*****************************************************************
01/24/07 ****     RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL)       **** VOL 15.19
*****************************************************************
   RADBULL IS PRODUCED BY THE ABALONE ALLIANCE CLEARINGHOUSE
*****************************************************************
Send News Stories to news@energy-net.org with title on subject
line and first line of body

                         NUCLEAR POLICY
 
1 AFP: Britain accuses Iran, Syria of spitting in West's eye - 
2 IRIB PERSIAN NEWS: IRI coop with IAEA little affected 
3 IRIB PERSIAN NEWS: No one can impose sanctions on IRI 
4 AFP: Iran vows to crush any threat
5 AFP: Iran vows to crush any threat as US steps up rhetoric 
6 AFP: Israeli PM warns of 'severe steps' against Iran - 
7 AFP: Iranians, Americans see room for compromise in nuclear row - po
8 UPI: Commentary: Hawks and doves over Iran
9 Guardian Unlimited: S. Korea Says North Showing Flexibility 
10 Korea Herald: Now is not the time to discuss summit - Lee   
11 Korea Herald: Korea's Joint Chiefs boost nuke vigilance   
12 Korea Times: Seoul Optimistic Over Nuke Talks 
13 Korea Times: Heritage Foundation Calls for Probing Seoul's NK Aid 
14 Korea Times: Half of World Disapproves of US Handling of NK Nukes
15 AFP: Rice dismisses report North Korea helping Iran prepare nuke tes
16 UPI: Report: N. Korea giving Iran nuclear info
17 UPI: N.Korea willing to halt nuke activities
18 US: Lester Brown: Davos Notes: Considering the Real Costs of Our Ene
19 AFP: Russia, India agree arms deals on eve of Putin visit - 
20 BBC: Russian president heads for India
21 IAEA: Nuclear Energy, Non-Proliferation Focus of Talks in France
 
                         NUCLEAR REACTORS
 
22 US: [NukeNet] Petition for rulemaking--please comment
23 The Hindu: Nuclear projects to make sea water fit for drinking 
24 US: World Nuclear News: Monticello shut down by weld failure
25 Toronto Star: Israel signals it may develop nuclear power 
26 ForUm: Energoatom to reduce violations at Nuclear Power Station
27 HindustanTimes.com: India for increasing share of N-power - PM
28 The Hindu: 'Russia, India to cooperate in peaceful use of nuke energ
29 Earth Times: Putin calls for global nuclear energy
30 World Nuclear News: Russia makes deals in India
31 BBC: Climate 'to affect nuclear sites'
32 US: NRC: NRC to Discuss Preliminary Results of License Renewal Inspe
33 Daily Yomiuri: Toppled turbine fans safety probe 
34 US: Rutland Herald: 7 arrested at Vt. Yankee
35 globeandmail.com: Nuclear has crucial role in power supply - Lunn
36 US: Rutland Herald: Yankee discovers safety failure; says problem fi
37 US: Boise Weekly: Gore chants, Craig Rants
38 Reuters: Czechs launch energy study, coalition to be tested
39 US: NRC: NRC Grants Entergy’s Request for Extended Deadline for Meet
40 US: NRC: Nuclear Management Company, LLC; Palisades Nuclear Plant; N
41 US: NRC: PPL Susquehanna LLC; Establishment of Atomic Safety and Lic
42 Brooks Bulletin: Surely we can find cleaner energy source
43 US: BBC: Bush 'must fight climate change'
44 US: Lincoln County News: Maine Yankee Damage Award Finalized for Wis
45 US: MSNBC.com: Plan for nuclear cartel faces reality check - Power P
46 ITAR-TASS: Federation Council passes law on state-owned nuclear hold
47 Bayshore Broadcasting Corporation: Nuclear hearing today 
48 US: New London Day: Hole In Energy Policy  
49 CAN: National Post: Tories 'not afraid' of nuclear, Lunn says
50 US: Knox News: Loose air hose prompts reactor shutdown
51 AdelaideNow: Liberals demand nuclear power summit
 
                          NUCLEAR SECURITY
 
52 US: NRC: Security of nuclear materials
 
                          NUCLEAR SAFETY
 
53 US: Deseret News: Internet will carry Divine Strake hearing
54 US: Salt Lake Tribune: Washington County takes stand against Divine 
55 US: Boise Weekly: Divine Strake meetings set
56 FIA: USA Donates Radioactive, Chemical and Biological Detection Equi
57 US: Deseret News: Radiation facts may ease fears
 
                         NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE
 
58 US: hidden costs of nuclear waste: Straightgoods.com
59 reviewjournal.com: Nuke industry mindful of Reid
60 BBC: Clean up begins at Dounreay plant
61 Reid: WE SHOULD WORK TOGETHER TO TAKE AMERICA IN A NEW DIRECTION
62 LasVegasNOW.com: Reid's Leadership in Senate Could Affect Yucca Moun
 
                           PEACE
 
 
                        US DEPT. OF ENERGY
 
63 AP Wire: Report questions Sandia lab charge card spending
64 SF New Mexican: DOE told to speed up efforts to move Los Alamos nucl
65 Hanford News: EnergySolutions buys nuclear services company
66 DOE: Office of Fossil Energy; Ultra-Deepwater Advisory Committee: 
67 DOE: Office of Fossil Energy; Unconventional Resources Technology 
68 KnoxNews: Will '07 budget stall Y-12 modernization?
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
                         FULL NEWS STORIES
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
 1 AFP: Britain accuses Iran, Syria of spitting in West's eye - 

 Wed Jan 24, 1:08 PM ET 		 	 

LONDON (AFP) - British Foreign Secretary Margaret Beckett has 
accused Iran" /> and Syria" /> of spitting in the eye of the 
West, but vowed to continue trying to engage with them due to 
their regional importance. 

 Wednesday, she said both countries could be crucial in
resolving the situations in Iraq, Lebanon and between Israelis
and Palestinians. 

"These are countries of great significance in the region, that
is why we have maintained contacts with them and why we continue
to aspire to those contacts being able to be made on a much more
friendly and open basis. 

"But... it is not always easy to make a friend with someone who
keeps trying to spit in your eye," she added. 

The British government, along with its European partners and in
contrast to Washington, has pursued efforts to engage with
Damascus and Tehran, which Prime Minister Tony Blair" /> has
said face a "strategic choice". 

Iran has defied the West's calls for it to curb its nuclear
activities, which Washington in particular suspects are a cover
for developing atomic weapons. 

Beckett also took Tehran to task over its treatment of its own
people, pointing out that Iran is second only to China in the
number of executions it carries out. 

"As for Syria we continue to be concerned about the nature of
their involvement in Iraq, and Lebanon as well as in Palestine,"
she said. 

And she warned: "Syria, like Iran, faces a strategic choice
either to act responsibly or to continue to support terrorism
and hold back progress in the region," she told lawmakers. 

But she also hailed recent "positive steps" by Syria, including
the re-establishment of ties with Iraq, concluding: "We will...
continue to engage diplomatically with both countries." 

Copyright © 2007 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 2 IRIB PERSIAN NEWS: IRI coop with IAEA little affected 

  2007/01/24   

Deputy International Affairs of the Iranian Atomic Energy
Organization (IAEO), Mohammad Saidi on Wednesday said that IRI's
cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency
overwhemingly cover medicine, food, agriculture and safety
matters.
 
Mohammad Saidi pointed to the latest resolution of the Security
Council againsty Iran and said it will not affect the above
mentioned cooperations.
 
He said that 90 percent of "our cooperations are in these
fields," adding that on the remaining 10 percent the Governors
Council will make decision in February 2007.
 
On Bushehr facilities, the Deputy International Affairs of the
Iranian Atomic Energy Organization said that Bushehr facilities
will be launched in September 2007.
 
M/D   

  Copyright 2004, All Rights Reserved By Islamic Republic of Iran 
Broadcasting News Network Sponsored By IRIB News Computer Center. 
E-Mail: Info@IRIBNEWS.ir     
*****************************************************************
 3 IRIB PERSIAN NEWS: No one can impose sanctions on IRI 

  2007/01/24   
  
President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said on Tuesday that not all
countries of the world, though they may have the will to impose
sanctions on the Islamic Republic of Iran, have the capacity to
materialize such will.
 
Speaking live on Iranian tv's channel 2, the president said he
was not worried about the future.
 
"We are not concerned about the future. Many world presidents
have indicated their desire to continue relations with us. We
are not even concerned about the restrictions imposed on our
banks by certain states since they do not have a monopoly of the
global banking system."
 
The president reiterated a finding of the International Atomic
Energy Agency (IAEA) that the Islamic Republic of Iran has not
violated rules and regulations of the UN's nuclear watchdog,
saying a recent report of IAEA Director-General Mohamed
Elbaradei confirms this.
 
Referring to the anti-IRI resolution passed by the UN Security
Council as a document of no significance, the Iranian president
said that Tehran will find ways to cushion its economy from
imposed sanctions and will prevent any resolution of the kind
from being issued against IRI again.
 
M/D   

  Copyright 2004, All Rights Reserved By Islamic Republic of Iran 
Broadcasting News Network Sponsored By IRIB News Computer Center. 
E-Mail: Info@IRIBNEWS.ir     
*****************************************************************
 4 AFP: Iran vows to crush any threat

 Wed Jan 24, 6:53 AM ET                          

TEHRAN (AFP) - Iran" /> 's defence minister has vowed that the 
country's armed forces would "crush" any military strike or 
threat, the latest broadside in a standoff with the West over its 
nuclear ambitions. 

to be "rational" with Iran, amid speculation that Washington 
could be planning a strike on its nuclear installations. 

"I advise Mr Bush and his advisors to be rational and think
about their own nation's interest," he said. 

Najjar's remarks came a day after Iranian President Mahmoud
Ahmadinejad delivered a defiant message to the United States,
saying Washington could not hurt Tehran by waging what he called
a "psychological war". 

"They are not in a position to hurt us, they do not have the
power to do so, their pressure is mostly psychological," he
said. 

US Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs Nicholas Burns
warned Tuesday that Washington would not allow Iran to "control"
the oil-rich Gulf and had sent two carrier battle groups to the
region in recent weeks. 

Last month, the UN Security Council passed a resolution imposing
sanctions on Iran banning transfer of material and technology to
its nuclear and missile programmes over its refusal to suspend
uranium enrichment. 

The West fears Iran's nuclear drive could be diverted to build
atomic weapons, a charge vehemently denied by Iran. 

Copyright © 2007 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 5 AFP: Iran vows to crush any threat as US steps up rhetoric 

 Wed Jan 24, 12:55 PM ET 		 	 

TEHRAN (AFP) - Iran" /> Iranvowed it was ready to crush any 
military strike or threat as the United States and its allies 
turned up the rhetoric over Tehran's nuclear ambitions and its 
growing clout in the region. 

 "The Islamic republic's armed forces are in a state of complete 
readiness and are monitoring everything in order to give a 
crushing response to even the smallest aggression or threat," 
Defence Minister Mostafa Mohammad Najjar was quoted as saying by 
the ISNA news agency. 

Najjar also urged the administration of US President George W. 
Bush" /> President George W. Bushto be "rational" with Iran, amid 
mounting speculation that arch-enemy Washington could be planning 
a strike on its nuclear installations. 

"I advise Mr Bush and his advisors to be rational and think
about their own nation's interest," he said. 

Najjar's remarks came after Iran's outspoken President Mahmoud
Ahmadinejad delivered another defiant message to the United
States, saying: "They are not in a position to hurt us, they do
not have the power to do so, their pressure is mostly
psychological." 

The United States has been at the forefront of the campaign to
stop Iran's nuclear drive, saying it could be a cover for
efforts to build atomic weapons, a claim vehemently denied by
Tehran. 

Iran has insisted it will not be diverted from its right to
nuclear technology, despite a UN Security Council resolution
last month which imposed sanctions over Tehran's refusal to
suspend uranium enrichment. 

Washington has also taken Tehran to task for allegedly fomenting
the violence in neighbouring Iraq" /> Iraqand playing a role in
the political turmoil in Lebanon, where the Iranian-backed
Hezbollah is spearheading a campaign to bring down the
Western-backed government. 

Washington's ambassador to Baghdad, Zalmay Khalilzad, said on
Wednesday that the turmoil in Iraq was helping to boost the
clout of Shiite-ruled Iran in the majority Sunni Arab region. 

"Historically, Iraq has played a balancing role vis-a-vis Iran.
Now that Iraq is a weakened state, it is helping the rise of the
relative power of Iran," Khalilzad told reporters in Baghdad. 

"Iran is a rising and increasingly important issue... Iran wants
to be a dominant power." 

US officials have repeatedly warned that Iran is supporting
renegade Iraqi Shiite militias and providing weapons technology
used by anti-US forces in Iraq. 

Earlier this month, US troops arrested five Iranians from a
liaison office in northern Iraq, accusing them of being agents
for Tehran, arming militias and inciting anti-US attacks. 

The arrests triggered a row, with Tehran accusing the US forces
of violating international diplomatic regulations. 

US Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs Nicholas Burns
also warned on Tuesday that Washington would not allow Iran to
"control" the oil-rich Gulf and had sent two carrier battle
groups to the region in recent weeks. 

And Jordanian King Abdullah II, who once warned that a Shiite
crescent was taking shape across the region, also weighed in to
the standoff on Wednesday. 

"We wish to see positive and balanced relations between Iraq and
Iran, and between Arab countries and Iran," he told the
London-based Arabic daily Asharq Al-Awsat in an interview also
carried by Jordan's Petra news agency. 

"We believe that Iran must refrain from seeking to rattle
stability in Palestine, Lebanon and Iraq and any other part of
the region so that we can make progress towards building such
relations," he said. 

"The situation in Iraq is very dangerous and complicated. If
sectarian strife in Iraq persists it will set ablaze everything
in its path and spread to all the countries in the region," he
said. 

"We hope the efforts of all of Iraq's neighbours, including
Iran, will focus on helping Iraq avoid civil war." 	 		 			

Copyright © 2007 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 6 AFP: Israeli PM warns of 'severe steps' against Iran - 

 Wed Jan 24, 2:55 PM 		 	 

HERZLIYA, Israel (AFP) - Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert
warned that if the world's diplomatic efforts to stop Iran's
nuclear programme fail, then "much more severe steps" should be
taken. [ src=] 

"It is clear to everyone that a diplomatic solution to the
Iranian issue is the preferred solution. We also prefer such an
outcome," Olmert said in a keynote speech on the last day of the
annual conference on Israel's national security in the town of
Herzliya, north of Tel Aviv. 

If the world turns "a blind eye now, while ignoring reality...
those of us who wish to prevent Iran from becoming a nuclear
power will, down the road, not be left with any choice but to
take much more severe steps in the future," he said. 

Israel and the West accuse Iran of seeking to acquire an atomic
bomb through its nuclear programme, which Tehran insists is
solely for peaceful purposes. 

Coupled with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's repeated
calls for the destruction of the Jewish state, Israel --
considered the sole nuclear power in the Middle East -- has come
to consider the Islamic republic as an existential threat. 

"Anyone who threatens us, who threatens our existence, must know
that we have the determination and capability to defend
ourselves, responding with force, discretion and with all means
at our disposal," Olmert said. 

But he also reassured the Israeli public that "as serious as the
Iranian threat is, the threat of a nuclear attack on Israel is
in no way imminent." 

He welcomed United Nations Security Council Resolution 1703,
passed last month, which calls for sanctions against Iran for
non-compliance over its nuclear programme of uranium enrichment. 

"Iran is very vulnerable and sensitive to international
pressure, despite its defiant, arrogant and provocative stance,
and it is already paying the ever-increasing price for its
behaviour," Olmert said. 

On Sunday a senior US official told the Herzliya conference that
the pressure exerted by the United States and the international
community on Iran over its nuclear programme had put Tehran on
the defensive. 

"Iran is no longer on the offensive but on the defensive and we
have to keep it on the defensive," Under Secretary of State
Nicholas Burns said. "Iran has to learn how to respect the power
and the will of the international community." 

Copyright © 2007 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 7 AFP: Iranians, Americans see room for compromise in nuclear row - poll

 Wed Jan 24, 11:08 AM 		 	 

WASHINGTON (AFP) - Most Iranians and Americans believe there is
room for compromise on their nuclear row and reject the idea
that conflict between Islam and the West is inevitable,
according to a new poll. [ src=] 

The public opinion survey conducted in Iran and the United
States showed that while majorities in both countries are deeply
suspicious of each other, they nonetheless agree on a wide range
of issues. 

"This survey shows that between the United States and Iran,
there is more common ground than one might readily assume from
seeing how government leaders interact with each other," Steven
Kull, director of the Program on International Policy Attitudes,
which commissioned the poll, told AFP. 

"It shows that Iran is not bent on isolating itself, is not bent
on polarizing with the West and is actually looking for some
kind of intermediary resolution to the nuclear issue," added
Kull. 

According to the survey, 84 percent of Iranians believe their
country must have the capacity to enrich uranium for nuclear
energy, despite the UN Security Council resolution calling on
the Islamic republic to cease enrichment. 

Nonetheless, 66 percent of those questioned agree that Iran
should comply with the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT)
which forbids Iran from developing nuclear weapons. 

A parallel poll carried out in the United States shows that a
majority of Americans would support a deal allowing Iran to
enrich uranium to produce nuclear power but not nuclear weapons.
In return, Iran would have to allow UN inspectors full access. 

Fifty five percent of Americans believe this would be a good
compromise while 38 percent feel it's a bad idea. 

"What really stands out is the degree to which the Iranians do
seem quite determined to enrich uranium and at the same time
they seem quite committed to the NPT regime," Kull said. 

Both publics rejected the idea that conflict is inevitable
between Islam and the West and that religious and social
traditions are incompatible between the two. 

Still, when questioned about attitudes toward each other, 76
percent of Iranians said they have negative opinions of the
United States and 93 percent feel that way about the Bush
administration. Their attitudes toward Americans are divided
with 45 percent favorable and 49 percent unfavorable. 

Most Americans, 78 percent, see the Iranian government
negatively and 59 percent feel that way about the Iranian
people. 

Both publics expressed interest in improving relations and by
majorities said they were concerned about international
terrorism. 

The poll in Iran was conducted between October and December of
last year and involved 1,000 people who were interviewed
face-to-face in rural as well as urban areas. The survey in the
United States concerned 1,004 people and was conducted in
December. 

Copyright © 2007 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 8 UPI: Commentary: Hawks and doves over Iran
     
  United Press International - Intl. Intelligence - 

1/24/2007 9:47:00 AM -0500

 By ARNAUD DE BORCHGRAVE UPI Editor at Large

WASHINGTON, Jan. 24 (UPI) -- "Cataclysmic ... Apocalyptic," said
Gianfranco Fini, Italy's former deputy prime minister and
foreign minister, and leader of the National Alliance. He had
just been asked for the likely reaction of America's NATO allies
in the event of Israeli and/or U.S. air strikes against Iran's
nuclear facilities. 

Stubbing out his second cigarette over breakfast at the Italian
Embassy residence, he said the consequences of such an attack on
Iran would be "unimaginable and without precedent." Fini
reminded his breakfast guests that European nations trade
extensively with Iran. 

Some allies would presumably recall their ambassador from
Washington and some might even break diplomatic relations. 

At the opposite end of the spectrum of reactions was a major
Gulf state official. Speaking privately, not for quotation, he
said, "if I had to choose between living with a nuclear Shiite
Iran across the Gulf from us, and the bombing of Iran's nuclear
installations, with all the dire consequences of such an attack,
I would still opt for bombing." 

The six Gulf Cooperation Council countries, all Sunni, do not
publicly endorse such an attack. But they all share the same
fear about a nuclear Iran. Saudi Arabia's outgoing ambassador to
the United States, Prince Turki al-Faisal, has said publicly the
kingdom would be firmly opposed to military operations against
Iran. 

"What we're not interested in is another war in the region,"
said Mohammed al-Naqbi, chairman of the Gulf Negotiations
Center. "Iraq is your problem not the problem of the Arabs. You
destroyed a country that had institutions. You handed that
country to Iran. Now you are crying to Europe and the Arabs to
help you out of this mess." 

"Neocon" elder statesman Richard Perle, speaking at the annual
Herzliya Conference in Israel last Sunday, said president Bush
will order an attack on Iran if it becomes clear to him that
Iran is set to acquire nuclear weapons capabilities. U.S.
presidential hopeful Mitt Romney, at the same conference, summed
up the sentiment of four presidential aspirants by saying, "Iran
must be stopped, Iran can be stopped, and Iran will be stopped." 

On his most recent trip to Israel, Tom Lantos, D-Calif., was
asked time and again by his interlocutors, "What are you waiting
for to attack Iran's nuclear installations?" In Israel, the
perception, clear across the political spectrum, is that Iranian
President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is plotting a "second Holocaust"
against Israel by way of a nuclear weapon lobbed by missile into
an Israeli city. 

Reinforcing these hair-raising suspicions was Iran's veto of 38
nuclear inspectors from a longer list submitted by the United
Nations, presumably retaliation for minor slap-on-wrist trade
sanctions imposed by the Security Council last months. 

Overlooked in this picture is the fact Ahmadinejad has no
control over Iran's nuclear program and cannot order around his
own military. His only authority is over his cabinet. Armed
forces, Revolutionary Guards, intelligence, Parliament, and
media are the purview of the Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali
Khamenei, and 14 senior Grand Ayatollahs. 

Wayne White, former deputy director of the State Department's
Office of Analysis for the Middle East (under the Bureau of
Intelligence and Research) said the Bush administration has
drawn up plans for a broad attack against Iran. "I've seen some
of the planning," said White, "and you're not talking about a
surgical strike." Most Middle Eastern experts in the United
States, Europe and the Arab world predict an attack on Iran
would destabilize the Muslim world for years. 

Ignored by the hawks is the rising chorus against Ahmadinejad's
anti-U.S. and anti-Israel foreign policy from within the upper
echelons of the mullahocracy. His state visits to America's
self-avowed enemies in Venezuela, Ecuador and Nicaragua were
denounced as "wasteful" and "irresponsible." 

As was the "unrealistic" budget he submitted to parliament.
Attempts to impeach him gathered 38 signatures, short of the 72
required. Ethnic and religious fissures abound in the body
politic. Iran's senior dissident cleric, Hossein Ali Montazeri,
blasted Ahmadinejad's "radical and provocative slogans" against
the West on the nuclear issue. 

Former Secretary of State Colin Powell's chief of staff has
disclosed Vice President Dick Cheney rejected an Iranian offer
in 2003 to help the United States stabilize Iraq. According to
Lawrence Wilkerson, who was close to Powell for 16 years, Tehran
also offered to end its military support for Hezbollah and
Hamas. Those were the heady days when Iran could not believe its
luck. The United States had "taken out" its two mortal enemies
-- Sunni Taliban in Afghanistan and Saddam Hussein's Sunni
tyranny in Iraq -- and Iran was still in a covertly conciliatory
mood via-a-vis the American giant next door. 

This flickered out when the U.S. military in 2004 took on Shiite
militias that were under the indirect control of Iran's
Revolutionary Guards. Today, if an air campaign were launched by
Israel and/or the United States against Iran, an all-out
guerrilla jihad ordered by Tehran could easily lead to a
precipitous and humiliating withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq. 

As long as Israel to the west and Pakistan to the east are
full-fledged nuclear weapons powers, with missile delivery
systems, Iran will not abandon its own quest that has been
underway for the past two decades. 

Those who argue the pros and cons of U.S. air strikes posit
Bush's six-year legacy: Iraq as the biggest blunder in U.S.
history, which relegates him in some surveys to one of the three
worst presidents in U.S. history. Hence the temptation for a
lame duck president to double down by reducing Iran's nuclear
facilities to rubble. The cons in this argument can see the NATO
effort in Afghanistan imploding; Pakistan's Musharraf siding
with his Muslim fundamentalists against a close alliance with
the United States and helping restore a "moderate" Taliban
regime in Kabul; Iraq and Iran signing a mutual-assistance
military alliance. 

How different would the picture be if Israel were to attempt a
military solution against Iran? Israel has always thought air
strikes appear to be out of the question because of limited
air-to-air refueling tanker capacity. Operation Babylon II --
Babylon I was launched in 1981 when Israeli aircraft pulverized
the Osirak light-water reactor under construction near Baghdad
-- would most probably come by air, but not in aircraft. Israel
has some 300 medium-range ballistic missiles (Jericho 2 has a
range of between 1,500 and 3,500 km) that are accurate within 50
feet. Some Jerichos have low-yield, bunker-busting nuclear
weapons designed to penetrate the thickest concrete that
protects some of Iran's underground targets. 

Israel believes it cannot wait much longer. For the past four
years, Mossad and Israeli military intelligence have estimated
the critical point of no return in Iran's nuclear timetable was
somewhere between 2005 and 2007. But the powers that be in the
Jewish state would, of course, much prefer to have the United
States do the job. For the first time since the invasion of
Iraq, the U.S. Navy will have two aircraft carrier battle groups
and cruise missile capabilities on escort ships close to Iran.
Also part of the lethal mix are B-52 and B-2B bombers based in
Diego Garcia in the middle of the Indian Ocean. 

U.S. air strikes against Iranian supply routes into Iraq would
be the first step on a new escalator.

© Copyright 2007 United Press International, Inc. All Rights
Reserved.
*****************************************************************
 9 Guardian Unlimited: S. Korea Says North Showing Flexibility 

From the Associated Press        

[UP] 

Wednesday January 24, 2007 12:46 PM

AP Photo SEL102 

By JAE-SOON CHANG 

Associated Press Writer 

SEOUL, South Korea (AP) - North Korea has shown a new
willingness to take steps toward dismantling its nuclear program
after the United States offered concessions during bilateral
talks last week, South Korean officials said Wednesday. 

South Korea and the United States have presented a ``proactive''
proposal aimed at getting North Korea to live up to a September
2005 pact in which it pledged to abandon nuclear weapons in
exchange for aid and security guarantees, Foreign Minister Song
Min-soon said. 

``North Korea is showing flexibility on this,'' he told
reporters. He declined to elaborate on details of the proposal,
saying negotiations were still under way. 

But another South Korean official, who spoke on condition of
anonymity citing the issue's sensitivity, said the minister was
referring to an offer that the United States made during three
days of one-on-one negotiations with North Korea in Berlin last
week. 

The official said the U.S. proposal includes ``various
exceptional concessions,'' but declined to specify them. 

North Korea has refused to discuss specific steps aimed at
carrying out the 2005 disarmament accord, demanding Washington
first desist from a campaign to isolate Pyongyang from the
international financial system over Pyongyang's alleged
counterfeiting and money laundering. 

That defiant stance caused the last session of six-nation
nuclear talks in December to end without any breakthrough. 

In Moscow, Russia's ITAR-Tass agency quoted a North Korean envoy
as saying his country is ready to cooperate with the
International Atomic Energy Agency if the U.N. agency does not
allow itself to be influenced by any on country. 

``If the IAEA as the relevant international organization in the
sphere of atomic energy maintains adherence to its mission and
will fulfill its responsibilities honestly, not obeying the
policy and position of any individual country, we are ready to
continue cooperation with the agency,'' Kim Yong Jae, North
Korean ambassador to Russia, was quoted as saying. 

The U.S. was the most vocal proponent of U.N. sanctions against
North Korea after its nuclear weapons test in October. 

North Korea kicked out IAEA inspectors in late 2002, ending
international oversight of its nuclear activities. 

The rare Berlin talks were between Assistant Secretary of State
Christopher Hill and North Korean Vice Foreign Minister Kim Kye
Gwan. After the meetings, North Korea's Foreign Ministry said it
reached an unspecified agreement, but did not elaborate. 

On Tuesday, Kim told reporters in Beijing that the U.S. position
has changed in a ``positive'' direction, suggesting that
Washington may have backed down from its earlier position that
the financial dispute was a law enforcement matter unconnected
to the nuclear issue. 

