of the House Committee on Small Business, a
committee on which he serves, in sending a letter to LANL
Director Michael Anastasio requesting information about the
impact of the contract cuts on small businesses.
In their letter, they asked Anastasio to specify how many of the
contracts being cut went to small businesses, the total dollar
amount of small business cuts, and the specifics of the
contracts being cut.
Udall has not yet heard from Anastasio adding that the letter
requested a response by the end of October.
Jeff Berger, LANL's director of communications ad-dressed the
issue this morning.
"Our aim is to honor what we put in our proposal and that
includes the small business commitment, but it may take us
longer to meet those commitments," Berger said. "Our performance
measures to meet those commitments are not yet negotiated in the
final contract. We expect those measures to be agreed upon with
NNSA in the next month or so."
Udall stated in his Sept. 30 release that he has also urged the
House Appropriations Committee's subcommittee on Energy and
Water, which is responsible for the legislation that funds LANL,
to pass a final version of the Energy and Water Appropriations
bill as soon as it resumes the legislative session in November.
Udall is requesting the House restore last year's funding level
for environmental restoration programs for the lab, which was
cut by $55 million in President Bush's FY-07 budget request for
energy and water. Udall stated that he made that same request in
March.
Udall explained that the recent cuts by LANL combined with
funding constraints as a result of the Continuing Resolution on
spending bills, might mean massive layoffs of contract employees
who support the environmental restoration programs, as well as
setbacks in cleanup efforts at LANL.
Udall added that because the House is the only Chamber to have
thus far passed its FY-07 Energy and Water Appropriations Bill -
the level of funding included in the Continuing Resolution -
LANL will be forced to operate under this amount until both
chambers pass, and Bush signs Energy and Water Appropriations
legislation.
© 2003 Los Alamos Monitor All Rights Reserved.
*****************************************************************
65 Oak Ridger: DOE and TEMA to sponsor Oak Ridge Regional Emergency Management Forum
Story last updated at 1:45 pm on 10/12/2006
On Oct. 26, the Department of Energys Oak Ridge Office (ORO) is
co-sponsoring the sixth annual Oak Ridge Regional Emergency
Management Forum. The forum is different this year because
members of the community are invited to attend this free event.
The forum, sponsored by DOE-ORO and the Tennessee Emergency
Management Agency and hosted by BWXT Y-12, LLC, offers various
speakers and breakout sessions that address emergency management
issues of current interest affecting the Oak Ridge Reservation
and the five surrounding counties of Anderson, Roane, Knox,
Loudon, and Morgan. The forum provides an opportunity to network
with emergency management professionals in the local area.
If members of the community would like to attend the forum, they
must pre-register for the event. A Web site has been developed to
make the registration process simple. In addition to registering
for the event, individuals must choose the three breakout
sessions they plan to attend.
We wanted to extend an invitation to the entire community this
year because we believe everyone can benefit from the program
that we have developed, said Gerald Boyd, manager of DOE ORO.
Many of the sessions will inform the community what to do if
there is an emergency in Oak Ridge, and providing that
information is part of our responsibility to the community.
In addition to the informational sessions, emergency response
vehicles and equipment will also be on display for public viewing
beginning at 10:30 a.m. the day of the event.
The opening session for the half-day event begins at 12:30 p.m.
at the Pollard Technology Conference Center, located at 210
Badger Ave. in Oak Ridge, but registrants should arrive early to
receive their conference schedules and name badges.
The forum Web site can be accessed at
http://www.oakridge.doe.gov/EMForum2006/index.htm. People may
visit the site to find more detailed information about the event
and to complete the necessary pre-registration form. The
registration deadline is Oct. 13.
The Oak Ridger |
*****************************************************************
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:
*****************************************************************