*****************************************************************
03/12/07 ****     RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL)       **** VOL 15.59
*****************************************************************
   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 SF Chronicle: Democrats Back Off on Iran Language
2 Reuters: U.S. embargo against Iran bank not a violation - IMF 
3 Reuters: West faces resistance on scope of Iran sanctions 
4 AFP: Iran attack would have 'dire' impact on Israel - think-tank - 
5 Guardian Unlimited: Key Nations Split Over Iran Sanctions 
6 Digital Chosunilbo: Did N.Korea Get All It Wanted From the U.S.?
7 Digital Chosunilbo: Abandoned at a Nuclear Crossroads by Kim Dae-joo
8 Reuters: North Korea nuclear disarmament complex - IAEA | U.S. 
9 Korea Times: Australian Delegation Arrives in North Korea
10 US: Tribune: Can the White House lie to Congress, then punish whistl
11 US: UPI: U.S. official to lobby for rockets
12 Scotland: Senior minister will defy Blair over Trident	nuclear subma
13 Guardian Unlimited: Labour rebels demand Trident answers 
14 Guardian Unlimited: Minister quits in Trident protest 
15 Guardian Unlimited: Trident troubles deepen for Blair 
16 AU ABC: Greens make renewable energy push
17 DAILY YOMIURI: Benefits of geothermal power eyed 
18 BBC NEWS: Minister quits over Trident plans
19 AFP: Minister quits over nuclear weapons plans -
20 The Herald: How can anyone justify Trident as patriotic?
21 Comment is free: The cold war is over
22 CEP: TRIDENT: AN OPEN LETTER TO PARLIAMENT FROM AMERICA
 
                         NUCLEAR REACTORS
 
23 US: [NukeNet] CA legislators try to lift nuke ban
24 Economic Times: Pace of Indo-US nuke talks stepped up-
25 AU ABC: Nuclear facility may go ahead despite traditional owners' op
26 MDN: Tohoku Electric Power failed to report emergency stoppage of nu
27 US: NRC: NRC Issues Confirmatory Action Letters on Welds to Group of
28 US: CMD: Moore Spin: Or, How Reporters Learned to Stop Worrying and 
29 US: Platts: NRC and industry reach agreement on inspection of welds
30 US: Times Argus: Yankee did not exceed limits
31 US: Observer-Dispatch: State faces decision on power program
32 IRNA: Saeedi to brief MPs on Russian compliance with undertaking to
33 Prague Daily Monitor: Bursik wants to sack nuclear safety office hea
34 Guardian Unlimited: Russians: Iran Nuke Plant to Be Delayed 
35 AFP: Libya may ask for US help on nuclear power - 
36 Libyan Jamahiriya: Libya, US to cooperate in peaceful use of nuclear
37 AFP: Russia foresees two month delay for Iran nuclear station - 
38 IAEA: Nuclear Energy and Safety Issues on Topical Agendas
39 US: Vermont Guardian: Report: State radiation measurements at VY ina
40 SPIEGEL: Interview With the EU's Environment Commissioner
41 Herald Sun: N-giant in Canberra talks | 
 
                          NUCLEAR SECURITY
 
 
                          NUCLEAR SAFETY
 
42 US: Morning Call: Why is thyroid cancer rate up?
43 US: Please sign radiation standards letter--if you haven't already
44 US: NRC: NRC Schedules Public Meeting March 21 on Honeywell Uranium 
45 US: IndyStar.com: Nuclear detectors being fine-tuned 
46 SA: The Citizen: Nuke workers to take legal action
47 US: FR NRC: Honolulu FONSI 
48 AU ABC: Govt urged to ease access to payouts for veterans affected b
49 ABC News: Neutralizing a Nuclear Nightmare -
 
                         NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE
 
50 US: [NukeNet] Enron prosecutor takes on Navajo uranium cleanup
51 US: Tucson Citizen: No room at the inn for Tucson nuclear convention
52 US: SF New Mexican: Uranium plant construction fuels quick growth fo
53 US: Las Cruces Sun-News: Uranium plant fuels growth for oil town
54 AU ABC: Nuclear facility may go ahead despite traditional owners' op
55 US: The Mercury: A new wrinkle in spent fuel rod debate
 
                           PEACE
 
56 Press TV: Russia urges Israel to join NPT
 
                        US DEPT. OF ENERGY
 
57 Alert: Tell DOE what you think of radwaste reprocessing!
58 reviewjournal.com: Test site manager sees challenges ahead
59 DOE: DOE Seeking Input on Alternative Uses of Nickel Inventory
60 DOE: Deputy Secretary Sell Highlights Cooperation in Global 
61 Hanford News: Hearing set on Bush plan to tap nuclear energy
62 FR DOE: Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board, Hanfo
63 FR DOE: Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board, Idaho
64 FR DOE: Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board, Savan
65 KnoxNews: Museum in K-25 building would thrive, early study results 
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
                         FULL NEWS STORIES
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
 1 SF Chronicle: Democrats Back Off on Iran Language

By DAVID ESPO and MATTHEW LEE, Associated Press Writers

Monday, March 12, 2007

(03-12) 16:21 PDT WASHINGTON, (AP) --

Top House Democrats retreated Monday from an attempt to limit 
President Bush's authority for taking military action against 
Iran as the leadership concentrated on a looming confrontation 
with the White House over the Iraq war.

Officials said Speaker Nancy Pelosi and other members of the 
leadership had decided to strip from a major military spending 
bill a requirement for Bush to gain approval from Congress before 
moving against Iran.

Conservative Democrats as well as lawmakers concerned about the 
possible impact on Israel had argued for the change in strategy.

The developments occurred as Democrats pointed toward an initial 
test vote in the House Appropriations Committee on Thursday on 
the overall bill, which would require the withdrawal of U.S. 
combat troops from Iraq by Sept. 1, 2008, if not earlier. The 
measure provides nearly $100 billion to pay for fighting in two 
wars, and includes more money than the president requested for 
operations in Afghanistan and what Democrats called training and 
equipment shortages.

The White House has issued a veto threat against the bill, and 
Vice President Dick Cheney attacked its supporters in a speech, 
declaring they "are telling the enemy simply to watch the clock 
and wait us out."

House GOP Leader John Boehner of Ohio issued a statement that 
said Democrats shouldn't count on any help passing their 
legislation. "Republicans will continue to stand united in this 
debate, and will oppose efforts by Democrats to undermine the 
ability of General Petraeus and our troops to achieve victory in 
the Global War on Terror," he said.

Top Democrats had a different perspective.

Pelosi issued a written statement that said the vice president's 
remarks prove that "the administration's answer to continuing 
violence in Iraq is more troops and more treasure from the 
American people."

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said in a statement 
that America was less safe today because of the war. The 
president "must change course, and it's time for the Senate to 
demand he do it," he added.

The Iran-related proposal stemmed from a desire to make sure Bush 
did not launch an attack without going to Congress for approval, 
but drew opposition from numerous members of the rank and file in 
a series of closed-door sessions last week.

Rep. Shelley Berkley, D-Nev., said in an interview there is 
widespread fear in Israel about Iran, which is believed to be 
seeking nuclear weapons and has expressed unremitting hostility 
about the Jewish state.

"It would take away perhaps the most important negotiating tool 
that the U.S. has when it comes to Iran," she said of the 
now-abandoned provision.

"I didn't think it was a very wise idea to take things off the 
table if you're trying to get people to modify their behavior and 
normalize it in a civilized way," said Rep. Gary Ackerman of New 
York.