Kim also said the North's position could change as well. 

North Korea tested its first-ever nuclear bomb in October,
adding urgency to the six-nation talks that have been held since
2003 without making any concrete progress on disarming the
communist nation. 

No date has been set for the next round of negotiations
involving China, Japan, Russia, the U.S. and the two Koreas, but
officials say they should occur before mid-February. 

Japan's nuclear envoy, Kenichiro Sasae, was in Beijing Wednesday
for talks with his Chinese counterpart. 

President Bush refrained from any criticism of North Korea in
his State of the Union address Tuesday, saying simply that
Washington was pursuing diplomacy with its partners to attain a
nuclear-free Korean peninsula. 

Also Tuesday, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice spoke by
telephone with her Chinese counterpart, Li Zhaoxing, to discuss
the North Korea nuclear issue and China-U.S. ties, China's
Foreign Ministry said. 	 
		 	 	   
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian News and Media Limited 2007
*****************************************************************
 10 Korea Herald: Now is not the time to discuss summit - Lee   
        
Unification Minister Lee Jae-joung yesterday said that now was
not the time to discuss the possibility of holding an
inter-Korean summit because nuclear negotiations must show
progress first.

 "As it is now most important to focus on the development of the
six-party talks, it is not the time to discuss any inter-Korean
summit," Lee said at a security forum.

 "For inter-Korean relations to normalize and all dialogue,
humanitarian aid and other activity take place, progress must
start to show in solving the nuclear problem," Lee said.

 All official inter-Korean talks remain suspended since North
Korea's July missile test and the detonation of a nuclear device
in October last year.

 Now that signs of progress are beginning to show in
negotiations, as recently indicated by members of the six-party
talks, several politicians in the ruling camp raised the
possibility of holding an inter-Korean summit this year. It
would make it the second such meeting after the first historic
summit between then-President Kim Dae Jung and North Korean
leader Kim Jong-il in 2000.

 
  Lee Jae-joung  

President Roh Moo-hyun said in his New Year message on Tuesday
that he has always been open to holding a summit but that it
would happen only when there is development in the nuclear
negotiations. "The president has called it an open task, I call
it an existing question," Lee said.

 To a question on what would be the conditions for holding
highest-level talks with the North, Lee said, "It should not be
arranged in the same method and steps that were taken in the
past."

 "The meeting should center on how to cooperate and realize
peace, denuclearization and prosperity on the Korean peninsula,"
Lee said.

 Later in the day, Lee visited Gaeseong industrial park and
toured the border town in North Korea for the first time since
becoming unification minister.

 (angiely@heraldm.com)

By Lee Joo-hee 

2007.01.25
 
*****************************************************************
 11 Korea Herald: Korea's Joint Chiefs boost nuke vigilance   
        
Prime Minister Han Myeong-sook yesterday ordered the military to 
step up monitoring of North Korea's nuclear facilities during an 
extensive meeting of security officials yesterday. 

During the meeting, about 200 military leaders and government 
officials pledged to beef up the nation's integrated defense 
posture to cope with increasing security instability in the 
region since North Korea's nuclear test last year, the Joint 
Chiefs of Staff said. 

The meeting, the 40th of its kind, reached the assessment that 
there were still various sources of conflict embedded in the 
Northeast Asian region and mounting instability due to North 
Korea's nuclear test and missile launches last year.

  Prime Minister Han Myeong-sook and other officials hold a
security meeting yesterday at the Foreign Ministry building,
downtown in Seoul. [The Korea Herald]  

Despite growing political and economic cooperation, the meeting
concluded neighboring countries in the region are stepping up
their efforts to modernize military forces and accelerate arms
buildups. Facing such security uncertainty, the Joint Chiefs
decided to try to establish the nation's full-scale integrated
defense posture. To achieve that goal, all central and local
authorities will enhance readiness to various threats and set up
a firm defense posture consolidating civilians, the public
sector and the military, they said. 

The authorities will increase preparedness for any enemy
infiltration and create greater war deterrence as well.

 The government also reaffirmed its decision to elevate its
military readiness to counter North Korea's nuclear arsenal.

 The military will reinforce 24-hour surveillance of North
Korea's nuclear facilities and develop joint plans to respond to
possible nuclear aggression. 

In addition, early deployment of armed forces necessary to react
to any contingencies will be made, along with an expansion of
nation-wide protection facilities. 

Yesterday's meeting was attended mainly by military officers
including JCS Chairman Gen. Kim Kwan-jin, police chiefs,
prosecutors and intelligence agency personnel.

 (davidpooh@heraldm.com)

By Jin Dae-woong 

2007.01.25
 
*****************************************************************
 12 Korea Times: Seoul Optimistic Over Nuke Talks 

Hankooki.com > The Korea Times > Nation   

By Park Song-wu Staff Reporter

 Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade Song Min-soon on
Wednesday did not rule out the possibility that North Korea
could repeat its demand for the United States to lift its
financial sanctions before discussing denuclearization. 

But he was positive about prospects of the upcoming six-party
talks that are likely to resume in Beijing in the second week of
February. 

``I can't rule out such a possibility,'' Song told reporters.
``But all parties, including North Korea, share the
understanding that it is now necessary to agree upon early-phase
measures to implement the September agreement.'' 

Song said the North is showing a flexible attitude toward
proposals that were recently offered by the United States and
South Korea to make it possible for Pyongyang to live without
nuclear weapons. 

Asked for the reasons of the North's change of attitude, he said
flexibility is also reciprocal. 

``Flexibility requires reciprocity,'' he said, indicating that
the United States is also showing a flexible attitude toward the
North. ``Every related party is showing a flexible attitude
now.'' 

The latest round of the nuclear talks, resumed in December after
a 13-month hiatus, ended with no tangible results because the
North refused to discuss denuclearization measures unless the
United States removes its financial sanctions on Pyongyang. 

In September 2005, Washington blacklisted Banco Delta Asia
(BDA), a bank in Macau, for its alleged role of helping the
North launder revenue from the illicit trade of narcotics and
weapons of mass destruction. 

Interpreting the U.S. move as an example of hostile policies,
the North boycotted the six-party talks. But Pyongyang agreed to
return to the negotiating table in December after Washington
agreed to discuss the financial issue on the sidelines of the
denuclearization talks. 

``Our target to achieve during the upcoming talks is to reach an
agreement on how to implement the early-phase measures that bind
together the North's initial steps of denuclearization and the
five other parties' corresponding measures,'' Song said. 

Officials in Seoul have declined to say exactly what are the
initial-step measures. 

But they have not refuted news reports, outlining the North's
freezing of the Yongbyon reactor, accepting the U.N. watchdog's
inspections and reporting all nuclear programs, in return for
the United States' lifting of sanctions on licit North Korean
accounts in BDA, first of all. 

Other reciprocal measures for the North reportedly include the
United States' signing of a document for security guarantees,
taking the North off the list of terrorism sponsoring states,
and beginning the process of diplomatic normalization. 

Describing the Berlin meeting last week between Christopher
Hill, the U.S. top nuclear negotiator, and his North Korean
counterpart, Kim Gye-gwan, as an intersession to ``take a
breath,'' Song said the upcoming talks in Beijing will open the
six-party talks' ``first scene of act two.'' 

``If the adoption of the September statement in 2005 closed the
first act of the talks, I can say the talks next month is the
first scene of act two that will depict the process of
implementing early-phase measures,'' he said. 

His upbeat remarks reached the climax when he pledged Seoul's
continuing efforts to open a new era for Northeast Asia by
reshaping the ``security structure'' of the Korean Peninsula. 

``Our government will continue trying to resolve the nuclear
standoff by mapping out the denuclearization process through the
six-party talks, and to broaden our horizons by reshaping the
security structure of the Korean Peninsula,'' he said. 

Song said he will hold talks with his Chinese counterpart, Li
Zhaoxing, and other ranking officials during his three-day visit
to Beijing that begins on Thursday to discuss measures to move
forward with the six-party talks. 

01-24-2007 17:46         

Song Min-soon Minister of Foreign Affairs &Trade
*****************************************************************
 13 Korea Times: Heritage Foundation Calls for Probing Seoul's NK Aid 

Hankooki.com > The Korea Times > Nation   

By Yoon Won-sup Staff Reporter

 The Heritage Foundation, a conservative U.S. think tank based
in Washington, called on South Korea to allow an independent
commission to review what it calls Seoul¡¯s extensive unilateral
provision of assistance to Pyongyang.

 It also urged the Bush administration Tuesday to freeze all
contributions to a U.N. relief program that allegedly funneled
money to North Korea.

 The report came after a Wall Street Journal report last week
that the U.N. Development Program (UNDP) has provided as much as
$100 million in cash to North Korea as it carried out assistance
for North Korea.

 ``As reported in the Wall Street Journal, North Korea convinced
the UNDP to provide hard currency to the cash-strapped nation
without even minimal safeguards or supervision,¡¯¡¯ the
newspaper said. ``Those funds ended up in the hands of Kim
Jong-il¡¯s regime.¡¯¡¯

 The daily said that the United States objected to the lack of
proper UNDP monitoring to ensure that the funds were spent on
targeted objectives. The laxness resulted in the relief agency
unintentionally becoming a major source of hard currency for a
regime developing nuclear weapons, it said.

 In response, the UNDP announced that it would start an audit.
U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon asked for a comprehensive
investigation into all U.N. agencies and programs.

 The Heritage Foundation paper, written by Nile Gardiner, Brett
Schafer and Steven Groves, further criticized the United Nations
as a whole by saying, ``It is a depressingly familiar story of
U.N. inefficiency and incompetence played out against the
backdrop of one of the biggest man-made humanitarian tragedies
of our time.¡¯¡¯

 The U.N. chief faces an enormous challenge in cleaning up an
institution that has proven vulnerable to corruption,
mismanagement and political manipulation by repressive regimes,
it said.

 Other recommendations proposed by the paper include that
Washington suspend U.S. co-financing or voluntary funding of
U.N. activities in North Korea and that it launch an independent
U.N. Security Council-backed inquiry into U.N. activities.

 The paper said Seoul¡¯s humanitarian assistance to Pyongyang
was a lingering concern.

 The paper said that South Korea has provided approximately $5
billion in aid to Pyongyang during the past decade, including a
secret $500 million payment to secure the 2000 inter-Korean
summit. 

 yoonwonsup@koreatimes.co.kr01-24-2007 17:50         
*****************************************************************
 14 Korea Times: Half of World Disapproves of US Handling of NK Nukes

Hankooki.com > The Korea Times > Nation   

About 54 percent of people disapprove of the U.S. handling of
North Korea's nuclear program, Yonhap News Agency reported
Wednesday. The figures were the result of a survey of people in
25 countries that was released Tuesday.

 In a Washington dispatch, Yonhap said a majority of those
polled in South Korea, China and Russia, all members of the
six-party talks aimed at resolving the nuclear issue,
disapproved of the U.S. treatment of the issue.

 The poll canvassed 26,381 people in 25 countries between
November and January, Yonhap said. It was conducted by GlobeScan
and the Program on International Policy Attitudes for the BBC
World Service.

 Forty-nine percent of people saw U.S. influence in the world as
``mostly negative,¡¯¡¯ while 32 percent deemed it ``mostly
positive,¡¯¡¯ according to Yonhap. Nineteen percent answered
``don't know.¡¯¡¯

 In South Korea, 54 percent said U.S. influence was mostly
negative, compared to 35 percent who said it was positive. Last
year 44 percent of South Koreans said U.S. influence was
positive. 

jckim@koreatimes.co.kr01-24-2007 20:10         
*****************************************************************
 15 AFP: Rice dismisses report North Korea helping Iran prepare nuke test
     
 Wed Jan 24, 5:34 PM ET 		 	 

PARIS (AFP) - US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice Condoleezza 
Ricesought to play down a report in a British newspaper that 
North Korea North Koreawas helping Iran Iranprepare an eventual 
nuclear test explosion. 

"I don't see that it's based on anything that I've seen," Rice 
said of the report published in The Daily Telegraph.

"I don't see what it's based on," she told reporters accompanying 
her to a Lebanon donors conference in Paris.

Citing an unnamed senior European defence official, the newspaper 
said that North Korea has agreed to share all the data it 
received from its nuclear test last year as both countries face 
Western pressures over the development of their own nuclear 
programmes.

"The Iranians are working closely with the North Koreans to study 
the results of last year's North Korean nuclear bomb test," the 
European defence official was quoted as saying by the newspaper.


"We have identified increased activity at all of Iran's nuclear 
facilities since the turn of the year ... All the indications are 
that the Iranians are working hard to prepare for their own 
underground nuclear test."

The official also said that North Korea had invited a team of 
Iranian scientists to study the results of last year's 
underground nuclear test.

Rice also said she had spoken with her South Korean counterpart 
Wednesday and the foreign ministers of China and Japan on Tuesday 
as part of efforts to hold a new round of six-party nuclear 
disarmament talks with North Korea.

"We're hoping for an early resumption. I think its' time to do 
that," she said.

"We've had productive preparatory discussions with all of the 
parties, including the North Koreans, but there's not going to be 
an agreement until we're in the six-party format," she said.

"So I think people would like to get to an early resumption of 
the talks."

The six-nation talks involving China, Japan, Russia and the 
United States, as well as North and South Korea, started in 2003 
but have been repeatedly suspended and have failed to yield 
concrete results." />

Related information on South Korea">South Korea, started in 2003 
but have been repeatedly suspended and have failed to yield 
concrete results. 

The most recent round was held last month in Beijing after a 
13-month break and a UN Security Council resolution imposing 
sanctions on North Korea for carrying out its first nuclear test 
explosion in October failed to make any headway. 

US and North Korean negotiators met in Berlin last week and 
reported progress towards a resumption of the broader 
negotiations, but no date has been set. 

Iran is also under UN sanctions since December for refusing to 
suspend a uranium enrichment program it says is designed to 
produce fuel for nuclear power production but that many fear is 
aimed at making nuclear weapons. 

Copyright © 2007 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 16 UPI: Report: N. Korea giving Iran nuclear info
     
United Press International - NewsTrack - 

1/24/2007 12:13:00 PM -0500

LONDON, Jan. 24 (UPI) -- European defense officials say North
Korea is sharing its nuclear data on last year's test explosion
with Iran, London's Daily Telegraph reported Wednesday. 

An unidentified official said Pyongyang had invited a group of
Iranian atomic scientists for a visit to share the results of
North Korea's underground test blast on Oct. 9, and there were
concerns Iran could be planning one of their own before the end
of the year. 

"We have identified increased activity at all of Iran's nuclear
facilities since the turn of the year," the official said. "All
the indications are that the Iranians are working hard to
prepare for their own underground nuclear test." 

While the United Nations Security Council unanimously authorized
the imposition of sanctions on Dec. 23 against Iran for refusing
to stop its uranium enrichment program that could create nuclear
weapons fuel, the worst North Korea experienced after its test
was an international outcry, which sources told the newspaper
was encouraging to Iran.

© Copyright 2007 United Press International, Inc. All Rights
Reserved.
*****************************************************************
 17 UPI: N.Korea willing to halt nuke activities
     
United Press International - Intl. Intelligence - 

        1/24/2007 8:00:00 AM -0500

SEOUL, Jan. 24 (UPI) -- North Korea is willing to freeze its
nuclear activities in return for eased financial sanctions, a
Seoul daily said Wednesday. 

The North's nuclear envoy Kim Kye Gwan told his South Korean
counterpart Tuesday that Pyongyang could freeze its nuclear
activities if the United States eases its financial restrictions
on the impoverished communist country, the Dong-a Ilbo said,
citing a diplomatic source in Beijing. 

Kim also said his country was willing to allow inspectors from
the International Atomic Energy Agency to enter the country to
confirm whether North Korea halts the operation of a 5-megawatt
reactor at the Yongbyon nuclear complex, north of Pyongyang, the
newspaper said. 

But the North is opposed to allowing the U.N. agency to inspect
other nuclear facilities in the country, the source was quoted
as saying.

© Copyright 2007 United Press International, Inc. All Rights
Reserved.
*****************************************************************
 18 Lester Brown: Davos Notes: Considering the Real Costs of Our Energy Economy | 

The Huffington Post

01.24.2007

Davos 2007 has officially begun. For me, the highlight of the
first day consisted of a series of debates, part of CNBC's Make
Green Pay panel. 

As is true with most events at the World Economic Forum, the
topics of each of the event's three panels were controversial,
and the speakers on both sides were thoughtful and
impressive.

I participated as a featured speaker discussing, among other
things, the viability of nuclear energy as a solution to our
world's current fossil-fuel-based energy economy. 

As concerns over climate change have mounted in recent years,
nuclear energy has been touted as a viable alternative to our
current dependency on carbon-intensive energy sources. 

The truth however, is that when the real costs of nuclear power
are considered, the energy source is quickly taken out of the
running. 

In fact, on a level playing field with no taxpayer subsidies,
nuclear power is dead. If utilities pay the full costs of
nuclear waste disposal, of insurance against an accident, and of
decommissioning plants that are worn out, the cost of nuclear
power will far exceed that of other promising alternatives. 

This notion of real costs is something that our
fossil-fuel-based throwaway economy does not take into account. 

In my recent book, Plan B 2.0 - which is downloadable, free of
charge from the Earth Policy Institute's website- I urge
considering the real costs of all products as we develop the
necessary 21st century, Plan B, economy. 

What does "real costs" mean? It means including the total
ecological and health costs of products on their prices. 

Throughout most of recorded history, the indirect costs of
economic activity were so small that they were rarely an issue
and, even then, only at the local level. But with the sevenfold
global economic expansion since 1950, the failure to address
these market shortcomings and the irrational economic
distortions they create could be fatal. 

Our modern economic prosperity is achieved in part by running up
ecological deficits, costs that do not show up on the books, but
costs that someone will eventually pay. 

The burning of coal, for example, results in increased costs for
society as citizens are affected by breathing polluted air, as
well as for governments that will be forced to deal with the
effects of climate change. 

Instead of pushing these costs - which will have to be paid at
some point - off until the future, it makes more sense to
incorporate them at the front end. The method for this,
increasing taxes on environmentally damaging goods while
decreasing income taxes, is a model I discuss at length in Plan
B 2.0. 

It is also something that has been proposed by ecologists and
economists alike, and, when real costs are included in the
pricing of goods, it is the greener, alternative energy sources
- like wind, solar, and geothermal - that emerge as the
cheapest, most viable solutions to our current model. 

The notion of taxing products to include their entire cost to
society is something that is being put into practice here in the
United States in the form of tobacco taxes. 

A study by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)
in the United States calculated the social costs of smoking
cigarettes at $7.18 per pack. As a result, prices for cigarettes
in many states across the country are rising toward this number
- a result of increased taxes intended to offset the social
costs. 

When it comes to energy, the International Center for Technology
Assessment has done a detailed analysis, entitled "The Real
Price of Gasoline." The group calculates several indirect costs,
including oil industry tax breaks, oil supply protection costs,
oil industry subsidies, and health care costs of treating auto
exhaust-related respiratory illnesses. The total of these
indirect costs centers around $9 per gallon, somewhat higher
than the social cost of smoking a pack of cigarettes. Add this
external or social cost to the roughly $2 per gallon average
price of gasoline in the United States in early 2005, and gas
would cost $11 a gallon (this does not include projected costs
of climate change). These costs are real; someone bears them. 

Now that these costs have been calculated, they can be used to
restructure taxes--lowering income taxes and offsetting this
with a rise in gasoline taxes. 

This practice is a necessary component to any energy economy we
consider as a solution to our current fossil-fuel-based energy
economy. 

That being said, nuclear energy with the real costs of
insurance, construction, security and waste disposal becomes
among the most expensive form of energy in the world. 

Conversely, green, clean, renewable energy becomes the most
viable; the costs we see today are very close to the real costs
we would endure as most of these energy sources have few if any
hidden effects on society. 

It's time we start being honest about what various energy
options actually cost in the long run. It was the failure to do
so in the first place that brought us to this juncture in human
history, where we must decide on our future. If we are willing
to acknowledge the full effects of our actions - including total
societal costs of our energy choices - then we may yet avert
some of the impending consequences of global climate change. 

By: jscott on January 24, 2007 at 10:20am               
*****************************************************************
 19 AFP: Russia, India agree arms deals on eve of Putin visit - 

January 24, 09:13 PM 
    
NEW DELHI (AFP) - India and Russia have agreed two arms deals
meant to bring bilateral military ties into a new era, a day
before Russian President Vladimir Putin's arrival here for a
two-day summit. 

At a signing ceremony, members of a bilateral military-technical
commission signed a contract for joint production of RD-33 jet
engines and a protocol of intent on joint development and
production of multi-purpose transport planes. 

"Russian-Indian military-technical cooperation has a large-scale
and dynamic character, and is a real manifestation of the
strategic partnership of our countries," Russian Defence
Minister Sergei Ivanov said at the ceremony. 

The two sides also discussed further cooperation on development
of the BRAHMOS cruise missile, joint development and production
of fifth-generation fighter planes, and future supplies and
licensed production of MIG35 jet engines, Ivanov said. 

Although about 70 percent of India's military hardware is of
Soviet and Russian origin, the relationship has shifted as New
Delhi has turned to other sellers and come to favour joint
production to simple purchases. 

"Our cooperation today is not just a simple buyer-seller
relationship," Indian Minister of Defence A.K. Antony said. 

The deals came on the eve of a two-day summit between Putin and
Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh that will culminate in
Friday's Republic Day parade, where the Russian leader will be
guest of honour. 

Ivanov was set to meet with Indian National Security Advisor
M.K. Narayanan, Foreign Minister Pranab Mukherjee, and Singh
later Wednesday, when he said talks would turn to nuclear and
space cooperation. 

The packed agenda reflects the urgency of updating the
countries' traditional ties -- which Ivanov called "one of
Russia's main foreign policy priorities" -- for a new era. 

Putin told news agency PTI that "somewhere by 2010, we can
achieve the level of 10 billion dollars' worth of (trade)
turnover," up from about 3.1 billion dollars currently. 

One of the key issues on the summit agenda is energy
cooperation, a priority for India, which imports about 70
percent of its fuel requirements. 

"There is a clear compatibility between India's demands and
Russia's resources," Singh said in an interview published
Wednesday in Russian daily newspaper Izvestia. 

Indian Oil Minister Murli Deora said he would meet Putin
separately on Thursday to press for a greater participation for
Indian oil companies in Russia's energy market. 

Deora said New Delhi was looking for a stake in the Sakhalin-3
project and Vankor -- two vast oil and gas fields in eastern
Russia. 

India's state-run Oil and Natural Gas Corporation already owns a
20 percent stake in Russia's Sakhalin-I field, which brings
India 2.4 million tonnes of crude a year. 

The sides have also said they expect to agree a preliminary deal
on Russia's building four additional nuclear reactors to
supplement the two Russia is already building at the Kudankulam
nuclear power station in India. 

   Copyright © 2007 AFP. All rights reserved. All information
*****************************************************************
 20 BBC: Russian president heads for India
 
Last Updated: Thursday, 25 January 2007
 
[Russian President Vladimir Putin (left) and Indian

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh in Moscow, May 2005]                              
Ties between Russia and India have traditionally been close                                            
		

Russian President Vladimir Putin is due to arrive in India for 
talks expected to focus on multi-billion dollar arms and energy 
contracts. 

Mr Putin will meet Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and other Indian 
leaders during his two-day trip. 

On the eve of the visit, Russia and India signed two deals on the 
production and joint development of aircraft and fighter plane 
engines. 

Russia is also offering to build four nuclear power reactors in 
India. 

The two countries have had close links since Soviet times, with 
India remaining a top buyer of Russian weaponry. 

However, the relationship faces new challenges, including 
competition from the West and the growing economic and military 
might of China 

Signing new co-operation agreements with his Indian counterpart 
on Wednesday, Russia's Defence Minister, Sergei Ivanov, said a 
close and trusting relationship with India remained a top 
priority. 

'Strategic triangle' 

Russia is currently bidding to supply more than 120 fighter 
planes to Delhi. 

Moscow faces stiff competition from Western manufacturers, 
leading a top Russian official to warn of "consequences" should 
India choose a Western manufacturer. 

Russia and India are also rapidly deepening co-operation in the 
energy sector. 

Russia has identified India as a new market for its civilian 
nuclear technology, with Russian engineers already building two 
reactors in India. 

For its part, India has declared an interest in securing a stake 
in future Russian oil and gas field developments. 

Future plans aside, businessmen from both countries say urgent 
action is needed to tackle insurmountable bureaucracy. 

The BBC's Russian affairs analyst Steven Eke says when weapons 
are left out of the equation, trade between Russia and India has 
actually fallen to its lowest level for more than two decades. 

Nonetheless, many Russian diplomats see a special place for 
India, our analyst says. 

They have repeatedly raised the idea of a strategic triangle, 
uniting Russia, India and China, in an axis opposed to the global 
dominance of the United States. 

It has been stymied by realities on the ground, including the 
fact that Russia and India are both wary of China's status as an 
emerging economic and military super-power, our analyst adds.           
	 		 	 	 
*****************************************************************
 21 IAEA: Nuclear Energy, Non-Proliferation Focus of Talks in France
 
+ [IAEA.ORG :: Atoms for Peace] 
 
Dr. ElBaradei Meets With Foreign Minister, Other High-Level
Officials
 
Staff Report
 23 January 2007 [Philippe Douste-Blazy and Mohamed ElBaradei] 
French Minister of Foreign Affairs Mr. Philippe Douste-Blazy and
Dr. ElBaradei meet in Paris in January 2007. (Credit: France
Foreign Ministry) 
  + Story Resources 
  + France Foreign Ministry Briefing, 19 January 2007 
  + French News Report| [PDF Version] 
  + Multilateral Fuel Cycles 
  + Nuclear Power´s Future 
  + IAEA & Iran 
  + Director General Statements 

IAEA Head Dr. Mohamed ElBaradei recently met with high-level
officials in France to discuss issues related to nuclear
non-proliferation and the peaceful development of nuclear power.
One main focus was Iran´s nuclear programme and the UN Security
Council resolution concerning it. 

"Engagement, dialogue, and negotiation are the only ways toward
a solution," Dr. ElBaradei emphasized. He restated his view that
the status quo is unacceptable, and that Security Council
sanctions are a clear expression of the concerns of the
international community regarding Iran´s nuclear programme. But
he added that sanctions alone would not solve the issue and
underlined his desire for a negotiated solution. 

Dr. ElBaradei visited France 17-18 January. In Paris, he met
with France´s Minister of Foreign Affairs Mr. Philippe
Douste-Blazy and other high-level officials, including French
Political Director Gerard Araud. He also spoke at events
attended by leaders in industry, government, the media, and
business. 

Iran´s nuclear programme and nuclear energy´s future in the
context of climate change and energy development were the main
topics discussed at meetings with Minister Douste-Blazy. The
Ministry issued the following communiqué: 

"Foreign Minister Philippe Douste-Blazy met with Mohamed
ElBaradei, Director-General of the International Atomic Energy
Agency (IAEA) on January 18. 

"France attaches special importance to IAEA action and is one of
the main contributors to the Agency´s technical cooperation. The
meeting afforded an opportunity to address the main
proliferation problems confronting us, particularly Iran and
North Korea. 

"With regard to Iran, Mr. Douste-Blazy recalled that our
objective is for Iran to comply with its commitments under the
Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and with the decisions of the
Security Council and IAEA. In other words, for it to suspend its
sensitive nuclear activities which are a matter of concern to
the international community and have no credible civilian
application in Iran today. 

"In adopting resolution 1737 in December establishing sanctions
for the first time, the Security Council sent a clear and
unanimous message to Iran. We intend to implement without delay
all the measures stipulated in the Council´s resolution. We call
on Iran to accept the offer of cooperation from the Six and the
proposal for "dual suspension" referred to in 1737 which would
allow negotiations to begin. Mr. ElBaradei will present his
report to the Security Council in February, and the Council will
review Iran´s application of the Security Council and IAEA
decisions. 

