***************************************************************** 02/01/07 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 15.26 ***************************************************************** 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 [NYTr] US-Iran Tensions: Hair-Trigger for War 2 The War on Iran 3 [NYTr] No Iran nuclear threat yet 4 Guardian Unlimited: Russia Signals Support for Iran 'Time-Out' 5 Guardian Unlimited: Nuclear-armed Iran would not be very dangerous, 6 BBC: US warns Iran on Iraq insurgents 7 AFP: Chirac sets record straight on Iran after blunder 8 AFP: Iran defiant on nuclear as revolution fete starts 9 AFP: Iranians block UN inspectors at nuclear facility - diplomats - 10 AFP: Iran has begun assembling centrifuges at Natanz site - diplomat 11 Guardian Unlimited: French Leader Retracts Comments on Iran 12 AFP: US asked to suspend free trade talks with Malaysia over Iran de 13 UPI: Russia urges Iran to work with IAEA 14 UPI: Russia urges Iraq pull-out 15 UPI: Chirac recants on 'Iran not dangerous' 16 Guardian Unlimited: U.S.-Iran Tensions Could Trigger War 17 Guardian Unlimited: Israel Has No Plans Against Iran 18 Guardian Unlimited: Paper: NKorea Demands U.S. Lift Sanctions 19 Korea Herald: U.S., N.K. end talks on 'productive' note 20 Korea Herald: Korean summit rumors resurface 21 YONHAP NEWS: China makes little investment in N. Korea since October 22 Digital Chosunilbo: Seoul 'Won't Be Content With Nuclear Freeze' in 23 Guardian Unlimited: U.S. Hopes for Progress on N. Korea Deal 24 Korea Times: Summit Likely in August 25 AFP: NKorea may take 'first step' to end nuclear program - US 26 US: Star-Telegram: Irrepressible liberal columnist Molly Ivins dies 27 US: Star-Telegram.com: Molly Ivins: A fond remembrance 28 US: Star Tribune: Editorial: Room for optimism on renewable energy 29 US: Boston Globe: House panel probing Bush's record on signing state 30 Winnipeg News: Lost Nuke exhibition to open at aviation museum NUCLEAR REACTORS 31 US: NRC Votes Against Protections of Reactors 32 US: Outrageous: NRC Votes Against Protections of Reactors 33 Helsingin Sanomat: Construction delays at nuclear plant spark row ov 34 India PRwire: India should achieve energy independence by 2030 - Kal 35 AU ABC: Aust Institute under fire over nuclear site naming 36 AU ABC: Planned nuclear sites are near homes, NT farmer says 37 business.iafrica.com: Is Pebble Bed technology the future? 38 BBC: Putin hits back at energy critics 39 US: Platts: FY 2007 spending bill shortchanges science, GNEP - White 40 US: Rutland Herald: Greenpeace founder backs Yankee relicensing 41 US: NRC: In the Matter of the Curators of the University of Missouri 42 US: NRC: Notice of Availability of Environmental Assessment and Find 43 US: NRC: Notice of Consideration of Amendment Request for Decommissi 44 US: NRC: Notice of Consideration of Amendment Request for Decommissi 45 US: APP.COM: River flows backward to cool Lacey plant's water | 46 IAEA: Haiti Moving to Revitalize Nuclear Technical Cooperation 47 Shanghai Daily: Areva signs deal with China on 2 nuclear reactors -- 48 Reuters: Bulgaria lobbies EU to reopen nuclear plant 49 Japan Times: Tepco must probe 199 plant check coverups 50 US: PRN: At Platts Energy Podium, DOE Official Unveils US$3 Billion 51 DNA: It' s payback for the N-deal 52 Viet Nam News: Viet Nam will need nuclear energy programme - company 53 Whitehaven News: N-firms vie for reactor contracts 54 US: Vermont Guardian: Feds declare: Vermont Yankee is safe, public u 55 US: NRC: Live NRC Meeting Webcast NUCLEAR SECURITY 56 UN Atomic Watchdog Agency Reports Cases Of Illegal Trafficking In Nu 57 IAEA: Georgian Authorities Report Seized Illicit Nuclear Material NUCLEAR SAFETY 58 US: Rapid City Journal: Bill would recommend tests 59 Whitehaven News: BNG denies huge overdose at Mox NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE 60 reviewjournal.com: Yucca manager defends expense to restore project 61 CBC: SRB Technologies loses radioactivity processing licence 62 US: Aiken Today: Area groups apply for nuclear recycling program 63 BBC: Dounreay's dome could disappear 64 US: Deseret News: Protesters raise 'red flag' over EnergySolutions b 65 US: NRC: RIN 3150-AI03 66 US: Inland News: March hearing over perchlorate postponed PEACE 67 University Journal: Weapons testing has global effect US DEPT. OF ENERGY 68 Knox News: Utilities behind research 69 Tri-City Herald: DOE could face fines after milestone miss 70 Chillicothe Gazette: Piketon group receives grant for site study 71 lamonitor.com: LANL K-9s held to higher standard ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** FULL NEWS STORIES ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** 1 [NYTr] US-Iran Tensions: Hair-Trigger for War Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2007 18:17:44 -0500 (EST) Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit sent by Dave Muller (southnews) AP - Jan 31, 2007 U.S.-Iran tensions could trigger war The behind-the-scenes struggle between the two nations could explode into open warfare over a single misstep, analysts and U.S. military officials warn. By JIM KRANE and ROBERT H. REID Associated Press Writers Citing Iranian involvement with Iraqi militias and Tehran's nuclear ambitions, the Bush administration has shifted to offense in its confrontation with Iran building up the U.S. military in the Persian Gulf and promising more aggressive moves against Iranian operatives in Iraq and Lebanon. The behind-the-scenes struggle between the two nations could explode into open warfare over a single misstep, analysts and U.S. military officials warn. Iraq has become a proxy battleground between Washington and Tehran, which is challenging at least rhetorically America's dominance of the Gulf. That has worried even Iraq's U.S.-backed Shiite prime minister, who in a reflection of Iraq's complexity also has close ties to Iran. Iran and the United States are already sparring on the ground. On Jan. 20, militants kidnapped and killed four American soldiers in a raid in Karbala, and a fifth was killed in the firefight. A U.S. defense official said one possibility under study is that Iranian agents either executed or masterminded the attack, a suspicion based on the sophisticated and unusual methods used in the attack, including weapons and uniforms that may have been American. He spoke on condition of anonymity because the probe is ongoing. There has been speculation that the Karbala assault may have been in retaliation for the arrest of five Iranians by U.S. troops in northern Iraq. Those five Iranians, who were arrested in the northern city of Irbil, included two members of an Iranian Revolutionary Guard force that provides weapons, training and other support to Shiite militants in the Middle East, U.S. Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad said last week. Iraqi and Iranian officials maintain the five were diplomats. Since the Karbala raid, U.S. saber-rattling has intensified. President Bush said this week that U.S. forces in Iraq would take action against Iranian operatives in the country, while insisting he had no intention of attacking Iran. "If Iran escalates its military action in Iraq to the detriment of our troops and/or innocent Iraqi people, we will respond firmly," Bush told National Public Radio. Although little evidence has been made public, U.S. officials have long insisted that Iran was supplying weapons and training to Shiite militias in Iraq, including some that have killed American troops. The No. 2 U.S. general in Iraq told USA Today in an interview published Tuesday that Iran was supplying Iraqi Shiite militias with a variety of powerful weapons, including Katyusha rockets and armor-piercing rocket-propelled grenades. "We have weapons that we know through serial numbers ... trace back to Iran," Lt. Gen. Raymond Odierno said. The Air Force is considering more forceful patrols on the Iraqi side of the border with Iran to counter the smuggling of weapons and bomb supplies, the Los Angeles Times reported, citing senior Pentagon officials. The U.S. is also building up its military presence in the Gulf in what it says is a show of strength directed at Iran. A second aircraft carrier is heading for the region, and Patriot missile batteries are being deployed. Since Bush announced his new Iraq strategy in early January, Iranian officials have raised the alarm repeatedly that the U.S. intends to attack. President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said Iran is "ready for anything" in its confrontation with the United States. A newspaper close to Iran's supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei last week threatened retaliation for any U.S. military action including stopping oil traffic through the Gulf's strategic Hormuz Straits and attacks on U.S. interests. The top editor of the Kayhan daily warned that Iran will turn the Middle East into "hell" for the United States and Israel if America attacks. Iran expert Ray Takeyh said the risks are all the greater because Tehran has an "unhealthy" disregard for American power, which "enhances the prospect of a miscalculation." Prof. Gary Sick, a leading authority on Iran, believes the U.S. is seeking to divert world attention from the crisis in Iraq and organize a coalition of Israel and conservative Sunni Arab states to confront Iran. "I see this as a very dangerous long-term policy because it promotes the idea that Sunnis and Shiites should be distrustful of each other, and I think that could come back and bite us later on," he said. Iran and the U.S. also are in dispute over Tehran's nuclear program. The United States accuses Iran of secretly developing atomic weapons an allegation Tehran denies. Iran's defiant refusal to suspend uranium enrichment prompted the U.N. Security Council to impose limited economic sanctions. The U.S. has also beefed up support for Lebanon's government in its power struggle with Hezbollah, the Shiite militia that Washington accuses of acting in Iran's interests. But Lee Feinstein of the Council on Foreign Relations said the U.S. was finding it hard "to calibrate its message" to distinguish "between a stern message and a warning of attack." The war of words has raised fears among both Democrats and Republicans in Congress that the United States and Iran are drifting toward armed conflict at a time when America is struggling against determined foes in Iraq and Afghanistan. It has also unnerved the Iraqi government, many of whose members have close ties to Iran. "We have told the Iranians and the Americans, `We know that you have a problem with each other but we're asking you, please, solve your problems outside of Iraq,'" Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, a Shiite, told CNN on Wednesday. "We do not want the American forces to take Iraq as a base to attack Iran ... we will not accept Iran using Iraq to attack American forces. But does this exist? It exists and I assure you it exists." As the rhetoric grows more strident, a U.S. military official in the Gulf likened the U.S.-Iran standoff to the buildup in hostility in Europe before World War I, when the assassination of the heir to the Austrian throne triggered a tragic war that engulfed a continent. "A mistake could be made and you could end up in something that neither side ever really wanted, and suddenly it's August 1914 all over again," the U.S. officer said on condition of anonymity, because of the sensitivity of the issue. "I really believe neither side wants a fight." Iranian coast guard vessels recently veered into territorial waters on the Arab side of the Gulf, an event that could have been viewed as either a mistake or a provocation, the officer said. Both sides are on tenterhooks. "A boat crosses a line ... but what does it mean? You've got to be very careful about overreacting," the officer said. Even if Iran pulled back from Iraq's conflict, it might not end the country's violence, said Kenneth M. Pollack, research director at the Saban Center for Middle East Policy. "The truth is that Iraq is a mess. It is in a state of low-level civil war. And all of these groups are largely self-motivated," he said on the Council on Foreign Relations Web site. "But its much easier to blame it on the Iranians." In Tehran, political analyst Hermidas Bavand said U.S. force increases were leading many Iranians to believe Washington is looking to pick a fight. "It's an extremely dangerous situation," Bavand said. "I don't think Tehran wants war under any circumstances. But there might be an accidental event that could escalate into a large confrontation." [AP writer Jim Krane reported from Doha, Qatar.] *** Sydney Morning Herald - Feb 1, 2007 http://fairuse.100webcustomers.com/fairenough/smh25.html Europe nervous despite US denials it plans to attack Iran by Ian Traynor in Brussels and Jonathan Steele in London EUROPEAN diplomats are increasingly anxious that the US is planning air strikes against Iran to destroy its suspected nuclear program. US officials are expected to unveil a secret intelligence dossier this week detailing evidence of Iran's alleged complicity in attacks on US troops in Iraq. Some believe the move parallels the British Government's release of a dossier in the run-up to the 2003 Iraq invasion. "The clock is ticking," one European diplomat said. "Military action has come back on to the table more seriously than before. The language in the US has changed." John Negroponte, who has been nominated as the US deputy secretary of state, on Tuesday defended the Bush Administration's policy with Iran in a fiery Senate confirmation hearing. "Do you think we are drifting toward a military confrontation with Iran?" demanded the anti-war Republican Senator Chuck Hagel, a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. "I don't think that has to be, senator," Mr Negroponte replied. "I think we would strongly prefer that the issues between us and Iran be resolved peacefully." Mr Negroponte maintained that an emboldened Iran could harm US interests in the region. "We don't believe that their behaviour, such as supporting Shia extremists in Iraq, should go unchallenged," he said. The US President, George Bush, said during a TV interview that stern measures aimed at Iran should not be seen as a precursor to war. "Some are trying to take my words and say, 'Well, what he's really trying to do is go invade Iran.' Nobody's talking about that," he said. Europe and the US have tried to maintain a united front on the nuclear issue for the past 30 months. Britain, France and Germany have attempted to negotiate with the Iranians, with the US offering tacit support. But diplomats in Brussels and Vienna say a fissure has opened up with the US on three crucial aspects - the military option; how quickly to hit Iran with economic sanctions already decreed by the United Nations Security Council; and how to deal with Russian opposition to any action. Mr Bush announced last month that the US would send another aircraft carrier and its supporting ships to the Persian Gulf, a response to the growing concern that Iran is building up its own missile capacity and naval power to dominate the Gulf militarily. The Director of the International Atomic Energy Agency in Vienna, Dr Mohamed ElBaradei, at the weekend called for a "timeout" in the worsening confrontation over Iran's suspected nuclear program. But the US rejected the proposal and European officials involved in the dispute also believe the Iranians cannot be trusted to stick to a deal. Iran's president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, is seen to have been weakened recently over his mishandling of the nuclear row. "One group of Western countries thinks it's a good time to step up the pressure on Ahmadinejad. All options are on the table. Others are worried we might be stumbling into a war," an unnamed diplomat said. Guardian News & Media, The New York Times Copyright ) 2007. The Sydney Morning Herald. * ================================================================ .NY Transfer News Collective * A Service of Blythe Systems . Since 1985 - Information for the Rest of Us . .339 Lafayette St., New York, NY 10012 http://www.blythe.org .List Archives: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/pipermail/nytr/ .Subscribe: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/mailman/listinfo/nytr ================================================================ ***************************************************************** 2 The War on Iran Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2007 05:50:19 -0600 (CST) What's Left January 31, 2007 THE WAR ON IRAN The war has already begun and it has nothing to do with nuclear weapons and threats against Israel and everything to do with who rules America By Stephen Gowans The US, Britain and Israel are at war with Iran. The war is not conducted, at the moment, anyway, through missile strikes, bombing campaigns or land invasion, but by intimidation, provocation, subversion, and economic warfare. While the war is being justified as a necessary response to a growing threat of nuclear proliferation and to counter the alleged existential threat to Jews living in Israel posed by the president of Iran, the real reason for the war is to be found in the domination of public policy by the owners and high-level executives of banks and large corporations and in the directions in which the logic of capitalism pushes them to shape foreign policy. More at http://gowans.blogspot.com/2007/01/war-on-iran.html ***************************************************************** 3 [NYTr] No Iran nuclear threat yet Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2007 17:22:38 -0600 (CST) Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit sent by Simon McGuinness The Irish Times - Feb 1, 2007 http://www.ireland.com/newspaper/world/2007/0201/1170281020492.html No Iran nuclear threat yet - IISS [UK-based right-wing think tank] IRAN: Iran is at least two to three years away from being able to produce a nuclear weapon, a leading global think-tank said yesterday. But the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) said pressure on the US to stop the programme, including possibly through military strikes, would increase this year as Tehran mastered the process of enriching uranium. The IISS said Iran's stockpile of 250 tonnes of uranium hexafluoride (UF6), the raw material for feeding into linked cascades of centrifuges, was enough to produce between 30 and 50 nuclear weapons when enriched. "The main bottleneck to producing such weapons remains learning how to run UF6 through the cascades for extended periods. If Iran overcomes the technical hurdles, the possibility of military options to stop the programme will of course increase," IISS director-general John Chipman said. The UN Security Council imposed sanctions on Iran on December 23rd and gave it 60 days to suspend uranium enrichment. Tehran denies pursuing the bomb and says it is developing nuclear energy only to generate electricity. An Iranian parliamentarian said on Saturday that Iran had started installing 3,000 new atomic centrifuges at its Natanz facility, although this was later denied by a nuclear official. Mr Chipman, presenting the IISS annual report, The Military Balance, said Iran was probably on track to meet its goal of producing 3,000 centrifuges by the end of March or soon after. He said there would be no technical logic in installing them all until Tehran had succeeded in running two smaller experimental cascades of 164 centrifuges each, something it has yet to achieve on a continuous basis. But Iran might go ahead anyway to signal technological prowess to its people and defiance to the West. If and when Iran does have 3,000 centrifuges operating smoothly, the IISS estimates it would take an additional nine to 11 months to produce 25kg (55lbs) of highly-enriched uranium, enough for one nuclear weapon. C 2007 The Irish Times * ================================================================ .NY Transfer News Collective * A Service of Blythe Systems . Since 1985 - Information for the Rest of Us . .339 Lafayette St., New York, NY 10012 http://www.blythe.org .List Archives: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/pipermail/nytr/ .Subscribe: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/mailman/listinfo/nytr ================================================================ ***************************************************************** 4 Guardian Unlimited: Russia Signals Support for Iran 'Time-Out' From the Associated Press [UP] Thursday February 1, 2007 10:31 AM MOSCOW (AP) - Russia signaled Thursday that it would support a proposal to hold off imposing U.N. sanctions on Iran if Tehran suspends uranium enrichment. Mohamed ElBaradei, head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, proposed the deal during this month's World Economic Forum in Switzerland as a way of ending the standoff over the Islamic republic's suspect nuclear program. ``We believe the initiative put forward by the IAEA head ... deserves close attention,'' Russia's Foreign Ministry said in a statement. Iran has said it needs time to review the plan. The U.N. Security Council voted unanimously in December to impose limited sanctions on Iran after the country ignored demands to halt enrichment, which has peaceful uses but can also produce fuel for nuclear bombs. Iran's state-run radio said Sunday that Tehran wants Moscow to help mediate the standoff and is looking to Russia for new proposals, such as enriching uranium on Russian soil. The Kremlin suggested last year that Iran move its uranium enrichment work to Russian territory, enabling Russia to monitor the operations to alleviate international suspicions. Iran says it only wants nuclear power to generate electricity, the U.S. and its allies believe Tehran is secretly developing nuclear weapons in violation of treaty commitments. Guardian Unlimited © Guardian News and Media Limited 2007 ***************************************************************** 5 Guardian Unlimited: Nuclear-armed Iran would not be very dangerous, says Chirac | Angelique Chrisafis in Paris Friday February 2, 2007 [Jacques Chirac] Jacques Chirac is popular in France for his stance against the war in Iraq. Photograph: Patrick Kovarik/AFP/Getty Jacques Chirac yesterday sparked a diplomatic controversy after saying that a nuclear-armed Iran would not be "very dangerous" and Tehran would be "razed" if it launched a nuclear strike on Israel. He later issued a humiliating retraction. The French president's comments to journalists prompted speculation as to whether, aged 74 and in the waning months of his second - and probably his last term - he was losing his political touch or even his mental vigour. Some also questioned whether Mr Chirac had simply voiced a fear that a nuclear-armed Iran would be a foregone conclusion. Mr Chirac prides himself on being an international statesman and is popular in France for his stance against the war in Iraq. He is determined to prove himself on the world stage before the April and May elections, but the international community was astounded by his comments which appeared on US front pages. In the interview on Monday, which was mainly about climate change, reporters from the International Herald Tribune, The New York Times and the French magazine Le Nouvel Observateur asked Mr Chirac about the current impasse over Iran's nuclear development. Paris has steadfastly opposed any attempt by Iran to develop nuclear weapons, with Mr Chirac recently accusing Tehran of "feeding the world's apprehension" with its atomic programme. But the president told the three reporters: "I would say that what is dangerous about this situation is not the fact of having a nuclear bomb. Having one or perhaps a second bomb a little later, well, that's not very dangerous." He said the danger lies in the chances of proliferation or an arms race in the Middle East should Iran build a nuclear bomb. The weapon would be useless for Iran because using it would mean an instant counterattack, he said. "Where will it drop it, this bomb? On Israel? It would not have gone 200 metres into the atmosphere before Tehran would be razed." Mr Chirac, who was hospitalised in 2005 for a suspected minor stroke, was reported to have appeared distracted at times during the interview, grasping for names and dates, according to the journalists. The president called reporters back the next day to try to have his quotes retracted. "I should rather have paid attention to what I was saying and understood that perhaps I was on the record," Mr Chirac said in the second interview. "Sometimes one can drift off, when one believes there are no consequences ... I honestly believed that the questions aside from the environment were off the record." On Wednesday night, attending a party in Paris to mark 30 years of the Pompidou centre, he appeared tired and frail. Mr Chirac's office quickly switched to damage-limitation mode as foreign governments asked for official clarification, opposition politicians protested and experts speculated that he was either joking, being brutally honest, irresponsible or simply speaking off the cuff. Mr Chirac's office issued a statement that "France, along with the international community, cannot accept the prospect of an Iran equipped with a nuclear weapon." "There should not be a controversy on such a serious subject," it said. France's allies downplayed the comments. "It is not a sentiment I share and from what I understand, the French president doesn't share it anymore either," said British foreign secretary Margaret Beckett. White House press secretary Tony Snow reiterated that Iran "should not have any nuclear weapons" and should suspend uranium enrichment. "That is not only the stated position of the United States but also its allies including France," he said. "Chirac gave us a moment of honesty," said researcher Alireza Nourizadeh at the Centre for Arab-Iranian Studies in London. But François Nicoullaud, who was France's ambassador to Tehran from 2001-2005, said Mr Chirac's comments lost political meaning once he formally withdrew them. "This wasn't one of those controlled slips - one of those little phrases that are dropped to see what effect it produces." Words from the wise Jacques Chirac is known for plain speaking, which sometimes lands him in a fix: In 2004, during a spat over common agricultural policy, he reportedly told Tony Blair that he was "badly brought up". In July 2005, he apparently thought he was off-microphone at a meeting in Russia when, describing Britain to Vladimir Putin and the then German chancellor, Gerhard Schröder, he said: "You can't trust people who cook as badly as that. After Finland, it's the country with the worst food." He later added: "The only thing they [the British] have ever done for European agriculture is mad cow." In March 2003, Mr Chirac told the leaders of eastern Europe that they should have "shut up" rather than take America's side over the Iraq war. [UP] Guardian Unlimited © Guardian News and Media Limited 2007 ***************************************************************** 6 BBC: US warns Iran on Iraq insurgents Last Updated: Thursday, 1 February 2007 [US wounded in Baghdad] The US says Iran is providing more lethal bombs to insurgents The US has issued the latest in a series of warnings to Iran, telling Tehran to stop helping Iraqi militants make lethal bombs to attack US troops. Undersecretary of State Nicholas Burns said US forces had detained several Iranians suspected of providing weapons technology to Shia insurgents. He said Iranian help for insurgents had spread from Basra north to Baghdad, leading to higher UK and US casualties. Tehran has repeatedly denied that it is fuelling the violence in Iraq. Mr Burns told the BBC that some of the five Iranians detained on 11 January by US troops were members of the al-Quds force of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard, and not diplomats as Tehran says. "These are not Iranian business people in Iraq that we've detained," said Mr Burns, the third most senior US diplomat. "These are operatives of the Quds force, paramilitary officials of the Iranian government and their intelligence officials... They're people who are engaged in sectarian warfare". British allegations In another interview with American radio, he said Iranian agents were transferring "sophisticated explosive technology to Shia insurgent groups who then use that technology to target and kill American soldiers". To hide a crisis, the Republicans usually try to create bigger crises Iran's Hamshahri newspaper [ border=] Press highlights tensions Washington has said that Iran is providing high-grade "shaped" explosives that can tear through the thick armour on many military vehicles. It is a repeat of British allegations made last year about attacks against UK troops in their zone around Basra in southern Iraq. Mr Burns said the US had been following Iranian involvement in Iraq for about two years and found increasing evidence that Iran has been assisting Shia militant groups. The Bush administration has been taking an uncompromising tone on Iran lately. In his state of the union speech, President Bush accused Iran of arming "terrorists like Hezbollah" and said, "the world will not allow the regime in Tehran to acquire nuclear weapons." The US is sending more troops to Baghdad to try to quell the worsening sectarian violence there and is building up its military presence in the Persian Gulf, deploying a second aircraft carrier to the region. ***************************************************************** 7 AFP: Chirac sets record straight on Iran after blunder Thu Feb 1, 1:59 PM ET PARIS (AFP) - French President Jacques Chirac" /> President Jacques Chiracsaid that a nuclear-armed Iran" /> Iranwas unacceptable, setting the record straight after stating that Tehran's possession of the bomb would not be "very dangerous." Chirac caused a stir after he downplayed the threat posed by Iran in an interview to three publications and stated that Tehran would be "razed to the ground" if it launched a nuclear strike on Israel" /> Israel. "Having one or perhaps a second bomb a little later, well that's not very dangerous," Chirac said in the interview to the New York Times, the Paris-based International Herald Tribune and the French weekly Nouvel Observateur. "Where would Iran drop this bomb? On Israel?" he asked. "It would not have gone off 200 meters into the atmosphere before Tehran would be razed to the ground," Chirac was quoted as saying by the three publications. The Elysee issued a statement clarifying Chirac's stance and a presidential aide complained of a "shameful polemic" stoked by "certain media across the Atlantic" who are anti-French. "France, along with the international community, does not accept the prospect of a nuclear-armed Iran," said the statement from the presidency. France has asked "Iran to respect its commitments under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, while reaffirming its right to nuclear energy for civilian use," it added. Chirac gave the interview on Monday but called the journalists back to the Elysee Palace the following day to say that he was retracting the comments. "It is I who was wrong and I do not want to contest it," Chirac was quoted as saying by the IHT. "I should have paid better attention to what I was saying and understood that perhaps I was on the record." "It was an oversimplification... It is a formulation that I am taking back," the Nouvel Observateur quoted him as saying. The presidential press service said Chirac had given "an extremely condensed and oversimplified" view of his Iran policy in the interview and that he sought to "correct" it the following day. In Washington, a White House spokesman also emphasized that Chirac had "revised and extended" his remarks and that the shared position of the US and France on Iran was "clear: They shouldn't have any nuclear weapons." Chirac's government has taken a leading role in European diplomatic efforts to persuade Iran to suspend its nuclear enrichment programme and comply with international demands for monitoring of its atomic facilities. Tehran has defied calls to suspend enrichment work, rejecting US allegations it wants nuclear weapons and insisting its atomic drive is solely aimed at producing nuclear energy. In the interview, Chirac also said that Iran's possession of a nuclear bomb would encourage other countries in the region to follow suit. "It is really very tempting for other countries in the region with large financial resources to say: 'Well, we too are going to do that: we're going to help others do it'," the president said, according to the three publications. He also retracted those remarks, saying: "Neither Saudi Arabia nor Egypt has made any declaration on these subjects, so it is not up to me to make them." Chirac, who is coming to the end of his second term in office, last month floated a plan to send a special envoy to Iran to discuss regional issues, but not to tackle the nuclear problem. Iran said it would be ready to receive the French envoy, but the United States has voiced disapproval, saying that it would send the wrong signal at a time when Tehran has come under UN sanctions over its nuclear activities. Copyright © 2007 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 8 AFP: Iran defiant on nuclear as revolution fete starts Thu Feb 1, 4:17 AM ET TEHRAN (AFP) - President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has vowed Iran" /> Iranwould emerge unscathed from UN sanctions over its nuclear programme as it kicked off celebrations to mark the anniversary of the Islamic revolution. "The language of sanctions belongs to the past," Ahmadinejad said as he paid tribute at the shrine of the 1979 revolution's late founder Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini on the outskirts of Tehran, the IRNA news agency reported. "Iran is a powerful nation with extensive ties and other nations will support us even if they are pressured," he added. Iranian leaders, including Ahmadinejad, have said Iran would make a major announcement on its nuclear programme during the 10 days of celebrations to mark the 28th anniversary of the Islamic revolution starting Thursday. The news is expected to relate to Iran's progress towards enriching uranium on an industrial scale at a key nuclear plant although it remains unclear which stage this process has reached. Sanctions "will not affect a great nation. We have expanding economic ties and they can at the most be just an irritation to our people. "Our nation has always moved in a lawful, peaceful direction and it seeks to exercise its definitive inalienable rights," said Ahmadinejad, referring to Iran's oft-repeated insistence that it will not halt uranium enrichment. Tehran has been defying calls to suspend uranium enrichment work, rejecting US allegations it wants nuclear weapons and insisting its nuclear drive is solely aimed at producing nuclear energy. The UN Security Council passed a resolution in December imposing sanctions on Iran for its refusal to freeze enrichment although the measures are not seen as far-reaching enough to hurt Iran's wider economy. Ahmadinejad also described the Islamic republic as a "cultural superpower" that was a "model" for the rest of the world, Mehr news agency reported. "Big powers are very worried about our nation's scientific progress. They want to convince people that governments built on religion... cannot respond to modern problems." Copyright © 2007 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 9 AFP: Iranians block UN inspectors at nuclear facility - diplomats - by Michael Adler Thu Feb 1, 2:51 PM ET VIENNA (AFP) - Iran" /> Iranis stopping UN inspectors from installing cameras at a nuclear facility where Tehran intends to place 3,000 centrifuges for industrial-scale uranium enrichment, diplomats said. Inspectors from the UN watchdog International Atomic Energy Agency" /> International Atomic Energy Agency(IAEA) are currently at the facility in Natanz in central Iran, where an underground site is being completed. But the Iranians are "not allowing the IAEA to install the cameras inside the (underground) cascade halls (for centrifuges) in Natanz and are causing further delays in the inspectors' activity," a diplomat who closely monitors IAEA verification work told AFP. This latest hitch in the international showdown with Iran over a nuclear programme, which the United States and others suspect is hiding secret development of an atom bomb, comes with the Islamic Republic under UN sanctions to force it to suspend enrichment. Uranium enrichment uses centrifugues to make fuel for civilian