Several officials said there was widespread opposition to the 
proposal at a closed-door meeting last week of conservative and 
moderate Democrats, who said they feared tying the hands of the 
administration when dealing with an unpredictable and potentially 
hostile regime in Tehran.

Public opinion has swung the way of Democrats on the issue of the 
war. More than six in 10 Americans think the conflict was a 
mistake — the largest number yet found in AP-Ipsos polling.

But Democrats have struggled to find a compromise that can 
satisfy both liberals who oppose any funding for the military 
effort and conservatives who do not want to unduly restrict the 
commander in chief.

"This supplemental should be about supporting the troops and 
providing what they need," said Rep. Dan Boren, D-Okla., on 
Monday upon returning from a trip to Iraq. Boren said he plans to 
oppose any legislation setting a clear deadline for troops to 
leave.

In his speech, Cheney chided lawmakers who are pressing for 
tougher action on Iran to oppose the president on the Iraq War.

"It is simply not consistent for anyone to demand aggressive 
action against the menace posed by the Iranian regime while at 
the same time acquiescing in a retreat from Iraq that would leave 
our worst enemies dramatically emboldened and Israel's best 
friend, the United States, dangerously weakened," he said.

*****************************************************************
 2 Reuters: U.S. embargo against Iran bank not a violation - IMF 

Mon Mar 12, 2007 3:09PM EDT

By Lesley Wroughton

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. sanctions against Iranian banks do not
contravene foreign-exchange rules, an International Monetary Fund
spokesman said on Monday, after Tehran asked the IMF to determine
whether the actions were legal.

"We have reviewed the Iranian authorities' request," IMF spokesman
William Murray told Reuters.

"We advised the authorities that the new U.S. measures do not give
rise to an exchange restriction," he added.

The comments by the Washington-based IMF follow a request in
November by Iran to explore whether the September 8 embargo against
Saderat, a large trade financier that the U.S. accuses of financing
terrorism, violated IMF rules on foreign-exchange restrictions.

An IMF source said the matter was also raised last month by the
chairs for India and Egypt during a meeting of the IMF's board of
member countries to discuss Iran's economy.

The countries questioned whether the U.S. should have informed the
IMF under an executive board decision, known as No:144-(52/51) of
August 14, 1952, about the sanctions and if it had breached the
rules.

Iran first raised the issue with the IMF during the November 2006
economic consultations that included talks on the impact of the U.S.
embargo, according to documents published last week detailing the
discussions.  Continued...

© Reuters 2007. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 3 Reuters: West faces resistance on scope of Iran sanctions 

Mon Mar 12, 2007 2:21PM EDT

By Evelyn Leopold

UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) - Western nations seeking tighter U.N.
sanctions on Iran over its nuclear program have offered some
compromises to try to overcome Chinese and Russian objections but
will still face resistance when talks resume later on Monday,
diplomats said.

They said a proposal for a mandatory travel embargo on a list of
Iranian officials had been dropped, although attempts were being
made to tighten a voluntary travel ban endorsed previously.

As negotiations were about to resume, U.S. officials played down the
significance of an offer from Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad
to address the body. "I'm not sure what purpose that would serve,"
said State Department spokesman Tom Casey.

Iranian state TV on Sunday quoted government spokesman Gholamhossein
Elham saying: "The president of Iran plans to speak in a possible
meeting of the Security Council on Iran's nuclear program to defend
the right of the Iranian nation to use peaceful nuclear technology."

Casey, speaking in Washington, said: "The issue here is not
explaining Iran's presumed right to civilian nuclear power, the
issue here is getting at international community concerns about
Iran's nuclear programs and its pursuit of nuclear weapons."

Ambassadors from the permanent Security Council members, the United
States, Britain, France, Germany, Russia and China, as well as
Germany, are working on a resolution they hope to put to the full
15-member council this week.

Two weeks of negotiations in New York have failed to yield a
resolution, meant to further penalize Tehran for refusing to suspend
uranium enrichment. The United States accuses Iran of trying to make
nuclear weapons, but Tehran says the program is for energy
generation.  Continued...

© Reuters 2007. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 4 AFP: Iran attack would have 'dire' impact on Israel - think-tank - 

Mon Mar 12, 5:49 AM ET

LONDON (AFP) - Israel faces "dire and far-reaching" consequences 
if it launches military action to destroy Iran's nuclear 
programme, a leading British think-tank said Monday.

A report by Chatham House researcher Yossi Mekelberg argued that
Israeli air strikes could be successful and cripple atomic
facilities, but the strategy was "extremely risky".

Iran could retaliate with massive ballistic missile attacks on
Israeli cities like Tel Aviv or Haifa, causing "substantial" loss of
life, said Mekelberg, from the think tank's Middle East programme.

"An Israeli military operation against Iran would hurt Israel's
long-term interests. It would be detrimental to Israel's overall
security and the political and economic consequences would be dire
and far-reaching," he wrote.

Despite recent claims -- denied by Tel Aviv -- that the Jewish state
was planning strategic strikes on Iran, he said Israeli leaders
preferred a diplomatic solution to the nuclear stand-off between
Tehran and the West.

But the Israeli people themselves could feel compelled to act if
they felt Iran was close to developing a nuclear weapon,
particularly after President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's call in 2005 to
"wipe Israel off the map", he added.

"Israeli decision-makers face a combination of extreme hatred
expressed by the Iranian leadership, a call for the removal of the
Jewish state, and the development of military capabilities which
could potentially inflict a fatal blow on Israel," Mekelberg said.

"Moreover, a greater danger to Israel and to other Western countries
is the transfer of knowledge and technology to terrorist groups by
rogue elements within the Iranian regime, which might end in a
non-conventional terrorist attack."

Mekelberg, a lecturer in international relations and politics at the
British American College in London, said the Iranians could also
attack Israeli or US interests around the world.

Mekelberg's report follows warnings from British global security
think-tank the Oxford Research Group on March 5 that pre-emptive
military action could accelerate rather than hinder Iran's
production of atomic weapons.

Copyright © 2007 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 5 Guardian Unlimited: Key Nations Split Over Iran Sanctions 

From the Associated Press

Monday March 12, 2007 7:31 AM

By EDITH M. LEDERER Associated Press Writer

  UNITED NATIONS (AP) - The world's most powerful nations failed 
to agree on new sanctions against Iran amid reports that 
President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad wants to put Tehran's case for a 
nuclear program before the U.N. Security Council.

  The surprise announcement about Ahmadinejad's intention to fly 
to New York came in the throes of intense debate Sunday among the 
five veto-wielding permanent council members - the U.S., Russia, 
China, Britain and France - and Germany on additional measures to 
pressure Iran to suspend uranium enrichment.

 South Africa's U.N. Ambassador Dumisani Kumalo, whose country 
holds the rotating Security Council presidency, said Ahmadinejad 
had not made a formal request to address the U.N.'s most powerful 
body, but if he did, ``it would be very difficult to deny him 
that opportunity.''

    Kumalo said he would ``be open to consulting'' with the other 
council members on scheduling Ahmadinejad's appearance. ``I would 
be surprised if they said they don't want to hear him,'' he told 
The Associated Press.

   Whether an appearance before the Security Council by 
Ahmadinejad would affect the contents or vote on a new U.N. 
resolution remains to be seen.

   Iranian TV on Sunday quoted government spokesman Gholam 
Hossein Elham as saying Ahmadinejad ``intends to attend a U.N. 
Security Council meeting to be held on Iran's nuclear case in 
order to defend the rights of the Iranian nation in exploiting 
peaceful nuclear energy.''