"With regard to the development of nuclear energy in the world,
Mr. Douste-Blazy recalled that France is very attached to the
right, recognized in Article 4 of the NPT, to develop the use of
nuclear energy for peaceful ends with due respect for
non-proliferation commitments. Because of proliferation risks,
the dissemination of sensitive technologies, particularly
enrichment and reprocessing has to be limited. But it is
appropriate on the other hand to offer credible assurances of
access to nuclear fuel. France presented a concrete proposal to
the IAEA last June, with five other states providing enrichment
services (United States, Russia, the UK, Germany and the
Netherlands) to guarantee the supply of fuel. We hope to move
forward quickly on this question." 

See Story Resources for more information. 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: 
*****************************************************************
 22 [NukeNet] Petition for rulemaking--please comment
 
Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2007 18:15:01 -0800

X-Nohoney: yes white-hard - relay H=adsl-63-203-231-61.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net (192.energy-net.org) [63.203.231.61]
X-Sender-Host-Address: 63.203.231.61
X-Sender-Host-Name: adsl-63-203-231-61.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net
X-Spam-Class: HAM-VERY-WHITELIST

<x-flowed>
NukeNet Anti-Nuclear Network (nukenet@energyjustice.net)

Correction, Third parragraph should read NRC, not TVA.  Sorry, Jeannine

Dear All,
Please comment on this and forward it to your own internet contacts, 
please.  This gets to exactly what I have been screaming about since the 
Hartsville Nuclear Plant Intervention hearings, where TVA opposed putting 
filters on the ventilation systems of the turbine buildings and the reactor 
buildings, on what was supposed to have been the world's largest nuclear 
power plant.
Instead of calculating the dose to a one year old child drinking milk from 
a cow that would have grazed near that plant, using the then in force 
guideline 1.42, that calculated a dose of 335 mrems per year, when the 
allowable dose to the thyroid was 15 mrems per year, TVA devised their own 
calculation model, TVA model 2, that brought the dose down to 11.1 
mrems.  How convenient.
Instead of TVA enforcing their regulations, they ABOLISHED GUIDELINE 1.42 
AND ESTABLISHED A NEW GUIDELINE 1.109, THAT IS STILL BEING USED 
TODAY.   They brought the dose down to 1.1, another 10 fold deduction  I 
have been begging for people to examine these guidelines to see how they 
did it.  Sally points out two things.
(1) Instead of using a 1 year old child, they substituted a "standard man" 
who is far more resistant to radiation than women, children, and especially 
fetuses.
(2) They do not consider ingested radiation.  This is criminal.  Ingested 
or inhaled radiation is hundreds of times more dangerous than surface 
radiation.
This is the secret to the the nuclear revival.  This is how the government 
gets away with calling nuclear plants "emission free."
This must be stopped.  Thanks Sally for taking this stand.  I will support 
you l00%. Please, everyone, do the same.
Jeannine Honicker


----- Original Message -----
From: 
<http://us.f533.mail.yahoo.com/ym/Compose?To=acer8sac@comcast.net>Sally Shaw
To: <http://us.f533.mail.yahoo.com/ym/Compose?To=djhonicker@msn.com>Dolph 
Honicker
Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2007 11:26 AM
Subject: Petition for rulemaking--please comment

PLEASE ACT NOW AND DISTRIBUTE WIDELY:
Please tell the NRC to approve a petition for rulemaking that
would improve radiation protection standards at older reactors. Your
comments are needed by February 5, 2007. Please see the Talking Points
below for more detailed information to help in writing your comments.

FEDERAL REGISTER SUMMARY: The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is
publishing for public comment a notice of receipt of a petition for
rulemaking which was filed with the Commission by Sally Shaw. The
petition was published in the Federal Register on November 20, 2006, and
has been assigned Docket No. PRM-51-11. Include PRM-51-11 in the subject line.

The petitioner requests that the NRC prepare a rulemaking that will
require that the NRC reconcile its generic environmental impact
statement for nuclear power plant operating license renewal applications
with current scientific understanding of the health risks of low-level
radiation, including but not limited to those discussed in the National
Academy of Sciences Health Risks From Exposure to Low Levels of Ionizing
Radiation: Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiation (BEIR) VII Phase 2
Report.

For background and summary of BEIR VII committee, see Monitor article
at: 
<http://www.nirs.org/mononline/nm632.pdf>http://www.nirs.org/mononline/nm632.pdf

SEND COMMENTS:

Please include PRM-51-11 in the subject line of your comments.

Mail: Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC
20555-0001, ATTN: Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff.

E-mail to: 
<http://us.f533.mail.yahoo.com/ym/Compose?To=SECY@nrc.gov>SECY@nrc.gov. If 
you do not receive a reply e-mail confirming
receipt of comments, please contact the NRC directly at (301) 415-1966.

Submit via website <http://ruleforum.llnl.gov/>http://ruleforum.llnl.gov.

Fax to: Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission at (301) 415-1101.

Find Federal Register notice HERE:
<http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-IMPACT/2006/November/Day-20/i19568.htm>http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-IMPACT/2006/November/Day-20/i19568.htm

TALKING POINTS:

Exercise Precaution:

1) Protect the most vulnerable: Tell the NRC to exercise precaution by
accounting for more vulnerable populations in their standards. Since no
level of radiation dose is safe (see BEIR VII quote below), the best
precaution would be no exposure. However recognizing and regulating for
vulnerable populations is a start.

"In BEIR VII, the cancer mortality risks for females are 37.5 percent
higher. The risks for all solid tumors, like lung, breast, and kidney,
liver, and other solid tumors added together are almost 50 percent
greater for women than men, though there are a few specific cancers,
including leukemia, for which the risk estimates for men are higher."
(Summary estimates are in Table ES-1 on page 28 of the BEIR VII report
prepublication copy, on the Web at
<http://books.nap.edu/books/030909156X/html/28.html>http://books.nap.edu/books/030909156X/html/28.html.)

The BEIR VII report estimates that the differential risk for children is
even greater. For instance, the same radiation in the first year of life
for boys produces three to four times the cancer risk as exposure
between the ages of 20 and 50. Female infants have almost double the
risk as male infants. (Table 12 D-1 and D-2, on pages 550-551 of the
prepublication copy of the report, on the Web starting at
<http://books.nap.edu/books/030909156X/html/550.html>http://books.nap.edu/books/030909156X/html/550.html)." 
(excerpted from
<http://www.ieer.org/comments/beir/beir7pressrel.html>http://www.ieer.org/comments/beir/beir7pressrel.html)

2) Recognize "allowable" levels are not safe: Tell the NRC that their
"allowable" levels of radionuclides are NOT conservative or protective
enough. They are based only on the obsolete "standard man", a healthy,
white male in the prime of life, and ignore the more vulnerable fetus,
growing infant and child, the aged, those in poor health, and women who
are, according to the BEIR VII report, 37- 50% more vulnerable than
standard man to the harmful effects of ionizing radiation.

3) Consider radiation damage from inhaling or ingesting radionuclides:
NRC does not consider the effects of internal radiation from ingested or
inhaled alpha and beta emitters. The amount of polonium-210 that
recently killed a former Russian intelligence officer was considered by
IAEA and NRC to be of the lowest possible risk because they failed to
account for internal radiation damage.

4) Recognize there is no safe dose: Further, regarding low dose
radiation, the BEIR VII panel has concluded, "it is unlikely that a
threshold exists for the induction of cancers... Further, there are
extensive data on radiation-induced transmissible mutations in mice and
other organisms. There is therefore no reason to believe that humans
would be immune to this sort of harm."

Demand that the NRC protect all members of the public from all types of
excess radiation exposure from nuclear power and its fuel cycle, gamma,
alpha, beta, neutron, particulate, fission products, noble gases, etc.
and that measurement and monitoring should include all forms and
pathways, not just gamma at the fence line. Argue that their radiation
limits should include accidental releases as well as planned emissions.

BACKGROUND FROM FEDERAL REGISTER

     Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. (Entergy) submitted an application
for renewal of Operating License No. DPR-28 for an additional 20 years
of operation at the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station (VYNPS). The
VYNPS is located in the town of Vernon, Vermont, in Windham County on
the west shore of the Connecticut River immediately upstream of the
Vernon Hydroelectric Station. The operating license for VYNPS expires on
March 21, 2012. A notice of receipt and availability of the application,
which included the environmental report, was published in the Federal
Register on February 6, 2006 (71 FR 6102). Subsequently, the NRC
published a ``Notice of Intent to Prepare an Environmental Impact
Statement and Conduct Scoping Process'' on April 21, 2006 (71 FR 20733).
The NRC will prepare an EIS related to the review of the license renewal
application.
     The applicable NRC regulation, 10 CFR 51.95(c), required that the
NRC, in determining whether to grant a renewal of a nuclear power plant
operating license, prepare an environmental impact statement (EIS). The
regulation provides that this EIS supplement the NRC's baseline,
generic EIS issued in 1996, NUREG-1437, ``Generic Environmental Impact
Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants'' (May 1996)(GEIS).

Petitioner's Request

     The petitioner requests that the NRC prepare a rulemaking that would
require that the NRC reconcile its GEIS for nuclear power plant
operating license renewal applications with the National Academy of
Sciences (NAS) Health Risks From Exposure to Low Levels of Ionizing
Radiation: BEIR VII, Phase 2 which was released in 2005. AND OTHER RECENT 
SCIENCE! The petitioner
asserts that the GEIS relies upon an earlier NAS report, the BEIR V,
with was released in 1990. According to the NAS Web site, the BEIR VII
updates the information contained in the BEIR V and draws upon new data
in both epidemiologic and experimental research.
     The petitioner requests that NRC consider the NAS BEIR VII report as
new and significant information and recalculate certain conclusions set
forth in the GEIS, including early fatalities, latent fatalities and any
injury projections based on this information.
incorporate by reference: your favorite source of new information on the 
harmful effects of low level radiation, or use the following references:

<http://www.ieer.org/reports/badtothebone/index.html>http://www.ieer.org/reports/badtothebone/index.html
Bad to the Bone:
Analysis of the Federal Maximum Contaminant Levels for
Plutonium-239 and Other Alpha-Emitting Transuranic
Radionuclides in Drinking Water
Arjun Makhijani, Ph.D.
Institute for Energy and Environmental Research
August 2005
from which the following was excerpted:
B. Bone dose estimation, present-day dose conversion factors
Scientific understanding of radiation doses and harm from intake of 
radionuclides has advanced
considerably over the years. Regulations have also evolved to some extent, 
though at a slower pace.
Specifically, in the 1970s, the International Commission on Radiological 
Protection (ICRP) published
ICRP 26 and ICRP 30 followed by ICRP 48 in 1986. The scientific work in 
these publications was
incorporated by the EPA into Federal Guidance Report 11 in 1988. The doses 
from alpha-emitting,
long- lived transuranic radionuclides in the new guidance issued by the EPA 
are much higher than
those estimated by NBS 69 methods.....etc
ALSO
<http://www.ieer.org/campaign/report.pdf>http://www.ieer.org/campaign/report.pdf
Science for the Vulnerable
Setting Radiation and Multiple Exposure Environmental Health
Standards to Protect Those Most at Risk
Arjun Makhijani, Ph.D.
Brice Smith, Ph.D.
Michael C. Thorne, Ph.D.
October 19, 2006

You could simply say you support the petition for rulemaking, Docket 
PRM-51-11, and request that the NRC incorporate by reference the Arjun 
Makhijani et al. reports (titled above), Rosalie Bertell's book,  No 
Immediate Danger: Prognosis for a Radioactive Earth by Rosalie Bertell 
1985, and Helen Caldicott's 2006 book Nuclear Power is Not the Answer
along with the research of Alice Stewart which demonstrated the damaging 
effect of radiation on the fetus. Ask that radiation standards be revised 
to protect the MOST VULNERABLE, not averaged to "reference man".






Correction, Third parragraph should read NRC, not TVA.  Sorry, Jeannine
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/no-new-nukes-yall;_ylc=X3oDMTJmOWtzcDZ2BF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzE4MzY2MjQxBGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTA0Mzk1NgRzZWMDdnRsBHNsawN2Z2hwBHN0aW1lAzExNjk1Nzg3NzA->Visit 
Your Group
SPONSORED LINKS
    * 
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads;_ylc=X3oDMTJkM2owbWphBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BF9wAzEEZ3JwSWQDMTgzNjYyNDEEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1MDQzOTU2BHNlYwNzbG1vZARzdGltZQMxMTY5NTc4Nzcw?t=ms&k=Regional+gift+basket&w1=Regional+gift+basket&w2=Regional+bgan&w3=Regional+magazines&w4=Regional+truck+driving+jobs&c=4&s=102&g=2&.sig=hByXEcrEUS2KcK5C2nU4bA>Regional 
gift basket
    * 
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads;_ylc=X3oDMTJkMmZ2ZmJjBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BF9wAzIEZ3JwSWQDMTgzNjYyNDEEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1MDQzOTU2BHNlYwNzbG1vZARzdGltZQMxMTY5NTc4Nzcw?t=ms&k=Regional+bgan&w1=Regional+gift+basket&w2=Regional+bgan&w3=Regional+magazines&w4=Regional+truck+driving+jobs&c=4&s=102&g=2&.sig=iCSAWHlbXOuWrTN1tiswlA>Regional 
bgan
    * 
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads;_ylc=X3oDMTJkYzM3aGNrBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BF9wAzMEZ3JwSWQDMTgzNjYyNDEEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1MDQzOTU2BHNlYwNzbG1vZARzdGltZQMxMTY5NTc4Nzcw?t=ms&k=Regional+magazines&w1=Regional+gift+basket&w2=Regional+bgan&w3=Regional+magazines&w4=Regional+truck+driving+jobs&c=4&s=102&g=2&.sig=VrrAyR7O54iho2x5n-Fi5A>Regional 
magazines
    * 
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads;_ylc=X3oDMTJkYnVhdjh2BF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BF9wAzQEZ3JwSWQDMTgzNjYyNDEEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1MDQzOTU2BHNlYwNzbG1vZARzdGltZQMxMTY5NTc4Nzcw?t=ms&k=Regional+truck+driving+jobs&w1=Regional+gift+basket&w2=Regional+bgan&w3=Regional+magazines&w4=Regional+truck+driving+jobs&c=4&s=102&g=2&.sig=tsKfr6ecTp_gkM6LV-AdjA>Regional 
truck driving jobs
Yahoo! Mail
<http://us.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=12iqc5js8/M=493064.9803214.10510208.8674578/D=groups/S=1705043956:NC/Y=YAHOO/EXP=1169585970/A=3848570/R=0/SIG=12j26nlu5/*http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=42411/*http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/handraisers>Get 
it all!
With the all-new
Yahoo! Mail Beta
Y! Messenger
<http://us.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=12ier1e87/M=493064.9803215.10510209.8674578/D=groups/S=1705043956:NC/Y=YAHOO/EXP=1169585970/A=3848583/R=0/SIG=11umg3fun/*http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=42403/*http://messenger.yahoo.com>Want 
a quick chat?
Chat over IM with
group members.
Yahoo! Photos
<http://us.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=12i99g0hm/M=493064.9803230.10510224.8674578/D=groups/S=1705043956:NC/Y=YAHOO/EXP=1169585970/A=3848628/R=0/SIG=10p8tommg/*http://photos.yahoo.com>Upload 
Now!
First 20
prints are free
.
b0114a.jpg
__,_._,___

Dear All,
Please comment on this and forward it to your own internet contacts, 
please.  This gets to exactly what I have been screaming about since the 
Hartsville Nuclear Plant Intervention hearings, where TVA opposed putting 
filters on the ventilation systems of the turbine buildings and the reactor 
buildings, on what was supposed to have been the world's largest nuclear 
power plant.
Instead of calculating the dose to a one year old child drinking milk from 
a cow that would have grazed near that plant, using the then in force 
guideline 1.42, that calculated a dose of 335 mrems per year, when the 
allowable dose to the thyroid was 15 mrems per year, TVA devised their own 
calculation model, TVA model 2, that brought the dose down to 11.1 
mrems.  How convenient.
Instead of TVA enforcing their regulations, they ABOLISHED GUIDELINE 1.42 
AND ESTABLISHED A NEW GUIDELINE 1.109, THAT IS STILL BEING USED 
TODAY.   They brought the dose down to 1.1, another 10 fold deduction  I 
have been begging for people to examine these guidelines to see how they 
did it.  Sally points out two things.
(1) Instead of using a 1 year old child, they substituted a "standard man" 
who is far more resistant to radiation than women, children, and especially 
fetuses.
(2) They do not consider ingested radiation.  This is criminal.  Ingested 
or inhaled radiation is hundreds of times more dangerous than surface 
radiation.
This is the secret to the the nuclear revival.  This is how the government 
gets away with calling nuclear plants "emission free."
This must be stopped.  Thanks Sally for taking this stand.  I will support 
you l00%. Please, everyone, do the same.
Jeannine Honicker


----- Original Message -----
From: 
<http://us.f533.mail.yahoo.com/ym/Compose?To=acer8sac@comcast.net>Sally Shaw
To: <http://us.f533.mail.yahoo.com/ym/Compose?To=djhonicker@msn.com>Dolph 
Honicker
Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2007 11:26 AM
Subject: Petition for rulemaking--please comment

PLEASE ACT NOW AND DISTRIBUTE WIDELY:
Please tell the NRC to approve a petition for rulemaking that
would improve radiation protection standards at older reactors. Your
comments are needed by February 5, 2007. Please see the Talking Points
below for more detailed information to help in writing your comments.

FEDERAL REGISTER SUMMARY: The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is
publishing for public comment a notice of receipt of a petition for
rulemaking which was filed with the Commission by Sally Shaw. The
petition was published in the Federal Register on November 20, 2006, and
has been assigned Docket No. PRM-51-11. Include PRM-51-11 in the subject line.

The petitioner requests that the NRC prepare a rulemaking that will
require that the NRC reconcile its generic environmental impact
statement for nuclear power plant operating license renewal applications
with current scientific understanding of the health risks of low-level
radiation, including but not limited to those discussed in the National
Academy of Sciences Health Risks From Exposure to Low Levels of Ionizing
Radiation: Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiation (BEIR) VII Phase 2
Report.

For background and summary of BEIR VII committee, see Monitor article
at: 
<http://www.nirs.org/mononline/nm632.pdf>http://www.nirs.org/mononline/nm632.pdf

SEND COMMENTS:

Please include PRM-51-11 in the subject line of your comments.

Mail: Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC
20555-0001, ATTN: Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff.

E-mail to: 
<http://us.f533.mail.yahoo.com/ym/Compose?To=SECY@nrc.gov>SECY@nrc.gov. If 
you do not receive a reply e-mail confirming
receipt of comments, please contact the NRC directly at (301) 415-1966.

Submit via website <http://ruleforum.llnl.gov/>http://ruleforum.llnl.gov.

Fax to: Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission at (301) 415-1101.

Find Federal Register notice HERE:
<http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-IMPACT/2006/November/Day-20/i19568.htm>http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-IMPACT/2006/November/Day-20/i19568.htm

TALKING POINTS:

Exercise Precaution:

1) Protect the most vulnerable: Tell the NRC to exercise precaution by
accounting for more vulnerable populations in their standards. Since no
level of radiation dose is safe (see BEIR VII quote below), the best
precaution would be no exposure. However recognizing and regulating for
vulnerable populations is a start.

"In BEIR VII, the cancer mortality risks for females are 37.5 percent
higher. The risks for all solid tumors, like lung, breast, and kidney,
liver, and other solid tumors added together are almost 50 percent
greater for women than men, though there are a few specific cancers,
including leukemia, for which the risk estimates for men are higher."
(Summary estimates are in Table ES-1 on page 28 of the BEIR VII report
prepublication copy, on the Web at
<http://books.nap.edu/books/030909156X/html/28.html>http://books.nap.edu/books/030909156X/html/28.html.)

The BEIR VII report estimates that the differential risk for children is
even greater. For instance, the same radiation in the first year of life
for boys produces three to four times the cancer risk as exposure
between the ages of 20 and 50. Female infants have almost double the
risk as male infants. (Table 12 D-1 and D-2, on pages 550-551 of the
prepublication copy of the report, on the Web starting at
<http://books.nap.edu/books/030909156X/html/550.html>http://books.nap.edu/books/030909156X/html/550.html)." 
(excerpted from
<http://www.ieer.org/comments/beir/beir7pressrel.html>http://www.ieer.org/comments/beir/beir7pressrel.html)

2) Recognize "allowable" levels are not safe: Tell the NRC that their
"allowable" levels of radionuclides are NOT conservative or protective
enough. They are based only on the obsolete "standard man", a healthy,
white male in the prime of life, and ignore the more vulnerable fetus,
growing infant and child, the aged, those in poor health, and women who
are, according to the BEIR VII report, 37- 50% more vulnerable than
standard man to the harmful effects of ionizing radiation.

3) Consider radiation damage from inhaling or ingesting radionuclides:
NRC does not consider the effects of internal radiation from ingested or
inhaled alpha and beta emitters. The amount of polonium-210 that
recently killed a former Russian intelligence officer was considered by
IAEA and NRC to be of the lowest possible risk because they failed to
account for internal radiation damage.

4) Recognize there is no safe dose: Further, regarding low dose
radiation, the BEIR VII panel has concluded, "it is unlikely that a
threshold exists for the induction of cancers... Further, there are
extensive data on radiation-induced transmissible mutations in mice and
other organisms. There is therefore no reason to believe that humans
would be immune to this sort of harm."

Demand that the NRC protect all members of the public from all types of
excess radiation exposure from nuclear power and its fuel cycle, gamma,
alpha, beta, neutron, particulate, fission products, noble gases, etc.
and that measurement and monitoring should include all forms and
pathways, not just gamma at the fence line. Argue that their radiation
limits should include accidental releases as well as planned emissions.

BACKGROUND FROM FEDERAL REGISTER

     Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. (Entergy) submitted an application
for renewal of Operating License No. DPR-28 for an additional 20 years
of operation at the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station (VYNPS). The
VYNPS is located in the town of Vernon, Vermont, in Windham County on
the west shore of the Connecticut River immediately upstream of the
Vernon Hydroelectric Station. The operating license for VYNPS expires on
March 21, 2012. A notice of receipt and availability of the application,
which included the environmental report, was published in the Federal
Register on February 6, 2006 (71 FR 6102). Subsequently, the NRC
published a ``Notice of Intent to Prepare an Environmental Impact
Statement and Conduct Scoping Process'' on April 21, 2006 (71 FR 20733).
The NRC will prepare an EIS related to the review of the license renewal
application.
     The applicable NRC regulation, 10 CFR 51.95(c), required that the
NRC, in determining whether to grant a renewal of a nuclear power plant
operating license, prepare an environmental impact statement (EIS). The
regulation provides that this EIS supplement the NRC's baseline,
generic EIS issued in 1996, NUREG-1437, ``Generic Environmental Impact
Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants'' (May 1996)(GEIS).

Petitioner's Request

     The petitioner requests that the NRC prepare a rulemaking that would
require that the NRC reconcile its GEIS for nuclear power plant
operating license renewal applications with the National Academy of
Sciences (NAS) Health Risks From Exposure to Low Levels of Ionizing
Radiation: BEIR VII, Phase 2 which was released in 2005. AND OTHER RECENT 
SCIENCE! The petitioner
asserts that the GEIS relies upon an earlier NAS report, the BEIR V,
with was released in 1990. According to the NAS Web site, the BEIR VII
updates the information contained in the BEIR V and draws upon new data
in both epidemiologic and experimental research.
     The petitioner requests that NRC consider the NAS BEIR VII report as
new and significant information and recalculate certain conclusions set
forth in the GEIS, including early fatalities, latent fatalities and any
injury projections based on this information.
incorporate by reference: your favorite source of new information on the 
harmful effects of low level radiation, or use the following references:

<http://www.ieer.org/reports/badtothebone/index.html>http://www.ieer.org/reports/badtothebone/index.html
Bad to the Bone:
Analysis of the Federal Maximum Contaminant Levels for
Plutonium-239 and Other Alpha-Emitting Transuranic
Radionuclides in Drinking Water
Arjun Makhijani, Ph.D.
Institute for Energy and Environmental Research
August 2005
from which the following was excerpted:
B. Bone dose estimation, present-day dose conversion factors
Scientific understanding of radiation doses and harm from intake of 
radionuclides has advanced
considerably over the years. Regulations have also evolved to some extent, 
though at a slower pace.
Specifically, in the 1970s, the International Commission on Radiological 
Protection (ICRP) published
ICRP 26 and ICRP 30 followed by ICRP 48 in 1986. The scientific work in 
these publications was
incorporated by the EPA into Federal Guidance Report 11 in 1988. The doses 
from alpha-emitting,
long- lived transuranic radionuclides in the new guidance issued by the EPA 
are much higher than
those estimated by NBS 69 methods.....etc
ALSO
<http://www.ieer.org/campaign/report.pdf>http://www.ieer.org/campaign/report.pdf
Science for the Vulnerable
Setting Radiation and Multiple Exposure Environmental Health
Standards to Protect Those Most at Risk
Arjun Makhijani, Ph.D.
Brice Smith, Ph.D.
Michael C. Thorne, Ph.D.
October 19, 2006

You could simply say you support the petition for rulemaking, Docket 
PRM-51-11, and request that the NRC incorporate by reference the Arjun 
Makhijani et al. reports (titled above), Rosalie Bertell's book,  No 
Immediate Danger: Prognosis for a Radioactive Earth by Rosalie Bertell 
1985, and Helen Caldicott's 2006 book Nuclear Power is Not the Answer
along with the research of Alice Stewart which demonstrated the damaging 
effect of radiation on the fetus. Ask that radiation standards be revised 
to protect the MOST VULNERABLE, not averaged to "reference man".







- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
"I do not believe that nuclear power is worth it if it creates radiation. 
Then you might ask me why do I have nuclear powered ships. That is a 
necessary evil. I would sink them all. I am not proud of the part I played 
in it. I did it because it was necessary for the safety of this country. 
That's why I am such a great exponent of stopping this whole nonsense of 
war. Unfortunately limits' attempts to limit war have always failed. The 
lesson of history is when a war starts every nation will ultimately use 
whatever weapon it has available." Further remarking: "Every time you 
produce radiation, you produce something that has a certain half-life, in 
some cases for billions of years. I think the human race is going to wreck 
itself, and it is important that we get control of this horrible force and 
try to eliminate it." Adm. Rickover - testimony before Congress

Molly Johnson
6290 Hawk Ridge Place
San Miguel, CA 93451


Everyone is raving about 
<http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=42297/*http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/mailbeta>the 
all-new Yahoo! Mail beta.
_______________________________________________________________________
Subscribe/Unsubscribe Here: http://www.energyjustice.net/nukenet/
Change your settings or access the archives at:
http://mail.energyjustice.net/mailman/listinfo/nukenet_energyjustice.net

</x-flowed>


Attachment Converted: b0114a.jpg: 00000001,35ecb1cd,00000000,00000000
*****************************************************************
 23 The Hindu: Nuclear projects to make sea water fit for drinking 

Thursday, January 25, 2007 : 0300 Hrs
 
New Delhi, Jan 25. (PTI): Nuclear power projects built in the
future will have water treatment plants to turn sea water
potable. 

The design of Advanced Heavy Water Reactor (AHWR) includes a sea
water desalination plant that will use the excess heat generated
by the power plant to make salty water fit for drinking. 

The AHWR, construction of which is likely to begin this year,
will generate 300 MW power and have an additional output of
desalinated water to the tune of 300 cubic metres per day,
nuclear scientists said. 

The Bhabha Atomic Research Centre (BARC), which has successfully
developed and demonstrated desalination technologies, is
constructing the critical facility to test various technological
parameters for the thorium-powered AHWR. 