nuclear reactors but can also produce the explosive material for atom bombs. The Iranians have said they will install in a large underground site in Natanz lines of centrifuges, in so-called cascades, in order to enrich uranium. Iran is already running two cascades of 164-centrifuges each at a pilot facility above-ground, which the IAEA monitors with cameras and visits by inspectors. The IAEA is entitled under the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty to the same sort of presence at the underground facility. "The Iranians are now willing to accept the installation of cameras only outside the cascade halls, which will not enable the IAEA to monitor the entire uranium enrichment process," said the diplomat, who requested anonymity. The diplomat said: "This way the IAEA will only be able to see the crates that are taken into the hall and the workers coming and going. "Uranium enrichment will nevertheless proceed inside the halls uninterrupted and unmonitored by the international community," the diplomat added. Two other diplomats confirmed the impasse. One said: "Whenever something new is done, normally it takes time," referring to problems the IAEA has had in setting up verification equipment in other countries. IAEA spokeswoman Melissa Fleming refused to comment. The IAEA has been investigating Iran since February 2003 after it was revealed that Tehran had hid sensitive nuclear activities for 18 years. But the atomic agency has been unable to conclude its inquest due to what it says is a lack of full cooperation from Iran. The UN Security Council passed a resolution in December imposing sanctions on Iran for its refusal to halt uranium enrichment although the measures are not seen as far-reaching enough to hurt Iran's wider economy. Iranian leaders have said Iran would make a major announcement on its nuclear programme during the 10 days of celebrations to mark the 28th anniversary of the Islamic revolution starting Thursday. The news is expected to relate to Iran's progress towards enriching uranium on an industrial scale at Natanz. Iran could be only two or three years away from being able to produce a nuclear weapon, John Chipman of the London think-tank the International Institute for Strategic Studies said Wednesday. But he stressed that Iran still faced other obstacles before it could build a weapon. While Iran is "probably" on track to hit a target of installing 3,000 centrifuges in Natanz by the end of March, making them function properly would be complicated, Chipman said. These developments come amid growing speculation the United States and Iran are on a course towards conflict. Although US President George W. Bush" /> President George W. Bushhas said the United States has no plans to invade Iran, Washington is isolating the Iranian regime over nuclear suspicions and allegations of complicity in attacks on US troops in Iraq" /> Iraq. Copyright © 2007 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 10 AFP: Iran has begun assembling centrifuges at Natanz site - diplomats by Michael Adler Thu Feb 1, 6:48 PM ET VIENNA (AFP) - Iran" /> Iranhas begun installing centrifuges at the Natanz site where it plans 3,000 of the machines to enrich uranium in defiance of UN demands to halt this sensitive nuclear activity, diplomats said. And at the same time it is stopping UN inspectors from installing surveillance cameras in the huge underground hall where the production lines, or cascades, of centrifuges are being set up, the diplomats said. Both moves mark an escalation in the international showdown with Iran over a nuclear programme which the United States and others suspect is hiding secret development of an atom bomb, and on which the UN Security Council has levied sanctions to force Tehran to halt enrichment. A diplomat in Vienna, where the UN watchdog International Atomic Energy Agency" /> International Atomic Energy Agency(IAEA) is based, told AFP "construction has started (at the underground Natanz facility) but the cascades have not yet been assembled." Another diplomat said bringing in centrifuge parts had started last week. But Iran has not yet assembled a complete cascade, the basic unit for beginning actual enrichment, said the diplomats, who asked not to be named due to the confidentiality of the information. Uranium enrichment uses centrifuges to make fuel for civilian nuclear reactors but can also produce the explosive material for atom bombs. IAEA spokeswoman Melissa Fleming refused to comment. Iran had last weekend given conflicting signals on its disputed nuclear work. The Islamic republic's atomic energy agency denied the Iranians had started to install the 3,000 centrifuges, shortly after the head of parliament's foreign affairs and national security commission said they had. Iran is building cascades in units of 164 centrifuges each. Iran already has two such cascades running above-ground at a pilot enrichment plant at Natanz which would only produce small amounts of enriched uranium. But the underground plant, protected in a bunker from possible air attack, could if running full tilt produce enough highly enriched uranium for one bomb in nine to 11 months, the London think tank the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) has said. Diplomats said Iran was stopping UN inspectors, who are currently at Natanz, from installing surveillance cameras at the underground site. The Iranians are "not allowing the IAEA to install the cameras inside the (underground) cascade halls (for centrifuges) in Natanz and are causing further delays in the inspectors' activity," a diplomat who closely monitors IAEA verification work told AFP. The IAEA monitors the above-ground pilot site with cameras and visits by inspectors and is entitled under the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty to the same sort of presence at the underground facility, as the agency is mandated to monitor the use of nuclear material. But the Iranians "have not yet introduced nuclear material (feedstock uranium gas) into the centrifuges at the underground site, so there is still time," a second diplomat said. Another diplomat said: "The game is not over." The first diplomat said: "The Iranians are now willing to accept the installation of cameras only outside the cascade halls, which will not enable the IAEA to monitor the entire uranium enrichment process." But another diplomat said that "verification goals can be achieved from inside or outside cascade halls." A fourth diplomat said: "Whenever something new is done, normally it takes time," referring to problems the IAEA has had in setting up verification equipment in other countries. The IAEA has been investigating Iran since February 2003 after it was revealed that Tehran had hidden sensitive nuclear activities for 18 years. But the atomic agency has been unable to conclude its inquest due to what it says is a lack of full cooperation from Iran. The UN Security Council passed a resolution in December imposing sanctions on Iran for its refusal to halt uranium enrichment. Iranian leaders have said Iran would make a major announcement on its nuclear programme during the 10 days of celebrations to mark the 28th anniversary of the Islamic revolution starting Thursday. Iran could be only two or three years away from being able to produce a nuclear weapon, IISS director John Chipman said Wednesday. Meanwhile, although US President George W. Bush" /> President George W. Bushhas said the United States has no plans to invade Iran, Washington is isolating the Iranian regime over nuclear suspicions and allegations of complicity in attacks on US troops in Iraq" /> Iraq. Copyright © 2007 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 11 Guardian Unlimited: French Leader Retracts Comments on Iran From the Associated Press [UP] Thursday February 1, 2007 11:46 AM AP Photo PAR114 By JAMEY KEATEN Associated Press Writer PARIS (AP) - French President Jacques Chirac said in an interview with three publications that Iran's possession of a nuclear bomb would not be ``very dangerous'' and that if it used the weapon on Israel, Tehran would be immediately ``razed.'' Chirac - who made the comments during a Monday interview with The New York Times, The International Herald Tribune and Le Nouvel Observateur, a weekly magazine - called reporters back the next day to try to have his quotes retracted. The publications said the interview was tape recorded and on the record. Chirac's initial remarks would mark a big departure from France's official policy of working to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons. ``I should rather have paid attention to what I was saying and understood that perhaps I was on the record,'' Chirac said in the second interview on Tuesday, according to transcripts that the three publications posted on their Web sites. On Monday, Chirac said of Iran and its nuclear program: ``I would say that what is dangerous about this situation is not the fact of having a nuclear bomb. Having one or perhaps a second bomb a little later, well, that's not very dangerous.'' Instead, Chirac said, the danger lies in the chances of proliferation or an arms race in the Middle East should Iran build a nuclear bomb. Possessing the weapon would be useless for Iran - whose leader has called for Israel to be ``wiped off the map'' - as using it would mean an instant counterattack. ``Where will it drop it, this bomb? On Israel?'' Chirac asked. ``It would not have gone 200 meters into the atmosphere before Tehran would be razed.'' Chirac's office took the unusual step of asking reporters to come over in person on Thursday for a clarification. It said the interview had mainly focused on the environment and that France's position on Iran had not changed. A French official, who briefed reporters on condition that he not be identified, confirmed that Chirac had later retracted his original comments on Iran, and said the president had been speaking in a ``strategic'' or hypothetical way about nuclear deterrence involving Iran - not about ``diplomacy.'' The official said Chirac had spoken hastily and that his reasoning ``was missing a few steps,'' prompting the president to call back the reporters. He said Chirac's idea was to point out how unthinkable it would be that Iran could even consider using a nuclear weapon. The U.N. Security Council recently imposed limited sanctions - which Chirac supported - to punish Iran for defying a resolution demanding that it suspend uranium enrichment, a process that can produce fissile material to fuel nuclear reactors or, at purer concentrations, the core of nuclear weapons. The U.S. and its allies accuse Iran of secretly trying to develop nuclear weapons, an allegation Tehran denies, insisting it only wants to produce energy. U.S. administration officials have said diplomacy was the focus of their policy on Iran but have never ruled out attacks on Iran. Israeli Foreign Ministry spokesman Mark Regev said it would be ``an extremely destabilizing factor'' for the Middle East and global security if Tehran got the bomb. ``I don't think anyone in the international community has any doubt that the Iranian nuclear program is benign,'' he said. Alexander Pikayev, a Moscow-based defense analyst who is co-chairman of the Committee of Scientists for Global Security, told The Associated Press that Chirac's ``incautious'' remarks revealed ``the mood of the French ruling elite.'' ``French leaders are afraid not so much of Iran's nuclearization, but that Iran will be attacked. France's tough position is not aimed against Iran becoming a nuclear power, but against the United States or Israel striking Iran,'' he said. Pikayev added that France had fiercely opposed invading Iraq and now wants to avoid a similar scenario in Iran, having economic interests in that country and having a sizable Iranian and Muslim diaspora, which would not support a strike on Iran. In the second interview with the same publications, Chirac retracted his comment about Tehran being razed. ``I retract it, of course, when I said, 'One is going to raze Tehran,''' he said. Chirac also said other countries would stop any bomb launched by Iran from reaching its target. ``It is obvious that this bomb, at the moment it was launched, obviously would be destroyed immediately,'' he said. ``We have the means - several countries have the means to destroy a bomb.'' Regarding his comments that Israel could be a target of an Iranian weapon and that Israel would retaliate, Chirac said: ``I don't think I spoke about Israel yesterday. Maybe I did so but I don't think so. I have no recollection of that.'' The two leading candidates to succeed Chirac - Interior Minister and Socialist Segolene Royal - have both said that Iran must not be allowed to develop nuclear weapons. Chirac is not expected to seek a third term in the two-round presidential election in April and May. Sarkozy has called the prospect of an Iranian bomb ``terrifying.'' His spokeswoman, Rachida Dati, on Thursday reacted to Chirac's comments by saying that Sarkozy has ``always been clear'' in his opposition to a nuclear-armed Iran. Royal has said that Tehran should not even have access to civilian nuclear power. That stance has elicited criticism since under the terms of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, Iran is allowed to have a civilian nuclear program. Royal's spokesman, former Culture Minister Jack Lang, said that Chirac had committed an ``unforgiveable'' error. Guardian Unlimited © Guardian News and Media Limited 2007 ***************************************************************** 12 AFP: US asked to suspend free trade talks with Malaysia over Iran deal - by P. Parameswaran Thu Feb 1, 12:17 AM ET WASHINGTON (AFP) - A key US lawmaker has called on the administration of President George W. Bush" /> President George W. Bushto suspend free trade talks with Malaysia in protest over its mega energy deal with nuclear renegade Iran" /> Iran. Tom Lantos (news, bio, voting record), the head of the US House of Representatives' top foreign affairs panel, described as "abhorrent" the 16 billion dollar deal signed in January between the state-owned National Iranian Oil Company and Malaysia's SKS Group. "That is why today I am sending a letter to our trade representative, Susan Schwab, requesting that all negotiations between the United States and Malaysia on a free trade agreement be suspended until Malaysia renounces this proposed deal," Lantos told a Congressional hearing. The United States and Malaysia, a predominantly Muslim and growing Southeast Asian economy, are preparing for a fifth and crucial round of negotiations to frame a free trade agreement before Bush's powers to strike free trade deals expire in June. In his letter to US Trade Representative Schwab, a copy of which was obtained by AFP, Lantos said the Malaysia-Iran deal was a "disturbing development that I believe requires swift action by the Administration." The US Congress recently extended and strengthened the Iran Sanctions Act, requiring sanctions against companies involved in Iranian energy development "as is potentially the case here," Lantos said. The 25-year deal was to develop the Ferdos and Golshan offshore gas fields in southeastern Iran and establish liquefied natural gas (LNG) plants. "Since the fundamental purpose of any FTA (free trade agreement) is to strengthen cooperation consistent with broader US strategic goals, I believe we have a right to expect the government of Malaysia to join us in condemning this LNG deal and, more importantly, to make certain that it is nullified before we proceed with further trade negotiations," Lantos said. Malaysia, he added, stood to benefit greatly from an FTA with the United States, and "it is important that our trade partners are not engaged, actively or passively, in undermining our most basic security policies." The USTR office said it was studying Lantos' request but gave no detailed comment. "We have received the letter and are reviewing it," USTR spokesman Stephen Norton told AFP. A proposed multi-billion dollar agreement by oil giants Repsol of Spain and Royal Dutch Shell to help commercialise Iranian gas deposits could also trigger US sanctions. The Iranian news agency ISNA reported on Sunday that Iran has signed a preliminary agreement with Repsol and Shell to produce liquefied natural gas from Iran's South Pars gas field in a deal worth some 10 billion dollars. State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said the investment agreement, if confirmed, would likely trigger a US investigation and possible sanctions under US law. The 1996 Iran-Libya Sanctions Act requires the US president to impose sanctions on companies which invest more than 20 million dollars in Iran's energy sector. Iran also said recently it would finalise in February a 16-billion-dollar gas agreement with China's largest offshore oil producer CNOOC. Beijing is already the second largest buyer of energy products from Iran, home to the world's second biggest proven oil reserves after Saudi Arabia, and the second biggest gas reserves after Russia. Copyright © 2007 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 13 UPI: Russia urges Iran to work with IAEA United Press International - Security &Terrorism - 2/1/2007 11:18:00 AM -0500 MOSCOW, Feb. 1 (UPI) -- Russia is still looking for a diplomatic solution to the Iranian nuclear crisis and wants Tehran to resume talks with the IAEA. Igor Ivanov, secretary of Russia's Security Council said Tuesday the Kremlin still wanted Tehran to resume its negotiations with the International Atomic Energy Agency based in Vienna, Austria. "The adoption of U.N. resolution 1737 on Iran (imposing sanctions against the country) did not in any way imply a shutdown of the talks process. On the contrary, the adoption was aimed at pushing Iran toward more active cooperation with the IAEA," Ivanov told a news conference at the RIA Novosti news agency. The United Nations Security Council passed the resolution on Dec. 23 with Russian approval. The resolution called for Iran to immediately cease its ambitious program to enrich uranium and develop heavy-water and chemical reprocessing programs that could produce weapons-grade nuclear material and to make ballistic missiles capable of delivering nuclear warheads. The Iranian government defied the U.S. resolution and said that instead it would re-evaluate its previous dealings with the IAEA. However, Ivanov reiterated Moscow's determination to continue sending nuclear fuel to Iran's Bushehr nuclear reactor although he said the process would be carried out under strict IAEA monitoring, RIA Novosti said. Ivanov said the work by Russian companies to complete the Bushehr reactor complex and activate it was progressing according to plan and that the power plant would start operating in late 2007. the report said Ivanov said Russia still backed IAEA Director General Mohamed ElBaradei's plan to suspend the U.N. sanctions if Tehran stopped enriching uranium. "This means Iran suspends its work on enriching uranium, and at the same time the U.N. Security Council freezes the validity of resolution 1737," he said according to the report. [[Get Copyright Permissions]] E-MAIL | PRINT | SAVE | LICENSE © Copyright 2007 ***************************************************************** 14 UPI: Russia urges Iraq pull-out United Press International - Security &Terrorism - 2/1/2007 9:15:00 AM -0500 MOSCOW, Jan. 31 (UPI) -- A top Russian security official has increased the diplomatic pressure on the United States to pull its troops out of Iraq. Igor Ivanov, secretary of Russia's powerful Security Council, told a news conference at the RIA Novosti news agency that conditions in Iraq were "unacceptable." He said a schedule for the full evacuation of foreign military forces in Iraq -- in effect, the more than 140,000 U.S. troops currently operating there -- should be arranged and implemented as quickly as it could be done. "There is no clear answer to the question of what should be done. But it is perfectly clear that the situation is unacceptable," Ivanov said according to the RIA Novosti report. "We have always acted on the assumption that there should be negotiations with legitimate representatives of the Iraqi people, which should produce a plan for further action," he said. Ivanov is one of the most trusted top deputies and advisers to Russian President Vladimir Putin in creating Russia's diplomatic and military policies. His statement marked a significant stepping up of the level of concern with which the Kremlin views the growing U.S. military presence in Iraq. LICENSE © Copyright 2007 United Press International, Inc. All Rights Reserved. United Press International, UPI, the UPI logo, ***************************************************************** 15 UPI: Chirac recants on 'Iran not dangerous' United Press International - NewsTrack - 2/1/2007 7:06:00 AM -0500 PARIS, Feb. 1 (UPI) -- French President Jacques Chirac has recanted remarks he made to journalists in Paris about Iran not being a big danger with one or two nuclear weapons. Monday, Chirac met with writers from The New York Times, The International Herald Tribune and Le Nouvel Observateur, a weekly magazine, and made the remarks. On Tuesday, he called the writers back and said he thought his remarks had been off the record and clarified his position. Under a media agreement, the incident could not be reported until Thursday, when the magazine published. Chirac's initial comments were that Iran having one or two bombs wasn't as dangerous as further proliferation. "Having one or perhaps a second bomb a little later, well, that's not very dangerous," he said Monday. On Tuesday, Chirac said repeatedly he had spoken casually and quickly the day before because he believed he had been talking off the record, the Times reported. [[Get Copyright Permissions]] E-MAIL | PRINT | SAVE | LICENSE © Copyright 2007 United Press International, Inc. All ***************************************************************** 16 Guardian Unlimited: U.S.-Iran Tensions Could Trigger War From the Associated Press [UP] Thursday February 1, 2007 5:01 AM AP Photo VAH111 By JIM KRANE and ROBERT H. REID Associated Press Writers BAGHDAD, Iraq (AP) - Citing Iranian involvement with Iraqi militias and Tehran's nuclear ambitions, the Bush administration has shifted to offense in its confrontation with Iran - building up the U.S. military in the Persian Gulf and promising more aggressive moves against Iranian operatives in Iraq and Lebanon. The behind-the-scenes struggle between the two nations could explode into open warfare over a single misstep, analysts and U.S. military officials warn. Iraq has become a proxy battleground between Washington and Tehran, which is challenging - at least rhetorically - America's dominance of the Gulf. That has worried even Iraq's U.S.-backed Shiite prime minister, who - in a reflection of Iraq's complexity - also has close ties to Iran. Iran and the United States are already sparring on the ground. On Jan. 20, militants kidnapped and killed four American soldiers in a raid in Karbala, and a fifth was killed in the firefight. A U.S. defense official said one possibility under study is that Iranian agents either executed or masterminded the attack, a suspicion based on the sophisticated and unusual methods used in the attack, including weapons and uniforms that may have been American. He spoke on condition of anonymity because the probe is ongoing. There has been speculation that the Karbala assault may have been in retaliation for the arrest of five Iranians by U.S. troops in northern Iraq. who were arrested in the northern city of Irbil, included two members of an Iranian Revolutionary Guard force that provides weapons, training and other support to Shiite militants in the Middle East, U.S. Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad said last week. Iraqi and Iranian officials maintain the five were diplomats. Since the Karbala raid, U.S. saber-rattling has intensified. President Bush said this week that U.S. forces in Iraq would take action against Iranian operatives in the country, while insisting he had no intention of attacking Iran. ``If Iran escalates its military action in Iraq to the detriment of our troops and/or innocent Iraqi people, we will respond firmly,'' Bush told National Public Radio. Although little evidence has been made public, U.S. officials have long insisted that Iran was supplying weapons and training to Shiite militias in Iraq, including some that have killed American troops. The No. 2 U.S. general in Iraq told USA Today in an interview published Tuesday that Iran was supplying Iraqi Shiite militias with a variety of powerful weapons, including Katyusha rockets and armor-piercing rocket-propelled grenades. ``We have weapons that we know through serial numbers ... trace back to Iran,'' Lt. Gen. Raymond Odierno said. The Air Force is considering more forceful patrols on the Iraqi side of the border with Iran to counter the smuggling of weapons and bomb supplies, the Los Angeles Times reported, citing senior Pentagon officials. The U.S. is also building up its military presence in the Gulf in what it says is a show of strength directed at Iran. A second aircraft carrier is heading for the region, and Patriot missile batteries are being deployed. Since Bush announced his new Iraq strategy in early January, Iranian officials have raised the alarm repeatedly that the U.S. intends to attack. President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said Iran is ``ready for anything'' in its confrontation with the United States. A newspaper close to Iran's supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei last week threatened retaliation for any U.S. military action - including stopping oil traffic through the Gulf's strategic Hormuz Straits and attacks on U.S. interests. The top editor of the Kayhan daily warned that Iran will turn the Middle East into ``hell'' for the United States and Israel if America attacks. Iran expert Ray Takeyh said the risks are all the greater because Tehran has an ``unhealthy'' disregard for American power, which ``enhances the prospect of a miscalculation.'' Prof. Gary Sick, a leading authority on Iran, believes the U.S. is seeking to divert world attention from the crisis in Iraq and organize a coalition of Israel and conservative Sunni Arab states to confront Iran. ``I see this as a very dangerous long-term policy because it promotes the idea that Sunnis and Shiites should be distrustful of each other, and I think that could come back and bite us later on,'' he said. Iran and the U.S. also are in dispute over Tehran's nuclear program. The United States accuses Iran of secretly developing atomic weapons - an allegation Tehran denies. Iran's defiant refusal to suspend uranium enrichment prompted the U.N. Security Council to impose limited economic sanctions. The U.S. has also beefed up support for Lebanon's government in its power struggle with Hezbollah, the Shiite militia that Washington accuses of acting in Iran's interests. But Lee Feinstein of the Council on Foreign Relations said the U.S. was finding it hard ``to calibrate its message'' to distinguish ``between a stern message and a warning of attack.'' The war of words has raised fears among both Democrats and Republicans in Congress that the United States and Iran are drifting toward armed conflict at a time when America is struggling against determined foes in Iraq and Afghanistan. It has also unnerved the Iraqi government, many of whose members have close ties to Iran. ``We have told the Iranians and the Americans, `We know that you have a problem with each other but we're asking you, please, solve your problems outside of Iraq,''' Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, a Shiite, told CNN on Wednesday. ``We do not want the American forces to take Iraq as a base to attack Iran ... we will not accept Iran using Iraq to attack American forces. But does this exist? It exists and I assure you it exists.'' As the rhetoric grows more strident, a U.S. military official in the Gulf likened the U.S.-Iran standoff to the buildup in hostility in Europe before World War I, when the assassination of the heir to the Austrian throne triggered a tragic war that engulfed a continent. ``A mistake could be made and you could end up in something that neither side ever really wanted, and suddenly it's August 1914 all over again,'' the U.S. officer said on condition of anonymity, because of the sensitivity of the issue. ``I really believe neither side wants a fight.'' Iranian coast guard vessels recently veered into territorial waters on the Arab side of the Gulf, an event that could have been viewed as either a mistake or a provocation, the officer said. Both sides are on tenterhooks. ``A boat crosses a line ... but what does it mean? You've got to be very careful about overreacting,'' the officer said. Even if Iran pulled back from Iraq's conflict, it might not end the country's violence, said Kenneth M. Pollack, research director at the Saban Center for Middle East Policy. ``The truth is that Iraq is a mess. It is in a state of low-level civil war. And all of these groups are largely self-motivated,'' he said on the Council on Foreign Relations Web site. ``But its much easier to blame it on the Iranians.'' In Tehran, political analyst Hermidas Bavand said U.S. force increases were leading many Iranians to believe Washington is looking to pick a fight. ``It's an extremely dangerous situation,'' Bavand said. ``I don't think Tehran wants war under any circumstances. But there might be an accidental event that could escalate into a large confrontation.'' --- AP writer Jim Krane reported from Doha, Qatar. AP writer Tracee Herbaugh in New York contributed to this report. Guardian Unlimited © Guardian News and Media Limited 2007 ***************************************************************** 17 Guardian Unlimited: Israel Has No Plans Against Iran From the Associated Press [UP] Thursday February 1, 2007 5:01 AM By MARK LAVIE Associated Press Writer JERUSALEM (AP) - Israeli Vice Premier Shimon Peres says that Israel does not intend to use military force against Iran, which Israel suspects is building nuclear bombs. In addition to Iran's nuclear program, Israel considers the Mideast country a threat because of repeated declarations by its president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, that the Jewish state should be wiped off the map. Peres spoke Tuesday during ``The Doha Debates,'' a project in which world leaders discuss current events with students in mideast nation of Qatar. According to taped excerpts of Peres' comments, the Israeli leader denied that Israel intended to strike Iran's nuclear facilities. Moderator Tim Sebastian recalled that Peres said last week at the Davos economic forum that there are only two options for dealing with Iran - regime change or military action. Asked if he would rule out military action, Peres said, ``By Israel, yes. Israel doesn't intend to use military action.'' Peres also said that Israel would not interfere in the internal affairs of Iran. Ahmadinejad ``is a problem for the Iranian people because he does not carry neither a promise, nor a solution,'' he said. Qatar and Israel have low-level relations, and visits by senior officials are rare. Israeli leaders have called for international action to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. Israel has said it would take part in such an effort, emphasizing diplomatic means, but it has not ruled out using its military. There has been speculation about the possibility that Israel might send its air force to bomb Iranian nuclear installations, as it did in 1981, when Israel destroyed the Iraqi nuclear reactor in an airstrike. But most experts believe that would not be possible against Iran, which has spread its nuclear facilities around the country, hiding many of the installations. Guardian Unlimited © Guardian News and Media Limited 2007 ***************************************************************** 18 Guardian Unlimited: Paper: NKorea Demands U.S. Lift Sanctions From the Associated Press [UP] Thursday February 1, 2007 8:31 AM AP Photo SEL103 By JAE-SOON CHANG Associated Press Writer SEOUL, South Korea (AP) - North Korea repeated its demand during talks with the United States this week that Washington lift financial restrictions on the communist regime, a pro-Pyongyang newspaper reported Thursday. Experts from Washington and Pyongyang met in Beijing on Tuesday and Wednesday to discuss the financial restrictions the United States imposed over the North's alleged counterfeiting of U.S. currency and money laundering. The meetings ended without a clear breakthrough. North Korea, denying any wrongdoing, has claimed the restrictions were evidence of Washington's hostile attitude toward it and therefore it needs nuclear weapons to protect itself. It was in October that North Korea tested a nuclear bomb, sparking global condemnation and U.N. sanctions. The financial row has been a key impediment to six-nation talks aimed at getting North Korea to give up its nuclear program, as Pyongyang has refused to address disarmament unless the financial restrictions are lifted. North Korea repeated the demand in this week's talks, according to the Choson Sinbo, a Korean-language newspaper based in Japan that has links to the government in Pyongyang. The North is ``demanding that the United States show an attitude of lifting the financial sanctions and not expanding them so as to create an atmosphere for entering into discussions on denuclearization commitments'' in a 2005 accord, said the report posted on the newspaper's Web site. The agreement - the only tangible outcome from the six-party talks - calls for North Korea to trade away its nuclear programs in exchange for security guarantees and aid. But it was never implemented because of the financial restrictions. This week's talks preceded a new round of nuclear negotiations set to resume next week. The top U.S. delegate to the financial talks, Deputy Assistant Treasury Secretary Daniel Glaser, said the two days of talks had validated U.S. suspicions of illegal financial activity by North Korea. He also suggested that the dispute could see an end. ``I think we are now in a position after a very lengthy investigation ... to start moving forward and trying to bring some resolution to this matter,'' Glaser said. The U.S. envoy did not say how the financial dispute would be settled. But there have been media reports that Washington was considering unfreezing some of North Korea's assets, worth $24 million, seized at a Macau bank over the counterfeiting and money laundering concerns. North Korea agreed to resume the nuclear talks, involving China, Japan, the two Koreas, Russia and the U.S., after the United States offered unspecified concessions during rare bilateral talks in Berlin last month. That has raised optimism that the next session, set to begin on Feb. 8, could see real progress. John Negroponte, nominated by President Bush to serve in the No. 2 post in the State Department, said in Washington on Tuesday that there were grounds for optimism due to continued international pressure on Pyongyang. Wu Dawei, China's representative to the talks, also expressed hopes Wednesday that the six nations can reach an agreement after three or four days, but added that ``this requires diligent efforts by all sides.'' Guardian Unlimited © Guardian News and Media Limited 2007 ***************************************************************** 19 Korea Herald: U.S., N.K. end talks on 'productive' note U.S. and North Korean financial officials meeting in Beijing ended discussions on financial sanctions yesterday, describing their talks as "productive." The two sides agreed to meet again but did not set a date. "The focus of today's talks was the issue of Banco Delta Asia, and we got a lot of information that is helpful to us," chief of U.S. delegation to the talks Daniel Glaser told reporters Wednesday evening. "Now we have to take the information we have, put it all together and try to determine what an appropriate way is to move forward with respect to the bank," he said. Pyongyang did not release any official comments on the latest round of talks. The discussions have been key in getting North Korea back to negotiations on its nuclear ambitions. The United States froze North Korean accounts at the Macau-based Banco Delta Asia in late 2005, on suspicions that Pyongyang was counterfeiting U.S. currency and laundering money. The North Korean delegation to the talks was led by O Kwang-chol, president of the DPRK's Foreign Trade Bank. Without disclosing any details of the discussions, the U.S. side said that their suspicions of illegal financial activities have been "vindicated" by the two-day-long talks. Glaser said he looked through information on 50 BDA account holders with his North Korean counterparts in Beijing. "I think we are now in a position after a very lengthy investigation ... to start moving forward and trying to bring some resolution to this matter." Glaser did not say whether North Korea had acknowledged any part in the illicit activities. The North has been claiming the measures are a reflection of the United States' hostile policy toward it and has been demanding its $24 million worth of accounts be unfrozen. It remains to be seen whether the two sides will be able to agree what measures to take next. The BDA talks first opened in December last year on the sidelines of the six-party negotiations. North Korea had cited the BDA sanctions as an issue to be tackled prior to any discussions on nuclear dismantlement. With the financial talks progressing, the six-party talks are expected to resume without a hitch for now, observers said. The six-party nuclear negotiations - comprising the two Koreas, the United States, China, Japan and Russia - are set to reopen in Beijing on Thursday. (angiely@heraldm.com) By Lee Joo-hee 2007.02.02 ***************************************************************** 20 Korea Herald: Korean summit rumors resurface Grand National Party lawmaker Chung Hyung-keun yesterday reignited rumors that the government is pushing for an inter-Korean summit this year. "Contrary to what President Roh Moo-hyun had said, there are apparently working-level discussions with North Korea with an aim to hold an inter-Korean summit on Aug. 15," Chung said at a senior party member meeting. Aug. 15 is Liberation Day, which is celebrated by both Koreas. President Roh had denied similar speculation earlier this year, saying that a summit with the North would only be possible when progress has been made in the nuclear negotiations. Chung said his information had come from a credible source. "I have been told that the government is pushing to hold the Aug. 15 summit in Seoul and to hold four-way talks including the United States and China in September," he said. The plans are in line with turning the cease-fire treaty on the Korean Peninsula into a peace treaty, he explained. The conservative lawmaker also claimed that the plans aimed to undermine opposition forces in the upcoming presidential election, and contended it was premature to sign a peace treaty with the North given lingering suspicions over its commitment to denuclearization. (angiely@heraldm.com) By Lee Joo-hee 2007.02.02 ***************************************************************** 21 YONHAP NEWS: China makes little investment in N. Korea since October nuclear test Friday, February 02, 2007 SEOUL, Feb. 2 (Yonhap) -- China has made little investment in North Korea since the North conducted its first nuclear device test in October last year, but their two-way trade volume rose 21.6 percent year-on-year over the past few months, informed sources said Friday. "Over the three months since the October test, China made no investment in the North except in some low-budget mining development. But North Korea's dependence on China in terms of trade increased sharply," a senior government official said, asking to remain anonymous because of the sensitivity of the information. ***************************************************************** 22 Digital Chosunilbo: Seoul 'Won't Be Content With Nuclear Freeze' in N.Korea Updated Feb.1,2007 10:03 KST N.Korea 'Ready to Suspend Nuclear Activities' Six-Party Talks Likely to Resume Soon N.Korea, U.S. 