    The announcement came hours before ambassadors of the six key 
nations met for the fifth time in a week to discuss what 
additional sanctions to include in a new resolution.

 In December, the Security Council imposed limited sanctions 
against Iran for its refusal to freeze uranium enrichment. It 
ordered all countries to stop supplying Iran with materials and 
technology that could contribute to its nuclear and missile 
programs, and to freeze assets of 10 key Iranian companies and 12 
individuals related to those programs.

  The council warned it would adopt further nonmilitary sanctions 
if Iran refused to comply.

 Iran not only refused to suspend its enrichment program but 
expanded it. So the six key nations that have been trying to rein 
in Iran's nuclear program started discussing possible new 
sanctions including a travel ban, an arms embargo, trade 
restrictions, and an expanded list of people and companies 
subject to an asset freeze.

 After Sunday's 1-hour meeting at Britain's U.N. Mission, 
however, it was clear that the key players remain divided. The 
U.S. and Europe want tougher sanctions than Russia and China, 
which both have strong business ties with Iran, are prepared to 
accept.

 China's U.N. Ambassador Wang Guangya said the basic positions of 
the six countries remained the same ``so I feel now it's up to 
our capitals to have one more round of exercises before we can 
meet again.''

    He said it would take ``at least a couple of days'' before 
the permanent members come up with a draft resolution to 
circulate to the 10 nonpermanent council members. The full 
council would then need time to consider the draft before it was 
put to a vote.

    Russia's U.N. Ambassador Vitaly Churkin said negotiations 
were ``moving slowly, back and forth.'' Asked whether the six 
were any closer to agreement, he said, ``Maybe a little bit, a 
little bit - but very, very gradual.''

 Acting U.S. ambassador Alejandro Wolff said Sunday's session 
``was a difficult one.''

  ``As always, when you get down to the last bits of agreement, 
the discussions harden a bit,'' he said. ``We had a session today 
that showed that there were still some firm views on all sides... 
I am hopeful still that we can overcome these remaining 
differences.''

      France's U.N. Ambassador Jean-Marc de La Sabliere said the 
negotiations ``are moving in the right direction.''

 ``We are not yet there but ... I expect, I hope that we will be 
able to have this resolution adopted next week,'' he said.

     China has resisted proposed cutbacks on loan guarantees for 
companies doing business in Iran, a measure strongly supported by 
the United States.

    There has been less friction over a proposal to ban Iran from 
exporting arms, although China wants the banned weapons to be 
specifically defined.

 As for Ahmadinejad, the Security Council would have to consider 
any request for him to speak, but approval seems likely.

 ``I think that any member can have the right to come to the 
council if they wish,'' said China's Wang who then added with a 
laugh: ``It will be fun if he comes - especially in connection 
with the adoption of this resolution!''

  Wolff, the U.S. ambassador, said he had only seen news reports 
and would wait for a formal request to the council.

  ``I've not seen any request for a visa,'' he said. ``I've not 
seen anything concrete, so I don't know what to make of it.''

                                 ---

  Associated Press Writer Alexandra Olson contributed to this 
report from New York.

Guardian Unlimited © Guardian News and Media Limited 2007
*****************************************************************
 6 Digital Chosunilbo: Did N.Korea Get All It Wanted From the U.S.?

Updated Mar.12,2007 12:06 KST

Since talks on the normalization of diplomatic ties between North
Korea and the U.S. ended in New York on Wednesday, North Korea¡¯s
top nuclear envoy Kim Kye-gwan has been telling everyone he reached
agreement on all critical issues with his U.S. counterpart
Christopher Hill. That includes Pyongyang¡¯s demands to unfreeze
North Korea¡¯s accounts with the Macau-based Banco Delta Asia,
remove it from the U.S. list of states sponsoring terrorism and lift
economic sanctions under the Trading with the Enemy Act. Does that
ring true even though North Korea has yet to shut down its nuclear
facilities in Yongbyon, the first step it promised under the Feb. 13
six-nation agreement?

¡ß The accounts

Kim suggested the U.S. agreed to unfreeze all US$24 million in
accounts with the Macau bank. But the U.S. has not said whether it
will unfreeze all or just some of them. In a meeting with the North
in Berlin in January, the U.S. agreed to unfreeze North Korean
accounts within a month after an accord is reached in the six-way
nuclear dialogue framework. Don Oberdorfer, the chairman of the
U.S.-Korea Institute at Johns Hopkins University¡¯s School of
Advanced International Studies, said it is uncertain which accounts
will be unfrozen. He said unless Washington unfreezes all accounts,
Pyongyang could change its attitude and argue that it need not
adhere to some parts of the six-party agreement either. Indeed, Kim
told reporters in Beijing on Saturday that the North will inevitably
take only partial steps if the U.S. leaves some accounts frozen.

The Macao Daily News supported speculations that the U.S. will
unfreeze only part of the North Korean accounts, while U.S. Rep. Ed
Royce wrote in the Wall Street Journal that punishing the North for
its illicit activities is a way to denuclearize the Korean Peninsula
earlier. By unfreezing all the accounts, the U.S. lays itself open
to charges that designating the bank a ¡°major money-laundering
concern¡± in the first place was over the top.

¡ß The blacklist

Kim said the U.S. agreed to remove North Korea from the list of
states sponsoring terrorism and lift economic sanctions under the
Trading with the Enemy Act. The U.S. added the North to the terror
sponsor list in 1988, one year after North Korea¡¯s bombing of
Korean Air flight 858. South Korean officials believe it would be
difficult for the U.S. to strike North Korea from the list before
the North shuts down its nuclear facilities. Bruce Klingner of the
conservative Heritage Foundation think tank said the North will
remain on the list of terrorist sponsors when it comes out in April.

Nor do analysts think that sanctions under the Trading with the
Enemy Act imposed after the Korean War can be lifted immediately.
Neither can sanctions which ban Americans from financial
transactions with the North and freeze North Korea¡¯s assets in the
U.S. Pundits say the sanctions will only be lifted when the U.S.
concludes that North Korea has completely disabled its nuclear
program and no longer poses a threat

(englishnews@chosun.com )

*****************************************************************
 7 Digital Chosunilbo: Abandoned at a Nuclear Crossroads by Kim Dae-joong

Updated Mar.12,2007 12:40 KST


The dynamics of international relations concerning the Korean
Peninsula are rapidly changing. So is the security situation of
South Korea. With North Korea's vice foreign minister Kim Kye-gwan's
visit to the United States as momentum, U.S.-North Korean relations
are suddenly improving. In Vietnam, Japan has held negotiations with
North Korea on improving relations (although their talks are broken
off for the time being). Senior officials from the U.S. departments
of State and the Treasury have visited China, suggesting that the
U.S. is giving weight to China's go-between role in the Korean
Peninsula. North Korean leader Kim Jong-il has unexpectedly visited
the Chinese Embassy in Pyongyang to stress his friendship with
China. Lee Hae-chan, a special aide to the South Korean president,
has visited Pyongyang, tapping the possibility of an inter-Korean
summit meeting.

It all shows that with the Feb. 13 six-party agreement as momentum,
the status of nuclear-armed North Korea is rising, and that the
traditional alliances and hostilities in and around the Korean
Peninsula are being readjusted. Today's South Korea may not be the
friend of the U.S. it was yesterday, just as today's North Korea is
not the enemy it was. Since his inauguration, U.S. President George
W. Bush at every opportunity branded North Korea part of an "axis of
evil," a dictatorship and a violator of human rights. But as seen in
his State of the Union address this year, Bush has become very quiet
as far as North Korea and Kim Jong-il are concerned. He has gone so
far as to praise the six-party agreement as "successful" even if he
would have thrown away only a few months ago. Bush is no longer a
politician of principles. He has virtually given in to North Korean
nuclear weapons.