BARC, engaged in research in desalination technologies since
1970, has already set up several water treatment plants across
the country including at Kalpakkam (TN), Trombay (Maharashtra),
and in Barmer district of Rajasthan. 

The Mumbai-based research facility is also developing a mobile
desalination plant that will be mounted on a barge, moving some
metres off the coastline. 

It can desalinate seawater or brackish water into potable water,
and supply it to the villages on the shore. It can also be
mounted on a trailer or a vehicle on land, and desalinate water
at places where there is scarcity of potable water. 

The AHWR is currently undergoing pre-licensing review by the
Atomic Energy Regulatory Board. 

A brain child of the Department of Atomic Energy Commission
Chairman Anil Kakodkar, the AHWR will be a technology
demonstrator reactor, and take about five to six years to
complete. 

The reactor, which will cost between Rs 5 and 6 crore per mega
watt, has a design life of 100 years and has several innovative
safety measures. 

India has a four-phased roadmap for utilisation of thorium
resources which includes development of AHWRs, Compact High
Temperature Reactor and an accelerator driven fast breeder
reactors. 

India has thorium reserves to the tune of 2.25 lakh tonnes,
which have an electricity potential of 1.55 lakh Giga Watt Year
(GWe-yr).
    
Copyright © 2006, The Hindu.
*****************************************************************
 24 World Nuclear News: Monticello shut down by weld failure

 23 January 2007 

The Monticello plant in Minnesota, USA was shut down on 11 
January after a beam supporting a large control box dropped from 
its mountings. 


Monticello, owned by Xcel Energy and operated by Nuclear
Management Company (NMC), is a boiling water reactor (BWR) built
in 1967 by General Electric and Bechtel. It outputs 613 MWe to
the grid and has a strong operating record, receiving awards
from General Electric and Minnesota Safety Council over its 36
years of commercial operation. In November 2006, its licence to
operate was extended by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC)
until September 2030. 

However, on 11 January an I-beam supporting the turbine control
valve enclosure in the plant's turbine hall broke loose from the
building's overall structure. One side of the enclosure support
dropped 15-20 cm onto a large steam pipe.
 
Kelli Huxford, NMC's Communications Manager for the Monticello
site, told WNN on 17 January that steam pipe integrity was
maintained and no steam escaped, but the extent of the damage to
the pipe and other nearby structures was not yet known as the
enclosure, which reportedly weighs over 15 t, had not yet been
fully lifted. A 23 January release from NMC confirmed that steam
lines suffered no damage.
 
Radiological conditions at BWRs do not permit access to the
turbine hall during power generation and so no plant personnel
were in the vicinity of the valve enclosure when it dropped.
 
Safety systems at the plant promptly shut it down as turbine
control mechanisms in the enclosure malfunctioned, opening main
steam isolation valves that caused steam pressure to drop, which
activated sensors and triggered a full shutdown. Jan Strasma of
the NRC said that all the plant's safety systems functioned
normally and there was no release of radioactivity or threat to
public health and safety.
 
Strasma added that "the initial assessment is that the welds
broke due to vibration over the years," but this was denied by
Huxford who told WNN that plant engineers' were currently
examining a number of theories. Huxford said that among the
theories under consideration are that the welds fixing the
supporting I-beams to the overall building structure were
underdesigned, and that the supporting strucutre as a whole may
have been underdesigned.
 
According to NMC's 23 January statement, its root cause
investigation found that the "control box support structure
design was inadequate and that, when installed, some welds were
undersized or lacked quality." Plant personnel evaluated similar
structures in both the turbine and reactor buildings and
identified no additional areas of concern.
 
The control box support structure has been modified and
strengthened while other affected equipment in the vicinity was
repaired and tested.
 
The plant was restarted on 23 January and was expected to reach
full power "within a few days."
 
*****************************************************************
 25 Toronto Star: Israel signals it may develop nuclear power 

January 24, 2007 

Israel may turn to nuclear power to widen its energy sources
because of concern over rising prices and dwindling oil
reserves, National Infrastructure Minister Binyamin Ben-Eliezer
signalled yesterday.

 Nuclear power would complement the country's efforts to rely
less on petroleum, Ben-Eliezer said at a conference in Herzilya.
Israel has no diplomatic relations with Saudi Arabia and other
Gulf countries that are among the world's biggest oil producers
and control its biggest reserves.

 "Considering Israel's special circumstances, it isn't enough to
rely only on conventional methods," Ben-Eliezer said. 







*****************************************************************
 26 ForUm: Energoatom to reduce violations at Nuclear Power Station

  [ForUm]     

  News / 24 January 2007 | 17:45   

National nuclear energy company “Energoatom” plans to reduce 
number of violations at electric power stations. Andry Derkach 
the president of “Energoatom” told during the meeting, where 
reasons and quantitative results of violations in nuclear power 
units in 2006 were discussed. 

“This year there won’t be such number of violations fixed last
years. We will increase responsibility for reliable and secure
work of power units both on administrative and stuff levels,”
Derkach said. 

In the scope of the meeting, reasons of breakdowns of equipment
at Nuclear Power Station in 2006 were discussed. Number of
decisions was made concerning security increase of power units. 

Moreover there was noted the necessity of demands increase to
inspectorial staff who is responsible for nuclear security, and
consequently their salary growth.   
  ForUm [Âåðñèÿ äëÿ ïå÷àòè] [Îòïðàâèòü ññûëêó äðóãó]   

   Comments yorga (18:41 | 24 January,2007) Why are there any
violations at all? When dealing with nukes, the policy should be
zero tolerence to anything out of the ordinary. Only registered
users can add comments. For registered users to enter e-mail and
password.

 Be aware, Editorial staff may not share opinions and ideas of
readers and commentators. 

 is allowed with the reference to en.for-ua.com only.
 All rights are reserved by © LTD. Inter-Media, ForUm 2001-2007 
*****************************************************************
 27 HindustanTimes.com: India for increasing share of N-power - PM

Press Trust of India

Moscow, January 24, 2007
   
Noting that Russian nuclear technology is internationally
competitive, India has said it would like to expand its
cooperation in the field as it has major plans to increase the
share of nuclear power in its energy mix.

Ahead of Russian President Vladimir Putin's visit to India on
Thursday, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh told the Russian media
that India-Russia strategic partnership is unique and has no
other parallel of two giant nations maintaining steady and
unbroken friendship over decades.

The prime minister also talked about increasing the trade volume
and transforming the nature of economic ties and expressed
concern over religious extremism and terrorism in its
neighbourhood.

On the nuclear issue, the Prime Minister expressed India's
interest in expanding nuclear cooperation with Russia, which is
presently building two nuclear power plans in Kudankulam.

"Russian nuclear power technology is internationally
competitive. Since we have major plans to increase the share of
nuclear power in our energy mix, there are concrete
opportunities for cooperation in this area. We would also like
this cooperation to expand in years to come," he said.

The Russian President is arriving in New Delhi on Thursday for
the seventh Indo-Russian summit during which nuclear cooperation
between the two countries will be high on the agenda. A number
of bilateral agreements are expected to be signed during the
visit.

Putin in an interview had said that Russia intends to help India
directly in the construction of atomic energy facilities for
peaceful use.   
    
*****************************************************************
 28 The Hindu: 'Russia, India to cooperate in peaceful use of nuke energy' 

Wednesday, January 24, 2007 : 1610 Hrs
 
New Delhi, Jan. 24 (PTI): Russia would cooperate with India on
peaceful use of nuclear energy and the issue would be discussed
during the visit of Russian President Vladimir Putin. Observing
that Russia has been cooperating with India for meeting the
latter's nuclear energy needs, Russian Defence Minister Sergei
Ivanov said "this issue will probably be discussed during
Putin's visit here". "Our cooperation (with India) will continue
on the development of peaceful nuclear energy", Ivanov said in
response to questions. 

Putin, in an interview to PTI, has said Moscow would help New
Delhi "directly" in the construction of atomic energy facilities
and declared that "we stand ready to support our Indian
friends". Cooperation in the construction of new reactors,
supply of nuclear fuel and transfer of reprocessing technology
are on the anvil during the Russian leader's visit beginning
tomorrow. 

In this context, Ivanov referred to Russian aid and cooperation
in two nuclear plants at Kudankulam in Tamil Nadu. 

Copyright © 2006, The Hindu.
*****************************************************************
 29 Earth Times: Putin calls for global nuclear energy

  Posted on : Wed, 24 Jan 2007 18:37:01 GMT | Author : Energy

MOSCOW, Jan. 24 Russia's president said international uranium 
enrichment centers should be created under strict regulation to 
increase global nuclear energy power.Vladimir Putin also said 
Tuesday, a day before a visit to India, that nuclear energy is 
needed to meet global energy demand and should be equally 
available to others providing nuclear weapons are not created, 
RIA Novosti reports.

We believe it is necessary to establish a network of
international centers for nuclear fuel enrichment under the
control of international organizations, especially the
International Atomic Energy Agency, Putin said. Within the
framework of these centers, in our opinion, equal,
non-discriminatory and democratic access must be provided to
technologies and materials, while simultaneously complying with
the principles and requirements of nonproliferation, he said.
Putin heads to India Wednesday for various negotiations,
including on energy cooperation. India is angling for
participation on a number of oil and natural gas ventures in
Russia. Russia is currently building nuclear reactors in
India.Our country has done a great deal for the development of
the Indian nuclear energy industry, Putin said. He said any
nuclear energy plans must include nonproliferation of nuclear
weapons.

Copyright 2007 by UPI                                                                                                                                              
  
(c) 2007 Earthtimes.org, All Rights Reserved.
*****************************************************************
 30 World Nuclear News: Russia makes deals in India

 24 January 2007 

President Vladimir Putin is about to visit India, his atomic 
minister Sergei Kiriyenko having made agreements on nuclear fuel 
and new plants.
 	 	
Kiriyenko, the head of Russia's federal agency for nuclear energy 
(Rosatom), has conducted a lengthy visit to India, inspecting 
progress at the Kudankulam site where Russian firms are 
constructing two 950 MWe VVER pressurised water reactors.
 	 	
Kiriyenko noted the physical progress and the increase in 
cooperational effectiveness between Indian and Russian companies 
that has been effected in the nine months since his last visit. 
He announced that the first batch of nuclear fuel for unit 1 
would be supplied by Russia in the second quarter of 2007. Russia 
is expected to supply nuclear fuel throughout both the reactors' 
lifetimes.
 	 	
In addition, Russian deputy prime minister and defence minister 
Sergei Ivanov has strongly hinted that agreements have been made 
for Russia to build four more power reactors at Kudankulam as 
well as even more at other, new sites.
 	 	
"Russia is ready to build four new units and intensify its 
activities in nuclear power engineering in India," he said, 
adding that President Vladimir Putin would visit India on 25-26 
January and that "During the visit... we will sign relevant 
documents. Let's wait two days and see."
 	 	
However, India is not a signatory to the Nuclear 
non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and so any deals would have been 
negotiated outside it. Normally, the Nuclear Suppliers Group 
confines nuclear trade to NPT signatories but India's record on 
non-proliferation has spurred countries like Australia, Russia 
and the USA to negotiate their own agreements to safeguard the 
use of nuclear materials and technology.
 	 	
*****************************************************************
 31 BBC: Climate 'to affect nuclear sites'
 
Last Updated: Tuesday, 23 January 2007
 
By David Shukman BBC science correspondent   

[UK nuclear power plant worker]                                 

The government is soon to release its criteria for possible new 
sites

Rising sea-levels, increased wave height and increased storm 
surge height must all be considered in the planning of the UK's 
future nuclear stations. 

Specialists from the Met Office make the recommendations in a 
report that assesses the likely risks to the industry from 
climate change. 

It was commissioned by the nuclear power company British Energy. 

All the current stations are on the coast, chosen for remoteness
and guaranteed access to cooling water. 

The study concludes future power plants will need to be further
inland and may need added protection. The government is likely
to release its criteria for possible sites in March. 

Constant maintenance 

At Sizewell in Suffolk, for example, site of Britain's most
modern reactor, the prediction is for the most severe storm
surges to be 1.7 metres higher in 2080 than at present. 

And at Dungeness in Kent, the storm surge increase could be up
to 0.9 metres. 

We would locate the station within the site in such a position 
that we don't perhaps have to work quite so hard in maintaining 
these hard defences [ border=] David Norfolk, British Energy           

Already the Dungeness plant, which is sited on land only two 
metres above sea-level, is protected by a massive wall of shingle 
which needs constant maintenance in the winter. 

Waves erode so much of it that it needs to be topped up
constantly with 600 tons of shingle every day. 

Met Office researcher Rob Harrison, who led the study, told the
BBC, "very large potential changes are in prospect; what we're
trying to do is avoid a catastrophic effect. 

"There's no immediate concern but in the future the extremes may
become more severe, especially with the combination of bigger
waves and surges. It's reassuring that British Energy are being
proactive about this." 

'Hard defences' 

The Met Office study finds the rise in storm surge heights will
be most extreme along the coast of south-east England - the
shorelines at Dungeness and Sizewell bearing the brunt of the
effects. 

[Hinkley Point nuclear power station]                           
All working nuclear power stations in the UK are located by the 
sea
			 			   		
One option for the nuclear operators is to build stronger sea 
defences. Another is to site future power stations further 
inland. 

David Norfolk, a member of British Energy's strategy team, said
any new power plant could be located further from the sea to
provide more of a buffer for any flooding. 

"We would locate the station within the site in such a position
that we don't perhaps have to work quite so hard in maintaining
these hard defences - put it further back so we have more land,
more space to absorb any water that comes over, to attenuate the
energy of the sea." 

The study follows a similar Met Office investigation last year
into the impact of climate change on conventional power plants.
*****************************************************************
 32 NRC: NRC to Discuss Preliminary Results of License Renewal Inspection for Pilgrim
Nuclear Power Plant

News Release - Region I - 2007-00 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY 
COMMISSION 

Office of Public Affairs, Region I No. I-07-004                          
January 23, 2007 CONTACT:     Diane Screnci (610) 337-5330 Neil 
A. Sheehan (610) 337-5331                     E-mail: 
opa1@nrc.gov  
  
The preliminary results of an NRC inspection associated with the
license renewal application for the Pilgrim nuclear power plant
will be presented during a public meeting on Tuesday, Jan. 30.
The purpose of the inspection, which was conducted from Sept. 8
to Dec. 5, 2006, was to examine whether the plants program for
managing the effects of aging on key safety systems, structures
and components is adequate and appropriate for a 20-year license
extension. 

NRC staff will discuss the results of the inspection with
representatives of Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc., which owns
and operates the Plymouth, Mass., facility. The meeting is
scheduled to begin at 6:30 p.m. at the Hilton Garden Inn,
located at 4 Home Depot Drive (near Long Pond Road) in Plymouth.
There will also be an opportunity for members of the public to
ask questions about the review prior to the meetings
adjournment. 

On Jan. 25, 2006, Entergy submitted an application to renew the
operating license for the Pilgrim plant for an additional 20
years. The current operating license for the Pilgrim plant is
due to expire on June 8, 2012. Under NRC regulations, the
original operating license for a commercial nuclear power plant
has a term of 40 years. The license can be renewed for up to an
additional two decades if NRC requirements are met. 

The aging management inspection is one of a number of NRC
activities involved in evaluating a license renewal application. 

Additional information concerning license renewal in general and
the Pilgrim application in particular can be found at:
http://www.nrc.gov/reactors/operating/licensing/renewal.html.   
  
NRC news releases are available through a free list server 
subscription at the following Web address: 
http://www.nrc.gov/public-involve/listserver.html. The NRC Home 
Page at www.nrc.gov also offers a Subscribe to News link in the 
News & Information menu. E-mail notifications are sent to 
subscribers when news releases are posted to NRC's Web Site.   
*****************************************************************
 33 Daily Yomiuri: Toppled turbine fans safety probe 

Keita Ikeda and Kojiro Tanikawa / Yomiuri Shimbun Staff Writers 

Attention has been drawn to the safety of wind power generators
following an incident in which a windmill toppled over in
Higashidorimura, Aomori Prefecture earlier this month. 

Wind power generation has emerged as a fast-growing source of
energy, prompted by the deregulation of the electricity industry
and the need to tackle global warming. 

But most of the wind turbines used in this nation are made
overseas, with many coming from Europe. Therefore, when
determining safety standards for turbines, this nation's weather
and terrain are not taken into consideration and, after
construction, the turbines are not thoroughly inspected. 

An official from the Economy, Trade and Industry Ministry's
Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency, who inspected Iwaya Wind
Farm on Jan. 10, two days after the accident there, expressed
surprise that the accident occurred, saying, "How could it have
fallen down like this?" 

The 68-meter wind power generator toppled from its base,
exposing the steel reinforcement rods meant to have secured it. 

The 25 generators at the wind farm are set at intervals of 100
meters to 200 meters in a curved line. The No. 11 generator,
which was located near the middle of the row, fell down. 

The wind turbine's structure is designed to withstand winds of
up to 216 kph, more than sufficient to cope with the maximum
instantaneous wind speed of just 90 kph recorded just before the
accident by a nearby wind meter. 

Experts and officials said it was unlikely wind caused the
generator to fall down. "The concrete of the base cracked and
the wind turbine broke from its moorings," the agency official
said. 

The possibility of design and construction error has emerged,
but there is no safety standard for constructing wind power
generators in this nation. 

The requirement that turbines be able to withstand a wind speed
of 216 kph is based on the Building Standards Law. The
regulation was set for high-rise buildings. 

Regarding the construction of the base, there is only a
regulation based on the Electric Utility Law, which stipulates
that the base of an electric generation facility must be
structurally sound. Construction methods are left up to each
operator and constructor, and the technical know-how used for
constructing steel towers is applied when installing a wind
power generator. 

=== 

European standards 


The generator that fell down was made in Denmark and was
installed by a major domestic construction company. 

There were 1,050 wind power generators across the country as of
the end of March 2006. Of them, 788, or 75 percent, were made
overseas. Three prefectures have a total of 79 generators made
by the same Danish maker of the generator that toppled over.
Construction of wind power generators for commercial use started
in this nation in 1995, but turbine makers still depend heavily
on European technology. 

The international safety standard for wind turbines is based on
the average wind speed found in Europe, among other factors. 

In 1998, there was an accident in India in which 129 wind power
generators were destroyed when a powerful cyclone hit an area.
But Japan Wind Energy Association Director Hiroshi Nagai, 53,
said, "Cases in which wind power generators are destroyed are
rare worldwide." 

But conditions differ greatly between Europe, where the terrain
is mainly flat and the wind direction--driven by circumpolar
westerlies--is stable, and this nation where the terrain is
hilly and typhoons often strike. 

In September 2003, wind power generators made in Denmark and
Germany were hit by a typhoon in Miyakojima island in Okinawa
Prefecture. Three were destroyed and seven were damaged. 

After the accident, new safety measures were called for, and in
September 2004, university professors joined officials from
electricity companies and wind power generator makers on a
subcommittee of the Japan Society of Civil Engineers tasked with
formulating high-wind-resistant designs for wind power
generation facilities and to start formulating nationwide
guidelines for relevant structural design. 

One of the subcommittee members, Assistant Prof. Hiroshi
Katsuchi of Yokohama National University, 44, who specializes in
wind-resistant engineering said, "The safety of wind power
generators can't be guaranteed in the current environment in
which no clear design guidelines exist, and guidelines for
building chimneys are being used instead." 

The subcommittee will compile new guidelines in this spring, but
the agency said it could not predict to what extent safety rules
would be improved before the guidelines are made. 

The government's safety inspection system for wind power
generators also has surfaced as an issue. 

Currently, the government checks only the results of strength
calculations when construction plans are submitted. 

The agency said operators have to formulate their own safety
management systems. 

The operator of Iwaya Wind Farm, Eurus Energy Iwaya based in
Higashidorimura, said it inspected its 25 generators, including
the one that fell down, in checks that ran from October to
December. However, it said it did not check the bases. 

Assistant Prof. Kozo Tsumura, 48, of Hirosaki University's
science and technology faculty, who specializes in concrete
engineering said: "It's almost impossible to reconfirm the
safety of a wind power generator's base once it's concreted.
Inspections by the government and a third-party organization are
necessary to avoid substandard design and construction." 

=== 

Winds of change 

The number of wind power generators in the country has rapidly
increased since about 2000. 

The number increased from 198 in fiscal 1999 to 1,050 in fiscal
2005. Total generating capacity has reached about 1.08 million
kW, 13 times more than the 80,000 kW available in fiscal 1999. 

One reason for this growth has been the liberalization of the
electricity market. In March 2000, liberalization of electricity
retail sales rules meant that nonpower companies, which had only
been allowed to sell electricity to factories with electricity
demands of at least 2,000 kW, could sell power to small
factories with electricity demands of as little as 50 kW. 

Wind power generation has attracted attention as effective
strategy for tackling the global warming problem, prompting
firms other than electricity companies to enter the market. 

The Economy, Trade and Industry Ministry plans to increase the
nation's wind power generating capacity to 3 million kW, about
three times the present level, by fiscal 2010. 

Prior to the liberalization, the International Trade and
Industry Ministry inspected wind power generators after they had
been constructed. But in 2000, the Electric Utility Law was
revised to promote deregulation, and inspection of sites became
the responsibility of operators. 

Liberalization made easier for newcomers to enter the market,
but insufficient measures were taken to guard against shoddy
design and construction. (Jan. 25, 2007) 


 © The Yomiuri Shimbun.   
*****************************************************************
 34 Rutland Herald: 7 arrested at Vt. Yankee

Rutland Vermont News & Information
 	 	 	 	 	 
January 24, 2007 

By DANIEL BARLOW Herald Staff   

VERNON — Seven activists protesting nuclear power were arrested
after they chained themselves across the main entrance of
Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Plant Tuesday morning, blocking
traffic into the plant for about 60 minutes.

The seven women, six of whom are from Massachusetts, padlocked
themselves together on a thin chain that stretched from a
telephone pole to a small pole outside the main gate of the
Vernon plant. They held signs calling for the immediate shutdown
of the plant.

"It's not green, it's dirty," the women, several of whom are in
their 60s and older, chanted, referring to a series of full page
ads placed in various state newspapers by Entergy Vermont
Nuclear, Yankee's owner, earlier this month claiming that
nuclear power is "green energy."

A handful of cars trying to enter Vermont Yankee found
themselves stalled, although several solved the problem by
entering via the nearby exit lane or pulling their car onto the
snow-covered grass on the right side of the entrance gate.

Nearly an hour after the women arrived, Vermont State Police
troopers and a Vernon Police officer cut the chain using bolt
cutters and arrested them for unlawful trespass. The interaction
between protesters and police was calm and one trooper even put
a woman's mittens back on her hands after binding her wrists
behind her back.

Tuesday's action outside the plant is the latest in a series of
nonviolent protests targeting the 43-year-old reactor in the
past year. It was also an escalation of tactics for Citizen's
Awareness Network, an anti-nuclear group in Massachusetts.

The group typically has targeted Entergy's corporate offices in
Brattleboro, leading to trespass charges for refusing to leave
the grassy area outside of the company's building. But the group
has targeted the plant at least once before and on Tuesday, they
cheerfully pointed out the faded remains of the word "danger"
and a radiation symbol they spray painted on the driveway in May
2006.

"Absolutely, this is an escalation," said Hattie Nestel of
Athol, Mass., one of the organizers of the protests, as she
stood chained to her friends. "We have exhausted the legal means
to shut down the plant and actions such as this one are our only
option."

Opponents of Vermont Yankee have had little luck in stopping its
operation in recent years. The plant successfully boosted its
power production by 20 percent last year and Entergy has now
asked the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to extend its operating
license by 20 years.

NRC staff reviewing the environmental impact on the license
extension have already given the plan preliminary approval. And
Monday, the five-member panel that oversees the NRC rejected the
latest appeal from the state of Massachusetts over concerns that
spent fuel at the site could be a terrorist target.

Decisions such as those — along with the revelation that an
August 2006 shipment from Vermont Yankee contained four times
the federal maximum for radiation levels — fueled Tuesday's
protest, Nestel said.

"We know that the NRC has consistently stated that it does not
believe its appropriate for issues like spent fuel storage,
emergency planning and security to be dealt with for license
renewal application review," read a one-page statement handed
out by the women. "Therefore, we women have taken the
responsibility upon ourselves to shut down Vermont Yankee!"

Nearly all the protests against the facility in the past year
have resulted in arrest, but Windham County State's Attorney Dan
Davis has never prosecuted the cases. In making that decision,
Davis, who could not be reached for comment Tuesday, has said he
doesn't want the court to be used as a political platform.

An Entergy spokesperson declined comment on the protest Tuesday.

Vernon Police Chief Kevin Turnley said the women were cited and
released to appear in Brattleboro District Court on March 20.

Julia Bonafine of Cuttingsville was among the seven arrested.
The other six were residents of Massachusetts: Marcia Gagliardi
of Athol, Dorthee of Wendell, P. Paki Wieland of Northampton,
Hattie Nestel of Athol, Claire Chang of Gill and Frances Crowe
of Northampton.

Contact Daniel Barlow at daniel.barlow@rutlandherald.com.
   
                © 2007 Rutland Herald
*****************************************************************
 35 globeandmail.com: Nuclear has crucial role in power supply - Lunn
 	
POSTED ON 24/01/07

ENVIRONMENT
 
Resources minister points to Ontario, which gets half its energy 
from that source

RICHARD BLACKWELL

TORONTO -- Nuclear energy will have an important place in 
Canada's future power mix, especially if new technology can help 
reduce the amount of radioactive waste the industry generates, 
federal Natural Resources Minister Gary Lunn said yesterday. 

In a speech to the Economic Club of Toronto, Mr. Lunn said that
"purely from an environmental perspective, we must look at
nuclear energy as a key source of energy in Canada. We know it's
clean, it produces zero emissions, [and] it produces no
greenhouse gases." 

He noted that Ontario has been using nuclear energy for more
than 40 years, and the province now generates more than half its
power from that source. 

"As a nation of energy consumers we must be prepared to have an
open discussion about nuclear power," he said, adding that a
"fourth generation" of reactors will extract more energy out of
nuclear fuel to minimize the storage of radioactive waste.	 	
			 			 			 			 			 			 	 		 	 	 	 	 	 		 				 			 			 	 	 	
Mr. Lunn emphasized the provinces will have to make the
individual decisions on whether to expand or adopt nuclear
technology, "but we will be there to support them." 

After his speech, Mr. Lunn was challenged by Greenpeace Canada's
energy co-ordinator Dave Martin, who asked the minister how he
can define nuclear as a "zero emission" energy source, and where
he proposed to dispose the waste it generates. 

Mr. Lunn said he was impressed with how carefully the industry
currently stores its waste, and said there will be federal help
to conduct research into new storage technologies, although he
offered no details. "There will be specifics of the exact
storage. . . but you're going to have to wait." 

Later, Mr. Martin deemed Mr. Lunn's comments "pie in the sky,"
because the nuclear industry is only now developing a third
generation of nuclear reactors, and the fourth generation is
years down the road. 

"To suggest that [a fourth generation of reactors] are any kind
of solution to any of our energy problems, even in the medium
term, is wishful thinking at best," Mr. Martin said. 

He described the Conservative's approach to nuclear power as a
"major change in federal climate-change policy." The previous
Liberal government excluded nuclear power from its approach to
dealing with climate change, but the environmental initiatives
announced by the government in the past week clearly embrace
nuclear as an option, he said. 

Mr. Lunn told reporters after his speech that he also supports
the idea of using a nuclear reactor to replace the natural gas
that is currently required to generate power and steam used in
the extraction of petroleum from the Alberta oil sands. 	 	