'Reached Agreement' in Berlin Talks How the U.S. Sees Seoul's N.Korea Policy Seoul ¡®Asked U.S. to Unfreeze N.Korean Accounts¡¯ What Agreement Did N.Korea and U.S. Reach? N.Korea Reports ¡®Positive Shift¡¯ in U.S. Attitude on Nukes Seoul, Beijing to Put N. Korea Reward Package in Writing Nuke Deal May Include Freeing N. Korea Funds Six-Party Nuclear Talks Set for Feb. 8 There's Danger in Bilateral N. Korea-U.S. Talks No Progress in Talks on N.Korea Financial Sanctions Foreign Minister Song Min-soon on Wednesday said six-party talks to resume on Feb 8 aim to ¡°eliminate all of North Korea¡¯s nuclear programs¡± rather than simply return to the status quo ante of 2002 or before the second North Korean nuclear crisis. After freezing activities at a nuclear reactor under the Geneva Agreement between the U.S. and the North in 1994, North Korea started to operate the reactors again in 2003 to produce plutonium, a key material to make nuclear weapons. Pundits have said getting North Korea to freeze nuclear activities again hardly amounts to progress. Song told reporters what the parties hope to achieve this time ¡°will become an integral part¡± of a Sept. 2005 statement of principles where Pyongyang agreed to scrap its nuclear program completely. ¡°Early measures we aim for in the upcoming round should be agreed based on full implementation of the ¡¦ statement,¡± Song said. "We still have a long way to go before adopting a joint statement, though we have gone through a lot of discussions and fine-tuning among the nations involved. Although we hope the countries will adopt a joint written agreement, we will only be able to know if they can reach agreement on everything when we start the negotiation process." Meanwhile, John Negroponte, just nominated as deputy U.S. secretary of state, told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee during his confirmation hearing that the purpose of the six-party talks is to put a freeze on the North¡¯s nuclear reactors and nuclear enrichment reprocessing facilities and to launch an international investigation. He said he ¡°certainly wouldn't rule out" the possibility of a visit to North Korea by the U.S. chief negotiator Christopher Hill if progress is made. (englishnews@chosun.com ) ***************************************************************** 23 Guardian Unlimited: U.S. Hopes for Progress on N. Korea Deal From the Associated Press [UP] Thursday February 1, 2007 9:31 PM AP Photo SEL103 WASHINGTON (AP) - The top U.S. negotiator on North Korea's nuclear program said Thursday he hopes six nations meeting in China next week will be able to take the first concrete steps toward eventual dismantling of the communist nation's nuclear weapons. The comments by Assistant Secretary of State Christopher Hill could mean that North Korea might begin the process of denuclearization while receiving economic benefits from other countries participating in the talks. This would be a significant breakthrough for a bargaining process that has achieved little since it began in August 2003. Meeting with reporters on the eve of his departure for South Korea, Hill declined to say what specific actions he expects when the six nations convene for their sixth round of talks in 3 1/2 years. Participants are the United States, the two Koreas, China, Japan and Russia. ``We will not achieve full denuclearization but we hope get a substantial start,'' Hill said. A December meeting of the six made little headway but the State Department has been hinting for days that the next round should be different. Guardian Unlimited © Guardian News and Media Limited 2007 ***************************************************************** 24 Korea Times: Summit Likely in August Hankooki.com > The Korea Times > Nation By Ryu Jin Staff Reporter Rep. Chung Hyung-keun of the GNP An opposition party lawmaker claimed Thursday that working-level negotiations are underway between Seoul and Pyongyang for an inter-Korean summit in August despite repeated denials by President Roh Moo-hyun. Rep. Chung Hyung-keun, a member of the supreme council of the main opposition Grand National Party (GNP), insisted that the government is pushing for the summit to sway the Dec. 19 presidential election. ``I heard from a reliable source that secret negotiations are underway for a summit between Roh and North Korean leader Kim Jong-il in Seoul on the Aug. 15 Liberation Day,'' he said in a meeting of key GNP post holders. ``Following the summit, the two Koreas, the United States and China might hold a four-way summit in September to replace the armistice with a peace treaty,'' he added. ``I was told the possibilities are quite high.'' Chong Wa Dae denied Chung's guesswork flatly, citing Roh's earlier remarks: ``I've always left the doors open for a summit. But a summit can hardly be held before a certain conclusion is drawn in the six-party talks on North Korea's nuclear problem.'' Chung, a prosecutor-turned-legislator who also served as a high-ranking official in the country's anti-espionage agency, is well known for his ability to collect information as well as his conservative political orientation. He argued that the Roh administration is trying to sway the political landscape in the lead-up to the December election by utilizing the ``summit card,'' which is expected to divide voters by ideology. Chung reminded his fellow lawmakers of the summit between Roh and U.S. President George W. Bush in Hanoi last November, when they talked about a ceremony to sign a peace treaty if North Korea gives up its nuclear ambitions. Speculations have been raised over and over again on a cross-border summit since it, if realized, could have huge implications on the general political configuration ahead of the presidential poll, currently favorable to the conservative GNP. In June 2000, then President Kim Dae-jung flew to Pyongyang to meet North Korean leader Kim Jong-il in the first-ever summit between the two Koreas since the 1950-53 Korean War. Cross-border relations improved drastically since the historic summit, though they were adversely affected by events like North Korea's nuclear test last October. Kim Jong-il vowed to pay a return visit ``at an appropriate time,'' but has not yet made the trip. GNP politicians are concerned about a possible summit since it could deal a blow to the conservative party. Some politicians _ either from the ruling or opposition camps _ made use of inter-Korean affairs to influence major elections in the past. Experts do not rule out the possibility of a Roh-Kim summit since the six-party talks have recently shown some signs of progress and inter-Korean relations could also be restored simultaneously once a breakthrough is found in the nuclear standoff. Earlier this week, Pyongyang proposed that South and North Korea jointly celebrate the anniversaries of the June 15, 2000 Joint Declaration and the Liberation Day which falls on Aug. 15, a sign that could be interpreted as a determination to restore soured relations. South Korea suspended humanitarian assistance toward the poverty-stricken North after Pyongyang went ahead with a missile test in July and then a nuclear test in October. The two Koreas are still technically at war since the fratricidal conflict, in which China and the former Soviet Union backed the communist North while the United States and 15 other countries supported the capitalist South ended in an armistice. jinryu@koreatimes.co.kr02-01-2007 18:10 ***************************************************************** 25 AFP: NKorea may take 'first step' to end nuclear program - US by P. Parameswaran Thu Feb 1, 5:49 PM ET WASHINGTON (AFP) - North Korea" /> North Koreacould agree to implement a "first tranche" of measures to end its nuclear weapons program during the upcoming round of six-nation talks in Beijing next week, the top US negotiator said. "What we hope to do in this round is to implement a first tranche of measures, which will be the beginning of the full implementation of the September (2005) agreement leading to full denuclearization of the Korean peninsula," Assistant Secretary of State Christopher Hill told reporters. He said the move "will be a substantial start" to making the Korean peninsula nuclear weapons free and added "there is a basis for making progress" at the talks in the Chinese capital beginning February 8. Hill declined to elaborate on the measures, but some experts familiar with the talks said the steps could be linked to a freeze by Pyongyang on its nuclear activities at the key Yongbyon reactor in return for some benefits. The Yongbyon complex produces spent fuel that can be "reprocessed" to yield plutonium for a nuclear weapon. Incoming deputy US secretary of state John Negroponte said at his Senate confirming hearing this week that Washington wanted to get North Korea "committed to putting a freeze on its nuclear program" and "subjecting those activities to international inspection." The step-by-step process for North Korea to abandon its atomic weapons program is seen as a rollback by the administration of President George W. Bush" /> President George W. Bushfrom its previous demand for a "complete, verifiable, and irreversible" dismantlement of Pyongyang's nuclear arsenal. Apparently referring to Pyongyang's breach of an earlier agreement to freeze its nuclear activities, Hill said North Korea had been told explicitly that it could not shed its nuclear pariah status unless it completely disbanded its atomic weapons network. "We have made it clear to the North Koreans that they should not be in this for the first tranche because we have a situation where a country has produced plutonium -- depending on who you believe -- for several weapons. "Clear denuclearization is not achieved unless North Korea can get back into the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty as a non-nuclear state and they are not going to be able do that until they give up these nuclear weapons and nuclear programs," he explained. "I think they understand that they have to move beyond the first tranche." Under the September 2005 deal, reached through an earlier series of talks among the United States, North Korea, China, Russia, Japan and South Korea" /> South Korea, Pyongyang agreed to give up its atomic weapons program in exchange for security guarantees, economic aid and improved relations with Washington. But North Korea walked away from the agreement a month later in protest at the imposition of US financial sanctions against a Macau bank accused of money-laundering for the regime in Pyongyang. As part of the deal that enticed North Korea back to negotiations last month, Washington agreed to discuss the sanctions imposed on Banco Delta Asia (BDA) in parallel with the resumed denuclearization talks. The last round of six-party negotiations in December ended in stalemate after North Korea, emboldened by its first-ever test of an atomic bomb in October last year, insisted that the US sanctions and broader UN measures imposed against the North be lifted. The two sides held two days of "very productive" discussions in Beijing this week on the financial sanctions, US negotiator Daniel Glaser told reporters in the Chinese capital Thursday. Asian diplomats said the United States was pushing North Korea to pledge in a written statement it would take immediate action towards denuclearization at the Beijing talks next week. Hill also moved to distance the current US strategy from the so-called Agreed Framework implemented during the administration of then President Bill Clinton" /> Bill Clintonthat was also aimed at freezing North Korea's nuclear program. That agreement resulted from direct US-North Korea talks but collapsed after the North allegedly carried out a secret program to enrich uranium, triggering the current standoff in 2002. "I will say that we have a six-party process. It is not just the US," Hill said. "It's a little more difficult for any one country to defy the other five participants than it is to have one country defy the whims of another country." Copyright © 2007 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 26 Star-Telegram: Irrepressible liberal columnist Molly Ivins dies 02/01/2007 | By JOHN MORITZ STAR-TELEGRAM AUSTIN BUREAU [Molly Ivins was a STAR-TELEGRAM ARCHIVES Molly Ivins was a "Texas original," President Bush said Wednesday. AUSTIN -- Molly Ivins, whose biting columns mixed liberal populism with an irreverent Texas wit, died Wednesday at her home in Austin after an up-and-down, seven-year battle with breast cancer. She was 62. Ms. Ivins, the Star-Telegram's political columnist for nine years ending in 2001, had written for The New York Times, the Dallas Times-Herald and Time magazine and had been a sought-after pundit on television talk shows where she provided a Texas slant on issues ranging from President Bush's pedigree to the culture wars rooted in the 1960s. "She was magical in her writing," said Mike Blackman, a former Star-Telegram executive editor who hired Ms. Ivins at the Austin bureau in 1992, a few months after the Times-Herald folded. "She could turn a phrase in such a way that a pretty hard-hitting point didn't hurt so bad." Ms. Ivins, a California native who moved to Houston as a child with her family, was diagnosed with breast cancer in 1999. Two years later, after enduring a radical mastectomy and chemotherapy, doctors told her she had a 70 percent chance of remaining cancer-free for five years. At the time, she said she liked the odds. But the cancer recurred in 2003 and again last year. In recent weeks, she had suspended her twice-weekly column for Creators Syndicate, allowing guest writers to use the space while she underwent further treatment. She made a brief return to writing in mid-January, urging readers to resist President Bush's increase in the number of troops in Iraq. She likened her call to an old-fashioned "newspaper crusade." "We are the people who run this country," Ms. Ivins said in the column published in the Jan. 14 edition of the Star-Telegram. "We are the deciders. And every single day, every single one of us needs to step outside and take some action to help stop this war. "Raise hell," she continued. "Think of something to make the ridiculous look ridiculous. Make our troops know we're for them and are trying to get them out of there. Hit the streets to protest Bush's proposed surge." She ended the piece by endorsing last Saturday's peace march in Washington: "We need people in the streets, banging pots and pans and demanding, 'Stop it, now!'" Ms. Ivins died at 5:24 p.m. Wednesday at her home in central Austin, representatives of her family said. President Bush called Ms. Ivins a "Texas original" in a statement Wednesday. "I respected her convictions, her passionate belief in the power of words, and her ability to turn a phrase. She fought her illness with that same passion. Her quick wit and commitment to her beliefs will be missed. Laura and I send our condolences to Molly Ivins' family and friends." The spice of Texas Born Mary Tyler Ivins on Aug. 30, 1944, in Monterey, Calif., Ms. Ivins was raised in the upscale River Oaks section of Houston. She earned her journalism degree at elite Smith College in Massachusetts in 1965. From there she ventured to Minnesota, taking a job as a police reporter for the Minneapolis Tribune. Growing weary of the winters in the Upper Midwest and missing the spice of Texas food and its politics, Ms. Ivins moved to Austin to become co-editor of the Texas Observer, long considered the state's liberal conscience. Nadine Eckhardt, the former wife of the late Texas novelist Billy Lee Bramer and who later married former U.S. Rep. Bob Eckhardt, said Ms. Ivins soon became a fixture in the Austin political and cocktail party scene in the early 1970s. "That's where she became the Molly Ivins as we've come to know her," said Eckhardt, Ms. Ivins' friend for nearly 40 years. "The Observer had such wonderful writers doing such wonderful stories at the time, and Molly was always right in the middle of everything." Her writing flair caught the attention of The New York Times, which hired her to cover city hall, then later moved her to the statehouse bureau in Albany. Later, she was assigned to the Times' Rocky Mountain bureau in Denver. Even though she wrote the Times' obituary for Elvis Presley in 1977, Ms. Ivins said later that she and the Times proved to be a mismatch. In a 2002 interview with the Star-Telegram, Ms. Ivins recalled that she would write about something that "squawked like a $2 fiddle" only to have a Times editor rewrite it to say "as an inexpensive instrument." So Ms. Ivins returned to Austin in 1982 to become a columnist for the Dallas Times-Herald and reconnect with such political figures as Ann Richards, who would later become governor, and Bob Bullock, then the hard-drinking state comptroller who later wielded great power as lieutenant governor. Trademark language Her column provided Ms. Ivins the freedom to express her views with the colorful language that would become her trademark. She called such figures as Ross Perot, former U.S. Sen. John Tower and ex-Gov. Bill Clements "runts with attitudes." As a candidate for governor, George W. Bush became "Shrub," a nickname she never tired of using. Surprised became "whomper-jawed." An angry person would "throw a walleyed fit." Ms. Ivins, who was single and had no children, told readers about her cancer in a matter-of-fact afterward in an otherwise ordinary column. "I have contracted an outstanding case of breast cancer, from which I fully intend to recover," she wrote in her Dec. 14, 1999, column. "I don't need get-well cards, but I would like the beloved women readers to do something for me: Go. Get. The. Damn. Mammogram. Done." Ms. Ivins wrote three books and co-authored a fourth. She was a three-time finalist for a Pulitzer Prize and had served on Amnesty International's Journalism Network, but the iconoclastic writer often said that her two highest honors were being banned from the conservative campus of Texas A University and having the Minneapolis police name their mascot pig after her when she covered the department. According to family representatives, Ms. Ivins is survived by her sister, Sara Ivins Maley of Albuquerque, N.M., her brother, Andy Ivins of London; sister-in-law Carla Ivins, nephew Drew and niece Darby; niece Margot Hutchison and her husband, Neil, and their children Sam, Andy and Charlie of San Diego, Calif., and nephew Paul Maley and his wife, Karianna, and their children Marty, Anneli and Finnbar of Eltham, Victoria, Australia. Funeral arrangements were pending. Staff writer Jay Root contributed to this report.>/i> THE WORD ON MOLLY Here are some examples of the way Molly Ivins used the language and the way others used the language to describe her: On covering politics: "I believe politics is the finest form of entertainment in the state of Texas: better than the zoo, better than the circus, rougher than football, and even more aesthetically satisfying than baseball." On her own politics: "Yes, I've called myself a little-'d' democrat. I am a populist, maybe even a left-wing Libertarian. It used to be if you didn't have a hyphen in your definition, you clearly had not thought about it." On experience: "The longer I cover politics, the more I respect good compromises. I didn't used to." Her way of paying a compliment: "He (Democrat Jim Mattox) was a wonderfully good attorney general. And somewhere underneath all that ruthless-pol, no-holds-barred fighter stuff there lurks a decent human being." Her views on President Bush, whom she had known since their high school days: "Although Bush rather promptly becomes defensive and prickly when questioned, he is by and large perfectly affable." Gov. Rick Perry on Ivins: "Molly Ivins' clever and colorful perspectives on people and politics gained her national acclaim and admiration that crossed party lines." Fort Worth Mayor Mike Moncrief on Ivins: "She has a really big heart and she really cares a lot about Texas. I don't think anyone has escaped the wrath of her pen." Former state Rep. Kent Grusendorf, R-Arlington: "When you've got a New York City mind-set with a Texas twist, it's really hard to get it right." Conservative syndicated columnist Cal Thomas: "She's tough, she's pugnacious, she makes us pay attention. I think she argues her position very well. Obviously, she is wrong all the time, but she'd say the same about me." Compiled by staff writer John Moritz John Moritz, 512-476-4294 jmoritz@star-telegram.com | Copyright | About the McClatchy Company ***************************************************************** 27 Star-Telegram.com: Molly Ivins: A fond remembrance 02/01/2007 | By MIKE BLACKMAN SPECIAL TO THE STAR-TELEGRAM I remember the first column Molly Ivins submitted to the Star-Telegram. It was the same day I saw my newspaper career pass before my eyes. It was February 1992, and we had just hired Molly as a full-time staff member — a free-ranging, free-wheeling political columnist based in Austin. We — the Star-Telegram — hoped to bask in the glow in our nationally renowned, left-leaning, populist writer who was a three-time Pulitzer Prize finalist and best-selling author. We hoped to signal to our newspaper peers that we had hit the big time. We hoped, perhaps naively, our circulation might rise on the wings of her soaring prose. We hoped we weren't making a big mistake. Since her longtime newspaper, the Dallas Times-Herald, had folded two months earlier, media outlets from across the nation were tussling for her talents. We joined the fray with little more than hope and a prayer, and more than a bit of unsolicited encouragement from various colleagues and friends who felt compelled to offer advice: "Fort Worth readers won't stand for a columnist like Ivins — they're convinced she's a pinko commie-lover." And: "You're gonna do the Hell what?" And: "She closed one paper — you trying to close yours, too?" Several editor friends, knowing we were trying to hire Molly, sent her messages: If you stay in Texas, they said, the Star-Telegram is where you want to be. Her old editor in Dallas, Roy Bode, was one. "You all make a good fit," he said. Fortunately, senior editors at the Star-Telegram thought trying to hire Molly was a grand idea, as did then-publisher Rich Connor, who suggested she'd be a sure-fire way to grab readers' attention. A more prescient thought he never uttered. Her first column, a Sunday missive in which she introduced herself to Star-Telegram readers and saluted Fort Worth's character and values, proved to be vintage Molly — elegant, insightful, and funny as hell. It just didn't start out that way, the column. We quickly learned at the Star-Telegram that editing a high-octane writer like Molly could, at once, be both precious and perilous.       When Ken Bunting and I flew to Austin in January 1992 to interview Molly, we agreed to meet for lunch at the Oasis, a trendy watering hole perched precariously on a hillside overlooking Lake Travis. Ken was deputy managing editor of the paper, had known Molly from his days as our Austin bureau chief, and, I figured, would be the gilded edge we needed to woo Molly to Fort Worth. The lunch — and interview — turned miserable. A blustery, hard norther had blown through overnight and the wind gusts had to be topping 50 mph, at least. I had brought a suit and tie for lunch, but discarded them for Levis and a motorcycle jacket, it was so cold. The old barn-like Oasis creaked and groaned and tipped with every blast. I couldn't finish my cheeseburger as I kept running to the west wall of windows — looking down the hillside to see where we were all going to tumble and die. My stomach tumbled the whole time. The only thing I remember about the interview was promising her that we wouldn't screw up her columns with clumsy, heavy-handed or skittish editing; we wouldn't rob her of her indomitable voice. Her response: money wasn't important, and decent, well-intentioned editing she could live with; she just wanted her freedom to call things the way she saw them, with passion and fun, no cows sacred. Exactly what we want we said, adding, delicately, a modest caveat about libel and good taste. Our readers were, well, just regular folks, after all. West Texas-oriented Fort Worth, we said, though surprisingly tolerant of mainstream quacks and contrary views, would never be confused with New York City. She had kin in Fort Worth, she said. "I always liked that town. Good folks." Lunch finished, Ken and I figured the most we had accomplished was one more at the company trough. A trip for nothing. "When do I start?" she asked. It was one of the happiest days of my newspaper career.       It didn't last long, the euphoria. "OK, Mister Editor," Ken said, dropping off a copy of Molly's first column, scheduled to run in a couple of days, "you might want to look at what Molly wrote." I'd been in the business long enough to know that the words "you might want to look at" rarely meant "you're going to love it." I read the lead paragraph. "Good god, Molly can't say this!" I said. "I think that was the name of her first book," said Ken. "This is crazy," I said. "This can't run this way." Ken laughed a little. I banged my head on my desk, and said to myself, "Oh, Lord, why me?" "Maybe you should call her," he said. "What — and say, ‘Molly, will you please consider altering the name of the sex toy in your lead?' Hell, she'll quit on the spot, and we'll all look like fools." First column, and already I was being tested. I could just see this celebrated, nationally acclaimed writer think of me as a hick hack. But I always edited with my First Baptist mama in mind — what would Mama do? — and I couldn't back down. Family newspaper and all that. And thus Molly'd probably resign, knowing she'd made a huge mistake coming to write for us "regular folks" in Fort Worth. A mess was truly brewing. I could just see my publisher, known to embrace an equal-opportunity temper, would surely take decisive action: me out the door for embarrassing all concerned. OK, fair enough. No, it didn't come to that. And now it all seems so small, so quaint, so far away. What really happened was this. I finally got Molly on the phone, hemmed and hawed and cajoled and groveled and finally, after all the agonizing and sputtering, knowing how proud she was of her word choices and their impact, said something like, "Molly, I just want be sure we want to say ‘dildo' in the lead. I'm a little worried…" Silence. Uh-oh. I was expecting the worst. Then: "Oh, Honey," she said, sweet as a prom-bound belle, "you change that to anything you want, and don't you worry…" Don't you worry your pretty little head, I thought. Not until an hour after news of her death Wednesday did I learn from Ken that Molly, on the day she sent in her first column, had in fact called the switchboard and left a message for him — you might not want to let this word get in, she said. She didn't always try to test us, Ken said. "She was very much a professional." Together, Ken and Molly had removed the word, crafting a new graph, which said, in part: "…Should you happen to contravene a law made by the only politicians we've got, this too will become a matter of some moment to you. For example, if you happen to possess six or more phallic sex toys, you are a felon under Texas law. In their boundless wisdom, our solons decided that five or fewer of the devices make you a mere hobbyist." I could have killed them both.       On the day Molly came to Fort Worth to meet her fellow staffers, I got what I thought was a whizbang idea, with a bit of mischief, to boot. After picking her up at the airport, I swung by the auto dealership where then-Arlington Mayor Richard Greene worked. Mr. Republican himself — think really tight underwear. As conservative as the political assembly line ever produced. But a straight shooter and good guy. What the heck, I thought, what poetry for Molly's first introduction to be to one of the Star-Telegram's most prominent detractors. "I wouldn't say I was stunned," Greene recalled last night, "Let's just say I was surprised in the extreme." The meeting lasted about 20 minutes. After each got over a mite of unease, they carried on like, if not longtime friends, cordial acquaintances. Both were gracious and good-humored, and genuinely appreciated the incongruence of their encounter. I remember thinking: Molly and Star-Telegram readers might just do all right together. "Even conservative Republicans have to admit that with her use of words, her use of the language and her commentary and criticism, she gave Texas an identity," Greene said. "She helped the whole country understand Texans. "I will always carry the memory of that meeting with me."       