South Korea is in trouble. Over the past five decades, we have had a
free ride for our national security is concerned, with full support
from the United States. Furthermore, North Korea was weak. China was
bent on reviving its own economy. Japan was trying to maintain its
status as an economic power. That allowed us to focus on developing
our economy relatively smoothly, without having to worry much about
security.

But now the tables have been turned. With its weapons, North Korea
has grown strong enough to confront the U.S. Buoyed by its economic
growth, China is stretching itself, longing for the good old days
when it had the run of Asia. With the backing of its strong
relations with the U.S., Japan behaves like a U.S. proxy in Asia.
Above all, the U.S. is leaving South Korea. Now South Korea's free
ride for its security is coming to an end -- a natural consequence
of South Korea's own actions, because the Roh Moo-hyun government
looked on as North Korea pursued a nuclear development program and
encouraged the U.S. to leave.

We may feel the U.S. is being irresponsible, but nobody can stop it
from leaving South Korea. This is what the Roh administration
wanted. And the U.S. can no longer afford to stay here, even if we
oppose its departure. The situation in Northeast Asia has changed,
and so has America. It has become disaffected with South Korea. As a
gesture of courtesy to an ally, it should lay out a step-by-step
roadmap to security prior to departure. But if we look at the Bush
administration's way of handling the transition of wartime
operational control of South Korean troops to Seoul and the North
Korean nuclear crisis, it is doubtful if the U.S. feels any sense of
responsibility for the future security of South Korea.

Last Wednesday, Gen. Burwell Bell, the commander of U.S. Forces
Korea, expressed concern about the reduction of the South Korean
forces and shortening of their military service, saying that North
Korea could be a nuclear power by 2009. It is difficult not to feel
aggrieved, since his statement sounds like, "Can you do it alone
even if we are leaving?"

Now we have to defend ourselves with our own efforts. Regardless of
who is to blame, that is the reality we have to face. We must work
out emergency measures to survive. We must double our diplomatic
efforts, boost defense capabilities, and pay more taxes for this
cause. More importantly, we need the defense equipment that allows
us to cope with North Korea's nuclear weapons. That means we need to
reconsider our position on nuclear weapons.

We are surrounded by countries who either have or are capable of
building nuclear arms. Because it has nuclear weapons, North Korea
has been able to survive and negotiate with the big powers. Of
course, China also has nuclear weapons, and the stark reality is
that Japan, with a nuclear reprocessing plant, is capable of making
nuclear arms any time it needs to. In addition, if we cannot expect
the support of the nuclear umbrella provided by the U.S, we could be
left helpless at a crossroads in East Asia amid a forest of nuclear
weapons. Mere troop numbers or longer military service, as General
Bell appeared to suggest, would not guarantee security. As long as
it tolerates North Korea's nuclear weapons, the U.S. has no
justification for preventing any country that is desperate to
survive from developing its own.

*****************************************************************
 8 Reuters: North Korea nuclear disarmament complex - IAEA | U.S. 

Mon Mar 12, 2007 10:16AM EDT

By Lindsay Beck

BEIJING (Reuters) - The head of the U.N. nuclear watchdog said on
Monday that moving to inspect and close facilities behind North
Korea's nuclear weapons program would be complex as the two sides
seek to rebuild severed ties.

International Atomic Energy Agency director Mohamed ElBaradei was in
Beijing en route to North Korea, where he is to negotiate the return
of agency inspectors as part of a February 13 accord.

That pact aims to wind down North Korea's nuclear weapons ambitions
in exchange for aid and security assurances.

"It is going to be a very incremental process," he told reporters on
arrival in Beijing. "There's a lot of confidence that needs to be
built."

IAEA inspectors have not visited the isolated North since 2002, when
Pyongyang expelled them as a previous disarmament deal ruptured.
Days later, North Korea announced its "automatic and immediate"
withdrawal from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.

"We need a lot of bridges to build, confidence to re-establish,"
ElBaradei said.

A shutdown of North Korea's Yongbyon nuclear plant by mid-April is
the centerpiece of last month's accord reached in six-party talks
grouping the two Koreas, Japan, Russia, the United States and host
China.  Continued...


© Reuters 2007. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 9 Korea Times: Australian Delegation Arrives in North Korea

Hankooki.com > The Korea Times > Nation > North Korea Today

An Australian government delegation arrived in the North Korean
capital Pyongyang on Sunday to call on the communist state to
abandon its nuclear weapons program, Australia's Department of
Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT) said Monday. The delegation, led by
First Assistant Secretary Peter Baxter, is scheduled to stay in
Pyongyang until Wednesday for denuclearization talks with ranking
North Korean officials, the department said.

The delegation is expected to make clear the country's intention to
offer economic assistance to the North in exchange for its decision
to completely scrap its nuclear program, it noted, adding Australia
has strong interest in peace on the Korean Peninsula.

Australia is one of a few Western countries that have diplomatic
ties with North Korea.

The visit followed a six-party agreement signed in Beijing on Feb.
13 in which North Korea committed to shut down its key nuclear
facilities in return for energy aid, security guarantees and
diplomatic incentives.

The accord also calls for outside inspections of the North Korean
nuclear facilities. The other countries involved in the deal are
South Korea, the U.S., China, Japan and Russia.

03-12-2007 14:07
  
*****************************************************************
 10 Tribune: Can the White House lie to Congress, then punish whistle blowers? 

New Brunswick Home News Tribune

Tribune Online 03/12/07

Henry Waxman, chairman of the House Oversight Committee, set 
hearings for this week to examine the CIA leak case in which 
Lewis "Scooter" Libby Jr. was convicted of obstruction of 
justice, perjury and lying to the FBI.

It's nice when the common sense of our elected representatives
matches the level of common sense of ordinary citizens.

This scandal stinks of treason, and it neither began, nor should
end, with Libby.

After the verdict was read for Libby, Vice President Dick Cheney's
former chief of staff, one of the jurors, Denis Collins, told
reporters that the nagging question brought up again and again
during deliberations was: "Where's Rove? Where are these other guys?"

That's Rove, as in presidential adviser Karl Rove, and the "other
guys" presumably as in Cheney and possibly other higher-ups.

Collins went so far as to call Libby the "fall guy."

Now there's the healthy dose of institutional distrust we've all
been waiting for.

It's now time for Waxman and Congress to do its part and get some
answers as to what this case was really about.

At the heart of the sordid episode lies the leaking to the press, by
members of the executive branch, the identity of a CIA official,
Valerie Plame, in order to retaliate against her husband, Joe
Wilson. Wilson wrote an op-ed piece in The New York Times that
discredited the White House's assertion that Iraq had pursued
significant quantities of uranium from Africa.

With the Libby verdict in, conservative political journalist and
pundit Andrew Sullivan came out swinging on the issue in his
insightful blog "The Daily Dish." Sullivan wrote, "The salience of
this case is obvious. What it is really about — what it has always
been about — is whether this administration deliberately misled the
American people about (Weapons of Mass Destruction) before the war.
. . . We now need a Congressional investigation to find out more, to
subpoena Cheney and, if he won't cooperate, consider impeaching him."

Others from the political right don't seem so eager. Sen. Lindsay
Graham called Libby "a good candidate for a pardon." Bob Novak,
columnist for the Chicago Sun-Times, called for his outright pardon.