 Copyright 2007 CTVglobemedia Publishing Inc. All Rights 
Reserved. globeandmail.com and The Globe and Mail are divisions 
of CTVglobemedia Publishing Inc., 444 Front St. W., Toronto, ON  
Canada M5V 2S9 Phillip Crawley, Publisher                               
-->                                     -->                    
close   
*****************************************************************
 36 Rutland Herald: Yankee discovers safety failure; says problem fixed

Rutland Vermont News & Information

January 24, 2007 

By DAVID GRAM The Associated Press   

MONTPELIER — The Vermont Yankee nuclear plant was threatened
with shutdown late Monday when a safety system was determined
not to be working properly, but the problem was fixed within
several hours, officials said.

A special Nuclear Regulatory Commission report was triggered
when staff at the Vernon reactor discovered at about 7 p.m.
Monday that a high-pressure coolant injection system flow
control gauge had malfunctioned, said NRC spokesman Neil Sheehan.

The gauge was showing flow through the system of 200 gallons per
minute when there was nothing flowing through the system,
Sheehan said.

"If 1,000 gallons a minute were needed, you may think you're
putting in a thousand gallons a minute when you're actually
putting 800," Sheehan said of the inaccurate reading. "That's
not a good situation."

With the malfunction, Vermont Yankee began operating under
"limiting conditions of operation," meaning that the plant was
going to have to shut down if the problem was not fixed within
14 days, Sheehan said.

"As of 8 a.m. (Tuesday) the system was operable again," he added.

Vermont Yankee spokesman Larry Smith said control room
technicians noticed the problem at about 7 p.m. and notified the
NRC.

The system was declared inoperable while it was re-calibrated,
but it could have been operated manually by control room
technicians, Smith said.

"That system was available to provide its safety function but
operators would have to do it manually," Smith said.

The system was fixed by 1:40 a.m. Tuesday, Smith said.

Sheehan said the risk from the malfunction was low, because the
plant has several redundant safety systems. But the watchdog
group New England Coalition wasn't buying it.

'''No problem, be happy, we got other safety equipment,' is no
answer," said Raymond Shadis, technical adviser with the group.

He said the plant, owned by Mississippi-based Entergy Nuclear
"is already running at reduced margins of safety," due to last
year's 20 percent increase in power output.

He said operating the plant under limiting conditions of
operations "is like driving for only a few hours while repairing
your car's brakes. Except in this instance they are taking the
whole neighborhood for a ride."
*****************************************************************
 37 Boise Weekly: Gore chants, Craig Rants
 
JANUARY 24, 2007
 
BY SHEA ANDERSEN
 
Pundits and observers alike were scratching their heads this
week as they watched Idaho Sen. Larry Craig make a concerted
effort to buffet the comments of former Vice President Al Gore.
Before Gore even made it to town for a speech to about 10,000
people in Boise State's Taco Bell Arena, Republican Craig was
making sure reporters knew his perspective on the climate change
issue. 

"This time of the year, when someone mentions warming, what
usually comes to mind is putting another log in the fireplace,"
Craig wrote in an op-ed offered on his Senate Web site and
printed by the Idaho Statesman. Craig called efforts by the new
Democratic majority in the Senate and House to limit the
emission of greenhouse gases "California dreamin'." 

Why was Craig so agitated about climate change, and so
determined to get the info into the hands of the media? 

"Something's up," said Boise State political science professor
John Freemuth, who was puzzled by Craig's pre-emptive strikes. 

"Somebody's getting nervous about this issue," said former
Congressman Larry LaRocco, who ran unsuccessfully for lieutenant
governor last year. 

With the Democratic rise in Congress responding to climate
change issues, LaRocco wondered if Craig wasn't getting antsy
about popular response to Gore's highly acclaimed documentary
about the climate crisis, An Inconvenient Truth and his
highly-publicized visit to Boise. 

"The people are getting ahead of Congress on this one," LaRocco
said. Craig's comments, LaRocco said, "had other people
scratching their heads." 

Gore's slideshow and lecture Monday, introduced by Bethine
Church, received loud ovations. The friendly crowd obligingly
yukked it up when Gore referred to himself, as he does often, as
the man who "used to be the next president." Gore's presentation
largely paralleled his documentary, but was salted with
references to Idaho's potential effects of global warming,
including risks to forest health, increased fire danger and
increases in disease-carrying insects like mosquitoes. 

And he highlighted what he called misconceptions about global
warming: That environmental policies can damage the economy,
that global warming is too big a problem to solve, and that
there is debate among scientists about global warming, a trope
that appears to be on its way out. 

Gore also made a jibe at former Gov. Jim Risch, by including a
slide quoting Risch as saying, "I personally think there is
science on both sides, I'm not strongly convinced either way." 

"Now, I'm not picking on this guy," Gore said, to laughter from
the friendly audience. 

As for Craig, he reminded the Senate and the media that his
focus is less on the science but more on the solutions. Calling
himself "a thrifty conservationist," Craig said he prefers
incentives for alternative energy--he includes newer nuclear
power technology among these ideas--to punitive action against
energy companies. 

"The environment used to be a bipartisan issue in the U.S., back
in Frank Church's day," Gore told reporters on his way in to the
arena. "We should try to get back to that." 

The next morning Gore's documentary received two Oscar
nominations for Best Documentary and Original Song. 

© Copyright 2007, Boise Weekly - Not Your Everyday Newspaper   
*****************************************************************
 38 Reuters: Czechs launch energy study, coalition to be tested
         
Wed 24 Jan 2007 8:38 AM ET                                      

PRAGUE, Jan 24 (Reuters) - The new Czech government set up a 
commission to study covering future energy needs on Wednesday, a 
thorny issue drawing a battle line in the ruling coalition which 
includes the fiercely anti-nuclear Green Party.

 Prime Minister Mirek Topolanek said the commission will be led 
by Vaclav Paces, head of the Academy of Sciences, and include 
experts from all political parties.

 "This is not connected only with the oil crises we witnessed in
the past, but also with what the entire EU is discussing as one
of its priorities under the Finnish and German presidencies, and
that is energy security," Topolanek told a news conference.

 The Czech Republic is an electricity exporter but domestic
demand is rising and many of its lignite-burning power plants
are nearing the end of their lives.

 Producers, including the dominant power firm CEZ <CEZPsp.PR>,
are under pressure to decide on replacements.

 Topolanek's Civic Democrats and the opposition Social Democrats
both back building a new nuclear power station, which would most
likely be based alongside CEZ's existing 2,000 megawatt plant at
Temelin, south of Prague.

 But the Greens, a key goverment partner for Topolanek, have
secured a pledge in the ruling coalition's founding agreement
that the government would not support building any additional
nuclear units to the two existing blocs at Temelin and four at
Dukovany, in the southeast.

 A new nuclear power station would also spark protests in
neighbouring Austria, which has rejected nuclear energy.

 The Czech coalition agreement also states that lignite mines in
northwestern Czech Republic would not be allowed to expand,
narrowing the chances to build new power stations there.

 Finland is the only west European country building a nuclear
power plant at the moment. 

However, debate around Europe on returning to atomic power is
intensifying, given the growing desire to diversify energy
sources from oil and gas coming from Russia and to use
technology not emitting greenhouse gases.

 Germany has pledged to phase out its nuclear power stations by
the 2020s but support for the plan is waning.

© Reuters 2007. All Rights Reserved.
*****************************************************************
 39 NRC: NRC Grants Entergy’s Request for Extended Deadline for Meeting 
Order Related to Siren Back-up Power

  NRC NEWS U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public 
Affairs     Telephone: 301/415-8200 Washington, DC 20555-0001     
E-mail: opa@nrc.gov www.nrc.gov   

  No. 07-010     January 23, 2007   
  
After careful review, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission has
granted Entergy's request for an extension of the deadline for
completing a project at the Indian Point Energy Center that was
required by NRC Order to meet specifications in the 2005 Energy
Policy Act. Entergy now has until April 15 to complete
installation of back-up power for its alert and notification
system, as originally outlined in a January 2006 confirmatory
Order. The original Order set a January 30, 2007, deadline for
compliance. 

The NRC determined that Entergy provided good cause for the
extension, including delays that were unanticipated, and had
made reasonable and appropriate attempts to resolve these issues
within the time initially provided in the Order. 

In its extension request, Entergy stated that considerable
progress has been made toward completing the work, but cited
issues with a tower needed to support additional equipment,
testing of the system, training of emergency service workers and
obtaining additional local permits for the new siren locations
as reasons for the extension request. Entergy had asked for an
extension until April 15, 2007. Entergy noted in the extension
request that they had discussed the request with surrounding
counties. 

Indian Points existing alert and notification system is
unaffected by the new system and remains in place to notify the
public, if necessary. 

"We carefully evaluated this request and believe that Entergy
took reasonable steps to complete installation of the system and
has provided good cause for relaxation of the Order deadline,"
said Jim Dyer, Director of the Office of Nuclear Reactor
Regulation. 

The Energy Policy Act included a provision directing the NRC to
require nuclear power plants located within certain population
densities to have back-up power for their emergency notification
systems, including sirens. Indian Point is the only nuclear
plant that fell within the requirement. 

	The Entergy extension request and the NRC approval letter are
posted on this page:
http://www.nrc.gov/reactors/plant-specific-items/indian-point-iss
ues.html.   
  
NRC news releases are available through a free list server 
subscription at the following Web address: 
http://www.nrc.gov/public-involve/listserver.html. The NRC Home 
Page at www.nrc.gov also offers a Subscribe to News link in the 
News & Information menu. E-mail notifications are sent to 
subscribers when news releases are posted to NRC's Web Site.   

Last revised Wednesday, January 24, 2007
*****************************************************************
 40 NRC: Nuclear Management Company, LLC; Palisades Nuclear Plant; Notice 
 
                         FR Doc E7-972 
[Federal Register: January 24, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 15)] 
[Notices] [Page 3168] From the Federal Register Online via GPO 
Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr24ja07-87]                         
 
of Issuance of Renewed Facility Operating License No. DPR-20 for 
an Additional 20-Year Period; Record of Decision Notice is hereby 
given that the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the 
Commission) has issued Renewed Facility Operating License No. 
DPR- 20 to Nuclear Management Company, LLC (licensee), the 
operator of the Palisades Nuclear Plant (PNP). Renewed Facility 
Operating License No. DPR-20 authorizes operation of PNP by the 
licensee at reactor core power levels not in excess of 2565.4 
megawatts thermal in accordance with the provisions of the PNP 
renewed license and its Technical Specifications.
 
The notice also serves as the record of decision for the renewal 
of Facility Operating License No. DPR-20, consistent with 10 CFR 
51.103 of the Commission's regulations. The factors considered in 
the Record of Decision can be found in the Supplemental 
Environmental Impact Statement (FSEIS) for PNP.
 
The PNP plant is a Pressurized Water Reactor located in Van Buren 
County, MI.
 
The application for the renewed license complied with the 
standards and requirements of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as 
amended (the Act), and the Commission's regulations. As required 
by the Act and the Commission's regulations in 10 CFR Chapter I, 
the Commission has made appropriate findings, which are set forth 
in the license. Prior public notice of the action involving the 
proposed issuance of the renewed license and of an opportunity 
for a hearing regarding the proposed issuance of the new license 
was published in the Federal Register on June 8, 2005 (70 FR 
33533). For further details with respect to this action, see: (1) 
Nuclear Management Company, LLC's license renewal application for 
Palisades Nuclear Plant, dated March 22, 2005, as supplemented by 
letters dated through July 5, 2006; (2) the Commission's safety 
evaluation report (NUREG-1871), dated December 2006; (3) the 
licensee's updated safety analysis report; and (4) the 
Commission's final environmental impact statement (NUREG-1437, 
Supplement 27, for the Palisades Nuclear Plant, dated October 12, 
2006). These documents are available at the NRC's Public Document 
Room, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, 
Maryland 20852, and can be viewed from the NRC Public Electronic 
Reading Room at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html .
 
Copies of Renewed Facility Operating License No. DPR-20, may be 
obtained by writing to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 
Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attention: Director, Division of 
License Renewal. Copies of the Palisades Nuclear Plant Safety 
Evaluation Report (NUREG-1871) and the final environmental impact 
statement (NUREG-1437, Supplement 27) may be purchased from the 
National Technical Information Service, U.S. Department of 
Commerce, Springfield, Virginia 22161 (http://www.ntis.gov), 
(703) 605-6000, or from the U.S. Government Printing Office, 
Attention: Superintendent of Documents, P.O. Box 37082, 
Washington, DC 20402-9328 (http://www.gpoaccess.gov), (202) 512- 
1800. All orders should clearly identify the NRC publication 
number and the requestor's Government Printing Office deposit 
account number or VISA or MasterCard number and expiration date.
 
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 17th day of January, 2007.
 
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
 
Pao-Tsin Kuo, Acting Division Director, Division of License 
Renewal, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
 
[FR Doc. E7-972 Filed 1-23-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P

 
*****************************************************************
 41 NRC: PPL Susquehanna LLC; Establishment of Atomic Safety and Licensing Board

07-851-01-LR-BD01]
 
                         FR Doc E7-975 
[Federal Register: January 24, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 15)] 
[Notices] [Page 3168-3169] From the Federal Register Online via 
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr24ja07-88]                         
 
Pursuant to delegation by the Commission dated December 29,1972, 
published in the Federal Register, 37 FR 28,710 (1972), and the 
Commission's regulations, see 10 CFR 2.104, 2.300, 2.303, 2.309, 
2.311, 2.318, and 2.321, notice is hereby given that an Atomic 
Safety and Licensing Board is being
 
[[Page 3169]]
established to preside over the following proceeding: PPL 
Susquehanna LLC (Susquehanna Steam Electric Station, Units 1 and 
2) A Licensing Board is being established pursuant to a November 
2, 2006 notice of opportunity for hearing (71 FR 64,566) 
regarding the September 13, 2006 application for renewal of 
Operating License Nos. NPF-14 and NFP-22, which authorize PPL 
Susquehanna LLC (PPL) to operate the Susquehanna Steam Electric 
Station (SSES), Units 1 and 2, at 3489 megawatts thermal. The PPL 
renewal application seeks to extend the current operating 
licenses--which expire on July 17, 2022, and March 23, 2024, for 
Units 1 and 2 respectively--for an additional twenty years. This 
proceeding concerns the January 2, 2007 request for 
hearing/petition to intervene filed by Mr. Eric Joseph Epstein. 
The Board is comprised of the following administrative judges: 
Ann Marshall Young, Chair, Atomic Safety and Licensing Board 
Panel, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 
20555-0001. Dr. Kaye D. Lathrop, Atomic Safety and Licensing 
Board Panel, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 
20555-0001.
 
Dr. William W. Sager, Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel, 
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001.
 
All correspondence, documents, and other materials shall be filed 
with the administrative judges in accordance with 10 CFR 2.302. 
Issued at Rockville, Maryland, this 18th day of January 2007.
 
E. Roy Hawkens, Chief Administrative Judge, Atomic Safety and 
Licensing Board Panel.
 
[FR Doc. E7-975 Filed 1-23-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P

*****************************************************************
 42 Brooks Bulletin: Surely we can find cleaner energy source

Brooks Alberta Editorials - 
 
Wednesday, January 24, 2007

The Brooks Bulletin P.O. Box 1450 Brooks, Alberta T1R 1C3

 Tel: (403) 362-5571 Fax: (403) 362-5080

  Editorials › Editorial
 
Canadas New Democrats, and specifically leader Jack Layton,
seem to be the only ones who have clued into what Canadians are
thinking when it comes to the environment which has topped the
list of voters concerns for the first time since 1990.

Now holding the balance of power in the House of Commons, Layton
is taking his new found power out for a spin and last week said
he wont help Prime Minister Stephen Harper stay in office
unless he scraps tax breaks for oil firms and moves to set
pollution caps. He says the energy sectors expansion is causing
environmental concerns and that money saved from ending the tax
breaks should instead be used to find and promote cleaner forms
of energy sources. 

While the prime minister has indicated that his party was short
on environmental legislation introduced this fall and has
promised to do better, there is little doubt the Conservatives
will hesitate when it comes to making energy companies bear more
environmental costs.

According to the Pembina Institute, a non-profit Alberta group
that researches environmental policy, the industry receives $1.4
billion in tax breaks each year. It adds that more than 40 per
cent of the increase in Canadas annual greenhouse gas emissions
in the seven years to 2010 will come from the oilsands. Canadas
environmental auditor has reported that the share of greenhouse
gases from increased development of Albertas oilsands may
double by 2015 as companies poise to spend as much as $125
billion over the next decade on new projects.

Ironically, this is how long it would take to build a nuclear
reactor at the oilsands which is what the Conservatives are
touting as the way to drastically reduce greenhouse gas
emissions. 

The more interesting part of the issue is that the U.S. House of
Representatives has just voted to end billions of dollars in tax
breaks for oil and gas companies and redirect the money to
alternative energy investmentsa total of some $14 billionwhich
reverses one of the most generous perks that was handed out
during the last 12 years of Republican rule.

Obviously, the large swing to the Democrats during the falls
mid-term elections will mean a move toward energy efficiency and
independence and a drastic change in policy from that of the
Republicans in terms of protecting the environment.

Meanwhile, recent discussions between the U.S. and Canadian
governments to boost oilsands production to five million barrels
of oil daily, which is the Alberta governments target for 2020,
might come as a bit of a surprise to Canadians given the costs
and shortages of labour and materials. There is also the matter
of oil now at around $50 a barrelor less.

The future will only tell if government and industry can come
together with incentives and subsequent diversification that
will drastically reduce our dependence on non-renewable
resources for energy.

Perhaps the people of Canada will have to jump-start the process.

© 2002 The Brooks Bulletin
*****************************************************************
 43 BBC: Bush 'must fight climate change'
 
Last Updated: Tuesday, 23 January 2007
 
[Duke Energy CEO Jim Rogers]                            

Duke Energy CEO Jim Rogers said it was time to take action                                                          

Chief executives of some of the largest companies in the US have 
urged President George W Bush to introduce measures to tackle 
global warming. 

The executives from nine corporations said Mr Bush should support 
a mandatory cap on greenhouse gas emissions. 

Mr Bush will address the issue in his State of the Union speech 
on Tuesday, but will not introduce binding rules for emissions, 
the White House says. 

President Bush has in the past rejected mandatory controls on 
greenhouse gases. 

Former President Bill Clinton signed the Kyoto protocol but it 
was never ratified by Congress. 

'Desire for clarity' 

"We can and must take prompt action to establish a co-ordinated, 
economy-wide market-driven approach to climate protection," the 
executives said in a letter to President Bush. 

[US President George W Bush. File photo] 

Mr Bush is preparing to make his State of the Union speech

They have formed a group - the US Climate Action Partnership 
(USCAP) - which they intend to use to push for mandatory caps on 
greenhouse gases to cut them by more than 60% by 2050. 

"It's time for the nation's political leaders to come together 
and act," Duke Energy chief executive Jim Rogers - a USCAP member 
- told reporters at a news conference in Washington. 

Other members of the USCAP are CEOs of Alcoa, BP America, DuPont, 
Caterpillar, General Electric, Lehman Brothers, FPL Group and PG 
and E. 

The pressure from big business stems from a desire for clarity, 
the BBC's Justin Webb in Washington says. 

At the moment, some states impose caps and the severity varies. 

The White House said President Bush was going to make an 
important announcement about energy efficiency and greenhouse 
gases. 

But White House press secretary Tony Snow said "binding 
economy-wide carbon caps" are not part of Mr Bush's approach. 

Mr Snow added that the president believed that industry must come 
up with innovations to address the issue of climate change.
*****************************************************************
 44 Lincoln County News: Maine Yankee Damage Award Finalized for Wiscasset 

January 25, 2007     
                                                         
Story date: 01/24/2007                                                
                                                                                
By Greg Foster

Wiscasset Town Manager Arthur Faucher said Tuesday night that the 
state Dept of Environmental Protection (DEP) proposal concerning 
Montsweag Brook remains unchanged, despite the town’s efforts for 
concessions.

 Meeting with DEP and Wiscasset Water Dist. officials Jan. 12,
selectman expressed their sentiments about the proposed awarding
of the Montsweag Brook dam and vicinity to the Chewonki
Foundation for removal of the dam. The award is part of a
natural resources damages settlement with Maine Yankee.

 Chewonki’s proposal is to restore the brook region to its
original environment prior to Maine Yankee’s construction of the
dam, to create a reservoir of water as backup for the nuclear
fuel pool.

 The board sent a Jan. 17 letter to the DEP with its comments
about the project, itemizing five concerns that the town has
about the project. It was well within the time period for public
comment after the DEP granted the town an extension to Jan. 19
to allow it time to prepare a statement.

 Faucher said the town at least learned at the Jan. 12 session
that the 31 acres adjacent to Montsweag Brook are not part of
the deal. Local officials had thought the acreage would be
removed from the tax rolls.

 Faucher told the general public present at the meeting that the
DEP’s concern has been to make settlements for projects that the
state has had in mind all along and which are going to be
environmentally beneficial for the people.

 “When it’s good for the people it’s good for Wiscasset,” he
said. “I doubt very much we’re going to get any money out of
this.”

 In his estimation, the state’s decisions on the issue are a
“done deal”, too late to forestall its attempts to keep the dam
and reservoir it has created, according to a news article he
read.

 Among the concerns enumerated in the town’s statement to the
DEP is that any future DEP projects applicable to the town
should be organized for the interest of its officials and their
willingness to work with the department. The board recommends
continuing jointly organized presentations.

 Another concern is the prevention of loss of any taxable
property and evaluation of any parcel or land project for its
best use, development and potential tax revenue prior to its
removal from the tax rolls.

 A third concern is to allow the town and water district public
access to Montsweag Brook for the future search and supply of a
secondary or primary water source. The board recommends that the
DEP record the matter in its inventory of projects and consider
it for future funding.

 A fourth concern the letter listed is to retain public access
for recreational uses traditional to the area, and the board
recommends working with Chewonki in establishing activities and
retaining a sense of community.

 The last concern is for nonremoval of the dam in keeping with
many public comments the board has received. Thus, the board is
asking the state “to look at its strategic use, avoid government
expense, and let the dam have its years of longevity”.

 Chewonki’s proposal calls for an independent feasibility study
before there is any final decision to remove the dam.

 Airport committee

 The board approved the appointment of Mike Flanagan to the
vacant seat on the airport committee. He is replacing Sean
Rafter.

 Clam flats closure:

 The board announced the shellfish committee’s decision for
closure of the clam flats in the vicinity of Foxbird Island at
Bailey Point for a year from Feb. 1 of this year to Feb. 1,
2008. 

The area is where the former Maine Yankee plant was located. The
flats are being reseeded and digging there would endanger them.
Apparently the closure does not affect worm diggers, according
to selectmen.

 Town reports:

 Selectmen also announced that residents may obtain a copy of
the 2006 town report at the community center, library, town
office, or post office.

 Police chief session:

 Faucher announced that the board and police chief have agreed
to a second executive session on the issue of renewal of his
contract in June. The previous town manager had given him notice
of non-renewal before leaving the position last month, but
Faucher has extended an opportunity for discussion of the matter.

 It was suggested that members of the police department be
invited to the executive session for any comments they might
have.

 School budget forum:

 A school board budget process forum wrap up will be held
Tuesday at 7 p.m. at the municipal building. It will include
answers to questions people had during two sessions last week.

Vol. 132 - No. 4                                                                                              

This site is owned by Lincoln County News © 2002
*****************************************************************
 45 MSNBC.com: Plan for nuclear cartel faces reality check - Power Play -
          
Expense, technical challenges threaten to keep GNEP in starting 
gate 
  
  [URANIUM LAYOFFS]   

  David Kohl / Associated Press

The Portsmouth uranium enrichment plant near Piketon, Ohio, is 
under study as a possible site for facilities that would be part 
of the ambitious Global Nuclear Energy Partnership.

Mike Stuckey Senior news editor

To Greg Simonton and other civic leaders in Piketon, Ohio,
population 1,973, it's all about the jobs. Jobs to bolster the
economy of the Appalachian burg where the double-digit
unemployment rate is always near the highest in the state. Jobs
to replace more than 1,500 that have been wiped out over the
past decade with the downsizing of a uranium enrichment plant.
Jobs that are so attractive they have led Simonton's nonprofit
agency to pair up with a private enterprise in a venture that
could eventually bring Piketon thousands of tons a year of some
of the most toxic nuclear waste on the planet.

Piketon is one of 11 communities recently awarded a total of $16
million in study grants by the U.S. Department of Energy. The
grants are to be used to determine if they would be suitable
sites for the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership, or GNEP, a
hotly debated proposal that proponents promise will change the
world.

Unveiled by the Bush administration early last year, GNEP
envisions a system in which developing nations would receive
nuclear power plants and fuel from the West in return for
agreeing not to develop their own nuclear technology. The plan
hinges on the controversial element of reprocessing spent
nuclear rods to produce fuel that can be burned at GNEP plants,
an activity that has never been done commercially in the United
States.

GNEP supporters say not only will it power up the Third World,
it will boost the U.S. nuclear industry, greatly reduce nuclear
waste and air pollution and avoid the further spread of nuclear
weapons. 

Opponents say the program has the same problem as conventional
nuclear power: It's impossibly expensive. But it's GNEP's added
element of nuclear fuel reprocessing, shelved for more than 30
years as unsafe and unnecessary in the United States, that
really inflames critics of the program. 

The race for toxic waste
The criticism has not deterred the Department of Energy and
job-hungry communities that vied for the study grants. "We are
very excited about the opportunity to take a look at this,"
Simonton said after Assistant Secretary of Energy Dennis
Spurgeon announced in November that the Piketon group was among
the grant recipients.

The area's congresswoman, Republican Rep. Jean Schmidt, was
equally enthusiastic, saying the grant "will go a long way
toward future economic development opportunities and may bring
thousands of jobs to the area."

Simonton directs the Southern Ohio Diversification Initiative, a
nonprofit whose purpose is to create jobs in a region hit hard
by the layoffs at the Portsmouth uranium enrichment plant in
Piketon, owned by the Energy Department and operated by the
United States Enrichment Corp., currently the only U.S. firm in
the enrichment business. 

What better way to do that, figured Simonton and his partner,
Cleveland entrepreneur and former Enrichment Corp. board member
Dan T. Moore II, than to find a new nuclear purpose for a
3,714-acre facility that has been processing radioactive
materials for 52 years, first for weapons at the height of the
Cold War and later for commercial nuclear power plants?

Politicians in other communities that received GNEP grants also
expressed eagerness to cash in on what they believe could be an
economic bonanza. "These nuclear fuel recycling facilities would
firmly establish our state as the leader in this field," said
Republican Rep. Steve Pearce of New Mexico, where the DOE
awarded two study grants. "This is an exciting opportunity for
East Tennessee," echoed Republican Rep. Zach Wamp, whose
district includes Oak Ridge National Laboratory, another
potential GNEP site.

Welcoming locals are just part of what senior Harvard nuclear
researcher Matthew Bunn describes as a large and "unwieldy
coalition" that has kept the GNEP proposal afloat despite
serious questions about its technical feasibility, concerns over
its potential to spread nuclear weapons materiel, doubts that
nuclear "have-not" nations will submit to a Western fuel and
technology cabal and tepid support and a lack of funding from
Congress.

That coalition includes the national nuclear labs, which see the
potential for billions in research funding, and some players in
the industry, who hope for lucrative contracts as part of GNEP
and the general growth of the nuclear power industry that they
expect will accompany it. 

Cover for waste dump stalemate?
And there appears to be a growing faction that sees it as at
least temporary cover for long-delayed efforts to open a nuclear
waste dump at Yucca Mountain, Nev., a vital component if the
nuclear power industry's predictions of a "renaissance" are to
be realized.

But Energy Department spokesman Craig Stevens denied that
finding an interim storage for waste is a GNEP goal. 

It's the "stated policies" that matter, he told MSNBC.com. "This
is a big thing. If it's successful and we can make it work, and
make it attractive enough at an economic level, this will change
the way we power the world."