Molly and I weren't close friends, but we visited occasionally over the years. She took me to little Tex-Mex joints in Austin, let two of my children spend a week camping on her floor during a sports camp at UT; I once told her my daughter, named Molly after a character in a McMurtry novel, I wished I had named her for her. On another Austin visit, she took me back to the Oasis in her new 18-wheeler pickup (gussied up like some LaGrange parlor), and after lunch she toured me through the iconic Hippie Hollow of skinny-dip fame, and then she went for a swim in Lake Travis: a powerful picture of grace gliding through the whitecaps; from the bank I could see her, in all her grace and glide, 30 years earlier, a basketball stalwart at Smith College. Later that day we talked about her family, about the relationship with her oil executive father, about estrangement and hurts and forgiveness and healing. I suggested, practically begged her, to consider writing her memoirs. Maybe, she said. Maybe some day, but, "Honey," she said, "I've got more important things to do." I never saw her again after that; we passed messages every year or so. I was saddened to see her leave the Star-Telegram in 2001, two years after I retired. Wednesday night, Ken Bunting, now a newspaper executive in Seattle, sent me his thoughts about Molly. "She was one of a kind, with a Texas-sized presence about her that was totally devoid of pretense. I'll never forget our trip to Austin to convince her she wanted to come to work for the Star-Telegram. We practiced our sales spiel over and over, trying our best to perfect it. But she told me many times she was sold the moment you walked into the Oasis restaurant wearing a leather jacket and no tie. She knew right away you were the kind of newspaper editor she wanted to work for." Lucky were we all, for Molly to pass our way. Mike Blackman, a former editor at the Star-Telegram, teaches journalism at Sam Houston State University in Huntsville, Texas. | Copyright | About the McClatchy Company ***************************************************************** 28 Star Tribune: Editorial: Room for optimism on renewable energy No need to assume progress must be slow and incremental. Published: February 01, 2007 The European Renewable Energy Council/Greenpeace report can be found at www.energyblueprint.info. Perhaps the most discouraging aspect of the Bush administration's foot-dragging approach to renewable energy is its implication that incremental progress is the best we can expect. But there are plenty of alternative visions of future energy production in the United States and the world, and two of particular interest -- as well as considerable encouragement -- were published in the last few weeks. In one, the European Renewable Energy Council teamed with Greenpeace to project a scenario in which renewable sources -- chiefly wind, solar, biomass, hydro and the ocean tides -- provide fully half the world's power by mid-century. Now, 50 percent is a big number. It's notably larger than the 14 percent projected last year by the International Energy Agency, which envisioned an essentially business-as-usual pattern over the next few decades. But the reports are based on strikingly different assumptions, both political and economic, and the EREC/Greenpeace model is hardly irrational. The IAE's numbers, issued last year, were based on oil prices dropping or remaining fairly steady through 2030, while energy demand increases by 50 percent and government policies continue to favor continued primary reliance on coal, oil and natural gas. The EREC/Greenpeace model assumes sharply higher oil prices in the years ahead, along with a slight reduction in energy demand as improved efficiency offsets population growth, and as national governments get serious about throttling back emissions of globe-warming combustion gases. Realists may incline more toward the EREC/Greenpeace view on oil prices, and one needn't be a wild-eyed optimistist to imagine that shifting public attitudes on the dangers of global warming may begin to change the regulatory climate -- even in the United States. The other report focuses much more narrowly on how U.S. electricity needs might be met with geothermal energy -- a source that has lacked the marquee status of wind and solar in recent years (and, indeed, gets short shrift in the IAE analysis). As reported in Scientific American, a study commissioned by the U.S. Department of Energy and conducted at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology has found that heat from the Earth's core has the potential to meet this nation's electricity needs 2,000 times over -- and affordably, too. Here is technology at its simplest: Drill wells into the hot rocks below the Earth's surface, to depths not uncommon in today's oil fields. Cycle water through these shafts and draw off the heat, using about 40 percent of it for direct heating and 15 percent to make electricity. This has been a familiar process for nearly a century in California, where utilities have taken advantage of earthquake-fractured bedrock and water deposits energy near the surface. Deep drilling obviously raises the cost of geothermal power, but the MIT report puts the nationwide average at roughly the same as today's coal-generated power (and much cheaper than the output of a new nuclear plant). Moreover, building geothermal plants away from the fault zones avoids the technology's chief downside -- triggering earthquakes in vulnerable geology. Would somebody at the Energy Department please slip a copy to the president? Star Tribune. All rights reserved. ||||||||||| 425 Portland Av. S., Minneapolis, MN 55488 (612) 673-4000 ['' border=0] ***************************************************************** 29 Boston Globe: House panel probing Bush's record on signing statements WASHINGTON -- The new chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, John Conyers Jr. of Michigan, said yesterday that he is launching an aggressive investigation into whether the Bush administration has violated any of the laws it claimed a right to ignore in presidential "signing statements." By Charlie Savage, Globe Staff | February 1, 2007 WASHINGTON -- The new chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, John Conyers Jr. of Michigan, said yesterday that he is launching an aggressive investigation into whether the Bush administration has violated any of the laws it claimed a right to ignore in presidential "signing statements." Bush has claimed that his executive powers allow him to bypass more than 1,100 laws enacted since he took office. But administration officials insist that Bush's signing statements merely question the laws' constitutionality, and do not necessarily mean that the president also authorized his subordinates to violate them. Conyers said the president has no power " to ignore duly enacted laws he has negotiated with Congress and signed." And he vowed to find out whether the administration has followed each law it challenged -- including laws touching on classified national security matters, such as the tactics used to interrogate suspected terrorists and the FBI's use of the Patriot Act. "This is a constitutional issue that no self-respecting federal legislature should tolerate," Conyers said, and he added that the committee was determined to "get to the bottom of this matter, and to be blunt, we are not going to take no for an answer." The Michigan Democrat made his remarks at the committee's first oversight hearing since Democrats took control of Congress, which Conyers devoted to signing statements. He called the hearing a kickoff to his plans to use the coming session to probe the administration's "growing abuse of power." Democrats on the Judiciary Committee are beefing up their staff by hiring a special "oversight and investigative unit" of about six attorneys to lead the panel's probes of the administration. The group is headed by Elliot Minc- berg , formerly the general counsel of the liberal activist group People for the American Way. Republicans on the committee complained about the hearing, saying that the controversy over the Bush administration's signing statements is overblown. But Democrats said they wanted to know whether Bush has followed through on his claims that the Constitution gives him the power to exempt executive branch officials from laws that Congress has passed to regulate the government, including affirmative action hiring requirements, a ban on all forms of torture, and oversight provisions in the Patriot Act. Deputy Assistant Attorney General John P. Elwood testified that the committee will find nothing amiss. He noted that Bush has repeatedly said his administration does not torture, and said that the Department of Justice has not held back any information from Congress about its use of the Patriot Act. Elwood also rejected the notion that Bush's signing statements represent a "power grab." Whatever power the Constitution gives the president, he said, exists regardless of the president's decision to note it in a signing statement. "Congress has no power to enact unconstitutional laws . . . whether the president issues a signing statement or not," Elwood said, adding Bush has attached signing statements to about the same number of bills as his recent predecessors of both parties. But critics said that it is misleading to focus on the number of bills instead of the number of challenges, since Congress often lumps many different laws together in a single omnibus bill. Bush has used signing statements to challenge 1,149 laws that were contained in 150 bills, according to data compiled by Christopher Kelley, a political science professor at Miami University in Ohio . By comparison, all previous presidents combined challenged about 600 total laws. The American Bar Association last year sounded an alarm about the escalating use of signing statements. ABA president Karen Mathis testified that it is "contrary to the rule of law and our constitutional system of separation of powers" for a president to sign a bill and then instruct the executive branch that parts are unconstitutional. Presidents must either veto a bill and give Congress a chance to override their judgments, or they must sign it and obey all of it as written, she said. Harvard Law School professor Charles Ogletree testified that signing statements create potential dangers even if the executive branch does not violate the laws. Ogletree cited a signing statement Bush attached to a December 2006 law banning the transfer of nuclear technology to India if it violates international non proliferation guidelines. Bush claimed that he has independent power to run America's foreign affairs and so he would view the ban as merely "advisory." Indian newspapers reported that the government of India took note of Bush's statement, Ogletree said, raising the possibility it would not take the ban seriously.[ /] © Copyright 2007 Globe Newspaper Company. ***************************************************************** 30 Winnipeg News: Lost Nuke exhibition to open at aviation museum winnipegsun.com - Thu, February 1, 2007 Its among the most compelling mysteries in Canadian aviation history, with a cross-border twist. Whatever happened to a nuclear bomb dropped by a U.S. military plane on a training run off British Columbia's coast more than a half-century ago? That question, and exhaustive details behind the February 1950 flight of the U.S. air force's B-36B bomber, will be laid out in Winnipeg beginning tomorrow. The Western Canada Aviation Museum’s Lost Nuke exhibit will display artifacts from the plane that crashed into a B.C. mountainside after the failure of three of its six engines, in addition to a small-scale yet detailed model of the aircraft itself. And in the Ferry Road museum’s main hangar, a full-size replica of the Mark IV nuclear bomb — a de-activated “dummy” explosive that was reportedly dropped intentionally by the aircraft and its 17-member crew into the Pacific Ocean following the engine failure — stands more than four metres tall. The exhibit — to remain at the museum through the end of May — not only raises questions about the fate of the bomb and five crew members reported missing after the incident, but highlights military paranoia that had come to North America with the Cold War. CANOE home | We welcome your feedback. Copyright © 2006, Canoe Inc.All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 31 NRC Votes Against Protections of Reactors Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2007 07:11:21 -0600 (CST) http://www.citizen.org/pressroom/release.cfm?ID=2369 Committee to Bridge the Gap * Nuclear Information and Resource Service *Public Citizen January 29, 2007 NRC Votes Against Requiring Reactors to Be Protected From Air Attacks Or A Large Number of Attackers Move Jeopardizes Safety of Millions, Public Interest Groups Say WASHINGTON, D.C. - The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission's (NRC) vote today against requiring existing nuclear power plants to be protected against 9/11-type terrorist attacks jeopardizes the safety of millions, three public interest organizations said. The new rule, which is supposed to lay out the extent to which operators must protect reactors from terrorist attacks, doesn't require protection against attacks by airplanes, nor against more than a small number of attackers on the ground - a number that would represent a fraction of the 19 terrorists involved in 9/11. The 9/11 Commission found that the plotters had considered targeting nuclear reactors. A successful terrorist attack on a nuclear plant could cause a devastating radioactive release. "Rather than requiring measures to prevent a plane crash from damaging vulnerable parts of a nuclear plant, which would be the smartest course, the government is relying on post-crash measures and evacuation plans to attempt to 'mitigate' the public's exposure to radiation," said Michele Boyd, legislative director of Public Citizen's Energy Program. "Fire prevention is always better than fire fighting. Nuclear terrorism prevention is far more prudent than trying to reduce radiation exposures after the fact." On Friday, Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), chair of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, wrote to the NRC that "the communities that surround existing plants need to be confident that the NRC, as the regulator charged with nuclear safety, did all it could to ensure that plants defend against current security threats. In particular, communities should be assured that the plants are prepared to defend against large attacking forces and commercial aircraft." Failing to address these issues, Boxer wrote, would be at odds with the intent of Congress in passing the Energy Policy Act of 2005. Commissioners will be required to explain their actions when they next appear before her committee, she said. The Energy Policy Act of 2005 directed the NRC to undertake a rulemaking to revise its "Design Basis Threat" - regulations defining the terrorist threat against which reactor operators must be prepared to protect. Congress specified that the rulemaking must consider the events of 9/11, attacks by multiple coordinated teams of a large number of attackers, attacks from the air, and the use of explosives of considerable size and other modern weaponry, among a number of other factors. "Rather than upgrading protections, the proposed rule merely codifies the status quo, reaffirming the existing, woefully inadequate security measures already in place at the nation's reactors," said Daniel Hirsch, president of the Committee to Bridge the Gap. In September 2004, the Committee to Bridge the Gap filed a petition for rulemaking requesting that existing nuclear plants be required to construct "Beamhenge" shields - consisting of steel I-beams and cabling - around sensitive parts of the facilities so an incoming plane would hit the shield, and not the reactor, spent fuel pool or other critical targets. Despite receiving more than 800 comments in support of the petition (including by eight state attorneys general) and almost none in opposition, the NRC rejected the proposal. It asserted that it saw no need to protect reactors against air attack because "mitigation" measures and evacuation plans for surrounding areas to lessen public radiation exposures could be activated after a plane crash that results in the release of radioactivity. "We are shocked that the NRC would even consider disregarding aircraft attacks on existing reactors with so many operable airfields within 10 miles of most nuclear power stations," said Paul Gunter, director of the Reactor Watchdog Project for the Nuclear Information and Resource Service. "Given that it is impossible to react to a fast-breaking event such as a local private plane laden with explosives, structural defenses against aircraft attack must be inserted into regulations - if not by NRC, then by Congress." The NRC also rejected any requirement to protect against attacks by groups of terrorists comparable in size to the four teams totaling 19 people that were involved in the 9/11 attacks. Instead, NRC staff argued that 9/11 should be considered four separate, individual attacks involving only the number of terrorists in a single plane. "Protecting reactors from a small fraction of the number of terrorists involved in 9/11 is irresponsible in the extreme," said Hirsch. "Have we learned nothing from that horrible event?" The NRC rulemaking was initiated in part in response to a 2004 lawsuit by Public Citizen that challenged NRC's existing security requirements, which were adopted behind closed-doors with the nuclear industry and without public participation. ### Note: A two-minute animation of the vulnerability of reactors to air attack, and how to protect them, narrated by Martin Sheen, can be viewed by clicking here. Stills for print reporters and broadcast-quality QuickTime video file for TV can be made available electronically upon request. ------------------------------------------------- Progchat_action is a non-partisan and progressive political news weblog, chat, and action discussion alternative in cyberspace: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/progchat_action/ ***************************************************************** 32 Outrageous: NRC Votes Against Protections of Reactors Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2007 16:04:07 -0600 (CST) Hello friends, The release below is an important one, so I hope you'll take a couple of moments to look it over. Nuclear power is bad news for so many reasons, most of which are based largely on the inherent danger of radioactive materials. This is why waste is a (very long-lived) problem. This is why reactor operating safety is such a big concern. This is why mining and other fuel chain activities--including transport--present serious risks. This is also largely the reason nukes are so damn expensive; they need one after another multiply redundant safety system to ensure that when something goes wrong there's a backup, and then a backup for the backup. Well, nukes are also pre-positioned WMDs. They are inviting terror targets and, if one was successfully attacked, it could lead to far more death and destruction than 9-11 or even Bhopal. Thank goodness we have groups like Committee to Bridge the NIRS, and Public Citizen's Critical Mass Project to raise these concerns. Unfortunately, however, the NRC is much more responsive to the industry's desire to reduce costs than it is to issue of public health and safety, as the release below points out. This certainly should be a wake-up call for those who think the NRC is looking out for our wellbeing. The problems inherent in this flawed technology make it such that we should not be operating our existing reactors and we certainly shouldn't be squandering hundreds of billions of dollars on new nukes. This money is sorely needed, and would be much better spent on efficiency and renewables, to facilitate the transition to a safe, sustainable energy future. Check it out, Mark Haim http://www.citizen.org/pressroom/release.cfm?ID=2369 Committee to Bridge the Gap * Nuclear Information and Resource Service *Public Citizen January 29, 2007 NRC Votes Against Requiring Reactors to Be Protected From Air Attacks Or A Large Number of Attackers Move Jeopardizes Safety of Millions, Public Interest Groups Say WASHINGTON, D.C. - The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission's (NRC) vote today against requiring existing nuclear power plants to be protected against 9/11-type terrorist attacks jeopardizes the safety of millions, three public interest organizations said. The new rule, which is supposed to lay out the extent to which operators must protect reactors from terrorist attacks, doesn't require protection against attacks by airplanes, nor against more than a small number of attackers on the ground - a number that would represent a fraction of the 19 terrorists involved in 9/11. The 9/11 Commission found that the plotters had considered targeting nuclear reactors. A successful terrorist attack on a nuclear plant could cause a devastating radioactive release. "Rather than requiring measures to prevent a plane crash from damaging vulnerable parts of a nuclear plant, which would be the smartest course, the government is relying on post-crash measures and evacuation plans to attempt to 'mitigate' the public's exposure to radiation," said Michele Boyd, legislative director of Public Citizen's Energy Program. "Fire prevention is always better than fire fighting. Nuclear terrorism prevention is far more prudent than trying to reduce radiation exposures after the fact." On Friday, Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), chair of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, wrote to the NRC that "the communities that surround existing plants need to be confident that the NRC, as the regulator charged with nuclear safety, did all it could to ensure that plants defend against current security threats. In particular, communities should be assured that the plants are prepared to defend against large attacking forces and commercial aircraft." Failing to address these issues, Boxer wrote, would be at odds with the intent of Congress in passing the Energy Policy Act of 2005. Commissioners will be required to explain their actions when they next appear before her committee, she said. The Energy Policy Act of 2005 directed the NRC to undertake a rulemaking to revise its "Design Basis Threat" - regulations defining the terrorist threat against which reactor operators must be prepared to protect. Congress specified that the rulemaking must consider the events of 9/11, attacks by multiple coordinated teams of a large number of attackers, attacks from the air, and the use of explosives of considerable size and other modern weaponry, among a number of other factors. "Rather than upgrading protections, the proposed rule merely codifies the status quo, reaffirming the existing, woefully inadequate security measures already in place at the nation's reactors," said Daniel Hirsch, president of the Committee to Bridge the Gap. In September 2004, the Committee to Bridge the Gap filed a petition for rulemaking requesting that existing nuclear plants be required to construct "Beamhenge" shields - consisting of steel I-beams and cabling - around sensitive parts of the facilities so an incoming plane would hit the shield, and not the reactor, spent fuel pool or other critical targets. Despite receiving more than 800 comments in support of the petition (including by eight state attorneys general) and almost none in opposition, the NRC rejected the proposal. It asserted that it saw no need to protect reactors against air attack because "mitigation" measures and evacuation plans for surrounding areas to lessen public radiation exposures could be activated after a plane crash that results in the release of radioactivity. "We are shocked that the NRC would even consider disregarding aircraft attacks on existing reactors with so many operable airfields within 10 miles of most nuclear power stations," said Paul Gunter, director of the Reactor Watchdog Project for the Nuclear Information and Resource Service. "Given that it is impossible to react to a fast-breaking event such as a local private plane laden with explosives, structural defenses against aircraft attack must be inserted into regulations - if not by NRC, then by Congress." The NRC also rejected any requirement to protect against attacks by groups of terrorists comparable in size to the four teams totaling 19 people that were involved in the 9/11 attacks. Instead, NRC staff argued that 9/11 should be considered four separate, individual attacks involving only the number of terrorists in a single plane. "Protecting reactors from a small fraction of the number of terrorists involved in 9/11 is irresponsible in the extreme," said Hirsch. "Have we learned nothing from that horrible event?" The NRC rulemaking was initiated in part in response to a 2004 lawsuit by Public Citizen that challenged NRC's existing security requirements, which were adopted behind closed-doors with the nuclear industry and without public participation. ### Note: A two-minute animation of the vulnerability of reactors to air attack, and how to protect them, narrated by Martin Sheen, can be viewed by clicking here. http://www.committeetobridgethegap.org/ Stills for print reporters and broadcast-quality QuickTime video file for TV can be made available electronically upon request. Mid-Missouri Peaceworks 804-C E. Broadway Columbia, MO 65201 573-875-0539 E-mail: mail@midmopeaceworks.org Web site: www.midmopeaceworks.org Check out our News Blog http://www.midmopeaceworks.org/articles.php "Acquiescence in Bush's monstrous war in Iraq has amply demonstrated the political elite's limited capacity for introspection, independent thought and civic courage." Stephen F. Cohen, The Nation, July 10, 2006 No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG. Version: 7.5.441 / Virus Database: 268.17.18/662 - Release Date: 1/31/2007 3:16 PM ***************************************************************** 33 Helsingin Sanomat: Construction delays at nuclear plant spark row over compensation Friday 2.2.2007 Serious delays in the construction of Finland’s fifth commercial nuclear reactor have led to sharp disagreements between the Finnish energy company TVO and the French builder in the project, Areva, on the amount of compensation that the builder should be liable for. At a press conference in Olkiluoto where the reactor is being built, TVO’s Martin Landtman and Philippe Knoche, the head of the project for the Areva-Siemens consortium, did not want to take specific stands on the size of the fines to be paid, but both agreed that differences exist. Construction of the new reactor, the third at the Olkiluoto plant on Finland’s west coast, is a year and a half behind schedule. Because of the delay, losses in TVO electricity production could reach up to EUR 600 million. Landtman emphasises that TVO has an unambiguous contract on the price and construction schedule for the plant, with items on fines for breaches, and mechanisms for resolving disputes, but that the content of the items is a business secret. "There is four years worth of construction work left, so what is most important now is to concentrate on it", Landtman notes. In early December Knoche replaced the previous head of the project, Ulrich Giese. Knoche says that Areva-Siemens is not willing to pay full compensation for the delays. Both Knoche and Landtman emphasise that sticking to the new construction schedule is most important. The two emphasised that they are responsible for the construction project, and that the issue of possible contract violation fines is a matter for the lawyers. Knoche admits that the delays have also caused problems for the project’s subcontractors. He says that the original schedule may have been too challenging, noting that the installation is the first third-generation nuclear facility of its kind. Last week cracks were found in the foundation of one of the cranes at the construction site, and it was decided that the whole crane should be dismantled. Knoche says that such unexpected setbacks might affect the schedule in the future as well. Managing the numerous subcontractors at the extensive construction site is a challenge. Currently there are 1,070 workers at the building site, just under half of whom are Finns. "Finland’s good employment situation means that it is difficult for subcontractors to get Finnish employees", Landtman says. Of the foreign workers, 40 per cent are from Poland, 28 per cent are from Germany, and 18 per cent are from France. TVO ordered its third unit on a turnkey basis, although the company itself originally contracted the first two units at the Olkiluoto plant, which were completed in 1978 and 1980. Landtman says that TVO decided on the present arrangement because it wants to focus on operating, rather than building nuclear power plants. ***************************************************************** 34 India PRwire: India should achieve energy independence by 2030 - Kalam - Hyderabad, Feb 1 (AINS) President A.P.J. Abdul Kalam Thursday said India should achieve energy independence by 2030 through hydel capacity, nuclear power and non-conventional energy sources like solar and wind power besides thermal power. Delivering the convocation address at the 77th annual convocation of Osmania University here, he said that based on the progress visualised for the nation during the next two decades, the power generating capacity has to increase to 400,000 Megawatts (MW) by 2030 from the existing 130,000 MW. 'In 2030, the hydel capacity is expected to contribute 80,000 MW. Large-scale solar energy farms could contribute around 55,000 MW and wind energy can contribute 64,000 MW. The nuclear power plants should have a target of 50,000 MW. The balance 15,000 MW will be generated through use of solid bio mass and municipal waste,' he said. He spoke of the scientific research and development challenges towards realising the mission of energy independence and asked Osmania University to take up the challenge. Explaining why energy independence was essential, Kalam, on a two-day visit to Andhra Pradesh, said it was estimated that the available resource of fossil fuels would get exhausted in the next 50 to 100 years. On nuclear power, Kalam said the capacity of 16 reactors, which at present is 3,900 MW, is expected to go up to 7,400 MW by 2010 with the completion of nine reactors. As per the present plan of Bhabha Atomic Research Centre and Nuclear Power Corp, the capacity is expected to increase to 24,000 MW by 2020. 'There is a need to plan right from now to increase this capacity to 50,000 MW by 2030,' he said. 'To meet the increased needs of nuclear power generation, it is essential to pursue the development of nuclear power using thorium, reserves of which are high in the country,' he added. He called for increasing the power generated through renewable energy sources from the existing 5 percent to 25. Noting that India is importing around 100 million tonnes of crude oil with a foreign exchange outflow of Rs.1.5 trillion per annum (nearly $34 billion), he said by 2030 the country may have to import 300 million tonnes. 'To reduce the import content, apart from locating the embedded oil resources in the country, we have to work on producing ethanol and bio-diesel in a cost effective manner which can be blended with petrol and diesel.' India will require production of 60 million tonnes each of bio-diesel and ethanol per annum by 2030. On wind energy, he said there was a need to earmark sufficient efforts and resources for research into potential windy areas, on optimal plant design and cost effectiveness to realise generating capacity of 64,000 MW. Copyright © India PRwire/Indo Asian News Service. ***************************************************************** 35 AU ABC: Aust Institute under fire over nuclear site naming ABC Sunshine &Cooloola Coasts Qld | Local News | Story Thursday, 1 February 2007. 13:37 (AEDT)Thursday, 1 February The Australia Institute has been criticised for again suggesting major Queensland population centres, including the Sunshine Coast, would be ideal sites for nuclear power stations. Federal Liberal Member for Fisher, Peter Slipper, says the Australia Institute is an organ of left-wing politics in Australia, and he is not surprised it is pushing the nuclear debate as a political tool of the Labor Party. Mr Slipper says the institute made the same suggestions last year and it should be a bit more responsible and stop scaring the community. "I honestly think the Australia Institute is trying to scare voters in middle Australia, they first raised these crazy suggestions in May 2006," he said. "I just think they ought to be responsible, they ought to get real, they ought to appreciate that cheap headlines are not really the right thing to gain when they're being gained at the cost of the well-being of Australians around the country." ***************************************************************** 36 AU ABC: Planned nuclear sites are near homes, NT farmer says ABC Northern Territory | Local News | Story (AEST)Thursday, 1 February 2007. 23:39 (ACDT)Thursday, 1 A Northern Territory pastoralist has rejected federal Science Minister Julie Bishop's claim that proposed nuclear sites are not near civilisation. Ms Bishop made the statement at the closure of the Lucas Heights reactor earlier this week. Valerie Utley from Yeltu Park station near Katherine says she lives three kilometres from the Defence Department's Fishers Ridge site, which is being considered for a nuclear waste facility. "We feel that we're quite urbanised really with the number of people around the area," she said. "And we feel that it is quite a dangerous situation because of the set-up the way Fishers Ridge is because it's a big drainage area that leads to the streams and the King River." ***************************************************************** 37 business.iafrica.com: Is Pebble Bed technology the future? JANUARY 31 SA desperately needs power — and the Pebble Bed Modular Reactor has just been given the go-ahead by government. But the reactor is controversial... not least because of the transportation of uranium. Bruce Whitfield: Nowadays, when you mention nuclear power, people are more likely to think about bolts and reactors than Chernobyl, but good to see news out this week of progress on the long awaited Pebble Bed Modular Reactor. Certainly, South Africa desperately needs alternative power generation, but is PBMR technology the future? It certainly looks like it because progress is being made in that way. Jaco Kriek is in Pretoria, the chief executive of the Pebble Bed Modular Reactor program and government giving the go-ahead finally for the manufacture of fuel and importantly I suppose Jaco, transportation of that fuel as well? Jaco Kriek: Yes Bruce, good evening. We are very excited and as you say, it is a very positive sign for the nuclear industry and that is in a big way, supported by government itself, the Department of Environmental Affairs and then obviously (Nexa) who is the applicant of this executive decision. Bruce Whitfield: And why has it taken so long? I remember talk of the Pebble Bed Modular Reactor years ago. Why has it taken so long for it to get to this point? Jaco Kriek: Nuclear is a very long process. You go through lots of safety procedures, safety analysis and obviously, the publics perception, you have to make sure that you follow procedure, there are no shortcuts and all over the world, they say today, if you order a new nuclear reactor in Switzerland, it will take you 20 years before you will switch it on. So it is an extremely long process in this industry. Bruce Whitfield: In terms of the manufacture and the transportation of the fuel, which is going to be manufactured, what does that actual process entail? Jaco Kriek: The fuel is in the form of a pebble, which is like a snooker ball, and that process, if you look at the fuel that will be transported down to Koeberg, that is a normal process and it is not an abnormal activity. That sort of material is transported all over the world and that is not an issue for us. Bruce Whitfield: It seems like a hell of a process though, the raw material taken from Durban to Pelendaba which is just north of Gauteng and then the fuel, once it is manufactured, gets transported down to Koeberg. How much is manufactured in the Western Cape, cut out a lot of trouble and surely it will be a lot safer? Jaco Kriek: At the moment, the nuclear facility at Nexa is available and you have to therefore make sure that you use those facilities as a country and then, you don’t talk about use volume, nuclear, nine grams of uranium is equivalent of five tons of coal. So you are really talking about small quantities for the bigger picture. Bruce Whitfield: So is this the sort of stuff that gets transported down to Koeberg in somebody’s briefcase, strapped to their wrist with a chain. Is it that sort of transportation? Jaco Kriek: No, it is transported in a truck and at the moment materials from Pelenbaba is exported on a weekly basis. South Africa exports large quantities of uranium to Durban on a regular basis. Bruce Whitfield: It is not all done and dusted though? You have not got it in the bag completely, there is still scope, as I understand it, for objections in terms of the environmental impact assessment. So you potentially still quite a long way away from actually flicking a switch on PBMR? Jaco Kriek: We will got through a process and that is the procedures in terms of the environmental impact assessments and from our side, we have to now make sure that we convince any affected parties that this is a safe operation and this is good for national interests. Bruce Whitfield: And when do you anticipate flicking a switch for the first of the power generated by PBMR to actually come onto the national grid? Jaco Kriek: At this stage, we are talking about different phases. So the construction should be completed by 2012 and we are talking about the first reactor down at Koeberg and then you go through a whole process where you will then start up your components before you get the technicality on the reactor. So it depends on how successful you are with the start up of the reactor. Bruce Whitfield: And anticipating 2013, 2014? Jaco Kriek: Yes, I think 2013 is a good date because you have to go through your regulator process on the reactor side, we still need executive decisions and we still need the nuclear license from our National Nuclear Regulator. So those are processes that you have to follow and you cannot exactly say when you are going to get those approvals. Bruce Whitfield: It is taking a very long term view. Who funds all of this in the meantime? Jaco Kriek: Well we have the IDC and Eskom and a US company as the shareholders in the process and then the Department of Public Enterprises are also funding the project. So, it is a state owned enterprise with private money involved in the process. Bruce Whitfield: Jaco Kriek thanks for talking to us this evening, the chief executive of the Pebble Bed Modular Reactor. Don’t anticipate getting any power from that anytime soon, 2013, 2014 is the likely first to see the lights come on, on that project. Copyright © 2002-2005 iafrica.com ***************************************************************** 38 BBC: Putin hits back at energy critics Last Updated: Thursday, 1 February 2007 [Russian President Vladimir Putin] Mr Putin says Russia's energy policy is shaped by the market Russian President Vladimir Putin has strongly denied claims that Russia is using its energy resources as a lever to put pressure on other countries. He was addressing the world's media at his annual news conference in Moscow. Mr Putin said Russia's energy deals with Ukraine and other neighbouring countries "benefit the consumers" and "experts understand this". On the poisoning of ex-spy Alexander Litvinenko in London, Mr Putin said he did not believe in conspiracy theories. "As for what happened there, this, I repeat, can only be answered by the investigation." [ border=] [ border=] There was no need for him [Litvinenko] to flee anywhere - he did not possess any secrets [ border=] [ border=] Litvinenko: The polonium trail There has been some speculation in the Russian media that enemies of Mr Putin may have had a hand in Mr Litvinenko's death, to put the Kremlin in a bad light. Mr Litvinenko was a vehement critic of Mr Putin. Mr Putin said Mr Litvinenko "did not possess any secrets" that could have damaged Russia. Market forces In a wide-ranging, marathon news conference, Mr Putin said Russia was now one of the world's most powerful economies, with a rapid growth rate - about 6.9% in 2006 - and declining inflation. Mr Putin insisted that Russia's price increases for energy exports were driven by necessary market adjustments. He said Russia could not continue Soviet-style energy subsidies for its former Soviet bloc neighbours. "We're not obliged to subsidise the economies of other countries," he said. "Nobody does that, so why are they demanding it of us?" In January a Russian row with Belarus over oil exports revived concern among Russia's energy customers in the EU. "We are always told that Russia is using its ... economic resources to achieve foreign policy aims. That is not the case," Mr Putin insisted on Thursday. No named successor Mr Putin is due to leave office in March next year and so far it is not clear who will take his place. He declined to state any preference for a successor, saying voters would have a "free, democratic" choice. "There will be no successor. There will be candidates to the presidential post," he told the news conference. "The authorities' goal is to ensure the elections are held democratically. "I, too, am a citizen of the Russian Federation, which I am very proud of, and of course have the right to express my preferences but I will only do it during the election campaign." Under the constitution Mr Putin has to stand down in 2008, after serving two terms. But he has now become so powerful and popular that it is widely assumed whoever he names as the preferred candidate will win the election, the BBC's Richard Galpin reports from Moscow. "For the time being I'm not going anywhere... Are you trying to shove me out before my time is up? I'll go by myself," Mr Putin said. More than 1,000 members of the Russian and foreign media registered for the news conference, which has become an annual event. ***************************************************************** 39 Platts: FY 2007 spending bill shortchanges science, GNEP - White House Washington (Platts)--31Jan2007 The Bush administration on Wednesday took exception to a fiscal 2007 continuing resolution proposed by Democrats saying it shortchanged the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership and science programs and set unacceptable conditions on construction of a mixed oxide nuclear fuel fabrication facility in South Carolina. The House is set to vote on the $463.5 billion bill later Wednesday. The measure would provide funding to the federal government from February 15, when the current continuing resolution expires, until September 30, the end of the fiscal year. It includes substantial boosts compared with fiscal 2006 levels for science and energy efficiency and renewable energy. But the White House objected to some of the measure's provisions. In a statement of administration policy, the Office of Management and Budget said the resolution "allows continued funding of oil subsidies for oil and gas research and development but fails to fully fund the president's Global Nuclear Energy Partnership." The bill directs $120 million to GNEP, a nuclear waste recycling program intended to reduce the volume of spent fuel that would need to go to the Yucca Mountain repository, and reduce the risks of proliferation worldwide. The administration asked for $250 million for the program for fiscal 2007. The resolution also gives DOE $3.8 billion for science, which is a $200 million boost over fiscal 2006, but the administration lamented the fact that Congress did not provide the full $4.1 billion request. The MOX plant, which is being built at the Savannah River Site to convert weapons grade material into nuclear fuel, would see no money that could be used for construction until August. The SAP said "the administration opposes any language in the bill that prohibits, conditions or in any way restricts the use of funds...for construction." Several congressional Republicans have complained that they were not invited to participate in crafting the resolution. But Senator Pete Domenici, of New Mexico, the ranking Republican on the Energy and Natural Resources Committee and the Appropriations Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development, said the resolution was "a huge win for clean energy. It's a win for nuclear power and it's an important victory in our push to maintain America's leading edge in science and technology." Copyright © 2007 - Platts, All Rights Reserved [The McGraw-Hill Companies] ***************************************************************** 40 Rutland Herald: Greenpeace founder backs Yankee relicensing Rutland Vermont News & Information February 01, 2007 By DANIEL BARLOW Herald Staff BRATTLEBORO — Greenpeace founder Patrick Moore testified in favor of Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant's relicensing Wednesday, calling the 34-year-old Vernon reactor an essential part of the state's clean energy formula. The meeting was the first of two scheduled Wednesday to collect public feedback on a 430-page draft Environmental Impact Statement released in December 2006 that gave a preliminary OK to the license extension. Yankee owner Entergy Vermont Nuclear applied early last year to extend the facility's license for 20 years beyond 2012, when it will expire. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission is reviewing the possible environmental and safety implications of the move while the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board, a quasi-judicial arm of the NRC, plans to hear proposed contentions from the state of Vermont and the New England Coalition, a nuclear watchdog group in Brattleboro. Comments made during the sessions in Brattleboro will be considered as a final report is prepared. The final Environmental Impact Statement is due in August. Moore, a well-known environmentalist who has embraced nuclear energy, said Vermont has the "best carbon footprint in the country" because most of its power comes from Yankee and hydroelectricity, two energy sources with low carbon dioxide emissions. "Vermont needs to engage the U.S. Congress on climate change so that you can demonstrate that you are a model with the lowest CO2 emissions in the country," Moore told a crowd of about 80 people who gathered Wednesday afternoon at the Latchis Theatre. Moore left Greenpeace in the 1980s and now co-chairs the Clean and Safe Energy Coalition, a group that supports increased reliance on nuclear power. He spoke at the NRC hearing in Brattleboro on behalf of Vermont Energy Partnership, a business group that supports the Yankee extension. His five-minute testimony drew heckles and interruptions from members of the audience, including one person who called him a "turncoat" to the environmental movement. Moore, who has been no stranger to controversy from the modern environmental movement, ignored the comments. Ten minutes after Moore's testimony, Brattleboro antinuclear activist Gary Sachs was the first to formally respond. "I do wish you would get your facts and science straight, sir," Sachs chided Moore. During Sach's brief testimony he said that reliance on nuclear energy has put Vermont "behind the eight ball" on energy issues. Moore's comments were echoed by former Gov. Thomas P. Salmon, a Rockingham resident who also testified on the behalf of the Vermont Energy Partnership. Salmon, who said Vermont can be seen as a leader on climate issues because of its reliance on nuclear and hydro power, began his testimony by commenting that "the snide remarks" aimed at Moore "don't add anything" to the debate. Critics of Yankee said they were concerned that the storage of spent fuel on site could be a terrorist target — a possibility that the NRC is now looking at as it considers rewriting its own rules. The move comes weeks after the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal of a lower court's verdict suggesting that the NRC should consider that issue in relicensing cases. "This is not an Environmental Impact Statement for Vermont Yankee as much as it is an environmental insult statement," said Sally Shaw, an anti-nuclear activist from Gill, Mass. "The entire review is based on wrong information and it needs to be revised." The NRC committed some embarrassing missteps during the early-afternoon session. A microphone failure at the start of the session prompted Sachs to jokingly inquire if the equipment was the result of "Yankee engineering." And during a 45-minute presentation on the relicensing process and the draft report findings, NRC officials repeatedly apologized because their slides, which were presented on a movie theater screen, referenced Pilgrim nuclear power plant, a facility in Plymouth, Mass., that is also seeking a 20-year extension. "Is this just a generic slide show?" asked one person from the crowd. "Is this information about Yankee or Pilgrim or both?" asked another. NRC officials conducted a session similar to the one in Brattleboro for residents living near the Pilgrim plant last week. Richard Emch Jr., the NRC's senior project manager for the Yankee license extension project, said there was a paperwork mistake, but said the information pertained to the Vernon facility. "I'm really sorry," Emch said. "This is really embarrassing." The start of the afternoon session was delayed for about 15 minutes after six anti-nuclear protesters holding signs saying, "no relicensing" and "kangaroo court," refused to leave the stage. Five agreed to stand near the side of the stage after speaking to two Brattleboro Police officers, but one stayed, seated on the stage floor without a sign, in silent protest for most of the session. One of the protesters, Sherrill Hogen of Conway, Mass., said later that police refused to let her back into the theater after she left to put more coins in her parking meter. She accused the NRC of "already making up its mind" on the relicensing. "He said I was disrupting the meeting," she said of the police officer. "But I never said anything. I just stood there and held my sign." Tuesday in Montpelier, Moore addressed lawmakers in the Vermont House and Senate on the same issue and said nuclear energy will have to be part of Vermont's electrical power future if the state is to keep down its output of the pollution responsible for global warming. "I firmly believe that the only way to make a serious dent in fossil fuel consumption, i.e. greenhouse gas emissions, is nuclear energy plus renewables," Moore said. "Renewables cannot possibly do it on their own." Some of the lawmakers were not impressed. Rep. Sarah Edwards, P-Brattleboro, said that Moore only told part of the story, particularly when he said nuclear power was one of the cheapest sources of electricity. "The federal government has been subsidizing this industry from the very beginning," she said. "My guess is if you look at the history of subsidies on that you will find a huge difference." Rep. Tony Klein, D-East Montpelier, said that if renewable energy sources like solar and wind power got the same subsidies they would be as cost-effective as nuclear electricity. "If only it could be as simple and as safe and as cheap as he is pretending it is the world would be a wonderful place," Klein said. "The facts tell a different story." The draft environmental impact statement can be read at www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/nuregs/staff/sr1437/supple ment30/Written comments on the draft can be sent by mail to the Chief, Rules and Directives Branch, Division of Administrative Services, Mail Stop T-6 D59, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C. 20555-0001 or by e-mail to VermontYankeeEIS@nrc.gov. Comments will be accepted until March 7. Staff writer Louis Porter contributed to this story. Contact Daniel Barlow at daniel.barlow@rutlandherald.com. © 2007 Rutland Herald ***************************************************************** 41 NRC: In the Matter of the Curators of the University of Missouri, The FR Doc E7-1633 [Federal Register: February 1, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 21)] [Notices] [Page 4731-4732] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr01fe07-88] University of Missouri Research Reactor; Order Modifying Emergency Plan Requirements I The Curators of the University of Missouri (the Licensee) hold Amended Facility License No. R-103 issued by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or the Commission) pursuant to Title 10, Part 50, ``Domestic Licensing of Production and Utilization Facilities'' (10 CFR part 50), and Broad Scope Materials License No. 24-00513-39 issued by the NRC pursuant to 10 CFR part 30, ``Rules of General Applicability to Domestic Licensing of Byproduct Material.'' Amended Facility License No. R-103 authorizes the operation of the University of Missouri Research Reactor (MURR or the facility) in accordance with conditions specified therein. Broad Scope Materials License No. 24-00513-39 authorizes the possession and use of various byproduct, special nuclear, and source material at the Licensee's facility. The facility is located on the Licensee's campus in Columbia, Missouri. II On March 19 and April 5, 1990, the NRC staff issued two license amendments applicable to the Licensee's Special Nuclear Material and Source Material License No. SNM-247. At the request of the Licensee, the NRC terminated Special Nuclear Material and Source Material License No. SNM-247 on July 7, 1993. On that day, the Commission included the special nuclear materials that were listed on Special Nuclear Material and Source Material License No. SNM-247 in the University's newly issued Broad Scope Materials License No. 24-00513-39. The amendments collectively authorized the Licensee to possess and use certain specified quantities of uranium (depleted in U-235), neptunium-237, americium-241, plutonium-239, and plutonium-240. The Licensee's purpose in requesting the amendments was to conduct research related to the Transuranic Management by Pyropartitioning Separation (TRUMP-S) Research Project. The Licensee carried out this research in the Alpha laboratory at the MURR. Three organizations and 10 individuals filed motions to intervene and requests for hearing on the license amendments. In response to the intervenors' filings, the Commission appointed a Presiding Officer to conduct an informal hearing pursuant to Subpart L, ``Informal Hearing Procedures for NRC Adjudications'' of the Commission's procedural regulations in 10 CFR part 2, ``Rules of Practice for Domestic Licensing Proceedings and Issuance of Orders.'' The Presiding Officer issued a First Initial Decision on April 5, 1991, followed by a Final Initial Decision on July 10, 1991. The Licensee and the intervenors appealed various aspects of the proceeding and decisions of the Presiding Officer and the Commission to the Commission. In response, the Commission issued Memorandum and Order, CLI-95-01, dated February 28, 1995; Memorandum and Order, CLI- 95-08, (Petitions for Reconsideration), dated June 22, 1995; Memorandum and Order, CLI-95-11, (Petition for Partial Reconsideration), dated August 22, 1995; and Memorandum and Order, CLI-95-17, (Petition for Reconsideration), dated December 14, 1995. The first three of these memoranda and orders required the Licensee to make changes to the MURR Emergency Plan (EP). The MURR EP was changed because the material, while under a NRC broad scope materials license, was being used in the Alpha Laboratory at MURR. In response to the memoranda and orders, the Licensee submitted proposed changes to the EP on December 20, 1995, as supplemented on May 1, 1996. The NRC staff reviewed the Licensee's proposed changes to the EP and, in a letter to the Licensee dated June 20, 1996, concluded that the proposed changes to the EP met the intent of the Commission's memoranda and orders and were acceptable as written. III By letter dated March 31, 2004, the Licensee requested changes to the EP to remove the requirements added to it by the Commission's memoranda and orders related to the TRUMP-S Research Project. The Licensee also requested the recision of the Commission's memoranda and orders requiring changes to the EP. The Licensee completed experiments at the MURR related to the TRUMP-S Research Project on September 30, 1997. By July 20, 1998, the Licensee had shipped all low-level waste from the project and completed final verification surveys documenting the decommissioning of the Alpha Laboratory. All transuranic waste (americium, neptunium, and plutonium) was shipped from the MURR to the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant on May 15, 2003. The NRC renewed Broad Scope Materials License No. 24-00513-39, effective December 22, 2003, with reduced possession limits for the radioisotope types associated with the TRUMP-S Research Project. The renewed license possession limits allow no radioisotope quantities in excess of the quantities listed in 10 CFR 30.72 Schedule C, ``Quantities of Radioactive Materials Requiring Consideration of the Need for an Emergency Plan for Responding to a Release.'' The NRC staff reviewed the Licensee's proposed changes to the EP and concluded that they will not decrease the effectiveness of the EP and are therefore acceptable. IV Accordingly, pursuant to Sections 104c, 161b and 161i of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, and the Commission's regulations in 10 CFR part 50, it is hereby ordered that: The changes to the University of Missouri Research Reactor Emergency Plan imposed by Commission-issued Memoranda and Orders CLI- 95-01 dated February 28, 1995; CLI-95-08 dated June 22, 1995; and CLI- 95-11 dated August 22, 1995, are hereby deleted and the changes to the Emergency Plan for the University of Missouri Research Reactor in the Licensee's letter of March 31, 2004, are approved. V Pursuant to the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, the licensee or any other person adversely affected by this Order may request a hearing within 30 days of the date of publication of this Order in the Federal Register. A request for a hearing or a petition for leave to intervene must be filed (1) By first class mail addressed to the Office of the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attention: Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff, or (2) by courier, express mail, or expedited delivery services to the Office of the Secretary, Sixteenth Floor, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852, Attention: Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff. Because of continuing disruptions in delivery of mail to U.S. Government offices, it is requested that requests for hearing [[Page 4732]] should also be transmitted to the Secretary of the Commission either by e-mail addressed to the Office of the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, HEARINGDOCKET@nrc.gov, or by facsimile transmission addressed to the Office of the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC, Attention: Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff at 301-415-1101 (the verification number is 301- 415-1966). A copy of the request for hearing and petition for leave to intervene must also be sent to the Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation and to the Assistant General Counsel for Operating Reactors and High Level Waste Programs, Office of the General Counsel, with both copies addressed to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001. The NRC further requests that copies be transmitted either by facsimile transmission to 301-415-3725 or by e-mail to OGCMAILCENTER@nrc.gov. If a person other than the Licensee requests a hearing, he or she shall set forth with particularity the manner in which his or her interest is adversely affected by this Order and shall address the criteria set forth in 10 CFR 2.309, ``Hearing Requests, Petitions to Intervene, Requirements for Standing, and Contentions.'' If a hearing is requested by the Licensee or a person whose interest is adversely affected, the Commission will issue an order designating the time and place of any hearing. If a hearing is held, the issue to be considered at such hearing shall be whether this Order should be sustained. In the absence of any request for a hearing or written approval of an extension of time in which to request a hearing, the provisions specified in Section IV above shall be effective and final 30 days from the date of publication of this Order in the Federal Register without further order or proceedings. If an extension of time for requesting a hearing has been approved, the provisions specified in Section IV shall be final when the extension expires if a hearing request has not been received. In accordance with 10 CFR 51.10(d), this Order is not subject to Section 102(2) of the National Environmental Policy Act, as amended. The NRC staff notes, however, that with respect to environmental impacts associated with the changes imposed by this Order as described in the safety evaluation, the changes would, if imposed by other than an Order, meet the definition of a categorical exclusion in accordance with 10 CFR 51.22(c)(14)(v). Thus, pursuant to either 10 CFR 51.10(d) or 10 CFR 51.22(c)(14)(v), neither an environmental assessment nor an environmental impact statement is required. For further information, see the application from the Licensee dated March 31, 2004 (Agencywide Documents Access Management System (ADAMS) Accession No. ML041040772), available for public inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room (PDR), located at One White Flint North, Public File Area O1 F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, MD. Publicly available records will be accessible electronically from the ADAMS Public Electronic Reading Room on the Internet at the NRC Web site, http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.thml. Persons who do not have access to ADAMS or who have problems in accessing the documents in ADAMS should contact the NRC PDR reference staff by telephone at 1-800-397-4209 or 301-415-4737 or by e-mail to PDR@nrc.gov. Dated this 26th day of January 2007. For the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Michael J. Case, Director, Division of Policy and Rulemaking, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulations. [FR Doc. E7-1633 Filed 1-31-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P ***************************************************************** 42 NRC: Notice of Availability of Environmental Assessment and Finding FR Doc E7-1645 [Federal Register: February 1, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 21)] [Notices] [Page 4736-4737] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr01fe07-91] of No Significant Impact for License Amendment to Byproduct Materials License No. 29-00040-10, for Termination of the License and Unrestricted Release of the Honeywell International, Incorporated Facility in Morristown, NJ AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission. ACTION: Issuance of Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact for License Amendment. ----------------------------------------------------------------- ------ FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dennis Lawyer, Health Physicist, Commercial and R Branch, Division of Nuclear Materials Safety, Region 1, 475 Allendale Road, King of Prussia, Pennsylvania; telephone 610- 337-5366; fax number 610-337-5393; or by e-mail: drl1@nrc.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Introduction The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is considering the issuance of a license amendment to Byproduct Materials License No. 29- 00040-10. This license is held by Honeywell International, Incorporated (the Licensee), for its facility located at 101 Columbia Road in Morristown, New Jersey (the Facility). Issuance of the amendment would authorize release of the Facility for unrestricted use and termination of the NRC license. The Licensee requested this action in an amendment request dated September 8, 2005. The NRC has prepared an Environmental Assessment (EA) in support of this proposed action in accordance with the requirements of Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 51 (10 CFR part 51). Based on the EA, the NRC has concluded that a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) is appropriate with respect to the proposed action. The amendment will be issued to the Licensee following the publication of this FONSI and EA in the Federal Register. II. Environmental Assessment Identification of Proposed Action The proposed action would approve the Licensee's September 8, 2005, license amendment request, resulting in release of the Facility for unrestricted use and the termination of its NRC materials license. License No. 29-00040-10 was issued on August 21, 1973, pursuant to 10 CFR part 30, and has been amended periodically since that time. This license authorized the Licensee to use sealed and unsealed byproduct material for purposes of conducting research and development activities on laboratory bench tops and in hoods. The Facility is situated on 150 acres of land and consists of office buildings, laboratory buildings, and support buildings. The Facility is located in a mixed industrial commercial area with some residential. Within the Facility, use of licensed materials was confined to an area of 1675 square feet within the DEV Building, specifically Laboratories 4, 7, and 8. On September 18, 2003, the Licensee ceased licensed activities and initiated a survey and decontamination of the Facility. Based on the Licensee's historical knowledge of the site and the conditions of the Facility, the Licensee determined that only routine decontamination activities, in accordance with their NRC-approved, operating radiation safety procedures, were required. The Licensee was not required to submit a decommissioning plan to the NRC because worker cleanup activities and procedures are consistent with those approved for routine operations. The Licensee conducted surveys of the Facility and provided information to the NRC to demonstrate that it meets the criteria in Subpart E of 10 CFR part 20 for unrestricted release and for license termination. Need for the Proposed Action The Licensee has ceased conducting licensed activities at the Facility, and seeks the unrestricted use of its Facility and the termination of its NRC materials license. Termination of its license would end the Licensee's obligation to pay annual license fees to the NRC. Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action The historical review of licensed activities conducted at the Facility shows that such activities involved use of the following unsealed radionuclides with half-lives greater than 120 days: hydrogen- 3 and carbon-14. Prior to performing the final status survey, the Licensee conducted decontamination activities, as necessary, in the areas of the Facility affected by these radionuclides. The Licensee conducted a final status survey on October 3, 2006. This survey covered DEV Building, Laboratories 4, 7, and 8. The final status survey report was submitted with the Licensee's letter dated October 24, 2006. The Licensee elected to demonstrate compliance with the radiological criteria for unrestricted release as specified in 10 CFR 20.1402 by using the screening approach described in NUREG-1757, ``Consolidated NMSS Decommissioning Guidance,'' Volume 2. The Licensee used the radionuclide-specific derived concentration guideline levels (DCGLs), developed there by the NRC, which comply with the dose criterion in 10 CFR 20.1402. These DCGLs define the maximum amount of residual radioactivity on building surfaces, equipment, and materials, and in soils, that will satisfy the NRC requirements in subpart E of 10 CFR part 20 for unrestricted release. The Licensee's final status survey results were below these DCGLs and are in compliance with the As Low As Reasonably Achievable (ALARA) requirement of 10 CFR 20.1402. The NRC thus finds that the Licensee's final status survey results are acceptable. Based on its review, the staff has determined that the affected environment and any environmental impacts associated with the proposed action are bounded by the impacts evaluated by the ``Generic Environmental Impact Statement in Support of Rulemaking on Radiological Criteria for License Termination of NRC-Licensed Nuclear Facilities'' (NUREG- [[Page 4737]] 1496) Volumes 1-3 (ML042310492, ML042320379, and ML042330385). The staff finds there were no significant environmental impacts from the use of radioactive material at the Facility. The NRC staff reviewed the docket file records and the final status survey report to identify any non-radiological hazards that may have impacted the environment surrounding the Facility. No such hazards or impacts to the environment were identified. The NRC has identified no other radiological or non- radiological activities in the area that could result in cumulative environmental impacts. The NRC staff finds that the proposed release of the Facility for unrestricted use and the termination of the NRC materials license is in compliance with 10 CFR 20.1402. Based on its review, the staff considered the impact of the residual radioactivity at the Facility and concluded that the proposed action will not have a significant effect on the quality of the human environment. Environmental Impacts of the Alternatives to the Proposed Action Due to the largely administrative nature of the proposed action, its environmental impacts are small. Therefore, the only alternative the staff considered is the no-action alternative, under which the staff would leave things as they are by simply denying the amendment request. This no-action alternative is not feasible because it conflicts with 10 CFR 30.36(d) requiring that decommissioning of byproduct material facilities be completed and approved by the NRC after licensed activities cease. The NRC's analysis of the Licensee's final status survey data confirmed that the Facility meets the requirements of 10 CFR 20.1402 for unrestricted and for license termination. Additionally, denying the amendment request would result in no change in current environmental impacts. The environmental impacts of the proposed action and the no-action alternative are therefore similar, and the no-action alternative is accordingly not further considered. Conclusion The NRC staff has concluded that the proposed action is consistent with the NRC's unrestricted release criteria specified in 10 CFR 20.1402. Because the proposed action will not significantly impact the quality of the human environment, the NRC staff concludes that the proposed action is the preferred alternative. Agencies and Persons Consulted NRC provided a draft of this Environmental Assessment to the State of New Jersey's Department of Environmental Safety and Health for review on December 18, 2006. On December 26, 2006, the State of New Jersey responded by letter, agreeing with the conclusions of the EA, and otherwise had no comments. The NRC staff has determined that the proposed action is of a procedural nature, and will not affect listed species or critical habitat. Therefore, no further consultation is required under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act. The NRC staff has also determined that the proposed action is not the type of activity that has the potential to cause effects on historic properties. Therefore, no further consultation is required under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. III. Finding of No Significant Impact The NRC staff has prepared this EA in support of the proposed action. On the basis of this EA, the NRC finds that there are no significant environmental impacts from the proposed action, and that preparation of an environmental impact statement is not warranted. Accordingly, the NRC has determined that a Finding of No Significant Impact is appropriate. IV. Further Information Documents related to this action, including the application for license amendment and supporting documentation, are available electronically at the NRC's Electronic Reading Room at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. From this site, you can access the NRC's Agencywide Document Access and Management System (ADAMS), which provides text and image files of NRC's public documents. The documents related to this action are listed below, along with their ADAMS accession numbers. 1. NUREG-1757, ``Consolidated NMSS Decommissioning Guidance;'' 2. Title 10 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 20, Subpart E, ``Radiological Criteria for License Termination;'' 3. Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 51, ``Environmental Protection Regulations for Domestic Licensing and Related Regulatory Functions;'' 4. NUREG-1496, ``Generic Environmental Impact Statement in Support of Rulemaking on Radiological Criteria for License Termination of NRC- Licensed Nuclear Facilities;'' 5. Honeywell International Inc., Termination Request Letter dated September 8, 2005, under cover letter dated August 31, 2005 [ML052590382]; 6. Honeywell International Inc., Deficiency Response Letter dated November 18, 2005 [ML053250525]; 7. Honeywell International Inc., Deficiency Response Letter dated March 13, 2006 [ML060820354]; 8. Honeywell International Inc., Deficiency Response Letter dated October 24, 2006 [ML063050527]; 9. Honeywell International Inc., Deficiency Facsimile dated November 26, 2006 [ML063320313]. 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 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov. These documents may also be viewed electronically on the public computers located at the NRC's PDR, O 1 F21, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852. The PDR reproduction contractor will copy documents for a fee. Dated at Region I, 475 Allendale Road, King of Prussia, PA this 23rd day of January, 2007. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. James P. Dwyer, Chief, Commercial and R Branch, Division of Nuclear Materials Safety, Region 1. [FR Doc. E7-1645 Filed 1-31-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P ***************************************************************** 43 NRC: Notice of Consideration of Amendment Request for Decommissioning FR Doc E7-1646 [Federal Register: February 1, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 21)] [Notices] [Page 4732-4734] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr01fe07-89] of the Defense Logistics Agency, Hammond Depot, Hammond, IN and Opportunity to Request a Hearing AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission. ACTION: Notice of amendment request and opportunity to request a hearing. ----------------------------------------------------------------- ------ DATES: A request for a hearing must be filed by April 2, 2007. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Betsy Ullrich, Senior Health Physicist, Commercial and R Branch, Division of Nuclear Materials Safety, Region I, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, King of Prussia, PA 19406. Telephone: (610) 337-5040; fax number: (610) 337-5269; or e- mail: . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Introduction The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is considering issuance of a license amendment to Source Material License No. STC-133 issued to the Defense Logistics Agency (the Licensee), to authorize decommissioning of its Hammond Depot (the Facility) in Hammond, Indiana under the Licensee's Decommissioning Plan (DP). An NRC administrative review, documented in a letter to the Defense Logistics Agency dated October 19, 2006, found the DP acceptable to begin a technical review. If the NRC approves the DP, the approval will be documented in an amendment to NRC License No. STC-133. However, before approving the proposed amendment, the NRC will need to make the findings required by the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, and NRC's regulations. These findings will be documented in a Safety Evaluation Report and an Environmental Assessment and/or an Environmental Impact Statement. The license will be amended to authorize release of the Facility for unrestricted use if this amendment is approved following completion of decommissioning activities and verification by the NRC that the radiological criteria for license termination have been met. II. Opportunity to Request a Hearing The NRC hereby provides notice that this is a proceeding on an application for a license amendment regarding decommissioning of the Facility located in Hammond, Indiana. In accordance with the general requirements in subpart C of 10 CFR part 2, as amended on January 14, 2004 (69 FR 2182), any person whose interest may be affected by this proceeding and who desires to participate as a party must file a written request for a hearing and a specification of the contentions which the person seeks to have litigated in the hearing. In accordance with 10 CFR 2.302(a), a request for a hearing must be filed with the Commission either by: 1. First class mail addressed to: Office of the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attention: Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff; 2. Courier, express mail, and expedited delivery services: Office of the Secretary, Sixteenth Floor, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852, Attention: Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff, between 7:45 a.m. and 4:15 p.m., Federal workdays; 3. E-mail addressed to the Office of the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, ; or [[Page 4733]] 4. By facsimile transmission addressed to the Office of the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC, Attention: Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff, at (301) 415-1101; verification number is (301) 415-1966. In accordance with 10 CFR 2.302(b), all documents offered for filing must be accompanied by proof of service on all parties to the proceeding or their attorneys of record as required by law or by rule or order of the Commission, including: 1. The applicant, Defense Logistics Agency, Defense National Stockpile Center, 8725 John J. Kingman Road, Suite 3229, Fort Belvoir, Virginia, 22060-6223, Attention: Michael Pecullan, Radiation Safety Officer; and 2. The NRC staff, by delivery to the Office of the General Counsel, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852, or by mail addressed to the Office of the General Counsel, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001. Hearing requests should also be transmitted to the Office of the General Counsel, either by means of facsimile transmission to (301) 415-3725, or by e-mail to . The formal requirements for documents contained in 10 CFR 2.304 (b), (c), (d), and (e), must be met. In accordance with 10 CFR 2.304(f), a document filed by electronic mail or facsimile transmission need not comply with the formal requirements of 10 CFR 2.304 (b), (c), and (d), as long as an original and two (2) copies otherwise complying with all of the requirements of 10 CFR 2.304 (b), (c), and (d) are mailed within two (2) days thereafter to the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attention: Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff. In accordance with 10 CFR 2.309(b), a request for a hearing must be filed by April 2, 2007. In addition to meeting other applicable requirements of 10 CFR 2.309, the general requirements involving a request for a hearing filed by a person other than an applicant must state: 1. The name, address, and telephone number of the requester; 2. The nature of the requester's right under the Act to be made a party to the proceeding; 3. The nature and extent of the requester's property, financial or other interest in the proceeding; 4. The possible effect of any decision or order that may be issued in the proceeding on the requester's interest; and 5. The circumstances establishing that the request for a hearing is timely in accordance with 10 CFR 2.309(b). In accordance with 10 CFR 2.309 (f)(1), a request for hearing or petitions for leave to intervene must set forth with particularity the contentions sought to be raised. For each contention, the request or petition must: 1. Provide a specific statement of the issue of law or fact to be raised or controverted; 2. Provide a brief explanation of the basis for the contention; 3. Demonstrate that the issue raised in the contention is within the scope of the proceeding; 4. Demonstrate that the issue raised in the contention is material to the findings that the NRC must make to support the action that is involved in the proceeding; 5. Provide a concise statement of the alleged facts or expert opinions which support the requester's/petitioner's position on the issue and on which the requester/petitioner intends to rely to support its position on the issue; and 6. Provide sufficient information to show that a genuine dispute exists with the applicant on a material issue of law or fact. This information must include references to specific portions of the application (including the applicant's environmental report and safety report) that the requester/petitioner disputes and the supporting reasons for each dispute, or, if the requester/petitioner believes the application fails to contain information on a relevant matter as required by law, the identification of each failure and the supporting reasons for the requester's/petitioner's belief. In addition, in accordance with 10 CFR 2.309(f)(2), contentions must be based on documents or other information available at the time the petition is to be filed, such as the application, supporting safety analysis report, environmental report or other supporting document filed by an applicant or licensee, or otherwise available to the petitioner. On issues arising under the National Environmental Policy Act, the requester/petitioner shall file contentions based on the applicant's environmental report. The requester/petitioner may amend those contentions or file new contentions if there are data or conclusions in the NRC draft, or final environmental impact statement, environmental assessment, or any supplements relating thereto, that differ significantly from the data or conclusions in the applicant's documents. Otherwise, contentions may be amended or new contentions filed after the initial filing only with leave of the presiding officer. Each contention shall be given a separate numeric or alpha designation within one of the following groups: 1. Technical--primarily concerns issues relating to matters discussed or referenced in the Safety Evaluation Report for the proposed action. 2. Environmental--primarily concerns issues relating to matters discussed or referenced in the Environmental Report for the proposed action. 3. Emergency Planning--primarily concerns issues relating to matters discussed or referenced in the Emergency Plan as it relates to the proposed action. 4. Physical Security--primarily concerns issues relating to matters discussed or referenced in the Physical Security Plan as it relates to the proposed action. 5. Miscellaneous--does not fall into one of the categories outlined above. If the requester/petitioner believes a contention raises issues that cannot be classified as primarily falling into one of these categories, the requester/petitioner must set forth the contention and supporting basis, in full, separately for each category into which the requester/petitioner asserts the contention belongs with a separate designation for that category. Requesters/petitioners should, when possible, consult with each other in preparing contentions and combine similar subject matter concerns into a joint contention, for which one of the co-sponsoring requesters/petitioners is designated the lead representative. Further, in accordance with 10 CFR 2.309(f)(3), any requester/petitioner that wishes to adopt a contention proposed by another requester/petitioner must do so in writing within ten days of the date the contention is filed, and designate a representative who shall have the authority to act for the requester/petitioner. In accordance with 10 CFR 2.309(g), a request for hearing and/or petition for leave to intervene may also address the selection of the hearing procedures, taking into account the provisions of 10 CFR 2.310. III. Further Information Documents related to this action, including the application for amendment and supporting documentation, are available electronically at the NRC's Electronic Reading Room at . From this site, you can access the NRC's Agencywide Document Access and Management System (ADAMS), which provides text [[Page 4734]] and image files of NRC's public documents. The ADAMS accession numbers for the documents related to this notice are: Submittal Letter dated February 3, 2006 ML060580094 Historical Site Assessment dated August ML060580605 2005. Preliminary Site Specific Derived ML060580605 Concentration Guidelines. Radiological Scoping Survey dated ML060580608 December 2005. Environmental Assessment, Disposition ML060580592 of Thorium Nitrate. Request for Additional Information ML061640494 dated June 8, 2006. Deficiency Response Letter dated July ML061870578 5, 2006. Deficiency Response Letter dated July ML062070231 19, 2006. Deficiency Response Letter dated ML062710160 September 19, 2006. Radiological Characterization Survey ML062710179 dated August 2006. Decommissioning/Remediation Plan dated ML062760618 September 2006. Receipt of Decommissioning Plan Letter ML062930051 dated October 19, 2006. 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 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by e-mail to . These documents may also be viewed electronically on the public computers located at the NRC's PDR, O 1 F21, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852. The PDR reproduction contractor will copy documents for a fee. Dated at 475 Allendale Road, King of Prussia, PA, this 25th day of January 2007. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. James P. Dwyer, Chief, Commercial and R Branch, Division of Nuclear Materials Safety, Region I. [FR Doc. E7-1646 Filed 1-31-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P ***************************************************************** 44 NRC: Notice of Consideration of Amendment Request for Decommissioning FR Doc E7-1647 [Federal Register: February 1, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 21)] [Notices] [Page 4734-4736] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr01fe07-90] of the Defense Logistics Agency, Curtis Bay Depot, Baltimore, MD and Opportunity To Request a Hearing AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission. ACTION: Notice of amendment request and opportunity to request a hearing. ----------------------------------------------------------------- ------ DATES: A request for a hearing must be filed by April 2, 2007. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Steve Hammann, Health Physicist, Commercial and R Branch, Division of Nuclear Materials Safety, Region I, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, King of Prussia, PA 19406. Telephone: (610) 337-5399; fax number: (610) 337-5269; or e-mail: . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Introduction The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is considering issuance of a license amendment to Source Material License No. STC-133 issued to the Defense Logistics Agency (the Licensee), to authorize decommissioning of its Curtis Bay Depot (the Facility) in Baltimore, Maryland under the Licensee's Decommissioning Plan (DP). An NRC administrative review, documented in a letter to the Defense Logistics Agency dated October 19, 2006, found the DP acceptable to begin a technical review. If the NRC approves the DP, the approval will be documented in an amendment to NRC License No. STC-133. However, before approving the proposed amendment, the NRC will need to make the findings required by the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, and NRC's regulations. These findings will be documented in a Safety Evaluation Report and an Environmental Assessment and/or an Environmental Impact Statement. The license will be amended to authorize release of the Facility for unrestricted use if this amendment is approved following completion of decommissioning activities and verification by the NRC that the radiological criteria for license termination have been met. II. Opportunity To Request a Hearing The NRC hereby provides notice that this is a proceeding on an application for a license amendment regarding decommissioning of the Facility located in Baltimore, Maryland. In accordance with the general requirements in subpart C of 10 CFR part 2, as amended on January 14, 2004 (69 FR 2182), any person whose interest may be affected by this proceeding and who desires to participate as a party must file a written request for a hearing and a specification of the contentions which the person seeks to have litigated in the hearing. In accordance with 10 CFR 2.302(a), a request for a hearing must be filed with the Commission either by: 1. First class mail addressed to: Office of the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attention: Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff; 2. Courier, express mail, and expedited delivery services: Office of the Secretary, Sixteenth Floor, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852, Attention: Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff, between 7:45 a.m. and 4:15 p.m., Federal workdays; 3. E-mail addressed to the Office of the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, ; or 4. By facsimile transmission addressed to the Office of the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC, Attention: Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff, at (301) 415-1101; verification number is (301) 415-1966. In accordance with 10 CFR 2.302(b), all documents offered for filing must be accompanied by proof of service on all parties to the proceeding or their attorneys of record as required by law or by rule or order of the Commission, including: 1. The applicant, Defense Logistics Agency, Defense National Stockpile Center, 8725 John J. Kingman Road, Suite 3229, Fort Belvoir, Virginia 22060-6223, Attention: Michael Pecullan, Radiation Safety Officer; and 2. The NRC staff, by delivery to the Office of the General Counsel, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852, or by mail addressed to the Office of the General Counsel, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001. Hearing requests should also be transmitted to the Office of the General Counsel, either by means of facsimile transmission to (301) 415-3725, or by e-mail to . [[Page 4735]] The formal requirements for documents contained in 10 CFR 2.304 (b), (c), (d), and (e), must be met. In accordance with 10 CFR 2.304(f), a document filed by electronic mail or facsimile transmission need not comply with the formal requirements of 10 CFR 2.304 (b), (c), and (d), as long as an original and two (2) copies otherwise complying with all of the requirements of 10 CFR 2.304 (b), (c), and (d) are mailed within two (2) days thereafter to the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attention: Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff. In accordance with 10 CFR 2.309(b), a request for a hearing must be filed by April 2, 2007. In addition to meeting other applicable requirements of 10 CFR 2.309, the general requirements involving a request for a hearing filed by a person other than an applicant must state: 1. The name, address, and telephone number of the requester; 2. The nature of the requester's right under the Act to be made a party to the proceeding; 3. The nature and extent of the requester's property, financial or other interest in the proceeding; 4. The possible effect of any decision or order that may be issued in the proceeding on the requester's interest; and 5. The circumstances establishing that the request for a hearing is timely in accordance with 10 CFR 2.309(b). In accordance with 10 CFR 2.309(f)(1), a request for hearing or petitions for leave to intervene must set forth with particularity the contentions sought to be raised. For each contention, the request or petition must: 1. Provide a specific statement of the issue of law or fact to be raised or controverted; 2. Provide a brief explanation of the basis for the contention; 3. Demonstrate that the issue raised in the contention is within the scope of the proceeding; 4. Demonstrate that the issue raised in the contention is material to the findings that the NRC must make to support the action that is involved in the proceeding; 5. Provide a concise statement of the alleged facts or expert opinions which support the requester's/petitioner's position on the issue and on which the requester/petitioner intends to rely to support its position on the issue; and 6. Provide sufficient information to show that a genuine dispute exists with the applicant on a material issue of law or fact. This information must include references to specific portions of the application (including the applicant's environmental report and safety report) that the requester/petitioner disputes and the supporting reasons for each dispute, or, if the requester/petitioner believes the application fails to contain information on a relevant matter as required by law, the identification of each failure and the supporting reasons for the requester's/petitioner's belief. In addition, in accordance with 10 CFR 2.309(f)(2), contentions must be based on documents or other information available at the time the petition is to be filed, such as the application, supporting safety analysis report, environmental report or other supporting document filed by an applicant or licensee, or otherwise available to the petitioner. On issues arising under the National Environmental Policy Act, the requester/petitioner shall file contentions based on the applicant's environmental report. The requester/petitioner may amend those contentions or file new contentions if there are data or conclusions in the NRC draft, or final environmental impact statement, environmental assessment, or any supplements relating thereto, that differ significantly from the data or conclusions in the applicant's documents. Otherwise, contentions may be amended or new contentions filed after the initial filing only with leave of the presiding officer. Each contention shall be given a separate numeric or alpha designation within one of the following groups: 1. Technical--primarily concerns issues relating to matters discussed or referenced in the Safety Evaluation Report for the proposed action. 2. Environmental--primarily concerns issues relating to matters discussed or referenced in the Environmental Report for the proposed action. 3. Emergency Planning--primarily concerns issues relating to matters discussed or referenced in the Emergency Plan as it relates to the proposed action. 4. Physical Security--primarily concerns issues relating to matters discussed or referenced in the Physical Security Plan as it relates to the proposed action. 5. Miscellaneous--does not fall into one of the categories outlined above. If the requester/petitioner believes a contention raises issues that cannot be classified as primarily falling into one of these categories, the requester/petitioner must set forth the contention and supporting basis, in full, separately for each category into which the requester/petitioner asserts the contention belongs with a separate designation for that category. Requesters/petitioners should, when possible, consult with each other in preparing contentions and combine similar subject matter concerns into a joint contention, for which one of the co-sponsoring requesters/petitioners is designated the lead representative. Further, in accordance with 10 CFR 2.309(f)(3), any requester/petitioner that wishes to adopt a contention proposed by another requester/petitioner must do so in writing within ten days of the date the contention is filed, and designate a representative who shall have the authority to act for the requester/petitioner. In accordance with 10 CFR 2.309(g), a request for hearing and/or petition for leave to intervene may also address the selection of the hearing procedures, taking into account the provisions of 10 CFR 2.310. III. Further Information Documents related to this action, including the application for amendment and supporting documentation, are available electronically at the NRC's Electronic Reading Room at . From this site, you can access the NRC's Agencywide Document Access and Management System (ADAMS), which provides text and image files of NRC's public documents. The ADAMS accession numbers for the documents related to this notice are: Submittal Letter dated February 3, 2006............... ML060580094 Historical Site Assessment............................ ML060580564 Preliminary Site Specific Derived Concentration ML060580566 Guidelines........................................... Radiological Scoping Survey........................... ML060580581 Environmental Assessment, Disposition of Thorium ML060580592 Nitrate.............................................. Request for Additional Information.................... ML061640494 Deficiency Response Letter dated July 5, 2006......... ML061870570 Deficiency Response Letter dated August 8, 2006....... ML062290404 Characterization Survey Report........................ ML062650300 [[Page 4736]] Decommissioning/Remediation Plan...................... ML062760618 Receipt of Decommissioning Plan....................... ML062930051 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 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by e-mail to . These documents may also be viewed electronically on the public computers located at the NRC's PDR, O 1 F21, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852. The PDR reproduction contractor will copy documents for a fee. Dated at Region I, 475 Allendale Road, King of Prussia, PA, this 23rd day of January 2007. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. James P. Dwyer, Chief, Commercial and R Branch, Division of Nuclear Materials Safety, Region I. [FR Doc. E7-1647 Filed 1-31-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P ***************************************************************** 45 APP.COM: River flows backward to cool Lacey plant's water | Asbury Park Press Online >Thursday, February 1, 2007 BY WILLIAM DECAMP JR. Close to the heart of Barnegat Bay, nestled along its western shoreline, near marshes and waterfront homes and crossing beneath Route 9, lies one of New Jersey's strangest artifacts: The only river in the world that flows backward. The rush of water landward up the Forked River has nothing to do with the lunar pull upon the tides. It is pulled rather by the force of greed through a channel of political expediency, and it is sucking the life out of Barnegat Bay. Every day, the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station in Lacey pulls 1.4 billion gallons of Barnegat Bay water into its "once-through" cooling system. The water is sucked up the Forked River and spat out — superheated and greatly depleted of living organisms — into Oyster Creek. Many people remain unaware of this carnage because of a single fact: While other energy-producing plants use highly visible cooling towers to minimize the volume and environmental impact of their cooling systems, Oyster Creek does not. This negligence results in at least five kinds of ecological damage to Barnegat Bay: Massive destruction of biomass. Shellfish larvae, fish eggs, plankton and microorganisms of many kinds suffer high mortality rates as they are strained out of the water at the intake or as they are superheated inside the plant. Billions of fish and aquatic organisms are killed. Thermal pollution. The water in the Oyster Creek discharge canal is extremely warm — up to 110 degrees Fahrenheit — which alters the natural character of Barnegat Bay. A looming question is whether this extreme artificial warmth is contributing to the prevalence of stinging sea nettle jellyfish, one of the most severe environmental problems of Barnegat Bay. Destruction of endangered sea turtles. Critically endangered Kemps Ridley, Atlantic green and loggerhead turtles are killed each year as they are attracted to the warm water and then sucked toward death on the cooling system intake. The number of diamondback terrapins lost is not known. Large fish kills occur in the winter when the plant temporarily shuts down for maintenance or mishap. Hundreds of fish attracted to the artificial warmth of Oyster Creek's outflow suffer fatal shock from the sudden onset of cold water. Biocides such as chlorine are allowed to be released into Oyster Creek and Barnegat Bay at levels known to be lethal to striped bass, bunker and other species. All these problems have a simple, sane solution. The plant's archaic "once through" cooling system can be replaced with a much lower volume "closed loop" system of cooling towers, a routine solution during the 20th century and no less of a necessity in the 21st. This step would reduce mortality rates by 95 percent. The most frustrating aspect of Oyster Creek's elementary failure to protect the waters of Barnegat Bay is that installation of a closed loop cooling system is already required by the Clean Water Act. Gov. Corzine and the state Department of Environmental Protection are aware of this requirement, which was recently reaffirmed for another plant by the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. Yet Oyster Creek's permit renewal under the Clean Water Act has been delayed by the state for years. By withholding action, Corzine is placing the profits and convenience of utilities and unions before the public interest and the health of a vital natural resource. This neglect is committed for the sake of a nuclear reactor that creates only about 1 percent of the electricity on our regional grid. If Corzine cannot muster the minimal political courage to require a closed loop cooling system at this plant, what hope is there that he will protect us as the harrowing facts of Oyster Creek's corroding nuclear containment continue to unfold? By his inaction, Corzine is taking the easy path of leaving it to environmentalists to solve his political problem through legal appeals. If environmentalists get the courts to say "no," then Corzine doesn't have to take the heat from the utilities and the unions. But courts sometimes err, and when they do, the public and our natural resources suffer. Gubernatorial acquiescence rather than leadership risks a legacy of destruction and tragedy. Tell the governor to enforce the Clean Water Act by requiring a closed loop cooling system at Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station. Barnegat Bay deserves no less. Let's get the Forked River flowing seaward again. William deCamp Jr. is chairman of the Board of Directors of Save Barnegat Bay, Lavallette. Copyright © 2007 Asbury Park Press. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 46 IAEA: Haiti Moving to Revitalize Nuclear Technical Cooperation [IAEA.ORG :: Atoms for Peace] 1 February 2007 [Map of Haiti] Haiti is one of the poorest countries in the Latin American & Caribbean region and the only one still classified as a least developing country. Haiti is taking steps to revitalize its nuclear cooperation with the IAEA in fields of nuclear science and technology. One main focus is nutrition and health, with the country set to launch a technical cooperation project later this year. The steps reflect a turnaround in Haiti, one of the poorest countries in the Latin American & Caribbean region and the only one still classified as a least developing country (LDC). It recently paid nearly US $330,000 in arrears to the IAEA regular budget, placing its membership in good standing. In a message to the IAEA, Mr. Azad Belford, Director, Department for International Organizatrions at the Ministry for Foreign Affairs, said Haiti has decided to pay its arrears to underscore its recognition of the importance of the Agency's programme in the field of development and the work it is doing in teh country. "We hope in the near future that Haiti could be a living example of what the Agency can do in the field of development in general and in the field of technical assistance for the LDC in particular", he said. Haiti has since 2002 stepped up its commitment to technical cooperation with the IAEA. It now receives support mainly for manpower development in the fields of energy planning, radiotherapy, productivity of crops and radiation protection. In addition, in 2007 the country will start technical cooperation projects to evaluate the effectiveness of nutrition intervention programmes in children and for investigating aquifers in the Plaine du Cul-du-Sac as well as the pollution of the coastal zone in Gonaives. 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: ***************************************************************** 47 Shanghai Daily: Areva signs deal with China on 2 nuclear reactors -- 2007-2-1 AREVA SA, the world's biggest builder of nuclear-power plants, signed an agreement with China Guangdong Nuclear Power Group Co Ltd to built two nuclear reactors for an undisclosed amount, Le Figaro reported without saying where it got the information. Areva's Chief Executive Officer Anne Lauvergeon signed an agreement last week, after the company lost an earlier multi-billion-euro nuclear contract in China in December to Toshiba Corp's Westinghouse Electric Co, the daily said. The company declined to comment, Le Figaro said. It couldn't immediately be reached by Bloomberg. Copyright © 2001-2007 Shanghai Daily Publishing House ***************************************************************** 48 Reuters: Bulgaria lobbies EU to reopen nuclear plant 01 Feb 2007 12:34:12 GMT01 Feb 2007 BRUSSELS, Feb 1 (Reuters) - Bulgarian President Georgi Parvanov urged the European Union on Thursday to reconsider a deal that forces the bloc's newcomer to shut down Soviet-era nuclear reactors, causing power shortages in the region. Bulgaria has closed two of the four reactors at the Kozloduy plant under the treaty that allowed the Black Sea state to join the EU on Jan. 1 along with neighbouring Romania. Brussels had insisted on the closures out of safety concerns. But Parvanov told the European Parliament the reactors were safe and invited more EU inspections to review the evidence. "If our EU partners find it necessary, Bulgaria may agree to a new peer review to the units 3 and 4 of our nuclear power plant," he said. "All experts agreed there are no technical barriers to the day-to-day operations of these units, they also pointed to high level of safety of those units," he added. Parvanov said shutting down the reactors had led to power shortages in the Balkan region, which might bring economic and political instability. "Some of the countries of the region have serious energy shortages and power cuts. When you combine this with the increase of prices it may lead to political and economic instability of the whole region," he said. Power-hungry Albania called on the EU this week to review the closure of the units until alternative resources were built, saying it had disrupted the Balkan electricity market. Lack of rain, almost drying up the reservoirs of its hydro-electric schemes, along with the failure of suppliers to respect contracts because of the Bulgarian plant closure have caused power cuts of 12 hours a day in Albania since November. Bulgarian officials have said the country will ask the EU to increase the planned financial compensation for the shutdown. The EU has earmarked 220 million euros ($290 million) for the decommissioning of the reactors, but Bulgaria says Lithuania and Slovakia, which joined the EU in 2004, are to receive much more generous compensation for shutting down their Soviet-designed nuclear power plants. ***************************************************************** 49 Japan Times: Tepco must probe 199 plant check coverups Friday, Feb. 2, 2007 Kyodo News The government ordered Tokyo Electric Power Co. on Thursday to reinvestigate 199 cases of data falsification and other irregularities at its nuclear plants in connection with state inspections. Japan's largest power utility will have to identify the causes of the irregularities and compile preventive measures by March 1 under the order based on related laws, the Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency said. The order follows Tepco's admission Wednesday that it falsified data at its nuclear power plants to cover up problems during government inspections on 199 occasions between 1977 and 2002. In one of the most serious cases, Tepco covered up a defect that emerged in 1992 in an emergency pump designed to cool down a reactor core during accidents at its Kashiwazaki-Kariwa plant in Kashiwazaki, Niigata Prefecture. It falsified data to make it look like the pump functioned properly so the plant would pass regular inspection. Tepco reported the coverups Wednesday to the Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency, which had ordered utilities last year to launch investigations following allegations that the firm and other power companies had falsified inspection data. The 199 cases had been missed during a previous comprehensive check that followed Tepco's 2002 admission that its inspection reports had been faked. That revelation forced the shutdown of all of the utility's nuclear plants until their defects were repaired, a process that for some plants lasted more than a year. Tepco claimed measures have been taken to address all the problems and they no longer pose any operational or safety risks. According to the nuclear safety watchdog, a three-year statute of limitations has expired on all the coverups for criminal action to be taken against Tepco for obstructing inspections under the law governing the power industry. The safety agency, a body under the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry, ordered Tepco to look into further details of the cases and submit a report on steps to prevent further coverups by March 1. According to Tepco, the coverup at the Kashiwazaki plant took place in May 1992. A pump that comprises the emergency core cooling system failed on the evening of May 11, the day before the regular inspection by government officials. Because inspectors usually check only the indication panels at the central control room, utility used a test-run mode for the inspection where a pump does not activate even if a switch is turned on and it passed the inspection, Tepco said. Tepco operated the reactor for two days before it finally repaired the emergency pump, it added. Other problems reported by Tepco included those at its Fukushima No. 1 and No. 2 nuclear plants. The utility also said data had been falsified at its thermal plants in Sodegaura, Chiba Prefecture, and in Kawasaki. The Japan Times (C) All rights reserved ***************************************************************** 50 PRN: At Platts Energy Podium, DOE Official Unveils US$3 Billion in Bush Energy Plans WASHINGTON, February 1 /PRNewswire/ -- Platts -- President Bush will ask Congress to provide US$2.7 billion in fiscal year 2008 for his Advanced Energy Initiative (AEI) in hopes of addressing human impacts on the climate and will seek US$405 million for the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership (GNEP), Deputy Energy Secretary Clay Sell said Thursday at a Platts Energy Podium in Washington, D.C. In a preview of energy budget proposals Bush will make on Monday (February 5) when he sends his new budget to Capitol Hill, Sell said the GNEP program would advance nuclear fuel recycling technology in an effort to prevent nuclear proliferation. The administration asked for US$250 million in FY-07, but would get only US$120 million in a spending bill currently being considered by Congress. Sell said advancing the program also will help address global climate change concerns. "No rational individual who wants to address global warming policy can acknowledge anything other than nuclear power is going to have to play a significant role," he said. The AEI budget request represents a US$500-million increase over the administration's FY-07 proposal, and would help "meet the president's goal of reducing use of gasoline by 20% in the next decade," Sell said. Bush said in his January 16 State of the Union address that he wants to curb U.S. gasoline consumption 20% by 2017 by promoting biofuels and increasing automobile fuel economy. Among other budget initiatives for FY-08, the White House will seek US$9 billion in authority for loan guarantees for advanced energy technologies, Sell said. With US$4 billion in authority proposed under an FY-07 bill pending in Congress, DOE could potentially provide as much as US$13 billion in financial backing for projects exploring new approaches to biofuel production, coal combustion, carbon sequestration, nuclear energy and electricity transmission. DOE would start issuing the guarantees "as early as this fall," Sell said. About Platts: Platts, a division of The McGraw-Hill Companies (NYSE: MHP), is a leading global provider of energy and metals information. With nearly a century of business experience, Platts serves customers across more than 150 countries. From 14 offices worldwide, Platts serves the oil, natural gas, electricity, nuclear power, coal, petrochemical and metals markets. Platts' real time news, pricing, analytical services, and conferences help markets operate with transparency and efficiency. Traders, risk managers, analysts, and industry leaders depend upon Platts to help them make better trading and investment decisions. Additional information is available at http://www.platts.com. About The McGraw-Hill Companies: Founded in 1888, The McGraw-Hill Companies (NYSE: MHP) is a leading global information services provider meeting worldwide needs in the financial services, education and business information markets through leading brands such as Standard & Poor's, McGraw-Hill Education, BusinessWeek and J.D. Power and Associates. The Corporation has more than 280 offices in 40 countries. Sales in 2006 were US$6.3 billion. Additional information is available at http://www.mcgraw-hill.com. Web site: http://www.platts.com http://www.mcgraw-hill.com ***************************************************************** 51 DNA: It' s payback for the N-deal Uttara Choudhury Thursday, February 01, 2007 22:28 NEW YORK: US firms are going all out to win the dogfight over India’s sizzling defence market. With the stakes climbing on the back of soon-to-be floated military plane tenders the US government has given the go-ahead to rival US aerospace giants Lockheed Martin and Boeing to fly their most advanced combat aircraft at the upcoming Indian air show in Bangalore from February 7 to 11. Boeing has changed tack to focus hard on the booming Asian market after anticipating smaller US Defence Department budgets. India is high on its military sales radar and the US firm is bringing some of its most advanced products to the air show including its Super Hornet, CH-47F Chinook helicopter and the US Air Force used Boeing C-17 Globemaster aircraft. According to the Asia Times, Pentagon expects India to start purchasing as much as $5 billion worth of conventional military equipment, in exchange for Washington’s support for supplying nuclear technology for civilian use that could also open up business opportunities to the tune of $100 billion. “We are going to have two F/A-18 Super Hornets at the show. At least one of them will be on static display while the other one is flying,” Boeing spokesman Brian Nelson told DNA. Nelson said that in addition to the two daily aerial demonstrations during the show Boeing would also be conducting “VIP flights” for members of the Indian Air Force and government who want a closer look at the strike fighter. “It has only been two years since the US government gave American defence companies the green light to go into India in pursuit of business. This time we are going to have a very significant presence in the air show due to the importance of India as an up-and-coming market,” said Nelson. Boeing expects India to throw up defence business worth $10 to $15 billion over the next decade. More significantly, India’s plan to buy 126 multi-role combat aircraft for upwards of $7 billion will pit Boeing’s F/A-18 Super Hornet and Lockheed’s F-16 against Russia’s MiG-29M/M2, the French Mirage 2000-5, and the Swedish JAS-39 Grippen. The French Rafaele and the four-nation European Typhoon are also in the running. The top US firms participating in the show, include Boeing, Lockheed Martin, Honeywell, General Electric, Raytheon, The Cohen Group, United Technologies Corporation/Pratt & Whitney, Bell Helicopter Textron, Emergent Bio-Solutions, L-3 Communications and the Fremont Group. RightsCOPYRIGHT © 2007 DILIGENT MEDIA CORPORATION LTD. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. ***************************************************************** 52 Viet Nam News: Viet Nam will need nuclear energy programme - company Thursday, February 01, 2007 (01-02-2007) HA NOI — Viet Nam will need to build at least 20 nuclear power plants over the next two decades to ensure energy security for the country’s economic development, said Dinh Duc Huu, general director of American Technologies, Inc. Huu made the comments at a seminar that was held to explore the potential role of nuclear energy in Viet Nam’s economic development. Huu believes that the time is right for Viet Nam to start on a nuclear power programme as the country has just become a member of the World Trade Organisation. "Viet Nam has a population of nearly 85 million and its economic development rate is progressing quickly. The nation is also in dire need of a stable, quality energy supply," said Huu. During the conference which was jointly organised by America Technologies and the Ha Noi University of Technologies, discussions were held on issues relating to the design, establishment and management of nuclear power plants in Viet Nam. "Nuclear power is the best method for cheap power generation that also leaves a small environmental footprint," Huu said. At the conference, America Technologies bequeathed a scholarship fund worth US$75,000 to the university. Six outstanding students will benefit from the scholarship. — VNS Copyright by Viet Nam News, Vietnam News Agency 11 Tran Hung Dao Street, Hanoi, Vietnam Editor in Chief: Tran Mai Huong Tel. 84-4-9332316; Fax: 84-4-9332311 E-mail: vnnews@vnagency.com.vn Publication Permit: 599/GP-INTER Granted by the Ministry of Culture and Information on April 9, 1998. ***************************************************************** 53 Whitehaven News: N-firms vie for reactor contracts Published on 01/02/2007 NUCLEAR companies are positioning themselves to win lucrative contracts to build new nuclear reactors ahead of the government’s energy white paper, due out next month. The Prospect trade union national secretary, Mike Graham, representing hundreds of Sellafield engineers, said there was “a lot of interest†in the possible revival of the UK nuclear industry from suppliers. “Everything seems to have been speeding up within the last month.†Although deal-making cannot go ahead until a formal decision from government to give the green light to new nuclear reactors, companies that make nuclear reactor technology as well as those that build nuclear plants have started positioning themselves. In its review of energy policy last July, the government said a new generation of nuclear power stations should be built and run by the private sector to replace those built in the 1960s and 1970s. Among those waiting to bid for new reactor business are executives from Atomic Energy of Canada Limited, the Canadian state-owned nuclear group, who were in London last week to meet nuclear regulators and officials at the Department for Trade and Industry and promote its new line of heavy-water nuclear reactors. Jerry Hopwood, vice-president for reactor development at AECL, told the Financial Times: “We have started talking to a number of utilities companies in the UK, and also extensively to the regulators.†Mr Hopwood added that, if hired to build a reactor for the UK, 70 to 80 per cent of the manufacturing would take place in the UK, creating jobs and safeguarding nuclear skills. He also said that AECL had a good record of building reactors on time and on budget. If, as expected, the energy white paper gives the go-ahead to new nuclear plants, the first step is for the Health and Safety Executive to approve or “pre-license†a number of reactor designs. The government wants to create competition between reactor manufacturers, so would like the HSE to approve at least two designs for power companies to choose from. The Canadians will be competing against more established reactor manufacturers such as General Electric, Westinghouse (just sold off by BNFL) and Areva of France. Robert Davies, UK marketing director for Areva, said his group had also been talking to the government about its latest design, the European Pressurised Water Reactor, as well as to Electricité de France, Eon and RWE. ***************************************************************** 54 Vermont Guardian: Feds declare: Vermont Yankee is safe, public unsure By Christian Avard | Vermont Guardian Posted February 1, 2007 BRATTLEBORO After two tense public hearings, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) told area residents that an initial analysis finds there would be minimal environmental impact if Vermont Yankee were allowed to operate for an additional 20 years. About 50 people showed up Wednesday night in Brattleboro to comment on the draft report. Entergy Vermont Yankees (ENVY) operating license expires in 2012 and has filed an application to renew its license. An initial step in that process is the completion of an environmental impact statement (EIS), where Vermont Yankee is inspected thoroughly for any possible damages in might incur on the environment. The NRC broke the draft report into two parts a generic overview, and a site-specific section. The criteria for evaluating the environmental effects of nuclear power plants were established in the mid-1990s. A total of 92 separate areas are evaluated, and in Vermont Yankees case 69 of them fell under the generic section of the report, which are labeled category one issues. Site-specific issues were evaluated separately and are dubbed category two issues. David Miller of Argone National Laboratories was the team leader of consultants that conducted the NRC study, which found no significant Category One findings that warranted special attention. They also determined the same for Category Two issues and assured the public the potential impact in these areas would be small, including bald eagles, which continue to nest in the vicinity. While the NRC concluded that environmental effects at the plant might be small, critics maintain the report is inadequate because it fails to address evacuation plans and more importantly, the high risks of storing spent nuclear fuel on the banks of the Connecticut River. The results of a spent fuel pool fire would be catastrophic, said Diane Sidebotham, president of the New England Coalition. [And] we learned the NRC has also declined to provide protection for reactors from air crash. Together these illustrate a serious disregard or unwillingness to address very serious issues within your agency. No consideration of nuclear waste in the EIS is complete. It is dismissed as a small effect. Deb Katz of the Citizens Awareness Network also raised concerns over the vulnerability of spent nuclear fuel storage to a terrorist attack, and asked by the NRC was holding hearings on the EIS in lieu of the recent Supreme Court ruling, San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace v. NRC. In that ruling, issued earlier this year, the U.S. Supreme Court refused to take up an appeal of Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruling that said the NRC must consider the environmental impacts of a possible terrorist attack on a dry cask storage site. NRC officials contend the ruling is only applicable in that district California and other West Coast states. The Massachusetts Attorney General, which made a similar challenge in Vermont Yankees license renewal, had its request to have the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board, an advisory panel to the NRC, conduct such a review denied. However, it has petitioned the full NRC to change its rules so it would consider such threats when reviewing license extensions. The NRC is reviewing the request. Why are we here if this is now under re-writing the regulations, questioned Katz. Why hasnt the NRC suspended its evaluation? Why doesnt it take the hard look that the national environmental policy act requires it to do instead of avoiding the issue? While critics maintained that the EIS is inadequate, VY supporters argued that Vermont Yankees license must be renewed for another 20 years. Bruce Wiggett, former CFO of Vermont Yankee touted the companys economic benefits to Vermont. From 2002 to the present VY has saved consumers $157 million in real dollars as compared to the cost of purchased power on the open market. The Vermont Department of Public Service estimated that savings to Vermont customers thorugh 2012 will total about $250 million and by 2012 VY will have invested $25 million to the states green energy fund which [will support renewable energy efforts in Vermont, said Wiggett. [That money] will go a long way in Vermont toward future developments in the state. But despite economic savings, the state of Vermont will have the ultimate say in VYs re-licensing efforts. Chris Williams, who drove down from Addison County, urged Vermonters to call their representatives and support a House bill is now under consideration that would revise the retail electric providers portfolio standards so that at least five percent of the states total electrical energy load as of 2012 will be met by renewable energy resources. There are currently 15 sponsors to the bill and Williams believes this will be an important first step moving away from nuclear power and towards a sustainable energy future. The NRC is accepting public comments on the draft EIS until March 7, with a final report due in August. The draft environmental impact statement can be read at www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/nuregs/staff/sr1437/supple ment30/ Written comments on the draft can be sent to: Chief, Rules and Directives Branch, Division of Administrative Services, Mail Stop T-6 D59, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C. 20555-0001, or e-mailed to VermontYankeeEIS@nrc.gov. Send us your news tips, a letter to the editor or general comments. * All fields required - This information is used for verification purposes only - Thanks! PO Box 335, Winooski, VT 05404 Southern Vermont: 139 Main Street, Suite 702, Brattleboro, VT 05301 Contact: 802.861.4880 (ph) | 802.861.6388 (fax) | 877.231.5382 (toll-free) ©2005 Vermont Guardian | Visit us: www.vermontguardian.com This document can be located online: www.vermontguardian.com/local/022007/VYHearing.shtml ***************************************************************** 55 NRC: Live NRC Meeting Webcast The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission broadcasts some Commission meetings over the Internet as a means of improving communications with the public. Upcoming webcasts are: Date Subject 2/1/07 Briefing on Strategic Workforce Planning and Human Capital Initiatives 1:30 P.M. + Slides 2/15/07 Briefing on Office of Chief Financial Officer (OCFO) Programs, Performance, and Plans 9:30 A.M. 2/28/07 Briefing on New Reactor Issues (PUBLIC MEETING) (Contact: Donna Williams, 301-415-1322) 9:30 A.M. 3/5/07 Meeting with Department of Energy on New Reactor Issues (PUBLIC MEETING) 1:00 P.M. 3/7/07 Briefing on Office of Nuclear Security and Incident Response (NSIR) Programs, Performance, and Plans (PUBLIC MEETING) 9:30 A.M. 3/8/07 Briefing on Office of Nuclear Materials Safety and Safeguards (NMSS) Programs, Performance, and Plans (PUBLIC MEETING) 10:00 A.M. 3/8/07 Briefing on Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR) Programs, Performance, and Plans (PUBLIC MEETING) 1:00 P.M. The following resources will assist you in participating: + Public Meeting Schedule - provides a complete listing of agency meetings. Live meetings shown as [webcast] + Commission Meeting Schedule - lists all Commission meetings for a six week period. Live meetings shown as [webcast] + Slides - available in advance of the meeting + Transcripts - available within 48 hours of the conclusion of the live meeting + Meeting SRM - documentation of any Commission's decisions from the meeting To view a webcast you will need to download the RealOne plugin [RealNetworks Media Streaming Player icon] . You may also view previous webcasts at our Webcast Archive. Comments and Feedback To help us determine the value of continuing to provide this service, the NRC would appreciate your assistance by providing comments and feedback on the usefulness, performance, and frequency with which you might use this service or any other items related to this service. + Contact Us About Webcasts + Webcast Interest Survey Notes on Accessibility Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act requires equal access to the Federal government's electronic and information technology. In compliance with this Act, NRC is including text equivalents (captioning) as part of the video image being shown over the Internet during the Commission meeting. Although every effort is made to assure the accuracy and completeness of this text, users should be aware that errors may nonetheless occur. Expressions of opinion in this text do not necessarily reflect final determination or beliefs. No pleadings or other paper may be filed with the Commission in any proceeding as a result of any statement or argument contained in the text-equivalent (captioned) material. Last revised Wednesday, January 31, 2007 ***************************************************************** 56 UN Atomic Watchdog Agency Reports Cases Of Illegal Trafficking In Nuclear Materials Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2007 12:01:23 -0500 UN ATOMIC WATCHDOG AGENCY REPORTS CASES OF ILLEGAL TRAFFICKING IN NUCLEAR MATERIALS New York, Feb 1 2007 12:00PM The United Nations atomic watchdog agency, whose tasks include pre-empting nuclear and radiological terrorism and preventing proliferation, today reported 149 confirmed incidents of illicit trafficking and other unauthorized activities involving nuclear and radioactive Of these, 15 involved the seizure of nuclear and radioactive materials from individuals who possessed them illegally, according to preliminary figures released by the UN International Atomic Energy Agency (<"http://www.iaea.org/NewsCenter/News/2007/itdb_update.html">IAEA) “Some of these individuals were attempting to sell the material or smuggle it across national borders,” IAEA said in a statement of the incidents, which were reported by the states involved with the Office’s Illicit Trafficking Database (ITDB). “Six of these incidents involved nuclear materials. Five involved materials such as natural uranium, depleted uranium, and thorium and one involved In the latter case, Georgia <"http://www.iaea.org/NewsCenter/News/2007/georgia_material.html">reported that in February 2006, 79.5 grammes of uranium enriched to 89 per cent was seized from a group of criminals in Tbilisi, the capital. The other incidents of illegal possession reported to the ITDB involved radioactive sources. Just last week, the IAEA noted another reported case in which Georgia seized about 100 grammes of uranium enriched to a level considered to be weapons-grade during a sting operation. Over the past several years, the agency has been assisting Georgia in the effective monitoring, control, and recovery of nuclear and radioactive In previous statements the IAEA has warned that “in the hands of terrorists or other criminals, some radioactive sources could be used for malicious purposes, for example in a radiological dispersal The other 134 incidents reported to the IAEA for 2006 included 85 involving theft or loss of nuclear or other radioactive materials, mainly radioactive sources. In about 75 per cent of the cases, the materials lost or stolen had not been recovered at the time The remaining 49 involved other unauthorized activities, primarily unauthorized disposal of radioactive sources and radioactively contaminated materials and discovery of uncontrolled, or orphan, radioactive materials. Another 103 incidents were reported in 2006 The ITDB was established by the IAEA in 1995 to facilitate exchange of authoritative information related to trafficking in nuclear and other radioactive materials among Member States. To date, 95 countries and organizations are members of the ITDB. A more complete report is expected later this year, in advance of the IAEA General 2007-02-01 00:00:00.000 ___________________ For more details go to UN News Centre at http://www.un.org/news To listen to news and in-depth programmes from UN Radio go to: http://radio.un.org/ _______________________________ To change your profile or unsubscribe go to: http://www.un.org/apps/news/email/ ***************************************************************** 57 IAEA: Georgian Authorities Report Seized Illicit Nuclear Material + [IAEA.ORG :: Atoms for Peace] Authorities in the Republic of Georgia have reported the seizure of illicit nuclear material, according to the Associated Press news service (AP). The IAEA is aware of the case, which remains under investigation by officials in Georgia and the United States, which reportedly aided the seizure. Authorities told AP that the seized material was about 100 grams of uranium enriched to a level considered to be weapons-grade. It was recovered during a "sting operation" in Georgia in 2006 that involved energy and law enforcement authorities from Georgia and the United States, AP reported. Over the past several years, the IAEA has been assisting Georgia in the effective monitoring, control, and recovery of nuclear and radioactive materials. The IAEA also maintains a database of reported illicit trafficking incidents. It shows there have been 16 previous confirmed cases in which either highly enriched uranium or plutonium have been recovered by authorities in Georgia and other countries since 1993. 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: ***************************************************************** 58 Rapid City Journal: Bill would recommend tests By Bill Harlan, Journal staff A bill to remind South Dakota veterans who served in certain combat zones that they can be tested for exposure to depleted uranium won a tentative recommendation from a House committee Wednesday. Uranium is heavy, and depleted uranium (with the radioactive isotopes removed) is used in armor-piercing shells. Its health risks are subject to controversy. House Bill 1202 requires the state Department of Military and Veterans Affairs to notify veterans of the Gulf War and wars in Iraq, Afghanistan and Bosnia that they can get free screenings from the VA. Rep. Margaret Gillespie, D-Hudson, the bill's sponsor, acknowledged the effects of depleted uranium were in dispute and that a similar bill failed last year. But she pointed out that New York, Connecticut and Louisiana had passed similar bills, and she said Congress also was considering related legislation. Under HB1202, service members would get a letter by first-class mail notifying them the tests were available. Gillespie said 2,904 veterans had returned to South Dakota since the start of the Iraq war, but only a few had requested the tests. "The numbers reported are very low," she said. The late Roger Andal, who was the state commander of the Disabled American Veterans, brought the issue to Gillespie's attention. "He lived through the Vietnam War and he lived through the effects of Agent Orange," she said. "Roger believed that this notice was a small and simple effort to bring awareness to our returning soldiers of their right to this test." John Hebrard, commander of the DAV in Rapid City, also testified in support of the bill. A disabled Gulf War veteran, Hebrard told the committee that many veterans didn't realize the test was available. "I don't think the word is getting out to the current veterans getting back," he said. The bill did have opponents. Andy Gerlach, deputy secretary of the Department of Veterans Affairs, said he believed soldiers were being trained about depleted uranium before they were deployed and that they were screened for it afterwards. Gerlach also said the Department sent the notifications Gillespie wanted last year, and he said there were "sufficient mechanisms in place" to notify veterans of the screenings. Gillespie said the notifications should be a matter of law, not a temporary policy. The committee voted 10 to 3 to recommend giving the program one-year trial. HB1202 now goes to the full House. Contact Bill Harlan at 394-8424 or bill.harlan@rapidcityjournal.com the Rapid City Journal Bill wrote on February 01, 2007 11:25 AM:"The VA's attempt to stop this bill shows how far the government will go to try to avoid making payments to the people who have it coming. The DOD and congress has done everything they can over the last several years to put the screws to veterans and their families. As to the contention that these members were trained before and screened afterwards, I have some serious doubts. As a retired miltary member and a disabled vet, I have seen how the military handles things and how far they will go in order to avoid admitting there is any possible problems. Just look at all of the veterans of the first Gulf war who came home with problems. It took years for the government to even acknowledge that there was a problem. The state should notify all members that there is a test available for them " sparky wrote on February 01, 2007 6:34 AM:"And you say South Dakota wants to move ahead and retain it young people I do'nt think so. The god fathers of this state more worried somebody might actuaul live decent'" Send us your Rapid Reply Name:Comments: The opinions above are from readers of rapidcityjournal.com and in no way represent the views of the Rapid City Journal or Lee Enterprises. Rapidcityjournal.com encourages readers to offer their opinions on our local stories. We will never edit or alter your comments, but we do reserve the right to not post or to remove comments that violate our code of conduct. For this reason, comments are first reviewed and may not post immediately, especially during overnight/weekend hours. No comment may contain: The Rapid City Journal Phone: 605-394-8300 Contact Us ©2007 Rapid City Journal. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 59 Whitehaven News: BNG denies huge overdose at Mox Published on 01/02/2007 By Alan Irving BRITISH Nuclear Group has dismissed speculation that a Sellafield worker may have been subjected to well over a lifetime’s dose of radiation in a single contamination incident. Concerns have been voiced to The Whitehaven News that the man was contaminated to “an incredibly high level†in the Mox plutonium recycling plant. He was one of five workers contaminated in the recent incident. BNG said yesterday: “We are not going to divulge individual personal dose records, suffice to say that none have exceeded their lifetime dose of radiation, neither has anyone received injections. “The circumstances of the event dictated that treatment was administered as a precaution. However, this is clearly a personal matter for the individuals concerned. We do anticipate that all of the workers could go back to work in the ‘active’ areas once their results are available — we cannot confirm this until then.†All five are working in non-active parts of the Sellafield site pending the final results. www.whitehaven-news.co.uk/digitalcopy ***************************************************************** 60 reviewjournal.com: Yucca manager defends expense to restore project Feb. 01, 2007 Porter calls $25 million price tag 'throwing good money after bad' By STEVE TETREAULT STEPHENS WASHINGTON BUREAU WASHINGTON -- The top Yucca Mountain manager on Wednesday defended the Energy Department's spending of more than $25 million to restore the project in the wake of scientists' e-mails that raised questions about research quality at the nuclear waste site. "An objective individual taking a look at this should, if nothing else, see that DOE spent a heck of a lot of effort" on corrective action, including searches to determine whether similar problems lurked elsewhere in the program, said Ward Sproat, director of the Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management. Sproat confirmed a $25.6 million price tag reported by the Government Accountability Office in a study released this week. He said the numbers were generated by DOE and given to the auditors as "a best estimate of the work." Much of the money already has been spent on investigations and corrective actions that began in 2005. About $5 million is scheduled to be spent this year to complete the tasks, the GAO said. On Wednesday, Yucca opponent Rep. Jon Porter, R-Nev., said the Energy Department was "throwing good money after bad" in trying to fix problems at the proposed waste repository that has been chronically delayed. Rep. Shelley Berkley, D-Nev., circulated a letter to other House members calling attention to new criticism of the repository leveled last week by Edward McGaffigan, a departing member of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Sproat, appointed by President Bush last year to manage the repository site, said his charge was to fix the project and move it forward. "I can't make excuses or really talk about what went on in the past and the problems that occurred," he said. "I can talk about what I am doing now and that I am aware of the quality problems that existed." The Energy Department launched a multipronged investigation after the discovery of e-mail messages in which several U.S. Geological Survey hydrologists assigned to Yucca indicated they may not have followed quality assurance requirements for a water infiltration computer model they were building. The messages were written between 1998 and 2000 but not discovered until 2004 and not disclosed until March 2005. The GAO report detailed costs to sample and review more than 14 million e-mails, to provide quality assurance training, and to replace the infiltration model that had been called into question. After reviewing that model and others the hydrologists had helped build, Energy Department officials declared scientific data had not been compromised but quality assurance standards had not been met. Engineers from Sandia National Laboratories were brought onto the Yucca program to reconstruct the model, a key piece of research of how water might seep into the mountain and over thousands of years rust canisters of highly radioactive spent nuclear fuel. Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal, 1997 - 2007 ***************************************************************** 61 CBC: SRB Technologies loses radioactivity processing licence CANADA | OTTAWA Last Updated: Wednesday, January 31, 2007 | 5:52 PM ET CBC News A Pembroke, Ont., company that was temporarily shut down in August for contaminating groundwater with radioactive tritium will not be allowed to use tritium to manufacture light sources anymore, the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission has ruled. In a news release issued Wednesday, the commission said it would not renew SRB Technologies' operating licence because it believes the company "will not make adequate provision for the protection of the environment when carrying out activities that include the processing of tritium." [The commission said it believed the company would 'not make adequate provision for the protection of the environment' while manufacturing glow-in-the-dark signs using radioactive tritium.] The commission said it believed the company would 'not make adequate provision for the protection of the environment' while manufacturing glow-in-the-dark signs using radioactive tritium. (CBC) The company will still be allowed to possess radioactive materials for the next 18 months. SRB Technologies, which uses the tritium to manufacture glow-in-the-dark signs and emergency lighting at a plant 130 kilometres northwest of Ottawa, had asked for a three-year renewal of its operating licence. Local environmental groups said they were concerned about the way the company handles the radioactive material washed off its smokestacks, and they fiercely opposed the renewal at public hearings on Oct. 25 and Nov. 27. On Nov. 30, the commission gave the company a temporary two-month renewal of its licence while it made a final decision. The plant was shut down temporarily in August after nuclear safety inspectors found the groundwater near the plant was contaminated with levels of radiation up to 80 times higher than what is considered safe. As part of its licence renewal proposal, the company said it would store the tritium-contaminated water washed off its smokestacks and release it periodically into Pembroke's sewer system, where it would be diluted to safe levels before flowing into the Ottawa River. Copyright © CBC ***************************************************************** 62 Aiken Today: Area groups apply for nuclear recycling program + AikenStandard.com Thu, Feb 1, 2007 By PHILIP LORD Senior writer The next 90 days will be very busy for two area groups looking to cash in on the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership being championed by President George Bush. Currently, EnergySolutions and the Savannah River National Laboratory, which is partnered with the Economic Development Partnership of Aiken and Edgefield counties, are working to complete applications by May 30 to be one of the sites selected for the nuclear recycling program. SRNL proposes building its structure at an energy park at the Savannah River Site, while EnergySolutions' plan calls for the former Allied-General facility in Barnwell County to be used for its project. "We were pleased with what DOE gave us," said Tim Dangerfield, senior vice president for EnergySolutions in South Carolina. Dangerfield, who stepped down late last year as the chief of staff in the S.C. Department of Commerce, said he was looking forward to the GNEP competition. "America is on the verge of a nuclear renaissance," Dangerfield said. All told, EnergySolutions received $3 million in first-phase funding for site characterization work at three sites around the country – Atomic City, Idaho, in the amount of $915,448; Barnwell in the amount of $963,151; and Roswell, N.M., in the amount of $1,134,522. "Recycling spent nuclear fuel is the right approach to closing the nuclear fuel cycle and helping America to become more energy independent," said Steve Creamer, CEO of EnergySolutions. "We are the only U.S. company with proven recycling technology, so we are proud to be partnering with the DOE to identify those sites which hold the most promise for a recycling facility," Creamer added. While officials with EnergySolutions make their case for the GNEP project, officials with Washington Group's Energy &Environment business unit, which is the parent company of Washington Savannah River Company, say the decades of experience at SRS and the existing site infrastructure make the Cold War era site perfect for the next generation of energy production. According to the DOE, the information generated from the studies will address a wide range of site-related issues, including, "site and nearby land uses; demographics; ecological and habitat assessment; threatened or endangered species; historical, archaeological and cultural resources; geology and seismology; weather and climate; and regulatory and permitting requirements." After the initial phase of funding for 11 projects is completed, DOE will narrow its choice to two sites and will move forward with pursuing the GNEP technology. If selected for the GNEP mission, the area could expect to see a capital investment of $16 billion and the creation of 8,000 new jobs. Current nuclear technology employed by reactors in the production of electricity around the world leaves behind tons of spent nuclear fuel that contains plutonium and other highly radioactive elements that can be weaponized. Instead of burying the waste rods – which continue to be radioactive and heat-producing for centuries – the Bush plan calls for building special advanced burner reactors that can fully break down the plutonium and create electricity while rendering the resulting waste much safer, according to the U.S. Department of Energy. Critics, however, say the Bush plan could allow the countries supplied with U.S. fuel rods to misuse them and stockpile plutonium or have it stolen by terrorists despite the plan's lofty goals. Published reports say the Bush administration's plan is similar to an ill-fated 1970s initiative by then-President Jimmy Carter. That plan involved using specialized fast reactors, none of which currently operate in the U.S. Carter abandoned the program in 1977 after India detonated a nuclear weapon that was developed with plutonium extracted with the aid of a U.S. reprocessing system. Despite that history, ever-increasing costs for petroleum-based fuels are leading the Bush administration and nuclear energy supporters to point to new reactors as a big part of the solution to the world's energy future. While questions about funding for the program and whether it should even be undertaken, rage on in Washington, local officials say they are excited about the impact winning the project could have on the local area and on the future of SRS. Contact Philip Lord at plord@aikenstandard.com © 2005 The AikenStandard. All Rights Reserved ***************************************************************** 63 BBC: Dounreay's dome could disappear Last Updated: Thursday, 1 February 2007 [Dounreay with cows in the foreground] The Dounreay dome has been a local landmark for many years pot after the site's new owners made