Novak rightfully pointed out there was no underlying criminal
violation as to why Libby was prosecuted, only that Libby had
"consciously and purposefully lied to FBI agents and the grand jury
about how he learned of Mrs. Wilson's identity."

Novak also notes that "no hard evidence was produced Libby was ever
told (Plame) was undercover." But, as author Dave Lindorff writes,
"the whole focus of the media in this case has been on the narrow,
inside-the-Beltway question of who leaked the information about
Plame to the media. Entirely forgotten has been what this leak was
all about to begin with."

What it was really all about, argues Lindorff and others, is a White
House smear operation unleashed in an effort to beat back charges
that it was misleading a nation into war.

Author John Nichols of The Nation argues that the fundamental
question to be addressed in the scandal is, "Can a member of the
executive branch . . . deliberately deceive the legislative branch,
then set out to punish Americans who expose those lies? That is not
just a legal question for prosecutor (Patrick) Fitzgerald, it is a
Constitutional question for Congress."

No doubt, Waxman will have a few questions to ask.

Gene Racz covers Middlesex County government. He is the co-author of
"Bury My Heart at Cooperstown" (Triumph, 2006). He can be reached at
gracz@thnt.com.

Copyright © 2007 Home News Tribune. All rights reserved.
Site design by Home News Tribune / Contact us
USA Today • USA Weekend • Gannett Co. Inc. • Gannett Foundation
*****************************************************************
 11 UPI: U.S. official to lobby for rockets

United Press International - International Intelligence - 

Published: March 12, 2007 at 9:05 AM

BERLIN, March 12 (UPI) -- A U.S. military official will arrive in
Berlin this week to lobby for a controversial U.S. anti-missile
system in Eastern Europe.


U.S. Air Force Lt. Gen. Henry Obering, who oversees the American
rocket defense system, will hold talks in Berlin with German Defense
Ministry officials and in the German Parliament to alleviate fears
that the system could strain Russia's relations with the West,
German news magazine Der Spiegel reported Monday.


"With a mixture of indignation and horror, the Bush administration
is observing the growing adversity against the controversial
military project," the news magazine wrote. It added that Washington
had realized it hadn't sufficiently consulted with its allies in
Europe.


Washington claims the system, which foresees ten bunker-protected
rockets to be stationed in Poland and a radar unit in the Czech
Republic, is to protect the United States and its allies against
long-range rockets armed with nuclear warheads fired by the likes of
North Korea and Iran.


But Moscow sees the missiles as threats against its territory.
Russian President Vladimir Putin said last month at a security
conference the U.S. plans would provoke a new arms race.

© Copyright 2007 United Press International, Inc. All Rights
*****************************************************************
 12 Scotland: Senior minister will defy Blair over Trident	nuclear submarines
 
Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2007 15:32:16 -0800


Senior minister will defy Blair over Trident</H3></CENTER>

The senior Labour MP, Nigel Griffiths, is preparing to quit his 
job as deputy leader of the House of Commons because he is 
opposed to the replacement of the Trident nuclear weapons 
system.

He told a meeting of constituents in Edinburgh last week that he 
will not back Tony Blair's £100 billion bid to renew the weapon, 
due to be put to a vote by MPs on Wednesday. He said he would 
vote "with his conscience" and he expected to be out of a job as 
a result.

The resignation of Griffiths would be the most senior casualty so 
far of the argument over Trident. Yesterday, Livingston Labour MP 
Jim Devine said he would step down as private parliamentary 
secretary in protest over Trident.

Reports have suggested that as many as 140 Labour MPs are 
planning to vote against the white paper to replace Trident 
warheads, carried by nuclear submarines based on the Clyde. That 
could leave the government dependent on the support of 
Conservative MPs to win the vote.

At a meeting in Morningside in Edinburgh last Saturday, Griffiths 
left little room for doubt about his position. "He 
wasabsolutelyclearhecouldnot support the white paper and that he 
will vote with his conscience," said Rachel Howell, a local 
resident who was present. "I thought it was gutsy of him."

David Somervell, who also attended the meeting, added: "Nigel 
said he would be out of his ministerial post within days'. He 
felt the issue was clear and acknowledged that many of his 
constituents sought an end to UK nuclear weapons."

Griffiths said he could see no purpose in proceeding with a 
weapon for which there would be no use in 15 years. And he 
indicated he would be reluctant to support LibDem and SNP 
amendments in this week's vote. This means he might 
endupsupportingarebelLabour amendment, or abstaining.

Griffiths has also emailed constituents saying he did not intend 
to vote for the replacementofTrident.Oneofthe branches of his 
constituency Labour Party has come out against Trident.

Nigel Griffiths was first elected as Labour MP for Edinburgh 
South in 1987, and has held a series of ministerial posts in the 
Department of Trade and Industry over the past 10 years. Seen as 
an ally of Gordon Brown, he has been deputyleaderoftheHouseof 
Commons under Jack Straw since 2005.

Griffiths declined to comment yesterday. "I don't comment in 
advance of votes," he told the Sunday Herald. "I find it 
unhelpful."

Jim Devine, the successor to the late Robin Cook as MP for 
Livingston, yesterday confirmed a report he was planning to 
resign as a ministerial aide over Trident. He is parliamentary 
private secretary to Rosie Winterton, health minister.

Devine has a history of campaigning against nuclear weapons and 
took part in Scotland's Long Walk for Peace last September. He 
addressed a rally in his constituency as part of the walk from 
Faslane to the Scottish Parliament.

Trident also prompted the resignation of a minister in the 
Scottish Parliament. In December, Edinburgh North and Leith MSP 
Malcolm Chisholm quit as communities minister after voting with 
the SNP after a Holyrood debate on Trident.

Further evidence of divisions in Labour ranks comes from a 
report, due to be releasedtomorrow,arguingstrongly against 
Trident. It has been endorsed by the Scottish Trades Union 
Congress and the Labour green group, the Socialist Environment 
and Resources Association.

The funding required for Trident could put 3000 public service 
jobsatriskinScotland,thereport argues. It also dismisses claims 
11,000 jobs could be lost if Trident was not replaced, saying the 
figure would be less than 1800.

The report, called Cancelling Trident, says more than 40,000 
defence jobs have been shed in Scotland since 1990. "For the 
decommissioning of Trident it is proposed that an Arms Conversion 
Agency be established to oversee the creation of alternative 
employment," it says.

Labour's split over nuclear weapons have been seized on by SNP 
leader Alex Salmond."TonyBlairisliving in a fantasy world if he 
thinks it makes sense for Labour to have a debate on Trident at 
thestartoftheScottishelection campaign," he said.

"Most of his own MPs in Scotland oppose a Trident replacement, as 
well as the overwhelming majority of the Scottish people. Tony 
Blair's obsession with his legacy - including trying to foist 
nuclear weapons on Scotland before he departs - has blinded him 
to reality."

Salmond added: "May presents the people of Scotland with a choice 
of two directions. A continuation down the route of wasting 
billions on a Trident replacement and ignoring international 
commitments to rid the world of nuclear weapons, or choosing to 
take the path of peace, prosperity and jobs.


*****************************************************************
 13 Guardian Unlimited: Labour rebels demand Trident answers 

From Press Association

Monday March 12, 2007 3:18 AM

The Attorney General, Lord Goldsmith, is facing calls to release his
advice to ministers on the legality of the decision to replace
Britain's Trident nuclear deterrent.

Labour rebels opposed to the Government's plans to acquire a new
generation of nuclear missile submarines are demanding to see the
legal basis for the decision before Wednesday's crucial Commons vote.