The proposal set off strong protests in anti-nuclear and
non-proliferation camps, because it reintroduced the
reprocessing of spent reactor fuel to the U.S. nuclear
landscape. The critics say the practice would make it far easier
for terrorists to get their hands on plutonium that could be
used to make crude nuclear weapons. That concern is the major
reason reprocessing was banned under the Ford and Carter
administrations. 

The argument for reprocessing

GNEP proponents maintain that reprocessing - which the nuclear
industry and the Department of Energy have taken to calling
"recycling" - has the twin benefits of cutting down on nuclear
waste and ensuring a rich fuel supply for hundreds of new
reactors.

In the "once-through" fuel cycle currently used in U.S. nuclear
reactors, thousands of tons of uranium ore are mined and
processed to produce a relatively small amount of fuel. Once the
fuel has been used, it is highly radioactive and must be stored
for years in pools of water before it has cooled enough to be
placed in concrete casks and eventually transferred to a
permanent disposal site. 

The only such U.S. site under development, at Yucca Mountain in
Nevada, has faced political and regulatory hurdles for decades
and is not expected to receive waste for at least 10 years, if
ever. That's currently the most daunting obstacle for the
nuclear power industry, which wants to build more plants and
thus create more waste.

Reprocessing advocates say that 95 percent of current nuclear
waste, chiefly uranium and plutonium, is still rich with energy
that could be harnessed by new "recycling" technology. The
process could be repeated until virtually all of the energy is
sucked out of the waste, allowing far more widespread use of
nuclear power and drastically reducing the amount of permanent
disposal space required.

The problem with plutonium

The problem with that logic, opponents counter, is that 
reprocessing would make it more likely that plutonium - the 
material of choice for nuclear bomb makers - could fall into the 
wrong hands. When it remains mixed with other components of 
highly radioactive spent fuel, the waste is "self-protecting" 
because it is quickly fatal to anyone who tries to handle it 
without specialized equipment and technical know-how. But once 
plutonium is separated from the other waste via reprocessing, it 
can be handled without any immediate danger to a would-be 
bomber's health.

"Plutonium itself is not a major radiation hazard," explained Dr. 
Edwin Lyman of the Union of Concerned Scientists. "You can carry 
weapons-grade plutonium around in your hands for hours and you're 
not going to sustain a severe radiation injury. And it only takes 
maybe 10 pounds to make a nuclear weapon."

As a result, foes say the amounts of plutonium that would be 
produced in commercial settings under the GNEP scenario would 
greatly increase the chances that it could fall into terrorists' 
hands.

"Do you really want more bomb-grade plutonium floating around the 
world?" asked Jim Riccio, nuclear policy analyst for the 
anti-nuclear environmental group Greenpeace.

"Reprocessing is a very dangerous technology," said Lyman. "The 
Department of Energy is in love with the idea of reprocessing. 
They at first claimed that the purpose behind GNEP was to develop 
new types of reprocessing that would not pose the same 
proliferation risks as conventional reprocessing and would not 
produce separated plutonium. But in fact none of the ideas that 
the Department of Energy proposed is new."

Current commercial reprocessing technology, like that practiced 
by the French firm Areva, extracts plutonium and uranium from 
spent fuel and produces "mixed oxide" or MOX fuel that can be 
used in conventional reactors. The remaining high-level wastes 
are "vitrified," or sealed up in glass, and  stored. But GNEP's 
goal is to also recycle that waste and turn it into fuel to be 
burned in a new generation of reactors.

New techniques touted

GNEP backers insist that new reprocessing techniques can extract 
all of the materials for fresh fuel from nuclear waste in ways 
that greatly limit proliferation threats. At a September hearing 
before a Senate panel, Dr. Alan S. Hanson of Areva, which hopes 
to be a key participant in GNEP, testified that a "phased 
approach" would avoid separation of pure plutonium, limit its 
concentration in other mixtures and develop "advanced safeguards" 
to protect it.

But a "GNEP Strategic Plan" released earlier this month by the 
Energy Department acknowledged  that "there are  limits to the 
nonproliferation benefits offered by any of the advanced chemical 
separations technologies, which generally can be modified to 
produce plutonium." Nonetheless, the plan says that GNEP's 
broader goals and security procedures will be a net plus to 
global nonproliferation efforts.

Because of that confidence, and high interest from Areva and 
other companies, the Energy Department's Spurgeon said in remarks 
prepared for the September hearing that the agency is ready to 
proceed with "commercial demonstrations of these (reprocessing) 
technologies." That triggered the selection of the 11 communities 
that had applied for GNEP study grants.

The Energy Department is looking for locations that could host a 
reprocessing facility capable of reprocessing 2,000 to 3,000 tons 
of nuclear waste a year or a new type of "advanced recycling 
reactor" that would consume nuclear fuel created in the 
reprocessing facility - or both.

In addition to Piketon, Oak Ridge and the two communities in New 
Mexico, DOE awarded grants to two communities in Idaho; Barnwell, 
S.C.; Hanford, Wash.; Morris, Ill.; Paducah, Ken.; and Savannah 
River, S.C. Like Piketon, most of the sites are at existing 
nuclear facilities.

According to Spurgeon, the site studies and other analysis are 
aimed at a decision sometime in 2008 by Energy Secretary Samuel 
Bodman on whether or not to proceed with full-fledged GNEP 
development and seek the billions of dollars in funding it would 
require.

At the September hearing, Harvard's Bunn, a leading authority on 
nuclear arms and a supporter of the expansion of conventional 
nuclear power, presented a 19-page paper that concluded that GNEP 
initiatives are headed in "precisely the wrong direction" and 
will "do more to undermine the future of nuclear energy than to 
promote it."

`A talking point, not serious analysis'

To begin with, Bunn said, reprocessing is far more expensive than 
"once through" use of nuclear fuel. A study by the National 
Academy of Sciences estimated that reprocessing the approximately 
62,000 tons of spent commercial fuel now in existence would cost 
as much as $100 billion more than placing it in a repository like 
Yucca Mountain. Like Lyman, Bunn flatly disagreed that new 
reprocessing technology removes the risk of proliferation, 
calling that notion "a talking point, not a serious analysis."

Stevens, the Energy Department spokesman, disputed that 
contention. "The policy will not move forward unless the 
technology is proliferation-resistant," he said. "If it doesn't 
work, we're going to find another way to do it. We believe, in a 
lab setting, it does work. It's a matter of ramping that up."

Bunn's paper raised a host of other questions about funding, the 
Energy Department's lack of experience in overseeing "a 
commercial-scale facility of this complexity" and the lack of 
political sustainability for a program that would require years 
of financial commitment from Congress. He told MSNBC.com he 
believes it's "very likely" GNEP will collapse before it gets 
serious funding from Congress.

Lyman, of the Union of Concerned Scientists, agreed. "This is the 
height of fiscal irresponsibility," he said.

He also argued that there are "zero" non-nuclear nations who 
would participate in GNEP out of fear of being seen as lackeys of 
the West and charged that the Bush administration is rushing GNEP 
along so that it can't easily be undone by future administrations 
and Congresses.

Not so, said Stevens. "It's a serious project. We have staffed up 
the office" and recruited Spurgeon, a former executive with USEC, 
the operator of the Piketon plant, out of retirement to lead the 
effort, he  said. 

Potential for world changing `payoff'

As for GNEP's high costs, he said, "We recognize the government 
has a role and a responsibility to invest in basic research. If 
it works, the payoff will be many times greater than the 
investment. ... It can literally change economies around the 
world."

At the September hearing on GNEP, Lyman and Bunn's objections 
were quickly brushed aside by Sen. Pete Domenici, R-N.M., one of 
the biggest backers of the nuclear industry in Congress and the 
fuel reprocessing program's chief proponent.

Domenici, then chairman of the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee 
on Energy and Water, charged that Bunn "isn't living in the same 
age I am with reference to support for nuclear power. He's still 
talking about things like we need (political) support for certain 
things, where I already think the nation is far ahead of that."
Story continues below  advertisement

Domenici's staff refused MSNBC.com's requests for an interview 
with the senator.

But GNEP has not been as warmly embraced by other members of 
Congress, and the $250 million sought by the Bush administration 
to begin work on the program is snarled in an appropriations 
battle.

Nor has the nuclear industry been a strong supporter, though that 
could be changing because of the program's perceived potential to 
solve some of the issues surrounding nuclear waste disposal.

"I support GNEP as a responsible solution to addressing our spent 
fuel needs," Domenici said at the outset of the September 
hearing. He has since introduced legislation that would 
"integrate" Yucca Mountain and GNEP to allow waste to bypass 
Yucca and be sent to a holding facility if "the secretary of 
energy determines if it can be recycled within a reasonable 
amount of time."

New interest in waste implications

The waste-handling implications caught the attention of Nevada's 
Democratic Sen. Harry Reid, now the Senate majority leader and a 
staunch foe of the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste dump. At the 
hearing, Reid said he was "pleased that we're taking another look 
at the administration's GNEP plan and pleased to see that we're 
looking particularly at the waste recycling portion of the plan."

The Nuclear Energy Industry, nuclear power's chief lobbying 
group, is showing new interest in GNEP after initially expressing 
concerns that the plan's potential for overreaching could stymie 
near-term plans for new reactors. As recently as July, NEI 
President Skip Bowman called GNEP "a distraction factor" on the 
waste issue and an NEI policy paper in August noted that viable 
reprocessing technologies are "decades away."

But in December, NEI spokesman Scott Peterson told MSNBC.com that 
there had been "a bit of a shift" in industry thinking on GNEP's 
implications for the waste problem. "It's not a shift away from a 
repository," he said. "But what I think it does recognize is the 
need we're going to have for new fuel from the 30 reactors we're 
going to have." And "you will need some definite movement toward 
the DOE taking (spent) fuel from plant sites," to dispose of it, 
as it is legally obligated to do, for U.S. nuclear expansion to 
proceed.

Echoing the Domenici bill, the GNEP strategy released Jan. 10 
notes that "once the nuclear fuel recycling center is approved to 
accept spent fuel, shipments of (spent) fuel could begin from 
utilities, which would be a significant step in providing 
confidence in our nation's ability to meet its nuclear waste 
management responsibilities."

Asked by MSNBC.com if such shipments could lead to a GNEP site 
becoming a nuclear waste dump if plans for a "recycling reactor" 
don't pan out, Spurgeon said no.

Not a `de facto permanent repository'

"We're not talking about interim storage . that would have it 
morph into a de facto permanent repository," he said during a 
conference call to unveil the strategy document. And he pledged 
that the Department of Energy would seek licensing from the 
Nuclear Regulatory Commission for its projects, even if not 
legally required to do so.

Such discussion has led some anti-nuclear activists in Piketon to 
charge that GNEP is a "secret plan" by DOE to turn the old 
Portsmouth plant into "a giant dump for commercial spent fuel," 
breaking the Yucca logjam and allowing more nuclear reactors to 
be built.

But the Southern Ohio Neighbors Group will fight the plan 
regardless, said Geoffrey Sea, a member of the group and a 
neighbor of the Piketon site.

Sea called it "an abomination to even consider this place" for 
GNEP projects for a number of cultural and environmental reasons 
and confidently predicted that the project will never happen. 
"It's very clear that the new Congress is going to kill GNEP," he 
said.

But Simonton, the Piketon civic leader, said his group would not 
advocate anything that is unsafe. "The true community leaders 
understand that taking a look at something makes sense," he said. 
"Finding out more information is never a harmful process as far 
as we're concerned."



MSNBC.com  
*****************************************************************
 46 ITAR-TASS: Federation Council passes law on state-owned nuclear holding

24.01.2007, 13.19

 MOSCOW, January 24 (Itar-Tass) -- The Federation Council passed
the law on management of property and shares of organisations
operating in the field of nuclear energy use, as well as on
introducing amendments in some legislative acts. 

The law stipulates the creation of a completely state-owned
nuclear corporation, chairman of the committee for industrial
policy Valentin Zavadnikov emphasized. 

The law permits Russian juridical persons to possess nuclear
materials, which are not designed for weaponry, nuclear plants
and nuclear material storage facilities. The president will
decree the list of such juridical persons. The law does not
embrace organisations dealing with nuclear weapons. 

The approval of the law is needed, as in fact the nuclear
industry is involved now in civil matters and commercial
activities, the committee chairman said, adding that,
“therefore, the corporatisation of the industry is inevitable.” 

       
© ITAR-TASS. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 47 Bayshore Broadcasting Corporation: Nuclear hearing today 

News for Wednesday, January 24th, 2007

Written by Shannon Snoes

The first of a two day hearing is taking place in Ottawa today.

Ontario Power Generation is asking to renew an application to
operate the Western Waste Management Facility for another ten
years.

That is where all low and intermediate level waste from the
Bruce - Darlington and Pickering Nuclear Generating Stations are
stored along with used fuel from the Bruce site in Tiverton.

OPG media spokesperson Marie Wilson says they are also seeking
approval to construct a low level waste storage building and 128
in-ground containers for intermediate level waste.

She says construction of another eight buildings for units 1 and
2 refurbishment waste have also been requested.

Wilson says the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission will take
into consideration many things when looking to offer renew the
license, including a 30 year track record of safety.

Day two of the hearing takes place in April.

Wilson says that is when the public's voice will be heard on the
matter.

Written submissions by the public have to be in to the CNSC by
March 19th.

The WWMF must renew its operating license each time it expires.

 Mix 106| 560 CFOS| Country 93| 98 the Beach| Bayshore
Broadcasting

    © 2006 Bayshore Broadcasting Corp. All Rights Reserved.
*****************************************************************
 48 New London Day: Hole In Energy Policy  

theday.com
 	
  Congress has shortchanged the agency that was going to make 
more nuclear plants possible.  
    
  By Day Staff Writer E-mail: newmedia@theday.com
  
  Published on 1/24/2007 in Editorial » Editorial

One of the key pieces in the nation's energy policy is nuclear
power. The federal energy bill passed in 2005 emphasized the
need for more nuclear power plants, and included provisions to
encourage their development after years of inactivity on that
front.

 But there's one problem. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission says
it doesn't have the funds to process applications for new
reactors, and probably won't for at least another year. While no
utilities have applied to build new plants yet, plans are being
considered for 20. Several utilities planned to submit
applications this year.

 The NRC says that due to the shortage of funds, it will have to
shelve the applications. The agency faces a $95 million, or 12
percent, cut in its budget as a result of the federal budget
impasse, according to The New York Times. While some companies
may wait, others are expected to choose other alternatives,
including coal, The Times reported.

 This is not the only obstacle to the Bush administration's
hopes for nuclear power. Plans for disposing of spent nuclear
fuel in Nevada are more out of reach than they ever were. A
commission member told the Times the Energy Department needs to
begin looking at alternatives, since it may now not be for
another 20 years before issues regarding the Yucca Mountain site
in Nevada are resolved and that facility will be ready to accept
its first shipments.

 With nobody to process applications and no place to store the
fuel, the government seems to have found another hole in its
energy policy.   
    
Privacy Policy  |  Contact Us at 1 (860) 442-2200  |  New
London, CT  |  © 1998-2007 The Day Publishing Co.   	 	 
*****************************************************************
 49 CAN: National Post: Tories 'not afraid' of nuclear, Lunn says

'No greenhouse gases'

Chris Wattie,                           

Published: Wednesday, January 24, 2007

Canadians cannot afford to shy away from nuclear power if the
country is to make any real progress in reducing greenhouse gas
emissions, Gary Lunn, the federal Minister of Natural Resources
said yesterday.

"You either believe in reducing greenhouse gases or you don't ,"
said Mr. Lunn, who spoke to the National Post editorial board
prior to a speech to the Economic Club of Toronto. "We shouldn't
be afraid to look at all of the potential energy options.

"We need clean, reliable, affordable energy to ensure that we
have our economic growth ... I think there are some very, very
good opportunities for nuclear in the future and we're not
afraid to talk about them."

The government is also on the verge of announcing a
comprehensive plan to deal with radioactive waste from nuclear
plants, he said, which could allay environmentalists' main
criticisms of nuclear power.

"We're looking at various options, which we haven't announced
... it's something that our government is seriously looking at,"
Mr. Lunn said during a question and answer session after his
lunch-hour speech. "There'll be more specifics on the exact
storage, where we put the permanent storage of nuclear waste,
but you're going to have to wait."

Two provinces are considering adding to Canada's nuclear power
supply. Ontario has said nuclear power is needed to replace
coal-fired plants, and Alberta is eyeing it as a means of
powering the oilsands.

Mr. Lunn said he was "very, very impressed" by what he saw of
the nuclear industry's facilities to deal with waste, but said
the Conservatives want to improve that system. "Previous
governments have been under pressure for years and years to do
something and refused to do. Well, I think we should talk about
it and put the resources in to get the job done," he said.

Mr. Lunn acknowledged that the decision on whether or not to use
nuclear power plants rests with the provincial governments and
would not give specifics on what incentives Ottawa might offer
to make the nuclear option more attractive. "At the end of the
day it will be up to the provinces to decide on their energy
mixes, but we will be there to support them."

Ottawa would also prefer they use Canadian technology, but it
would be up to Canada's nuclear industry to demonstrate it
offers the best deal, he said.

He took direct aim at Liberal leader Stephane Dion's publicly
stated discomfort with nuclear power, saying that the
Conservative government is willing to look at every power
generating option. "It's clean, it produces zero emissions, it
produces no greenhouse gases, and we know that Ontario has been
using nuclear energy for over 40 years," he said. "As a nation
of energy consumers we must be prepared to have an open
discussion about nuclear power."

The minister is on a cross-country speaking tour to promote the
government's renewable energy policies, announced last week by
the Prime Minister.

The Conservatives have unveiled a series of programs to fund
technologies that reduce greenhouse-gas emissions, although
skeptics say the government has only repackaged programs
launched by the former Liberal government.		 

Mr. Lunn said the three-part Tory plan is an improvement on the 
former government's green initiatives, because it is practical 
and enforceable. "We are getting the job done. In only one year, 
our government has delivered on its commitments and will continue 
to deliver results."

The government will invest federal funding in technology that 
would "clean up conventional energy," has committed itself to 
generating 4,000 megawatts of renewable energy in the next four 
years and has introduced energy efficiency programs to encourage 
ordinary Canadians to conserve.

"The largest untapped source of energy in this country ... is the 
energy we waste. So energy efficiency is very, very important."

© 2007 CanWest Interactive, a division of . All rights
*****************************************************************
 50 Knox News: Loose air hose prompts reactor shutdown

By ANDREW EDER, edera@knews.com 

January 24, 2007                                                                

A reactor at TVA’s Sequoyah Nuclear Plant in Soddy-Daisy, Tenn., 
automatically shut down Tuesday when an air supply line connected 
to a steam generator system came loose. 

TVA spokesman John Moulton said the plant systems functioned as 
designed and the shutdown posed no danger to employees or the 
public. 

About 12:45 p.m. Tuesday, the air supply line became
unfastened from a valve that controls water flow to one of the
plant’s four steam generators, causing Sequoyah’s Unit 2 reactor
to shut down automatically, Moulton said. 

He said the unit had been online for 28 days and operating at
100 percent capacity. 

Staff at the plant will review the cause of the incident and
bring the unit back online in "the near future." Moulton said
return-to-service information is competitive and TVA does not
release predictions, although the federal utility will confirm
when the reactor is running again. 

Unit 1 of the two-reactor plant near Chattanooga was unaffected
by Tuesday’s incident, Moulton said. 

More details as they develop online and in Thursday’s News
Sentinel. 

Business writer Andrew Eder may be reached at 865-342-6318.

© 2007 - Knoxville News Sentinel
*****************************************************************
 51 AdelaideNow: Liberals demand nuclear power summit
             
+ NEWS.com.au | 			

PAUL STARICK, CHIEF REPORTER 				

January 25, 2007 01:15am                                                                                Article from: <img

THE State Opposition is organising a summit on nuclear power, 
directly challenging Premier Mike Rann's stance that it will not 
be used in South Australia.                                             

The Opposition's energy spokesman, Martin Hamilton-Smith, argues 
that "it is increasingly apparent that the risks of nuclear 
power, conversion, enrichment and storage may have been 
overstated" and he has written to business and the state's three 
universities seeking support for his summit call. 

While the State Government has scoffed at Mr Hamilton-Smith's
proposal, he has already received some support to reignite the
debate. 

An issues paper he has prepared warns of "considerable doubt"
that renewable energy, such as wind and solar, "will ever be
able to meet the energy needs of this country or the world". 

Mr Hamilton-Smith says Mr Rann has ruled out nuclear power "by
edict, in haste" and with "little informed debate". 

"The reality is that if Australia at a point in the future
decides to build nuclear power plants and chooses to become
involved in conversion, enrichment and/or waste storage, SA will
need to decide whether it wants to be part of the action or
not," he says. 

"SA will need to decide whether such an industry and the
developments that flow from it are to occur in other states,
with no involvement from us." 

Mr Hamilton-Smith argues that SA is "in a unique position",
having almost 40 per cent of the world's accessible uranium
deposits. 

He has written to Adelaide's three university vice-chancellors,
Business SA, the SA Chamber of Mines and Energy and conservation
groups, asking them to consider hosting a two-day summit. 

It would consider climate change, the merits of renewable
energy, carbon emissions issues and nuclear power generation. 

Premier Mike Rann ruled out nuclear power for SA last November
on the day a federal report on uranium mining, processing and
nuclear energy was released. 

The draft report by Prime Minister John Howard's nuclear energy
taskforce suggested 25 reactors could be operating in Australia
by 2050, producing one-third of the nation's electricity. 

Mr Rann said Mr Howard clearly was "on a crusade to introduce
nuclear power into Australia" and vowed to consider special
legislation to block a nuclear plant being built in SA. 

Energy Minister Patrick Conlon told The Advertiser the private
sector was uninterested in nuclear power because of massive
establishment costs, which would result in vastly inflated power
bills. 

"The call for nuclear power from Martin Hamilton-Smith is a call
for much, much higher electricity prices," he said. 

"The only way that there will be a nuclear power station in
South Australia is if people pay at least 40 per cent more for
electricity. 

"If you don't believe me, then let's see Mr Hamilton-Smith
produce a serious investor who wants to build a nuclear power
station." 

In his issues paper, Mr Hamilton-Smith argues Mr Rann has not
outlined how he would respond to SA uranium being used for an
interstate nuclear power plant, or whether SA would become
involved in nuclear conversion or enrichment. Adelaide
University vice-chancellor Professor James McWha said Mr
Hamilton-Smith's proposal would be considered, because the
"research-intensive university" was always interested in
engaging with the community on important issues, such as climate
change. 

SA Chamber of Mines and Energy acting chief executive Andrew
Blue welcomed "independent and academic-led debate that took
emotion out of . . . the nuclear energy and climate change
question". 

Business SA chief executive officer Peter Vaughan said
furthering debate on SA's energy future was important and Mr
Hamilton-Smith's proposal was still being considered. 
						 							 		 			 				 
Copyright 2007 News Limited. All times ACDT (GMT +10:30).
*****************************************************************
 52 NRC: Security of nuclear materials

                         FR Doc E7-971 

[Federal Register: January 24, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 15)] 
[Rules and Regulations] [Page 3025-3027] From the Federal 
Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] 
[DOCID:fr24ja07-1]                         

Rules and Regulations
Federal Register

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory 
documents having general applicability and legal effect, most of 
which are keyed to and codified in the Code of Federal 
Regulations, which is published under 50 titles pursuant to 44 
U.S.C. 1510. The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the 
Superintendent of Documents. Prices of new books are listed in 
the first FEDERAL REGISTER issue of each week.

[[Page 3025]]
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 10 CFR Part 73 RIN: 3150-AH90
 
Secure Transfer of Nuclear Materials AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory 
Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is amending its 
regulations to implement requirements for secure transfer of 
nuclear materials as required by Section 656 of the Energy Policy 
Act of 2005 (EPAct), signed into law on August 8, 2005. The final 
rule implements Section 656 by specifically excepting certain 
licensees from provisions of Section 170I of the Atomic Energy 
Act (AEA) of 1954, as amended. DATES: Effective Date: The final 
rule is effective on February 23, 2007.

ADDRESSES: Publicly available documents related to this 
rulemaking may be viewed electronically on the public computers 
located at the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR), Room O1F21, One 
White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland. The 
PDR reproduction contractor will copy documents for a fee. 
Selected documents can be viewed and downloaded electronically 
via the NRC's rulemaking Web site at http://ruleforum.llnl.gov .

    Publicly available documents created or received at the NRC 
are available electronically at the NRC's Electronic Reading Room 
at http://www.nrc.gov/NRC/reading-rm/adams.html.

 From this site, the public can gain entry into the NRC's 
Agencywide Document Access and Management System (ADAMS), which 
provides text and image files of NRC's public documents. If you 
do not have access to ADAMS or if there are problems in accessing 
the documents located in ADAMS, contact the NRC Public Document 
Room (PDR) Reference staff at (800) 397-4209, (301) 415-4737, or 
by e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Frank Cardile, Office of Federal 
and State Materials and Environmental Management Programs, U.S. 
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, 
telephone (301) 415- 6185, e-mail: fpc@nrc.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background

The Energy Policy Act of 2005

    On August 8, 2005, the President signed into law the EPAct of 
2005 Pub. L. No. 109-58,119 Stat. 594 (2005). Section 656 of the 
EPAct added Section 170I to the AEA, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 2210i, 
and requires that: (a) A system be established by the Commission 
to ensure that materials transferred or received in the United 
States, by any party, pursuant to an import or export license 
issued by NRC, are accompanied by a manifest describing the type 
and amount of materials; (b) each individual receiving or 
accompanying the transfer of materials shall be subject to a 
security background check conducted by appropriate Federal 
entities; and (c) the Commission issue regulations, within one 
year after enactment of the EPAct, identifying radioactive 
materials or classes of individuals that, consistent with the 
protection of the public health and safety and the common defense 
and security, are appropriate exceptions to the requirements in 
Section 170I of the AEA. Rulemaking Considerations Related to 
Proposed Rule To Implement Section 656 of the EPAct

    In preparing the proposed rule to implement Section 656 (71 
FR 51534; August 30, 2006), the NRC determined that, based on 
existing requirements for shipping papers for radioactive 
materials already in place in Department of Transportation 
regulations and incorporated by reference in NRC regulations in 
10 CFR part 71, an appropriate system is already established to 
ensure that shipments of radioactive materials, that would be 
affected by Section 656, are accompanied by papers (i.e., a 
manifest) appropriately describing the materials being shipped. 
Thus, NRC did not include any additional requirements for 
manifesting of radioactive material shipments in the proposed 
rule.

    In addition, the NRC determined that the most appropriate and 
comprehensive approach for establishing requirements for security 
background checks is as part of the broader considerations of 
NRC's rulemaking to implement Section 652 of the EPAct. Section 
652 mandates the Commission to require fingerprinting and 
criminal history record checks for any individual who is 
permitted unescorted access to risk- significant radioactive 
material. The individuals referred to under Section 656 are a 
subgroup (i.e., those transferring radioactive material pursuant 
to an export or import license) of the larger group of 
individuals at a licensed facility, with unescorted access to 
radioactive material, and will be covered by the comprehensive 
Section 652 rulemaking. The Section 652 proposed rule is 
currently in preparation and its schedule calls for issuance of a 
proposed rule in the Fall of 2007 and a final rule in the Fall of 
2008.