clear there were no plans to retain it. Up until recently, the iconic sphere of the world's first fast breeder reactor was due to be kept for posterity. Many locals support its retention while Historic Scotland had been keeping its future listing under review. The dome's fate is being discussed along with what state the site should be left in after its £2.9bn clean-up. The Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA) said it was likely there would not be a sphere at the end of the site's decommissioning. The UKAEA is carrying out a consultation exercise on behalf on the NDA, which is in overall charge of Dounreay and the UK's other 19 defunct reactor sites. The most prudent strategy radiologically is to arrange to dismantle it - to get rid of it John Farquhar NDA In all five "endgame" scenarios set out by the agency, the former fast reactor complex has been levelled, apart from the dome. However, the NDA said it saw no case for the dome's retention after the internal plant, fittings and equipment are stripped out. Scottish regional director John Farquhar said he understood the historical and emotional case for keeping the landmark sphere, but added that his organisation must observe its remit to oversee the safe clean-up of the site. He said: "The most prudent strategy radiologically is to arrange to dismantle it - to get rid of it." Maintenance costs Mr Farquhar said the Dounreay fast reactor, which ran from 1959 to 1977, handled some of the highest hazard material on the site. The stainless steel sphere is contaminated with tritium, which is said to be notoriously hard to clean up. Mr Farquhar said there was also evidence of corrosion to the structure. If kept the shell would be costly to maintain, with painting it alone costing £250,000 every five years. Mr Farquhar added that neither the NDA nor any other government body would pick up the bill associated with the sphere's retention beyond the site clean-up. Historic Scotland said it had no plans to list the sphere. Doug Graham, who is in charge of firming up the UKAEA's eds unclear. He said both he and Mr Farquhar were keen to see if it featured in public feedback to the current consultation. ***************************************************************** 64 Deseret News: Protesters raise 'red flag' over EnergySolutions bill By Joe Bauman Deseret Morning News Lofting small red flags outside the Senate Chamber on Capitol Hill, demonstrators demanded the end of a bill that would let EnergySolutions operate on its own square mile without legislative or gubernatorial oversight. [Sue Corth of Salt Lake City attends a news conference at the State Capitol Wednesday about a proposed bill involving oversight of EnergySolutions. (Laura Seitz, Deseret Morning News)] Laura Seitz, Deseret Morning NewsSue Corth of Salt Lake City attends a news conference at the State Capitol Wednesday about a proposed bill involving oversight of EnergySolutions. Supporters say the bill would correct a mistake lawmakers made a couple of years ago when they said it and the governor must approve any substantial change in EnergySolutions' operations, even on the square mile that it owns. That square mile of Tooele County desert is designated Section 32. For years, EnergySolutions and its predecessor, Envirocare, have had a permit to dispose of Class A radioactive material there. The bill does not apply to another section where EnergySolutions would like to expand and does not prevent state environment officials from going through the permitting process for changes on Section 32. Demonstrators sent notes to lawmakers and waited to pigeonhole some as they left the Senate chamber. The stiff paper flags carried the logo, "No On SB155." The flags represented a comment that Minority Whip Sen. Gene Davis, D-Salt Lake, who supports SB155, made Jan. 24 during a hearing on the bill when he told Patrick Cone, a member of the Radiation Control Board, that if red flags come up during the permitting process, it's the duty of the control board to "run those red flags up" and take the concerns to the Legislature. "What the bill would do is remove all elected leaders from decisions about nuclear waste disposal" on Section 32, Christopher Thomas, policy director for the Healthy Environment Alliance of Utah, said in a press conference Wednesday. He listed three "red flags" that worried the approximately 30 demonstrators present and responded to those concerns: • "Why is the State Legislature spending its time" on a bill to help one company? He said EnergySolutions had donated campaign funds to many legislators. • "Senate Bill 155 does a Divine Strake" on Utah policy, referring to the planned federal detonation of 700 tons of explosives at the Nevada Test Site. Utah residents did not have adequate time to respond to the Divine Strake plans, he said, and SB155 will mean that decisions about EnergySolutions will be by state bureaucrats and not elected representatives. • "Our elected leaders have to weigh, filter and struggle with conflicting ideas." Cutting the Legislature and governor out of that process allows them to "excuse themselves" from difficult questions, he said. "My biggest concern is that we're talking about a highly dangerous form of waste and we really haven't figured out how to handle it safely," said Ed Firmage Jr., Salt Lake City, in an interview. The material will be around "thousands of years," he said. Before the Senate adjourned for its noon break, many of the demonstrators wrote notes on their red flags, as well as comment sheets, and sent them in to their senators. They followed instructions to take the flags off the small balsawood staffs. Others waited until senators began leaving the chamber. A group of several Utahns opposed to the bill approached Sen. Ross I. Romero, D-Salt Lake, talking to him and giving him a red flag on its staff. "Oh, I think it's very helpful for the citizens to come up and talk to their representatives about issues that are important to them," Romero said. E-mail: bau@desnews.com © 2007 Deseret News Publishing Company ***************************************************************** 65 NRC: RIN 3150-AI03 FR Doc E7-1643 [Federal Register: February 1, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 21)] [Proposed Rules] [Page 4660-4661] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr01fe07-13] List of Approved Spent Fuel Storage Casks: Standardized NUHOMS[reg] System Revision 9 AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission. ACTION: Proposed rule. ----------------------------------------------------------------- ------ SUMMARY: The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is proposing to amend its regulations revising the Transnuclear, Inc., Standardized NUHOMS[reg] System listing within the ``List of Approved Spent Fuel Storage Casks'' to include Amendment No. 9 to the Certificate of Compliance (CoC) Number 1004. Amendment No. 9 would modify the CoC by revising Technical Specifications 1.2.1 and 1.2.14 to add the Framatome-ANP, Version 9x9-2 fuel assemblies (FANP9x9-2) as approved contents for storage in the NUHOMS[reg]-61BT dry shielded canister, under the general provisions of 10 CFR part 72. DATES: Comments on the proposed rule must be received on or before March 5, 2007. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by any one of the following methods. Please include the following number (RIN 3150-AI03) in the subject line of your comments. Comments on rulemakings submitted in writing or in electronic form will be made available for public inspection. Because your comment will not be edited to remove any identifying or contact information, the NRC cautions you against including personal information such as social security numbers and birth dates in your submission. Mail comments to: Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, ATTN: Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff. E-mail comments to: SECY@nrc.gov. If you do not receive a reply e- mail confirming that we have received your comments, contact us directly at (301) 415-1966. You may also submit comments via the NRC's rulemaking Web site at http://rulemaking.llnl.gov. Address questions about our rulemaking Web site to Carol Gallagher (301) 415-5905; e-mail cag@nrc.gov. Comments can also be submitted via the Federal eRulemaking Portal http://www.regulations.gov. Hand deliver comments to: 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852, between 7:30 a.m. and 4:15 p.m. Federal workdays [telephone (301) 415-1966]. Fax comments to: Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission at (301) 415-1101. Publicly available documents related to this rulemaking may be viewed electronically on the public computers at the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR), O-1F21, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland. Selected documents, including comments, can be viewed and downloaded electronically via the NRC rulemaking Web site at http://ruleforum.llnl.gov. Publicly available documents created or received at the NRC after November 1, 1999, are available electronically at the NRC's Electronic Reading Room at http://www.nrc.gov/NRC/ADAMS/index.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 PDR Reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov. An electronic copy of the proposed CoC No. 1004, proposed Technical Specifications (TS), and preliminary safety evaluation report (SER) for Amendment No. 9 can be found under ADAMS Accession Nos. ML062830065, ML062830067, and ML062830069. The proposed CoC No. 1004, the proposed TS, the preliminary SER for Amendment No. 9, and the Environmental Assessment (EA) are available for inspection at the NRC PDR, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville MD. Single copies of these documents may be obtained from Jayne M. McCausland, Office of Federal and State Materials and Environmental Management Programs, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, telephone (301) 415-6219, e-mail jmm2@nrc.gov. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jayne M. McCausland, Office of Federal and State Materials and Environmental Management Programs, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, telephone (301) 415- 6219, e-mail jmm2@nrc.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: For additional information see the direct final rule published in the Rules and Regulations section of this Federal Register. Procedural Background This rule is limited to the changes contained in Amendment 9 to CoC No. 1004 and does not include other aspects of the Standardized NUHOMS[reg] System design. Because NRC considers this action noncontroversial and routine, the NRC is publishing this proposed rule concurrently as a direct final rule. Adequate protection of public health and safety continues to be ensured. The direct final rule will become effective on April 17, 2007. However, if the NRC receives significant adverse comments by March 5, 2007, then the NRC will publish a document that withdraws the direct final rule and will subsequently address the comments received in a final rule. The NRC will not initiate a second comment period on this action. A significant adverse comment is a comment where the commenter explains why the rule would be inappropriate, including challenges to the rule's underlying premise or approach, or would be ineffective or unacceptable without a change. A comment is adverse and significant if: (1) The comment opposes the rule and provides a reason sufficient to require a substantive response in a notice-and-comment process. For example, in a substantive response: (a) The comment causes the NRC staff to reevaluate (or reconsider) its position or conduct additional analysis; (b) The comment raises an issue serious enough to warrant a substantive response to clarify or complete the record; or (c) The comment raises a relevant issue that was not previously addressed or considered by the NRC staff. [[Page 4661]] (2) The comment proposes a change or an addition to the rule, and it is apparent that the rule would be ineffective or unacceptable without incorporation of the change or addition. (3) The comment causes the NRC staff to make a change (other than editorial) to the CoC or Technical Specifications. List of Subjects in 10 CFR Part 72 Administrative practice and procedure, Criminal penalties, Manpower training programs, Nuclear materials, Occupational safety and health, Penalties, Radiation protection, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Spent fuel, Whistleblowing. For the reasons set out in the preamble and under the authority of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended; the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974, as amended; and 5 U.S.C. 553; the NRC is proposing to adopt the following amendments to 10 CFR part 72. PART 72--LICENSING REQUIREMENTS FOR THE INDEPENDENT STORAGE OF SPENT NUCLEAR FUEL, HIGH-LEVEL RADIOACTIVE WASTE, AND REACTOR- RELATED GREATER THAN CLASS C WASTE 1. The authority citation for part 72 continues to read as follows: Authority: Secs. 51, 53, 57, 62, 63, 65, 69, 81, 161, 182, 183, 184, 186, 187, 189, 68 Stat. 929, 930, 932, 933, 934, 935, 948, 953, 954, 955, as amended, sec. 234, 83 Stat. 444, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2071, 2073, 2077, 2092, 2093, 2095, 2099, 2111, 2201, 2232, 2233, 2234, 2236, 2237, 2238, 2282); sec. 274, Pub. L. 86-373, 73 Stat. 688, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2021); sec. 201, as amended, 202, 206, 88 Stat. 1242, as amended, 1244, 1246 (42 U.S.C. 5841, 5842, 5846); Pub. L. 95-601, sec. 10, 92 Stat. 2951 as amended by Pub. L. 102- 486, sec. 7902, 106 Stat. 3123 (42 U.S.C. 5851); sec. 102, Pub. L. 91-190, 83 Stat. 853 (42 U.S.C. 4332); secs. 131, 132, 133, 135, 137, 141, Pub. L. 97-425, 96 Stat. 2229, 2230, 2232, 2241, sec. 148, Pub. L. 100-203, 101 Stat. 1330-235 (42 U.S.C. 10151, 10152, 10153, 10155, 10157, 10161, 10168); sec. 1704, 112 Stat. 2750 (44 U.S.C. 3504 note); sec. 651(e), Pub. L. 109-58, 119 Stat. 806-10 (42 U.S.C. 2014, 2021, 2021b, 2111). Section 72.44(g) also issued under secs. 142(b) and 148(c), (d), Pub. L. 100-203, 101 Stat. 1330-232, 1330-236 (42 U.S.C. 10162(b), 10168(c),(d)). Section 72.46 also issued under sec. 189, 68 Stat. 955 (42 U.S.C. 2239); sec. 134, Pub. L. 97-425, 96 Stat. 2230 (42 U.S.C. 10154). Section 72.96(d) also issued under sec. 145(g), Pub. L. 100-203, 101 Stat. 1330-235 (42 U.S.C. 10165(g)). Subpart J also issued under secs. 2(2), 2(15), 2(19), 117(a), 141(h), Pub. L. 97- 425, 96 Stat. 2202, 2203, 2204, 2222, 2244 (42 U.S.C. 10101, 10137(a), 10161(h)). Subparts K and L are also issued under sec. 133, 98 Stat. 2230 (42 U.S.C. 10153) and sec. 218(a), 96 Stat. 2252 (42 U.S.C. 10198). 2. In Sec. 72.214, Certificate of Compliance 1004 is revised to read as follows: Sec. 72.214 List of approved spent fuel storage casks. * * * * * Certificate Number: 1004. Initial Certificate Effective Date: January 23, 1995. Amendment Number 1 Effective Date: April 27, 2000. Amendment Number 2 Effective Date: September 5, 2000. Amendment Number 3 Effective Date: September 12, 2001. Amendment Number 4 Effective Date: February 12, 2002. Amendment Number 5 Effective Date: January 7, 2004. Amendment Number 6 Effective Date: December 22, 2003. Amendment Number 7 Effective Date: March 2, 2004. Amendment Number 8 Effective Date: December 5, 2005. Amendment Number 9 Effective Date: April 17, 2007. SAR Submitted by: Transnuclear, Inc. SAR Title: Final Safety Analysis Report for the Standardized NUHOMS[reg] Horizontal Modular Storage System for Irradiated Nuclear Fuel. Docket Number: 72-1004. Certificate Expiration Date: January 23, 2015. Model Number: NUHOMS[reg]-24P, -52B, -61BT, -32PT, - 24PHB, and -24PTH. * * * * * Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 19th day of January, 2007. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Luis A. Reyes, Executive Director for Operations. [FR Doc. E7-1643 Filed 1-31-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P ***************************************************************** 66 Inland News: March hearing over perchlorate postponed PE.com | PERCHLORATE: The delay comes as the appointed hearing officer gives his resignation. 10:00 PM PST on Wednesday, January 31, 2007 By JENNIFER BOWLES The Press-Enterprise A March hearing aimed at assigning blame and cleanup responsibility for the Inland region's most pressing water pollution case will be delayed after the specially appointed hearing officer unexpectedly resigned Wednesday. Walt Pettit's resignation came a day after the acting executive director of the State Water Resources Control Board urged regional water-quality regulators to restrict his powers to issuing recommendations rather than rendering verdicts. Pettit said he was unwilling to proceed because the disagreement between the state and regional boards on his role "is not likely to be clearly resolved soon," he said in a letter dated Wednesday. At issue is a plume of perchlorate that spreads several miles long below Rialto and Colton and has shut down more than a dozen wells used for drinking water in the two cities. Regional water-quality investigators say they believe most of the perchlorate, a chemical used in rocket fuel and fireworks, sunk into the ground in the 1950s and 1960s from companies that worked with the materials in north Rialto. Perchlorate is linked to thyroid illness. The regional board more than five years ago began investigating those possibly responsible for the pollution, and say they consider Goodrich Corp. and Emhart, a subsidiary of Black and Decker, to be the key contributors to the perchlorate. Attorneys for both companies have disputed those claims. To resolve challenges by Emhart of the regional water panel's bias, the regional board appointed Pettit as a special hearing officer in October, said Kurt Berchtold, assistant executive officer for the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board. He said Pettit's resignation was unexpected. "We need to figure out how to move this process forward and we'll be resolving that as quickly as we can," he said. "Obviously, it's a high priority." Community activists said they were disappointed the March 23 hearing will be delayed. "As the plume moves it may hit more wells. It's imperative we get cleanup now," said Davin Diaz, with the Center for Community Action and Environmental Justice in San Bernardino. Reach Jennifer Bowles at 951-368-9548 or jbowles@PE.com--> © 2007 Press-Enterprise Company ***************************************************************** 67 University Journal: Weapons testing has global effect Matthew Montgomery Issue date: 2/1/07 Section: News Media Credit: Jennifer Fernandez + This is the last in a series on the history of the Nevada Test Site and the issues surrounding Divine Strake. Divine Strake, a proposed conventional weapons test scheduled to take place in 2007 at the Nevada Test Site 45 miles northwest of Las Vegas, has national and international implications that stretch beyond interests in southern Utah. As reported in the University Journal Jan. 18, Divine Strake has garnered enough controversy to convince Gov. Jon Hunstman Jr. to request public hearings in St. George and Salt Lake City. Primary concerns about the test concentrate on the possibility of radiation from previous nuclear tests at the Nevada Test Site being spread downwind. As reported in the University Journal Jan. 18, G. Michael Stathis, professor of political science, said he thinks the Divine Strake could lead to more weapons testing. "It could be a way to kick the door open for more weapons testing - not excluding nuclear testing," Stathis said. "It could help in the development of a new generation of bunker busters." Divine Strake has had no shortage of regional news coverage; international outlets are reporting on the issue, but news outlets in the eastern U.S. are largely dismissing it. Eileen McCabe, national delegate for the Desert Greens, or the Green Party of Utah, and policy adviser with the Blue Sky Institute, said "many media outlets are making this a local issue, but a lot of the eastern media is ignoring it." "This is a global issue," she said. "It's received attention from Al-Jazeera." Stathis said continued testing could also lead to increased tensions in the Middle East. "It will further inflame the Middle East," he said. "It won't help and will radicalize Iran." McCabe said the test is not winning the U.S. any friends globally. "I really feel the test is aggravating global tensions; it's setting up against the U.S.," she said. "The ramifications of this are not lost on the rest of the world." Divine Strake and future tests will not help our security efforts, McCabe said. "I think it's very dangerous," she said. "I really feel there are security threats against the U.S. because of the policy decisions it is making on things like weapons." John Howell, assistant professor of political science, said he thinks weapons testing is necessary for the safety of the nation. "I believe we absolutely need weapon testing," he said. "Having up-to-date weaponry benefits the country." Jim Eardley, Washington County Commission chairman, said he thinks weapons technology is an important factor in defense. "What seems to have been most effective at holding (our enemies) at bay is the technology of our weapons system," he said. "I hope that continues to be a priority." Stathis said escalating testing in the U.S. could give other nations reason to increase their own testing. "If we begin testing, it sets in motion justification for testing in China, Pakistan and India," he said. "There are other ways to do it." Page 1 of 1 © 2006 University Journal ***************************************************************** 68 Knox News: Utilities behind research Knox lab hopes to find ways for consumers to get most from their electricity By ANDREW EDER, edera@knews.com January 31, 2007 A Knoxville lab will lead a multiyear research initiative to develop technologies for improved energy efficiency - an effort that its backers hope will lower consumers' electric bills and cut down on greenhouse gas emissions. The Electric Power Research Institute, a nonprofit research and development firm, is launching the program backed by a coalition of more than 35 electric utilities, including the Tennessee Valley Authority. EPRI's lab in West Knoxville will be the hub for the project, dubbed "Dynamic Energy Management." EPRI engineers will coordinate their research with utilities, universities, manufacturers and national labs such as Oak Ridge National Laboratory. The firm is expanding its technical operations in Knoxville and hiring engineers to handle the duties. The goal is to find ways to improve energy efficiency of consumer products, integrate new technologies into existing infrastructures and help level out utilities' energy loads to cut down on peak power demands. "Utilities are using energy efficiency as a resource, but it's not wide-scale," said Arshad Mansoor, vice president of EPRI's Power Delivery and Markets Sector. Mansoor said EPRI intends to create "living laboratories" to study technologies such as Internet Protocol addressable devices, which can be remotely controlled through the Internet. For example, an IP-addressable dimmer switch could be programmed to slightly dim lights during periods of peak demand, easing the strain on power providers. Consumer products such as flat-screen televisions are contributing to increased power demands, an issue EPRI researchers are studying. "If we can reduce peak load by 5 percent, that is a huge benefit to everyone in the valley," Mansoor said. "The research is, how do you put it end to end and control the whole system?" Today in Kansas City, Mo., representatives of the three dozen utilities backing the research initiative will meet for what EPRI spokesman Clay Perry described as a summit. Perry said the mix of investor-owned, municipal and cooperative utilities will identify areas where research is needed and develop a road map for the program. Perry would not disclose the names of specific utilities before today's meeting, but he said EPRI's board of directors "is enthusiastically behind the initiative." EPRI's board includes representatives from many of the nation's major utilities, including Southern Co. of Atlanta, Duke Energy Corp. of Charlotte, N.C., and American Electric Power Co. of Columbus, Ohio. TVA was a founding member of EPRI, and Kate Jackson, TVA's executive vice president of River System Operations and Environment, sits on EPRI's board. Jim Keiffer, TVA's senior vice president of marketing, will attend today's meeting in Kansas City. He said TVA has benefited through the years from EPRI's research in power generation and transmission. In recent years, Keiffer said, the research focus on energy efficiency and use has been reduced, making this new project an important one. "If we can help in an energy-wide initiative to help consumers control their use of energy, that's going to be of value not only to TVA but to our customers as well," Keiffer said. For ORNL, the research program is the latest chapter in a nearly 20-year relationship with EPRI. Bob Hawsey, director of ORNL's Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy program, said EPRI's focus dovetails with his department's research on building control systems such as heating and air conditioning. "One future vision is that some of our largest products that consume electricity in our homes will be able to communicate with the electric companies that provide that power," Hawsey said. Tom King, manager of ORNL's Electric Transmission and Distribution Technologies program, said his department would help examine how to integrate new technologies into existing power infrastructures. King said the initiative should provide opportunities to bring research and development projects like hybrid lighting and heat pump water heaters to commercialization. EPRI's Mansoor said research on new technologies would be done with an eye toward "what is best for society." "We're very keen on interoperability, very keen on open architecture," he said. At its Knoxville location, EPRI is preparing to move its business operations to a neighboring building in order to expand its technical operations. The institute expects to hire 20 new employees in Mansoor's department this year, most of those in Knoxville. The initial launch of the initiative is scheduled to last a year, but EPRI expects the full research and development program to last at least five years. "You don't address an issue as big as energy efficiency in 12 months," Mansoor said, "but we want to make a difference in 12 months." Business writer Andrew Eder may be reached at 865-342-6318. MICHAEL PATRICK NEWS SENTINEL Arshad Mansoor, right, vice president of power delivery and markets, talks about research at the Electric Power Research Institute being done in the background by engineer Chris Trueblood at the company’s West Knoxville facility. A coalition of more than 35 electric utility companies is backing the research that could result in more energy efficiency, which would lower bills for consumers. RELATED LINKS + Link: Find out more about EPRI and its Knoxville lab ELECTRIC POWER RESEARCH INSTITUTE + Established: 1973 + Profile: Nonprofit research and development firm for energy and environmental research. EPRI’s members represent more than 90 percent of electricity generated in the U.S. + Offices: Palo Alto, Calif., Charlotte, N.C., and Knoxville + Top executive: Steven Specker, president and CEO + Total employees: 720 + Knoxville employees: 78 + Knoxville office: 942 Corridor Park Blvd. © 2007 - Knoxville News Sentinel ***************************************************************** 69 Tri-City Herald: DOE could face fines after milestone miss Published Thursday, February 1st, 2007 By Annette Cary, Herald staff writer The state of Washington is warning the Department of Energy that it could issue fines after DOE failed to have enough Hanford waste approved for shipment to a national repository in 2006. DOE was legally required to have 3,900 cubic yards of Hanford waste contaminated with plutonium certified for shipment to the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant in the New Mexico desert for disposal by the end of 2006. The radioactive waste, called transuranic waste, is typically contaminated debris such as laboratory equipment and building rubble. However, DOE's contractor, Fluor Hanford, still was about 750 cubic yards short of that Tri-Party Agreement milestone by mid-January. DOE filed a request at the end of September for an extension to the Tri-Party Agreement milestone, but the state declined. After a series of legal steps that included DOE disputing the decision, the Washington Department of Ecology notified DOE in January that it would not revise the legal agreement to give DOE more time. It also reminded DOE that it could issue fines and penalties when DOE meets the milestone. The Tri-Party Agreement allows fines of up to $5,000 for the first week the deadline was missed and $10,000 for each additional week. Although the state is evaluating enforcement action, it usually issues fines as a last resort. DOE also has asked the state to revise related milestones for transuranic waste, and the state is considering those. Not getting enough waste certified in 2006 will put DOE behind schedule on its legal obligations to get more of the waste certified in the future. It also has asked for more time to develop facilities for handling transuranic waste that is so radioactively hot that it has to be handled with robotic equipment, and for handling oversized containers of transuranic waste. But the state denied the extension for the 2006 deadline because it did not see enough effort on DOE's part to meet the milestone, said Laura Cusack, a Department of Ecology section manager. "We had been telling them they would miss the milestone since December (2005)," she said. DOE could have taken steps to meet the deadline, such as having an extra shift added at the Waste Receiving and Processing Facility, she said. When the milestones were set, DOE had planned to meet the 2006 deadline with newly generated waste from taking down buildings at the Plutonium Finishing Plant. But work there has been postponed because weapons-grade plutonium continues to be stored at the site as DOE works to come up with a national plan for consolidating the waste, likely in South Carolina. But DOE could have made adjustments to certify other waste, according to the state. Hanford also has waste that was temporarily buried after Congress ordered all transuranic waste to be sent to a national repository in 1970, years before a repository site was selected. DOE met legal deadlines for retrieving that waste from the ground in 2006, but not for getting enough of it certified for shipment to New Mexico. Containers of waste must be checked for waste that's not allowed, such as liquids and aerosol cans, and repackaged in some cases. The radioactivity must be verified, then extensive paperwork must be done. Processing a single drum can take weeks to months, according to DOE. DOE has taken several steps to meet certification deadlines, said Matt McCormick, assistant manager for central Hanford projects. That includes increasing staff, adding repackaging stations and installing a new drum venting system. DOE does not want to ramp up work, then have to lay off those workers before transuranic waste volumes from the Plutonium Finishing Plant increase in about 2011 and 2012, said Mark French, DOE federal project director for waste treatment and disposal. © 2007 Tri-City Herald, Associated Press &Other Wire Services ***************************************************************** 70 Chillicothe Gazette: Piketon group receives grant for site study www.chillicothegazette.com - Chillicothe, OH Thursday, February 1, 2007 The Gazette Staff A Piketon group has been named recipient of an Energy Department grant that would fund a siting study of the former Piketon uranium enrichment plant. The grant, totalling $673,761 and awarded to the Piketon Initiative for Nuclear Independence, LLC, would be used to determine whether the Piketon site could be used as a Global Nuclear Energy Partnership site to recycle spent nuclear fuel. The grants will allow the recipients to carry out studites to determine if the sites can host an advanced nuclear fuel recycling center and/or an advanced recycling reactor, according to a release from the Department of Energy. The studies have begun, and must be complete within 90 days, with submission by May 30. Piketon wasn't the only grant winner. The total amount awarded was nearly $10.5 million, divided amongst 11 recipients. The recipients included: Energy Solutions, LLC, representing Atomic City, Idaho ($915,448), Roswell, N.M. ($1.1 million) and Barnwell, S.C. ($963,151); Tri-City Industrial Development Council/Columbia Basin Consulting Group, representing Hanford Site, Wash. ($1.02 million); Eddy Lead Energy Alliance, representing Hobbs, Minn., ($1.6 million); Regional Development Alliance, Inc., representing Idaho National Laboratory, Idaho ($648,745); General Electric Co. representing Morris, Ill., ($1.5 million); Community Reuse Organization of East Tennessee representing Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Tenn., ($894,704); Paducah Uranium Plant Asset Utilization, Inc. , for Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant, Ky., ($664,600); and Economic Development Partnership of Aiken and Edgefield Counties representing Savannah River National Laboratory, S.C. ($468,420). Six of the sites are owned and operated by the Department of Energy. Originally published February 1, 2007 Print this article Copyright ©2007 Chillicothe Gazette ***************************************************************** 71 lamonitor.com: LANL K-9s held to higher standard The Online News Source for Los Alamos ROGER SNODGRASS Monitor Assistant Editor The Inspector General for the Department of Energy took a close look at the department's canine program at three "selected sites" and concluded they were "inadequate." The IG's office declined to specify which sites were inspected, citing security reasons, but a spokesperson said Los Alamos National Laboratory was not one of the sites visited. Canine teams are assigned to DOE facilities to deter potential threats and may be involved in such things as explosive detections, suspect apprehension and searches. They are also used to help other federal and local law enforcement efforts, such as searching for explosives before VIP visits and clearing public facilities after a threat. In a summary of the DOE report released on Tuesday, IG Gregory H. Friedman said that at three sites under review canine teams failed the explosive detection part of the evaluation, that the canines in each demonstration of suspect apprehension failed to respond to at least one of the handler's commands and that the canines were not getting enough hours of training each week. In evaluating the canine teams, Friedman said he recommended that DOE review the program at all the sites. At LANL, canine security is used specifically for explosives detection and handled under a contract by K-9 Search on Sight, a company based in Knoxville, Tenn. Terran Robertson, who manages the K-9 program for the laboratory, said the company also manages the contract for Oak Ridge National Laboratory and is one of the top companies in the nation. K-9 Search on Sight has held the contract for four years now. Michael Hartmann, the company's field operation manager, said the teams are tested quarterly, but train more frequently, one day a month along with continuous on-going training. Michael Wismer, who supervises the canine operations as group leader in LANL's safeguards and security directorate, said the dogs must be able to recognize a suite of 21 odors. "If they fail, they are retrained immediately," he said. The IG report noted that the Department of Energy "does not have assessment standards" for the work of its canines. Wismer said K-9 Search on Sight was chosen because "they use the most up to date and stringent standards." He said LANL's canines meet standards established by the Mid-South Police Canine Association and standards set for certification by the Peace Officer Standards and Training (POST). Editors note: LANL has offered to provide a demonstration of its K-9 corps' proficiency, which will be the subject of a follow-up story. © 2003 Los Alamos Monitor All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 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: *****************************************************************