In a letter to Lord Goldsmith asking him to release his legal
advice, Labour MP Jon Trickett said MPs were particularly concerned
about whether the decision was consistent with Britain's obligations
under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.

He also questioned whether an exchange of letters last December
between Tony Blair and US president George Bush agreeing Britain
would join a US programme to extend the life of the D5 Trident
missiles had pre-empted the Commons vote.

Mr Trickett pointed out that the exchange took place within eight
days of the controversial abandonment of a Serious Fraud Office
corruption inquiry into an arms deal between Saudi Arabia and BAE
Systems, which will build the new submarines.

"It is clearly in the interest of MPs to be in possession of the
full legal assessment of your office before we are asked to vote on
this issue," he said in the letter.

The letter was sent on Thursday. Mr Trickett's office said it was
still awaiting a reply from Lord Goldsmith.

The request for the release of the legal advice is almost certain to
be turned down as the Government argues that the Attorney General's
advice is always confidential.

Ministers are bracing themselves for a major Labour backbench revolt
in Wednesday's Commons division, as well as possible Government
resignations.

The Deputy Leader of the Commons Nigel Griffiths and Jim Devine, the
parliamentary private secretary to health minister Rosie Winterton,
are reported to be ready to quit over the issue.

© Copyright Press Association Ltd 2007, All Rights Reserved.

Guardian Unlimited © Guardian News and Media Limited 2007
*****************************************************************
 14 Guardian Unlimited: Minister quits in Trident protest 

From Press Association

Monday March 12, 2007 12:48 PM

A Government minister has resigned in protest at Prime Minister 
Tony Blair's plans to renew Britain's Trident nuclear deterrent 
system.

Nigel Griffiths stepped down as Deputy Leader of the House of
Commons to be able to vote against the Government in the key vote on
Trident on Wednesday.

The MP for Edinburgh South was appointed deputy to Commons Leader
Jack Straw in May 2005 following Labour's third general election
victory.

Mr Griffiths said: "I am resigning with a heavy heart but a clear
conscience. I intend to make a personal statement in the House of
Commons to colleagues and it is only right that they hear the
reasons first."

Mr Griffiths sent a letter to the Prime Minister tendering his
resignation.

Mr Griffiths' resignation highlights the difficulties Mr Blair faces
in securing parliamentary approval for his plans to build a new
generation of V-class submarines to carry the UK's Trident nuclear
missiles.

With a large-scale rebellion expected on the Labour backbenches, the
Prime Minister may be forced to rely on support from Conservative
MPs to win Wednesday's division.

A second member of the Government payroll - Jim Devine,
parliamentary private secretary to Health Minister Rosie Winterton -
is also reported to be ready to quit over the issue.

An MP since 1985, Mr Griffiths was minister for competition at the
Department of Trade and Industry 1997/98, and returned to the
department from 2001 to 2005 as minister for construction,
enterprise and small business.

In that role, he also had responsibility for measures to ensure
non-proliferation of weapons.

© Copyright Press Association Ltd 2007, All Rights Reserved.

Guardian Unlimited © Guardian News and Media Limited 2007
*****************************************************************
 15 Guardian Unlimited: Trident troubles deepen for Blair 

From Press Association

Monday March 12, 2007 6:03 PM

Prime Minister Tony Blair's troubles over Trident have deepened
after the Deputy Commons Leader Nigel Griffiths quit in protest at
the Government's decision to renew Britain's nuclear deterrent.

Mr Griffiths, MP for Edinburgh South, resigned from his unpaid post,
saying he did so "with a heavy heart but a clear conscience" - and
may be followed by more junior ministerial aides.

But Tory leader David Cameron renewed his pledge to side with No 10
over the decision to update the UK's submarine-based nuclear
arsenal, ensuring parliamentary success for Mr Blair on Wednesday
night.

Two further ministerial aides, Jim Devine, Parliamentary Private
Secretary (PPS) to Health Minister Rosie Winterton and Stephen
Pound, PPS to Labour chairwoman Hazel Blears, have said they are
considering their position on the lowest rung of the Government
ladder.

Mr Griffiths said: "I am resigning with a heavy heart but a clear
conscience. I intend to make a personal statement in the House of
Commons to colleagues and it is only right that they hear the
reasons first."

He also said he had sent a so-far unpublished letter to the Prime
Minister tendering his resignation. Mr Blair's official spokesman
said the Prime Minister would "take his time" to announce a
replacement for Mr Griffiths.

The spokesman went on: "The Prime Minister has set out the
fundamental issue underlying Trident. Because of the lead time of 17
years, if you don't make the decision this year then you are in fact
making the decision the other way round."

The spokesman added: "The Prime Minister recognises that there are
those who, for whatever reason, have always had principled
objections to the nuclear deterrent. He believes that on balance the
argument remains that Britain should have the nuclear deterrent."
The spokesman added that "uncertainty in the world" meant "now is
precisely not the time" to dispose of the deterrent.

Mr Griffiths' resignation highlights the difficulties Mr Blair faces
in securing parliamentary approval for his plans to build a new
generation of V-class submarines to carry the UK's Trident nuclear
missiles.

With a large-scale rebellion expected on the Labour backbenches, the
Prime Minister may be forced to rely on support from Conservative
MPs to win Wednesday's division.

© Copyright Press Association Ltd 2007, All Rights Reserved.

Guardian Unlimited © Guardian News and Media Limited 2007
*****************************************************************
 16 AU ABC: Greens make renewable energy push

ABC New South Wales | Local News

11:04 (ACDT)Monday, 12 March 2007. 09:04 (AWDT)

The New South Wales Greens have come up with a plan to help the 
Illawarra and Hunter Valley move from coal mining to renewable 
energy.

The Greens have promised if elected later this month to establish 
a fund to help start wind manufacturing industries in the 
Illawarra and the Hunter.

The Greens say the $300 million package would retrain coal 
workers and provide interest-free loans for companies to 
manufacture wind farm components.

MP Ms Lee Rhiannon says there are high wind areas suitable for
siting wind farms in both the Upper Hunter and parts of the
Illawarra, mainly around the escarpment.

"The Greens would then be initiating dialogue with local communities
to determine the location of these wind farms, clearly it's much
better to have a wind farm located near one rather than have a
nuclear power plant or a coal-fired power station, so we're seeing
there will be enormous support for this project," she said.

*****************************************************************
 17 DAILY YOMIURI: Benefits of geothermal power eyed 

Geothermal energy, which is generated from the Earth's internal
heat, is again attracting attention as a technology with the
potential to help curb global warming.

An advisory panel to the economy, trade and industry minister that
has been studying energy resources last month compiled a report
calling for an expansion in the use of geothermal power, considered
less damaging to the environment than other energy sources, thus
pushing the issue into the spotlight for the first time in a decade.

Following a number of oil shocks, geothermal power generation
rapidly grew in importance at a time when new energy sources were
being sought in an effort to lower dependence on oil. By the
mid-1990s, facilities capable of generating up to 530,000 kilowatts
in geothermal power were built at 18 locations, mainly in the Kyushu
and Tohoku regions.

But as circumstances changed, such as a fall in crude oil prices,
oil regained its attractiveness as a fuel source, and geothermal
power was excluded from targets set in 1997 in an energy law aimed
at promoting new energy sources. With the developmental stage
considered over for geothermal power, the construction of new
facilities to generate geothermal power ground to an almost complete
halt.

In other countries, however, development of geothermal energy has
continued to be promoted. The United States, for example, has a
capacity of 2.5 million kilowatts of geothermal power, while the
Philippines can generate 1.9 million kilowatts.