    While the Section 652 rulemaking is being conducted, NRC has 
a regulatory framework for security background checks through an 
extensive system of Orders issued during 2002-2006 that includes 
requirements for background checks, including fingerprinting for 
criminal history checks, for unescorted access to radioactive 
material for certain facilities which it licenses. NRC has also 
issued Orders to licensees for shipment of radioactive material 
in quantities of concern (RAMQC). The purpose of these Orders has 
been to impose certain security measures to supplement existing 
regulations at 10 CFR part 20, and equivalent Agreement State 
regulations, for securing licensed materials from unauthorized 
access, with the intent of providing the NRC with reasonable 
assurance that the common defense and security is protected. The 
Orders note that conditions for unescorted access to 
risk-significant sources of radioactive material are governed by 
an appropriate need-to-know and by background checks as input to 
a determination concerning the trustworthiness and reliability of 
individuals who have access to the material. Most recently, in 
October 2006, NRC issued Orders to pool-type irradiator 
licensees,

[[Page 3026]]

manufacturing and distribution (M) licensees, and licensees 
making shipments of RAMQC, to specifically require fingerprinting 
and criminal history checks for unescorted access to the 
risk-significant sources of radioactive material at their 
facilities.

Issuance of Proposed Rule

    Consistent with Section 656(b) of the EPAct, the Commission 
proposed to amend NRC's regulations to except from the security 
background check requirements of Section 170I of the AEA, as 
amended, licensees who have not received NRC Orders containing 
requirements for background checks for trustworthiness and 
reliability, that include fingerprinting and criminal history 
record checks, as a prerequisite for unescorted access to 
risk-significant radioactive materials. As noted above, Orders 
restricting access based on fingerprinting and criminal history 
record checks have been issued for pool-type irradiator 
licensees, M licensees, and licensees who make shipments of 
RAMQC. These licensees can use the provisions of their existing 
Orders (or new or amended Orders) to comply with Section 170I. 
Also, if additional Orders for fingerprinting and criminal 
history checks for unescorted access to radioactive material are 
issued to licensees other than those noted here, licensees who 
receive any such new Orders would no longer be excepted from the 
security background check requirements of Section 170I.

    The rationale for the exceptions is that it is consistent 
with the system of Orders, issued to certain licensees, that the 
NRC has instituted for protection of the common defense and 
security. The materials possessed and transferred by the 
licensees who have received Orders have been deemed, during the 
process of issuance of the Orders, to be appropriate for 
immediately requiring certain security measures for unescorted 
access based on potential higher risk resulting from malevolent 
use of those materials.

    The proposed rule was published in the Federal Register on 
August 30, 2006 (71 FR 51534) as a proposed new Sec.  73.28 in 10 
CFR part 73.

II. Discussion

Summary of Public Comments on the Proposed Rule

    The public comment period closed on September 29, 2006. In 
response to the request for comments, NRC received two comment 
responses, one from the Organization of Agreement States (OAS) 
and one from the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI).

    The comment response from the OAS summarized the content of 
the NRC's proposed rulemaking and its effect on Agreement States, 
including that the proposed Agreement State Compatibility 
Category of the proposed rule would be ``NRC.'' The comment 
response from the OAS concluded by stating that the NRC approach 
in the rulemaking seemed reasonable to the OAS Executive Board.

    The comment response letter from NEI stated that NEI supports 
the proposed rule as drafted. However, NEI also stated that there 
were two areas of confusion regarding the applicability of the 
rulemaking. In particular, NEI noted that there are a number of 
power reactor licensees that were not issued additional orders, 
but that have personnel who come in contact with radioactive 
materials in transit and who are not covered by existing rules in 
10 CFR 73.57. Particularly noted were personnel in shipping and 
receiving operations located outside of the protected area who 
are considered outside of the nuclear power facility and do not 
require access to Safeguards Information. The second area of 
confusion related to a NEI concern as to where this Section 656 
rulemaking will end and where the referenced Section 652 
rulemaking, due for issuance in late 2007, will start.

    With regard to the first point raised by NEI, the 
Supplementary Information in the Federal Register Notice, issuing 
the proposed rule, stated that this Section 656 rulemaking is 
relying upon the framework of the existing system of NRC Orders, 
either in place or to be put into place, as the basis for 
codifying exceptions. This allows for a consistent approach for 
radioactive materials which NRC considers appropriate, at this 
time, for exception from the requirements of Section 170I of the 
AEA as amended by the EPAct. The materials possessed and 
transferred by licensees who have received Orders have been 
deemed, during the process of issuance of the Orders, to be 
appropriate for immediately requiring certain security measures 
for unescorted access based on potential higher risk resulting 
from malevolent use of those materials. Orders for fingerprinting 
and criminal history checks for persons at licensed facilities 
shipping RAMQC were issued in October 2006. As noted previously, 
the Section 652 rulemaking will take a more comprehensive 
approach in establishing requirements for security background 
checks for licensees, and for licensee employees, for unescorted 
access to radioactive material. To the extent that personnel at a 
nuclear power plant handle risk- significant material and are not 
currently covered by regulation and/or order with regard to 
background checks and fingerprinting, consideration can be given 
to including such licensee personnel in NRC's framework of 
orders. If such additional Orders are issued, those licensees who 
have not previously received any such Orders would no longer be 
excepted from the security background check requirements of 
Section 170I, under the provisions of this final rule.

    With regard to the second point raised by NEI, the 
Supplementary Information in the proposed rule notes that the NRC 
intends to address background checks and fingerprinting for 
criminal history record checks for licensees in a more 
comprehensive manner under the rulemaking to implement Section 
652 of the EPAct. One of the elements of that rulemaking, as 
mandated by Section 652(B)(i)(ll), will be determining 
requirements for access to quantities of radioactive material, 
subject to regulation by the Commission, that the Commission 
determines to be of such significance to the public health and 
safety or to the common defense and security as to warrant 
fingerprinting and background checks. The requirements for 
exceptions in this Section 656 rulemaking were issued as part of 
a mandate of Section 656 of the EPAct for a limited subset of 
licensee employees. If necessary, the requirements now codified 
at 10 CFR 73.28 will be revisited, and may be amended and/ or 
superseded by the more comprehensive Section 652 rulemaking. 
Summary of Revisions to Proposed Rule After review of the public 
comments, the NRC has decided to make final the approach in the 
August 30, 2006, proposed rule (i.e., to amend NRC's regulations 
to except from the security background check requirements of 
Section 170I those licensees that have not received NRC Orders 
restricting unescorted access to radioactive materials to 
individuals who have undergone background checks, for 
trustworthiness and reliability, that include fingerprinting and 
criminal history record checks). As of October 2006, Orders for 
fingerprinting and criminal history checks for unescorted access 
to radioactive materials have been issued to pool-type irradiator 
licensees, M licensees, and licensees who make shipments of 
RAMQC. Under the provisions of the final rule, if additional 
Orders for fingerprinting and criminal history checks for 
unescorted access to radioactive material are issued to licensees 
other than those noted above, licensees who receive any such new 
Orders would no longer be

[[Page 3027]]

excepted from the security background check requirements of 
Section 170I of the AEA. III. Section by Section Analysis of 
Final Rule New Sec.  73.28 has not been revised from the wording 
in the proposed rule and continues to except licensees from the 
security background check provisions of Section 170I of the AEA 
if they have not received Orders from the NRC containing 
requirements for background checks for trustworthiness and 
reliability that include fingerprinting and criminal history 
checks as a prerequisite for unescorted access to radioactive 
materials. Licensees subject to Orders are not excepted from the 
security background check provisions, and would use the 
requirements in their existing Orders to comply with Section 170I 
of the AEA.

IV. Voluntary Consensus Standards

    The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 
(Pub. L. 104-113) requires that Federal agencies use technical 
standards that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus 
standards bodies unless the use of such a standard is 
inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical. In 
this final rule, NRC is indicating specific exceptions to the 
requirements of Section 656 of the EPAct. This action does not 
constitute the establishment of a standard that establishes 
generally applicable requirements.

V. Agreement State Compatibility

    Under the ``Policy Statement on Adequacy and Compatibility of 
Agreement State Programs,'' which became effective on September 
3, 1997 (62 FR 46517), NRC program elements (including 
regulations) are placed into four compatibility categories 
(Compatibility Category A through D). In addition, NRC program 
elements also can be identified as having particular health and 
safety significance or as being reserved solely to NRC.

    The amendment to 10 CFR part 73 is a program element 
designated ``NRC'' based on implementation of the procedure in 
NRC's Management Directive 5.9, ``Adequacy and Compatibility of 
Agreement States.'' The requirements in this amendment are 
limited to providing exceptions to requirements in Section 170I 
of the AEA and are based on a system of Orders that were 
developed under NRC's authority to protect the common defense and 
security which are areas of exclusive NRC regulatory authority 
and cannot be relinquished to the Agreement States. Therefore, 
the requirements of this amendment should not be adopted by the 
Agreement States.

VI. Environmental Impact: Categorical Exclusion

    NRC has determined that this final rule is the type of action 
described in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(3)(ii) as a categorical exclusion. 
Therefore, neither an environmental impact statement nor an 
environmental assessment has been prepared for this final rule. 
VII. Paperwork Reduction Act Statement

    This final rule does not contain new or amended information 
collection requirements subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 
1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).

    Existing requirements were approved by the Office of 
Management and Budget, approval number 3150-0002.

VIII. Public Protection Notification

    The NRC may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not 
required to respond to, a request for information or an 
information collection requirement unless the requesting document 
displays a currently valid Office of Management and Budget 
control number.

IX. Regulatory Analysis

    A regulatory analysis has not been prepared for this 
regulation because it relieves restrictions and does not impose 
any additional burdens on licensees.

X. Regulatory Flexibility Certification

    As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 
U.S.C. 605(b), the Commission certifies that this rule will not 
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of 
small entities. The amendment does not impose any additional 
burdens on licensees.

XI. Backfit Analysis

    NRC has determined that the backfit rule (Sec. Sec.  50.109, 
70.76, 72.62, or 76.76) does not apply to this final rule because 
this amendment does not involve any provisions that would impose 
backfits as defined in the backfit rule. Therefore, a backfit 
analysis is not required.

XII. Congressional Review Act

    In accordance with the Congressional Review Act of 1996, the 
NRC has determined that this action is not a major rule and has 
verified this determination with the Office of Information and 
Regulatory Affairs of OMB. List of Subjects in 10 CFR Part 73

    Criminal penalties, Export, Hazardous materials 
transportation, Import, Nuclear materials, Nuclear power plants 
and reactors, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Security 
measures. 0 For the reasons set out in the preamble and under the 
authority of the AEA, as amended; the Energy Reorganization Act 
of 1974, as amended; and 5 U.S.C. 552 and 553; NRC is adopting 
the following amendment to 10 CFR part 73.

PART 73--PHYSICAL PROTECTION OF PLANTS AND MATERIALS 0

1. The authority citation for part 73 continues to read as 
follows: Authority: Secs. 53, 161, 68 Stat. 930, 948, as amended, 
sec. 147, 94 Stat. 780 (42 U.S.C. 2073, 2167, 2201); sec. 201, as 
amended, 204, 88 Stat. 1242, as amended, 1245, sec. 1701, 106 
Stat. 2951, 2952, 2953 (42 U.S.C. 5841, 5844, 2297f); sec. 1704, 
112 Stat. 2750 (44 U.S.C. 3504 note).

    Section 73.1 also issued under secs. 135, 141, Pub. L. 
97-425, 96 Stat. 2232, 2241 (42 U.S.C, 10155, 10161). Section 
73.37(f) also issued under sec. 301, Pub. L. 96-295, 94 Stat. 789 
(42 U.S.C. 5841 note). Section 73.57 is issued under sec. 606, 
Pub. L. 99-399, 100 Stat. 876 (42 U.S.C. 2169). 0 2. Section 
73.28 is added to read as follows: Sec.  73.28  Security 
background checks for secure transfer of nuclear materials.

    Licensees are excepted from the security background check 
provisions in Section 170I of the AEA if they have not received 
Orders from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission containing 
requirements for background checks for trustworthiness and 
reliability that include fingerprinting and criminal history 
record checks as a prerequisite for unescorted access to 
radioactive materials.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 18th day of January 2007. 
Annette L. Vietti-Cook, Secretary of the Commission. [FR Doc. 
E7-971 Filed 1-23-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
 
*****************************************************************
 53 Deseret News: Internet will carry Divine Strake hearing
 
[deseretnews.com] 

Wednesday, January 24, 2007                              

Utahns who can't attend tonight's hearing about the proposed
Divine Strake blast can listen to the hearing live on the
Internet.

       Gov. Jon M. Huntsman Jr. is to make introductory comments
at the hearing, scheduled from 5:30 to 8:30 p.m. at the
Capitol's West Building, Room 135. The session concerns the
federal government's proposal to blow up as much as 700 tons of
non-nuclear explosive at the Nevada Test Site. Federal officials
held public information sessions in St. George and Salt Lake
City earlier this month.

       People interested in listening can visit the DEQ's
Internet site, www.deq.utah.govand click on the "listen live"
link. 
			  		 		   

		© 2007 Deseret News Publishing Company 	 	 	 		 [ /] 	 	 	 	 	
*****************************************************************
 54 Salt Lake Tribune: Washington County takes stand against Divine Strake bomb test

By Mark Havnes 

The Salt Lake Tribune

Article Last Updated: 01/24/2007 01:53:56 AM MST

CEDAR CITY - Divine Strake is bombing with local governments in
southwestern Utah. 

    This week, the Washington County Commission became the
latest to oppose - for now - federal plans to detonate 700 tons
of ammonium nitrate in a non-nuclear blast at the Nevada Test
Site. 

    St. George and Springdale have adopted similar resolutions,
and Iron and Kane counties may follow suit. 

    "We [commissioners] are opposed to Divine Strake and any
other similarly crafted weapons experiments," Washington
County's statement reads. "We will remain opposed until the
federal government finishes a full and complete Environmental 
Impact Statement which clearly demonstrates the continued safety 
of our citizens." 

  Opposition to Divine Strake 

    Many southwestern Utah residents blame radiation fallout
from nuclear testing in the 1950s and '60s for causing cancer
and early deaths in thousands of friends and family members. 

    They worry that Divine Strake - the test proposed by the
Defense Threat Reduction Agency to help create bunker-busting
weapons - could stir up contaminated soil. 

    "We want to be careful with what happens," Commission
Chairman James Eardley said Tuesday. "We're not completely in
opposition [to testing]. [We] just want to make sure there is no
danger to the public." 

    Last week, the St. George City Council also issued a 
statement against the test - despite government pledges it would 
pose no danger. 

    "Assurances from those involved in the testing this time
around sound too familiar to those made years ago," reads the
statement. 

    Longtime Mayor Daniel McArthur said Tuesday that St. George
wants more in-depth studies before such an explosion is allowed. 

    The federal government "made us do an Environmental Impact
Statement on the Red Hills Parkway and [new] airport, so they
should have to do the same," McArthur said. "People have come to
me who worked at the test site and say they know there is
radiation in the ground where they plan the test." 

    mhavnes@sltrib.com 
    
   What's next 

    * The Kane County Commission is expected to consider a
resolution Monday opposing Divine Strake, according to
Commissioner Mark Habbeshaw. Iron County Commissioner Wayne
Smith said the issue "probably" will appear on his government's
Feb. 5 agenda.

*****************************************************************
 55 Boise Weekly: Divine Strake meetings set
 
JANUARY 24, 2007
 
BY SHEA ANDERSEN
 
Idahoans will have the opportunity to hear firsthand about the
Divine Strake experiment proposed for later this year at the
Nevada Test Site. The Idaho Congressional Delegation has won a
commitment from the U.S. Defense Threat Reduction Agency and the
National Nuclear Security Administration to hold an
informational meeting in Boise concerning the experiment. Some
believe that the activity will resuspend radioactive
contamination from atmospheric nuclear tests conducted during
the 1950s and 1960s at the Nevada Test Site and potentially
affect residents outside the experiment site. 

The agencies will hold a public information session on Sunday,
January 28, 2007, at the Grove Hotel, in the Evergreen and Cedar
rooms. The meetings are set to begin at noon and go to 2:30 p.m. 

The meeting was asked for and pushed by Idaho's Congressional
delegation, including Sen. Mike Crapo, a Republican. 

"Clearly, Idahoans need more answers concerning the Divine
Strake experiment, in large part because past tests at the
Nevada Test Site have led to the downwinder effects of
radiation," said Crapo in a prepared statement. "While there is
no definitive proof that this non-nuclear test will result in
the scattering of radioactive material, I cannot support the
Divine Strake test until I see evidence that it will not bring
harm to Idahoans." 

 Copyright 2007, Boise Weekly 
*****************************************************************
 56 FIA: USA Donates Radioactive, Chemical and Biological Detection Equipment   

FOCUS Information Agency

  Did They Managed to Drive Away Traders fromTemple   

www.focus-radio.net -->     www.focus-radio.net 
      
  24 January 2007 | 09:47 | FOCUS News Agency   
    
  Pazardzhik. The US embassy will donate chemical, biological
and radioactive detection equipment to the Bulgarian Interior
Ministry, which is estimated at USD 313,000, the US embassy
announced.

 The donation is made by the Export Control and Related Border
Security (EXBS) program. A special study will be equipped in the
town of Pazardzhik (near Sofia), where policemen will be trained
to avert trafficking in chemical, biological and radioactive
substances. 
  
  Information Agency FOCUS   
  is a member of FIBEP   
  and is certified under the   
  ISO 9001:2000 standard   
*****************************************************************
 57 Deseret News: Radiation facts may ease fears
 
[deseretnews.com] 

Wednesday, January 24, 2007                              

By Lee Benson Deseret Morning News                                                          

Blaine Howard is beside himself. Again.

       You may remember Mr. Howard. He is the retired health
physicist I introduced to readers of this column five years ago
when he took issue with something I'd written about the hazards
of nuclear waste coming to Utah.

       In a polite but firm way, Howard let me know that I was
seriously undereducated about radiation. While neither promoting
nor lobbying against the dumping of somebody else's nuclear
waste in Utah, he said that as a scientist he was disappointed
at reactions to perceived dangers of radiation that tend to be
based largely on emotion rather than fact.

       Too often, he said, hysteria grows because of anecdotal
evidence and not supportable truth.

       Howard's latest concern involves opposition to the
proposed detonation of a chemical explosive at the Nevada Test
Site called "Divine Strake."

       He refers specifically to anti-nuclear activists who have
been vocal at government hearings — and who are expected to be
in full voice again tonight at a scheduled public hearing at the
state Capitol.

       "It bothers me to hear of people worried about trivial or
nonexistent amounts of radiation," Howard said, "and what we're
talking about in this case is a level of radiation so small it
should realistically be called zero."

       He went on to explain:

       "According to quotes from the (government's) official
draft assessment, the most radiation a person could receive
standing next to the test site boundary during the explosion is
estimated to be 0.006 to 0.007 millirem, while off-site
populated areas would have an exposure two to five times lower
still. That is 40 to 100 times lower than the 0.1 millirem level
established by the EPA as allowable exposure (at the Nevada Test
Site) under any conditions."

       Layman's translation: "The result is zero exposure."

       "Doesn't the public know that they are getting radiation
of approximately 100 to 150 millirems per year just from
background radiation in Utah — that's radioactive materials from
the soil, in building materials and from cosmic rays?" said
Howard. "That's 60 times the .006 cited for Divine Strake every
day."

       "Don't they realize that a cross-country trip in an
airliner could get them about five extra millirems? Don't they
know that a dental X-ray exposure is about 100 millirems?"

       Further, the physicist said that any Nevada soil that
might be transported to Utah as the result of Divine Strake
would contain an increase in radioactivity also too small to
measure — because any radioactive materials lingering from
atmospheric nuclear blasts in the 1950s and 1960s have decayed
to inconsequential levels.

       "We should not be concerned about an explosion that would
only throw ordinary dirt into the air," he said.

       As always, the gentlemanly Mr. Howard stressed that his
only agenda in the N-debate is to do all he can as a physicist
to discourage fear of trivial amounts of radiation and let the
public know that nuclear is a viable and safe energy option as
opposed to an evil one.

       "We need to know the truth," he said. "Then act
accordingly."

       I, for one, think he makes a convincing case. Again.

Lee Benson's column runs Sunday, Monday, Wednesday and Friday.
Please send e-mail to benson@desnews.comand faxes to
801-237-2527. 			  		 		 	 	 		

© 2007 Deseret News Publishing Company
*****************************************************************
 58 hidden costs of nuclear waste: Straightgoods.com
 
Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2007 21:17:12 -0600 (CST)

X-Sender-Host-Name: chumbly.math.missouri.edu
X-DSPAM-Result: mail; result="Innocent"; class="Innocent"; probability=0.0000; confidence=1.00; signature=N/A
X-Spam-Class: HAM-VERY

from: http://www.straightgoods.ca/ViewFeature7.cfm?REF=54
Hidden costs of nuclear energy

We have no way to dispose of nuclear waste.

Dateline: Tuesday, January 23, 2007

by Charles Caccia

Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty might have hoped that the issue of burying
nuclear waste would remain, um, buried. But it shot back to the surface
when federal Liberal Leader Stiphane Dion said this week that he has yet to
see a convincing disposal plan for nuclear waste. Mr. Dion is right to
raise this fundamental issue, especially before Mr. McGuinty proceeds with
a megaplan to build more nuclear plants and create more radioactive nuclear
waste.

Nuclear waste disposal is a federal responsibility. Ontario is not the only
province with nuclear waste waiting for disposal. New Brunswick and Quibec
have the same problem, but Ontario has most of the 1.8 million bundles of
nuclear waste stored temporarily in large water pools at power plants.
Since November of 2005, when the Nuclear Waste Management Organization
(NWMO) delivered a report about disposal options, the matter has been
waiting for a final decision from the federal government. The question is
not just finding communities willing to accept nuclear waste disposal sites
in their midst, but also whether Canadians are willing to accept the
transport of nuclear waste through their communities to the final
destination.

The International Atomic Energy Agency, in its l995 report on nuclear
power, observed that "nuclear waste should be treated in a manner not to
impose too heavy a burden on future generations." But what yardstick should
be applied in determining "too heavy a burden"?

The Seaborn Panel concluded in 1998 that, while technical difficulties can
be overcome in finding the appropriate burial technology, a thorny social
and political issue is posed by reluctance (or downright opposition) to
accepting nuclear waste in one's backyard. The panel's report raised so
many questions that, in 2002, the federal government created the NWMO. Its
mandate: to conduct a study of approaches for the long-term management of
used nuclear fuel, to recommend a preferred approach to Ottawa, and to
implement the approach approved by the government.

26e706b.jpgThe Nuclear Fuel Waste Act requires the NWMO to study at least
three methods: deep geological disposal, storage at nuclear reactor sites,
and centralized storage, either above or below ground, so as to accommodate
the 1.8 million used nuclear fuel bundles and the 85,000 additional bundles
that are generated each year.

The act requires nuclear waste producers Ontario Power Generation,
Hydro-Quibec, New Brunswick Power and Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd. to
create trust funds to ensure money is available to implement the selected
approach. The initial payments required by the act from the four companies
totaled $550 million, to be followed by annual increments of $110 million.
The NWMO will use these funds in the implementation phase.

Nobody actually knows the full cost of the nuclear power cycle, from start
to decommissioning and waste disposal. All we know for sure is that the
proponents of nuclear energy are usually to be found at the provincial
level, while the responsibility for safe, final burial of nuclear waste
rests with the federal government.....

whole article at: http://www.straightgoods.ca/ViewFeature7.cfm?REF=54

Penney Kome, author and journalist
http://penneykome.ca
Editor, Straight Goods, http://straightgoods.com

[demime 1.01d removed an attachment of type application/octet-stream which had a name of 26e706b.jpg]
*****************************************************************
 59 reviewjournal.com: Nuke industry mindful of Reid
 
  Jan. 24, 2007

Association won't push bills to speed work on waste repository
	 
By STEVE TETREAULT STEPHENS WASHINGTON BUREAU
	
WASHINGTON -- Mindful of the powers wielded by Senate Majority 
Leader Harry Reid of Nevada, the leading nuclear industry 
association does not plan to push Congress for bills this year to 
speed waste disposal at Yucca Mountain, the group's chief 
lobbyist said Tuesday. 

"We are frustrated by the schedule. The Department of Energy is 
way behind," said Alex Flint, senior vice president of government 
affairs at the Nuclear Energy Institute. 

"But we also are respectful and realistic of the influence of
Senator Reid," Flint said at an NEI conference for industry
executives. 

"It is going to be extremely hard to use legislation to
accelerate the schedule at Yucca Mountain" because Reid has
"extraordinary authority," he added. 

Speaking to reporters afterward, Flint added, "A fight with
Senator Reid right now is not in our best interests" because NEI
also wants to nurture policies that encourage new nuclear plant
construction. 

Flint left a door open for possible breakthroughs with Reid. "We
are working real hard to find solutions for our used fuel. I
don't want to take anything off the table," he said. "I would
like to work with Senator Reid as well as our supporters to see
if we can come to some accommodations." 

Flint told industry officials NEI will work to get the Energy
Department enough money from Congress to meet a June 30, 2008
application deadline for a Yucca Mountain repository, the latest
goal for a project that missed a 1998 opening and other
deadlines since then. 

"Our eggs are in that basket," Flint said. 

Speaking later at the conference, a Department of Energy
official hinted that DOE's latest repository effort could be its
last if it fails to meet the latest application deadline. 

"We need to deliver by 2008 or else there will be a substantial
restructuring of the program, and perhaps a new direction," said
Christopher Kouts, a senior manager in the Office of Civilian
Radioactive Waste Management. "My sense is that we will
deliver." 

Kouts said afterward he did not know how the repository project
might be changed if DOE falls short. 

"I just think that everybody knows we need to deliver this time
and that is what we are driving very hard to do," Kouts said. "I
do think that people are very impatient with the program." 

In his presentation, Flint provided a glimpse of NEI's efforts
in the Democrat-controlled Congress. 

Flint said NEI lobbyists are expanding outreach to Democrats and
to junior members of Congress. He said he was encouraged that
most lawmakers generally have become accepting of nuclear power. 

"Congress has become de facto neutral on issues affecting our
industry," Flint said. 

For instance, Flint said, there may not be enough votes in
Congress to speed Yucca Mountain, but on the other hand there
are not enough votes to repeal the 1982 nuclear waste law that
underpins the project. 

"So the federal policy and the federal program will continue
indefinitely until there is an agreement on some other course,
and I don't know if there is a consensus on another course,"
Flint said. 

As Senate majority leader, Reid has said bills that would help
the Energy Department obtain permits and accelerate spending for
Yucca Mountain will not be brought up for votes. 

Nonetheless, Sen. Larry Craig, R-Idaho, has said he and Sen.
Pete Domenici, R-N.M., plan to reintroduce a bill to allow
military nuclear waste to be shipped to Yucca Mountain starting
in 2010 and commercial spent fuel to be stored there in
above-ground casks in 2011. 

DOE officials have said their plans don't call for nuclear waste
to arrive at Yucca Mountain, 100 miles northwest of Las Vegas,
until 2017 at the earliest, and probably three or more years
later. 	   

Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal, 1997 - 2007
 Stephens Media GroupPrivacy Statement
*****************************************************************
 60 BBC: Clean up begins at Dounreay plant
 
Last Updated: Wednesday, 24 January 2007
 
[Dounreay with cows in the foreground]

Up to 400 boreholes are being drilled

One of the "biggest clean up challenges in the world" has begun 
at the Dounreay nuclear complex in Caithness. 

Up to 400 boreholes are being drilled around the site's waste 
shaft in the biggest step so far towards its eventual clean out. 

The project will prevent large volumes of ground water flowing 
into the shaft during waste retrieval and becoming contaminated. 

The work also aims to reduce the risk of leakage. 

The work has started as managers at Dounreay reassured the public 
that there is no cause for concern after the most radioactive 
particle to date was found on nearby Sandside Beach. 

It is the fourth to be discovered in three days bringing the 
total to 81. 

*****************************************************************
 61 Reid: WE SHOULD WORK TOGETHER TO TAKE AMERICA IN A NEW DIRECTION

: 01/23/2007
 					 						 					 				 				 Washington, DC—Senate Majority
Leader Harry Reid of Nevada and Speaker Nancy Pelosi today
released the following statement on President Bush’s sixth
State of the Union Address. 