Geothermal power is an attractive option for many countries because
it creates less than half the carbon dioxide emissions of nuclear,
wind or solar power. It also has the advantage of being renewable
and domestically produced.

Kasumi Yasukawa, a researcher at the National Institute of Advanced
Industrial Science and Technology, said that geothermal development
has been accelerating overseas. "With the use of deep drilling
technology, development [of geothermal energy] has been under way
even in volcano-free countries. In Australia, temperatures as high
as 250 C have been measured at 4,000 meters underground," Yasukawa
said. "In China, drilling for geothermal energy has reached a depth
of 70,000 meters over the last seven years."

The institute believes that Japan has significant domestic
geothermal generation potential--perhaps as much as 20 million
kilowatts, which would make up nearly 10 percent of the nation's
overall power generation capacity of 235 million kilowatts.

However, more than half of the thermal sources are located in and
around national parks and near the country's 27,000 thermal springs.
This imposes certain restrictions on geothermal drilling and has
raised development costs. The cost of geothermal power
generation--about 16 yen for a kilowatt per hour--is three times
higher than that of thermal or nuclear power.

Given these complications, attention is now turning to binary power
generation, the power generators for which are easy to install and
which are efficient even when using waste heat or thermal sources
with low temperatures.

===

Binary generation

With conventional geothermal power generation, vapor reaching
temperatures approaching 200 C is pumped from deep underground to a
power-generating turbine.

In binary power generation, liquids with lower boiling points than
water are sent to a heat exchanger within which the liquid is
transformed, using hot water, to vapor. The vapor is then directed
to a turbine for power generation. Power can thus be generated even
with thermal sources whose temperatures are as low as 100 C.

With the use of substances such as pentane, which has a boiling
point of 36 C, and ammonia water, power can be generated at iron
works or from hot spring waters, where temperatures are lower than
100 C and which cannot be used for steam powered systems.

The term binary power generation derives from the use of two types
of resource--water, and a substance with a lower boiling point.

Kyushu Electric Power Co.'s Hatchobaru thermal power plant in
Kokonoemachi, Oita Prefecture, has a binary power generating system
with an output of 2,000 kilowatts. The government has passed
legislation obliging the electric power industry to use new energy
resources along with existing ones. The binary power generating
system at Hatchobaru plant was built in 2004, and was the first such
system for thermal power generation.

In the Kusatsu hot spring area in Gunma Prefecture, a system
utilizing heat from thermal springs, which have temperatures of
about 96 C, have been introduced. This system also is a form of
binary power generation, and is known as the Kalina cycle.

Takao Kashiwagi, a professor of energy engineering at Tokyo
University of Agriculture and Technology said, "Geothermal power has
the advantage of having a variety of energy sources, and plays an
important role in providing electricity to neighboring
regions...It's time to start making use of this energy source."

An official at the Economy, Trade and Industry Ministry's electric
power infrastructure improvement section, said, "We'd like to start
discussions with people in academic and relevant industry circles on
improving the situation of geothermal power."

The Environment Ministry also has started discussions on how to
incorporate policies on the use of geothermal power as a means to
help prevent global warming into the administration of national
parks.

If this strategy is to be successful, cooperation among ministries,
agencies and local communities will be essential.

The Daily Yomiuri, The Yomiuri Shimbun
  
© The Yomiuri Shimbun.
*****************************************************************
 18 BBC NEWS: Minister quits over Trident plans

Last Updated: Monday, 12 March 2007, 17:20 GMT

Mr Griffiths had been deputy commons leader since 2005

Deputy leader of the Commons Nigel Griffiths has quit the 
government in protest at plans to renew the UK's Trident nuclear 
weapons system.

He resigned "with a heavy heart but a clear conscience" ahead of 
Wednesday's House of Commons vote on the plan.

Although a Labour rebellion is expected the Tories back renewal 
of Trident, making a government defeat unlikely.

In a statement after handing his letter in to Number 10 Downing
Street, Mr Griffiths, MP for Edinburgh South, said: "I'm resigning
with a heavy heart but a clear conscience.

"I intend to make a personal statement in the House of Commons to
colleagues and it is only right that they hear the reasons first."

Tory backing

MPs will debate and vote on Wednesday evening on the £20bn plan to
replace submarine-based Trident nuclear weapons system.

Ministers say the long lead time in developing and building the
replacement submarines means a decision needs to be taken soon on
replacing Trident.

I hope other MPs will follow suit and start leading the UK down the
path of nuclear disarmament

Jeremy Corbyn Labour MP

Profile: Nigel Griffiths

Conservative leader David Cameron made clear his support for the
plans on BBC Radio 4's Today programme on Monday.

He said: "I think it needs to be done and I've always supported
Britain having a nuclear deterrent, so when Trident comes to the end
of its life it needs to be replaced."

The Liberal Democrats have said Parliament should not make its
decision until at least 2012.

Mr Griffiths, an MP since 1987 and deputy Commons leader since 2005,
previously served as a trade and industry minister.

Survey

Commons leader Jack Straw paid tribute to him in the Commons on
Monday, saying: "I would like to place on record my appreciation for
the excellent work which he undertook in this place."

Labour MP Jeremy Corbyn, an opponent of Trident renewal, said: "I
hope other MPs will follow suit and start leading the UK down the
path of nuclear disarmament, not re-armament, on Wednesday."

Alan Mackinnon, chairman of Scottish CND, said: "We welcome the
principled stand taken by Griffiths on this crucial issue and we
hope his example will be followed by other Labour MPs."

A survey for BBC Radio 4's The World This Weekend programme found
that out of the 101 Labour MPs who responded, 22 said they supported
the renewal of Trident.

* BBC Copyright
*****************************************************************
 19 AFP: Minister quits over nuclear weapons plans -

Mon Mar 12, 11:40 AM ET

LONDON (AFP) - A minister resigned on Monday over government 
plans to renew the country's Trident missile nuclear deterrent 
system, two days before a key parliamentary vote on the issue.

Deputy leader of the House of Commons, Nigel Griffiths, said he 
was standing down "with a heavy heart but a clear conscience" to 
be able to oppose the government line in a vote in the lower 
chamber.

Blair's official spokesman gave no immediate comment on the
resignation but said a decision to renew Britain's nuclear arsenal
had to be taken now because it takes 17 years to develop a
replacement.

Griffiths' resignation comes amid predictions that another Labour
member of parliament is about to quit over the issue while another
publicly stated on Monday his intention to vote against Blair.

On Sunday, 64 out of 101 Labour MPs polled by BBC radio said they
were against Blair's plans. A further 15 were undecided, while 22
backed the proposals.

If that is replicated Wednesday, it will mean Blair will need the
support of the main opposition Conservatives, who largely back his
position, to win a majority. The Liberal Democrats want a decision
delayed and further debate.

Unilateral disarmament was Labour Party policy in the left-wing
Labour Party in the 1980s and many traditionalists are unhappy the
stance was abandoned by Blair's centre-left "New Labour" and proper
debate stifled.

Lobby group the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament argues that
replacing Trident at a time when Britain and the West opposes North
Korea and Iran's nuclear ambitions is hypocritical but could also
increase proliferation.

Blair's proposals, announced last December, could cost up to 20
billion pounds and include a new fleet of nuclear submarines to
carry the warheads.


Copyright © 2007 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
 20 The Herald: How can anyone justify Trident as patriotic?

Features: OPINION

IAN BELL March 12 2007

When, tomorrow, Labour MPs rebel, and when Liberals and 
Nationalists dissent, they will have no shortage of arguments on 
their side. Certainly, they will have several more points to hand 
than the government in the debate over Trident renewal.