“Congress has demonstrated in the last three weeks that great
things happen for the American people when we work together. In
his sixth State of the Union Address, President Bush once again
talked about many of the issues facing our country. It is long
past time to stop talking about our problems and start working
to solve them. The Congress is delivering results, and doing it
in a new way - by reaching across the aisle and putting the
American people first. Tonight, we welcomed President Bush's
overtures of bipartisanship and we hope to begin working with
him to move our country in a new direction. “Energy
independence is a national security issue and an economic
security issue. President Bush's goals for energy independence
are commendable, but we now must get straight to work on a real
national energy policy. In Congress, we have already begun work
in earnest on renewable fuels, on global warming, and on
shifting energy tax incentives away from Big Oil. We ask the
President to join us to take real steps forward.

“Unfortunately, tonight the President demonstrated he has not
listened to Americans' single greatest concern: the war in Iraq.
The overwhelming majority of Americans, military leaders, and a
bipartisan coalition in Congress oppose the President's plan to
escalate the war. Democrats, Republicans, and the bipartisan
Iraq Study Group have offered the President a plan to end our
open-ended commitment to Iraq, transition the U.S. mission, and
begin the phased redeployment of American troops. While the
President continues to ignore the will of the country, Congress
will not ignore this President's failed policy. His plan will
receive an up-or-down vote in both the House and the Senate, and
we will continue to hold him accountable for changing course in
Iraq. “When it comes to health care, we welcome the
President's commitment to help the 47 million people living
without health care and the millions more in danger of losing
it. However, the President's plan falls short of meeting the
health care challenge. Health care is a crisis in costs and
coverage, and the President's plan will make both fronts worse
for millions of Americans. “Last November, Americans asked all
of us in Washington to work together. Democrats will continue to
take America in a new direction by making our nation energy
secure, improving access to affordable health care, cutting
costs for middle class families, and working to end the war in
Iraq.� 

Reno Bruce R. Thompson Courthouse & Federal Bldg 400 S. Virginia 
St, Site 902 Reno, NV 89501 Phone: 775-686-5750 Fax: 775-686-5757                         
[ /]                          Las Vegas Lloyd D. George Building 
333 Las Vegas Boulevard South, Suite 8016 Las Vegas, NV 89101 
Phone: 702-388-5020 Fax: 702-388-5030                         [ 
/]                          Carson City 600 East William St, #302 
Carson City, NV 89701 Phone: 775-882-REID (7343) Fax: 
775-883-1980                         [ /]                          
Washington, DC 528 Hart Senate Office Bldg Washington, DC 20510 
Phone: 202-224-3542 Fax: 202-224-7327 Toll Free for Nevadans: 
1-866-SEN-REID (736-7343) 
*****************************************************************
 62 LasVegasNOW.com: Reid's Leadership in Senate Could Affect Yucca Mountain's Future

News for Las Vegas, Nevada - 

Harry Reid's leadership in the Senate may have an effect on the
future of Yucca Mountain. 

The leading nuclear industry association says it will stop
trying to push bills on Yucca Mountain through Congress, with
Reid as the majority leader. 

The Nuclear Energy Institute says it realized it would be hard
to do given Reid's long time opposition to yucca mountain. 

Senator Reid's office provided this statement on the institute's
announcement: 

"We have to be vigilant, just because Yucca Mountain is in
trouble doesn't mean that they are not going to continue to do
all kinds of crafty things to take our eyes off the prize. We
have our eyes on the prize, Yucca Mtn. has been bad for Nevada,
it's bad for this country." 

The Yucca Mountain Nuclear Waste Repository would house
radioactive waste from this country's nuclear power plants. 

The Department of Energy says it wouldn't be ready until about
2020 at the earliest.   

      All content © Copyright 2000 - 2007 WorldNow and KLAS. All
Rights Reserved.
*****************************************************************
 63 AP Wire: Report questions Sandia lab charge card spending

01/24/2007 | 

 Associated Press 

ALBUQUERQUE - Sandia National Laboratories employees in
California used company charge cards to make $374,286 worth of
questionable purchases, federal investigators say. 

The purchases - between January and November 2005 - included
items from an online adult novelty store, catered meals,
massagers, movie tickets, coffee mugs and Sandia souvenir
apparel, according a report by the U.S. Energy Department's
inspector general. 

"We concluded that Sandia-CA's internal controls did not ensure
that purchases made using procurement cards were in accordance
with applicable policies and procedures," according to the Jan.
18 report. 

Sandia California engineers support Lawrence Livermore National
Laboratory's work on maintaining the nation's nuclear weapons
stockpile and work on homeland security projects, automotive
fuel efficiency and other work. 

Mike Janes, a spokesman for Sandia California based in
Livermore, a suburb about 50 miles east of San Francisco, did
not dispute the inspector general's findings. But he said
Wednesday the company might disagree with some characterizations
in the report. 

For example, he confirmed that the employee who had made the
purchase at the adult store had mistakenly used the Sandia
credit card. But, he said, the worker reported it to his
managers and reimbursed Sandia long before the inspector general
began his audit. 

"Obviously we take these kinds of findings seriously and we do
have a number of internal controls and reports to ensure there's
reasonable assurance that our procurement card holders are
adhering to policy," Janes said. 

Sandia conducts internal audits of the program every other year,
and limits the number and types of merchants where the cards can
be used, he said. 

"Based on the inspector general's report, we're certainly going
to be looking at those and beefing those up where appropriate,"
Janes said. 

The report found that managers at Sandia's California operations
approved 571 transactions worth $272,009 that lacked the
required descriptions of the items purchased. 

Workers also bought restricted items without required advance
permission, and those purchases were approved by managers
without that permission, the report said. 

Employees and visitors also might have inappropriately benefited
from $102,277 worth of questionable items, the inspector general
said. That included 218 purchases of meals worth $89,649 and 56
purchases of such items as massagers, water bottles and coins
totaling $12,628, the report said. 

Federal policy prohibits using government funds to pay for meals
unless the person is on official travel. 

The inspector general recommended Sandia look into how much of
the $374,286 should be reimbursed. 

Although questionable purchases were only a small amount of the
total, actions could be taken to decrease the risk of waste or
abuse in the future, the report said. 

Investigators reviewed all 21,568 card transactions, worth $12.7
million, during the 11-month period. Of those, investigators
found 845 were questionable. 

The inspector general said there are about 400 employees at
Sandia's California operations - or 44 percent - who have
company credit cards, most with a spending limit of $5,000 per
transaction and $25,000 per month. 

"We do not believe this is consistent with guidance pertaining
to procurement card internal controls, which calls for the
number of procurement card users to be limited to the minimum
necessary to carry out activity missions," the inspector general
said. 

The procurement card program "was established to simplify the
procurement of low value, commercially available goods and
services without going through a more protracted and costly
competitive procurement process," the report said. 

Los Alamos National Laboratory's purchase card program came
under scrutiny in 2002 after lab officials uncovered $2,500 in
improper purchases. Documents showed the cards were used by
employees to get cash at a casino and shop at department stores.

*****************************************************************
 64 SF New Mexican: DOE told to speed up efforts to move Los Alamos nuclear waste

 Wed Jan 24, 2007 5:58 pm

By ASSOCIATED PRESS

LOS ALAMOS, N.M. (AP) - A independent federal agency that 
oversees safety at nuclear weapons facilities says high-risk 
radioactive waste at Los Alamos National Laboratory needs to be 
moved soon or stored more safely.

Several hundred drums of the highest-risk waste sit amid 20,000
drums of less radioactive waste in temporary aboveground storage
domes, said A.J. Eggenberger, chairman of the Defense Nuclear
Facilities Safety board. About 320 drums contain about a third
of the radioactivity in the inventory, he said.

Accident scenarios involving the drums would have "very high
consequences because of their significant radioactive material
inventory, the proximity of the storage area to the (lab)
boundary and the lack of robust engineered controls to mitigate
or prevent these scenarios," he wrote Energy Secretary Samuel
Bodman on Jan. 18.

His letter asked for an outline of the Department of Energy's
plan to expedite shipments of the highly radioactive drums.

Failing that, he said, Los Alamos lab should take "urgent 
actions" to improve the safety of the storage at its radioactive 
waste dump site, Area G.

The DOE is still working on a plan to ensure Los Alamos will
safely handle the waste, said Megan Barnett, a department
spokeswoman. The DOE hopes to begin moving the waste this
summer, she said.

"It's a large-scale movement, and we want to ensure we're doing
it right," she said.

Watchdog groups say delays add to the risks.

"How long is this going to languish?" said Joni Arends of
Concerned Citizens for Nuclear Safety. "What is going on with
the management at LANL that this can't get done?"

Lab officials had hoped to finish sending the most radioactive
waste to the DOE's underground nuclear dump, the Waste Isolation
Pilot Plant near Carlsbad, by the end of 2006.

However, lab environmental manages said last summer that the
program _ already two years behind schedule _ would be delayed
an additional year because Los Alamos lacked adequate facilities
to package the highest risk waste for shipment.		 	   	 	 	 		
 		   			 		   	 
Privacy Policy / Terms of Use | ©2007, Santa Fe New Mexican
*****************************************************************
 65 Hanford News: EnergySolutions buys nuclear services company
 
This story was published Wednesday, January 24th, 2007 

By the Herald staff 

EnergySolutions has purchased Parallax, an environmental cleanup, 
engineering and management company based in Germantown, Md., that 
provides services to the nuclear industry. 

EnergySolutions includes the former Duratek and BNG America 
operations and their contracts at the Hanford nuclear 
reservation. 

The acquisition of Parallax will help provide a full range of
services across the nuclear fuel cycle, according to
EnergySolutions. The founder and chief executive of Parallax,
Margie Lewis, will serve as president of EnergySolutions'
federal services division, which includes 150 employees
associated with Hanford.

 
© 2007 Tri-City Herald. All rights reserved.


*****************************************************************
 66 DOE: Office of Fossil Energy; Ultra-Deepwater Advisory Committee: 
 
                         FR Doc E7-973 
[Federal Register: January 24, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 15)] 
[Notices] [Page 3127-3128] From the Federal Register Online via 
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr24ja07-56]                         
 
Solicitation of Nominations for Appointment as a Member to the 
Ultra- Deepwater Advisory Committee AGENCY: Department of Energy.
 
ACTION: Notice.
 
SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Fossil 
Energy is soliciting nominations for candidates to serve as 
members of the Ultra- Deepwater Advisory Committee. The Advisory 
Committee shall advise the Secretary of Energy on the development 
and implementation of programs under Subtitle J, Section 999 of 
the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPACT) related to ultra-deepwater 
natural gas and other petroleum resources and review and provide 
written comments on the annual plan as described in this subtitle 
of the EPACT. The membership of the Advisory Committee must be in 
accordance with the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee 
Act and some members of the Advisory Committee may be appointed 
as special Government employees of the Department of Energy.
 
 
DATES: Nominations must be received by February 2, 2007.
 
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For information regarding this 
Request for Nominations please contact Ms. Elena Melchert, Mr. 
Bill Hochheiser, or Mr. James Slutz, Designated Federal Official 
(DFO), Ultra-Deepwater Advisory Committee, at 
ultradeepwater@hq.doe.gov or (202) 586-5600. Complete text of 
Subtitle J, Section 999 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 can be 
found on the DOE Office of Fossil Energy Web site at 
http://www.fe.doe.gov/programs/oilgas/advisorycommittees/UltraDee 
pwater.html .
 
 
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background: Under Subtitle J, Section 
999, the Secretary of Energy is required to carry out a program 
of research, development, demonstration, and commercial 
application of technologies for ultra- deepwater and 
unconventional natural gas and other petroleum resource 
exploration and production, including addressing the technology 
challenges for small producers, safe operations, and 
environmental mitigation (including reduction of greenhouse gas 
emissions and sequestration of carbon). The activities should 
maximize the value of natural gas and other petroleum resources 
of the United States by increasing the supply
 
[[Page 3128]] of such resources through reducing the cost and 
increasing the efficiency of exploration for and production of 
such resources while improving safety and minimizing 
environmental impacts. In support of this subtitle, the Secretary 
will contract with a corporation that is structured as a program 
consortium [REF: Energy Policy Act of 2005, Pub. L. No. 109-58, 
Sec.  999B, 119 Stat. 917-21] to administer the activities 
outlined above.
 
The program should include improving safety and minimizing 
environmental impacts of activities involving ultra-deepwater 
architecture and technology, including drilling to formations in 
the Outer Continental Shelf to depths greater than 15,000 feet.
 
Projects should focus on the development and demonstration of 
individual exploration and production technologies as well as 
integrated systems technologies including new architectures for 
production in ultra- deepwater (water depths greater than or 
equal to 1500 meters).
 
The Secretary is also required to prepare an annual plan that 
describes the ongoing and prospective activities of the program.
 
In May 2006, the Secretary established the Ultra-Deepwater 
Advisory Committee to advise the Department on the development 
and implementation of programs related to ultra-deepwater natural 
gas and other petroleum resources, and to review and comment on 
the annual plan.
 
Qualifications for membership of this committee include: (A) 
Individuals with extensive research experience or operational 
knowledge of offshore natural gas and other petroleum exploration 
and production; (B) individuals broadly representative of the 
affected interests in ultra-deepwater natural gas and other 
petroleum production, including interests in environmental 
protection and safe operations; (C) no individuals who are 
Federal employees; and (D) no individuals who are board members, 
officers, or employees of the program consortium [REF: Energy 
Policy Act of 2005, Pub. L. No. 109-58, Sec.  999D(a)(2), 119 
Stat. 922]. How to Apply: Candidates who wish to be considered 
for appointment to the Committee must provide the requested 
information by February 2, 2007. The format to be used for 
nomination is a resume that addresses the specific qualification 
criteria stated in Section 999D(a)(2) of the EPACT and other 
information. Details and specifications for preparing the resume 
are summarized below and can be found at 
http://www.fe.doe.gov/programs/oilgas/advisorycommittees/UltraDee 
pwater.html .
 
Resume must address all the following: (Incomplete resumes will 
not be considered): Full name; Professional Title (if 
applicable); Employment Affiliation; Address; Phone; E-mail; 
Organization Being Represented, if applicable; Organization 
Address; Organization Phone Number; Organization website address; 
Brief description of organization being represented; Education; 
Professional Experience related to research or operational 
knowledge of offshore natural gas and other petroleum resource 
exploration and production, and related experience broadly 
associated with the affected interests in ultra-deepwater natural 
gas and other petroleum resource production, including interests 
in environmental protection and safe operations; Affiliations and 
Awards; Contributions to the Committee: please provide a 
statement that highlights the key contributions you hope to make 
if appointed to the Committee; Relationship to the program 
consortium [REF: Energy Policy Act of 2005, Pub. L. No. 109-58, 
Sec.  999B, 119 Stat. 917-21], please provide a statement that 
highlights your degree of involvement with this organization, 
especially include any leadership and/or strategic planning 
activities, note that only board members, officers, and employees 
of the program consortium are ineligible for appointment to this 
Committee.
 
In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act [REF: 5 
U.S.C. App. 2], this committee's membership will be balanced in 
terms of the points of view represented. All resumes must be 
received by February 2, 2007. Candidates may use the form found 
at 
http://www.fe.doe.gov/programs/oilgas/advisorycommittees/UltraDee 
pwater.html

 
to address the required resume elements. Candidates who wish to 
be considered for appointment to the Committee must submit a 
resume via one of the following methods.
 
1. E-mail to UltraDeepwater@hq.doe.gov (with resume embedded 
within the body of the e-mail message; no attachment), 2. 
Facsimile to 202/586-6221, Attn: UDAC Nomination, 3. Overnight 
delivery service to: U.S. Department of Energy, Mail Stop FE-30, 
1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585. No resumes 
should be sent via the U.S. Postal Service due to extensive 
security processing that can damage documents and result in 
extensive delays.
 
4. Resume Submission Online at 
http://www.fe.doe.gov/programs/oilgas/advisorycommittees/UltraDee 
pwater.html .
 
For security reasons, no email attachments are allowed, nor will 
they be opened if included.
 
The closing date for receipt of resumes is February 2, 2007.
 
All resumes received will be acknowledged within 10 working days 
from date of receipt. Members will have their travel expenses 
reimbursed, but their time will not be compensated. Some members 
of the Advisory Committee may be appointed as special Government 
employees of the Department of Energy. Questions regarding the 
nomination process should be directed to B. Hochheiser or E. 
Melchert at 202/586-5600. Issued in Washington, DC on January 18, 
2007.
 
Rachel M. Samuel, Deputy Advisory Committee, Management Officer.
 
[FR Doc. E7-973 Filed 1-23-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P

 
*****************************************************************
 67 DOE: Office of Fossil Energy; Unconventional Resources Technology 
 
                         FR Doc E7-976 
[Federal Register: January 24, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 15)] 
[Notices] [Page 3128-3130] From the Federal Register Online via 
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr24ja07-57]                         
 
Advisory Committee: Solicitation of Nominations for Appointment 
as a Member to the Unconventional Resources Technology Advisory 
Committee AGENCY: Department of Energy.
 
ACTION: Notice.
 
SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Fossil 
Energy is soliciting nominations for candidates to serve as 
members of the Unconventional Resources Technology Advisory 
Committee. The Advisory Committee shall advise the Secretary of 
Energy on the development and implementation of programs under 
Subtitle J, Section 999 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPACT) 
related to onshore unconventional natural gas and other petroleum 
resources, and review and provide written comments on the annual 
plan as also described in this subtitle of the EPACT. The 
membership of the Advisory Committee must be in accordance with 
the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act and some 
members of the Advisory Committee may be appointed as special 
Government employees of the Department of Energy.
 
 
DATES: Nominations must be received by February 2, 2007.
 
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For information regarding this 
Request for Nominations please contact Ms. Elena
 
[[Page 3129]] Melchert, Mr. Bill Hochheiser, or Mr. James Slutz, 
Designated Federal Official (DFO), Unconventional Resources 
Technology Advisory Committee, at 
UnconventionalResources@hq.doe.gov or (202) 586-5600. Complete 
text of Subtitle J, Section 999 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 
can be found on the DOE Office of Fossil Energy Web site at 
http://www.fe.doe.gov/programs/oilgas/advisorycommittees/Unconven 
tionalResources.html .
 
 
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background: Under Subtitle J, Section 
999, the Secretary of Energy is required to carry out a program 
of research, development, demonstration, and commercial 
application of technologies for ultra- deepwater and 
unconventional natural gas and other petroleum resource 
exploration and production, including addressing the technology 
challenges for small producers, safe operations, and 
environmental mitigation (including reduction of greenhouse gas 
emissions and sequestration of carbon). The activities should 
maximize the value of natural gas and other petroleum resources 
of the United States by increasing the supply of such resources 
through reducing the cost and increasing the efficiency of 
exploration for and production of such resources while improving 
safety and minimizing environmental impacts. In support of this 
subtitle, the Secretary will contract with a corporation that is 
structured as a program consortium [REF: Energy Policy Act of 
2005, Pub. L. No. 109-58, Sec.  999B, 119 Stat. 917-21] to 
administer the activities outlined above.
 
The program should include improving safety and minimizing 
environmental impacts of activities onshore unconventional 
natural gas and other petroleum resource exploration and 
production technology. Projects should focus on areas including 
advanced coalbed methane, deep drilling, natural gas production 
from tight sands, natural gas production from gas shales, 
stranded gas, innovative exploration and production techniques, 
enhanced recovery techniques, and environmental mitigation of 
unconventional natural gas and other petroleum resources 
exploration and production. The Secretary is also required to 
prepare an annual plan that describes the ongoing and prospective 
activities of the program.
 
In May 2006, the Secretary established the Unconventional 
Resources Technology Advisory Committee to advise the Department 
on the development and implementation of programs related to 
unconventional natural gas and other petroleum resources, and to 
review and comment on the annual plan.
 
Qualifications for membership of this committee include: (A) 
Employees or representatives of independent producers of natural 
gas and other petroleum, including small producers; (B) 
individuals with extensive research experience or operational 
knowledge of unconventional natural gas and other petroleum 
resource exploration and production; (C) individuals broadly 
representative of the affected interests in unconventional 
natural gas and other petroleum resource exploration and 
production, including interests in environmental protection and 
safe operations; (D) individuals with expertise in the various 
geographic areas of potential supply of unconventional onshore 
natural gas and other petroleum in the United States; (E) no 
individuals who are Federal employees; and (F) no individuals who 
are board members, officers, or employees of the program 
consortium [REF: Energy Policy Act of 2005, Pub. L. No. 109-58, 
Sec.  999D(b)(2), 119 Stat 922-23].
 
How to Apply: Candidates who wish to be considered for 
appointment to the Committee must provide the required 
information by February 2, 2007. The format to be used for 
nomination is a resume that addresses the specific qualification 
criteria stated in Section 999D(b)(2) of the EPACT and other 
information. Details and specifications for preparing the resume 
are summarized below and can be found at 
http://www.fe.doe.gov/programs/oilgas/advisorycommittees/Unconven 
tionalResources.html .
 
Resume must address the following: (Incomplete resumes will not 
be considered): Full name; Professional Title (if applicable); 
Employment Affiliation; Address; Phone; E-mail; Organization 
Being Represented, if applicable; Organization Address; 
Organization Phone Number; Organization Web site address; Brief 
description of organization being represented; Education; 
Professional Experience related to employment or representation 
of independent producers of natural gas and other petroleum, 
including small producers, research experience or operational 
knowledge of unconventional natural gas and other petroleum 
resource exploration and production, experience broadly 
representative of the affected interests in unconventional 
natural gas and other petroleum resource exploration and 
production, including interests in environmental protection and 
safe operations, expertise in the various geographic areas of 
potential supply of unconventional onshore natural gas and other 
petroleum in the United States; Affiliations and Awards; 
Contributions to the Committee: please provide a statement that 
highlights the key contributions you hope to make if appointed to 
the Committee; Relationship to the program consortium [REF: 
Energy Policy Act of 2005, Pub. L. No. 109-58, Sec.  999B, 119 
Stat. 917-21], please provide a statement that highlights your 
degree of involvement with this organization, especially include 
any leadership and or strategic planning activities, note that 
only board members, officers, and employees of the program 
consortium are ineligible for appointment to this Committee.
 
In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act [REF: 5 
U.S.C. App. 2], this committee's membership will be balanced in 
terms of the points of view represented. All resumes must be 
received by February 2, 2007. Candidates may use the form found 
at 
http://www.fe.doe.gov/programs/oilgas/advisorycommittees/Unconven 
tionalResources.html to address the required resume elements. 
Candidates who wish to be considered for appointment to the 
Committee must submit a resume via one of the following methods.
 
1. E-mail to UnconventionalResources@hq.doe.gov (with resume 
embedded within the body of the e-mail message; no attachment.), 
2. Facsimile to 202/586-6221, Attn: URTAC Nomination, 3. 
Overnight delivery service to: U.S. Department of Energy, Mail 
Stop FE-30, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585. 
No resumes should be sent via the U.S. Postal Service due to 
extensive security processing that can damage documents and 
result in extensive delays.
 
4. Resume Submission Online at 
http://www.fe.doe.gov/programs/oilgas/advisorycommittees/Unconven 
tionalResources.html .
 
For security reasons, no e-mail attachments are allowed, nor will 
they be opened if included.
 
The closing date for receipt of resumes is February 2, 2007.
 
All resumes received will be acknowledged within 10 working days 
from date of receipt. Members will have their travel expenses 
reimbursed, but their time will not be compensated. Some members 
of the Advisory Committee may be appointed as special Government 
employees of the Department of Energy. Questions regarding the 
nomination process should be directed to B. Hochheiser or E. 
Melchert at 202/586-5600.
 
 
[[Page 3130]] Issued in Washington, DC on January 18, 2007.
 
Rachel M. Samuel, Deputy Advisory Committee, Management Officer.
 
[FR Doc. E7-976 Filed 1-23-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P

 
*****************************************************************
 68 KnoxNews: Will '07 budget stall Y-12 modernization?
					
By FRANK MUNGER, munger@knews.com 

January 24, 2007                                                                

A lot has been said about the potentially devastating impacts 
that a continuing resolution could have on Oak Ridge National 
Laboratory, with reports that congressional budget restraints for 
2007 could force the shutdown of the Spallation Neutron Source 
and stall other key research activities. 

A worst-case scenario, according to ORNL officials, would require 
900 layoffs. 

"I'm not trying to be Chicken Little," ORNL communications chief 
Billy Stair said, although a few observers did suggest the lab 
was trying to scare people to drum up support. 

What hasn't been discussed in much detail is the potential impact 
on the Y-12 nuclear weapons plant, and as usual the folks at Y-12 
weren't anxious to elaborate on budget numbers, etc. 

One presumes that, if a budget resolution maintains spending at 
2006 levels, most production operations at Y-12 would be OK. 

However, there are modernization projects under way, including 
construction of a new $500 million storage complex for bomb-grade 
uranium that's 40 percent complete. Also, a proposed $1 billion 
center for uranium manufacturing activities is going through the 
design stages. 

Those are obviously a concern. 

According to numbers released by the National Nuclear Security 
Administration, the 2006 budget authority for the uranium storage 
project was $80.5 million, and the proposed presidential budget 
request for fiscal year '07 was $21.3 million. 

That would seem to be OK because the spending level was projected 
to be on a decline anyway, but Y-12 spokesman Steven Wyatt said 
the 2007 request was submitted to Congress last winter before 
there were significant changes in the storage project. He was 
referring to construction problems that resulted in a two-month 
shutdown of work on the facility, known officially as the Highly 
Enriched Uranium Materials Facility. 

"For this reason, it was recognized that the FY 2007 would need 
to be increased to avoid construction impacts," Wyatt said. "NNSA 
is currently working with Congress to address budget issues for 
HEUMF to keep construction of this important project under way as 
planned." 

He declined to address any concerns about the Uranium Processing 
Facility, which is tentatively scheduled for first production 
activities sometime after 2015. 

Wyatt indicated the 2006 spending level for UPF was $5 million, 
with a request to increase that amount to $40 million in 2007. 

"No other specific details are available at this time," he said. 
"In regards to impacts to overall Y-12 operations, there is 
simply not enough information at this point to comment. Until 
these issues are resolved, there is going to be some uncertainty 
about impacts to Y-12 operations." 

Stay tuned for more drama on "As the Budget Turns." 


+ 

Harold Cofer, one of the true gentlemen of Oak Ridge, recently 
celebrated his 60th wedding anniversary with his wife, Harriet, 
and their kids. Their special dinner was at Regas. 

Cofer is a retired Y-12 electrician who has a flair for 
storytelling. He came to Oak Ridge with his family during the 
World War II Manhattan Project, but he didn't stay long - leaving 
high school early to join up with the Navy and head to the 
Pacific. 

He shamelessly admits to a bit of fraud when the United States 
dropped the A-bomb on Japan. All his Navy buddies knew he was 
from Oak Ridge, and when word got out about Tennessee's Atomic 
City and its role in the war, Cofer was kind of a celebrity. 

He let them believe that he knew all along about the secret work 
in Oak Ridge, which, of course, was a "big lie." 

After Cofer returned from the war, he and a girlfriend 
double-dated with his friend Joe Chaffee and his girlfriend, 
Harriet. To make a long story short, Chaffee joined the military 
and asked Cofer to look after his girl. 

Well, Cofer looked after her all right. They were married on Jan. 
4, 1947. 

Congratulations. 

Senior writer Frank Munger covers the Department of Energy for 
the News Sentinel. He may be reached at 865-342-6329 or at .

      © 2007 - Knoxville News Sentinel
    
*****************************************************************

NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 this 
material is distributed without profit or payment to those who 
have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for 
non-profit research and educational purposes only. For more 
information go to: 
<http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml> 
    
*****************************************************************