An administration expecting us to believe it decides
multi-billion-pound expenditures on the basis that "you never know"
is not rich in ideas, exactly. Ministers retreating to this, as it
were, defensive position, have left the field clear for every
opponent. It's bad politics and poor government, but since when did
nuclear weapons have much to do with either? Not in 60 years.

The critics have their moral case, more or less unimpeachable. Just
how do you defend weapons of mass destruction? Others will make a
strategic argument. The world is threatened in any number of ways,
they will say, but just which of those threats is, or is likely
plausibly to become, nuclear?

Most MPs could, meanwhile, draw up lists of things urgently needed
in their constituencies. This is neither petty nor parochial. It is
the duty of parliamentarians to keep watch over the public finances.
The government claims that Trident renewal will require £20bn.
Organisations such as Greenpeace say government ignores the running
costs of the system over its projected lifetime. They mention £75bn.

Whoever is right, many billions are at stake. One of them, at least,
has already been spent rebuilding the Aldermaston establishment for
the sake of a weapons system over which, this morning, "no decision
has been made". Yet invoke schools, houses, hospitals, child
poverty, transport, pensioners, whatever: MPs are entitled to wonder
about the rush to invest in missiles.

Then there are those, finally, who remember our sworn commitments
under the nuclear non-proliferation treaty. This is supposed to be
one of our international obligations, but the government will not
release the legal advice it has received. Even Whitehall lawyers
find it hard to talk their way around blunt statements forbidding
the transfer of nuclear devices from one state (the US) to another
(Britain).

Make all these points and you have said some powerful things. But
what have you really said? The government will win tomorrow, no
doubt, thanks to the payroll vote (with a couple of minor
exceptions) and the Tories. Not morality, not common sense, or
prudence will prevail. A version of patriotism, a calculation as to
future British influence and status in the world, will win. Other
arguments carry more historic weight, but this is one that matters.
How to change the minds of the nuclear armers?

Ask the generals. Then the officers. Then the squaddies. Then the
families. Then ask if Trident is a Tory policy worth defending.


If that cannot be done, we go on preaching to the converted, to the
already-convinced abolitionists and to people who listened,
astonished, to the fable of Iraq and WMD. In other words, we remain
where we have been for decades, sometimes remembering the days when
the Labour Party was unilateralist, more often recalling how Labour
behaved when election became possible. Labour is not the practical,
political problem.

David Cameron's efforts to change his party are well-known. The
efforts, indeed, are perhaps the only things most people know, and
then vaguely. Quite how radical Cameron is prepared to be remains a
mystery. Quite how prepared his party is for soft-hearted radicalism
remains to be seen. But ask the question, in any case: what would be
a respectable Conservative case for nuclear disarmament?

Try this: for every £100,000 wasted on Trident renewal, a British
service person will be put at risk. The transaction is more or less
straightforward: billions earmarked for the next generation of
unusable missiles while the army, reduced to barely 100,000 souls,
attempts to fight two wars simultaneously, taking mounting
casualties as it goes. What's patriotic about that?

What's patriotic about the ceaseless force rotations, the lack of
body armour, the rotten boots, the duff radio systems, the lack of
helicopters and air support, the vehicles without worthwhile
protection, the failure even to get food through to troops under
fire for days in Afghanistan? The stories have come and gone, each
met with the glib reassurance that the forces will get "whatever
they need". Sooner or later.

What's patriotic about stinking barracks and decrepit family
accommodation? What's patriotic about pay and pensions miserable by
any standard? And where's the patriotic pride in failing to provide
the injured and the maimed, the scarred in body and mind, with
decent medical services?

Cameron would promise, no doubt, that his government would tolerate
none of this. He seems to say, though, that the Iraq and Afghanistan
"commitments" should be maintained while he leads his party through
the lobby to vote for Trident renewal. It doesn't add up. Britain is
already Europe's biggest spender on defence, and fourth - though
trailing by a large margin - in the world. Yet still our generals
signal frantically that their army cannot cope. It makes no sense,
and does no service to the defenders or the defended.

My perspective, you may have noticed, is not a Tory perspective.
Iraq and Afghanistan are, respectively, illegal and suicidally
illogical. Trident is a working definition of lunacy. Nevertheless,
I'd like to hope - and even Tony Blair shared the hope, in the early
days - that young people from these islands might no longer die in
wars. We can all hope.

If I had to strike a political deal with Cameron and the Tories,
however, I'd say this. Have your flags. Let's agree, nevertheless,
that in an ideal world Britain's forces could do an honourable job
of work for the UN. Let's agree that some of that world is liable to
be dangerous, especially if we cannot bear another Srebrenica. Let's
then agree that it is wrong to ask youths to fight without allowing
them a fighting chance. So where does that leave Trident, and Tory
patriotism?

Trident has more to do with the self-esteem of politicians than with
Britain's defence needs. Most of those who will vote with the
government tomorrow know as much: it's Tony's wish, his way of
binding his successor. But why should Cameron agree? Simply to avoid
being painted by the armchair heroes of new Labour as soft on
defence? If half of what slips through from the soldiers in
Afghanistan is true, real martial malleability involves boys in the
middle of nowhere fighting for their lives.

Stupid wars and Trident missiles have no immediately obvious
connection. I favour neither. I'm suspicious, too, of patriotism and
people who need to talk about it. For all that, I would have thought
it incumbent on a Conservative Party, of all parties, to explain how
it would best defend the realm or, as the jargon has it, reconfigure
the defence establishment. Simply to ape Blair is neither novel nor,
given the blood and treasure at stake, particularly patriotic.

It's not much of a slogan, is it? "Support Our Boys - Lease Trident
D5 from an Unreliable Ally and Fix the Radios Another Day." Cameron
needn't take my word for this. He should not ask for a briefing from
compromised MoD civil servants, above all. He should make no
inquiries of admirals and air-marshals, who always get all the best
toys.

Ask the generals. Then the officers. Then the squaddies. Then the
families. Then ask if Trident is a Tory policy worth defending.

© All rights reserved. Reproduction in whole or in part without
permission is prohibited.

Copyright © 2007 Newsquest (Herald & Times) Limited. All Rights
*****************************************************************
 21 Comment is free: The cold war is over

guardian.co.uk/commentisfree > Joan Ruddock

So why does the white paper on renewing Trident use the language of
the past? Where is the new thinking?

March 12, 2007 4:53 PM | Printable version

On Wednesday MP's will vote on whether plans should go ahead to
replace the UK's Trident nuclear weapons system in the mid 2020s.
The consultation promised by the Prime Minister last June never
materialised and the white paper published in December invited no
comment. Strangely for a Prime Minister so fond of telling us that
everything has changed since 9/11, there is no evidence of any new
thinking on this issue. Briefings for MPs and indeed the white paper
itself are couched in language reminiscent of the cold war.

There is no attempt to analyse the world beyond 2020 or the
influence we might have in shaping that world if we reconfigured our
foreign and security policy. There is no analysis of the new Europe
we now inhabit or the nature and role of the US led, nuclear armed
Nato, of which we remain a leading member. Instead we are given
three scenarios for threats which the white paper tells us can only
be countered by Britain maintaining its own nuclear weapons system
until 2050.

We are told that a major nuclear power, presumably Russia, might
re-emerge to threaten us - though no one can explain why the
Russians who have everything to gain from a more united Europe
should aim nuclear weapons at Britain.

The white paper goes on to pose a second threat - new states
acquiring nuclear weapons and threatening our vital interests. Such
a threat was of course the justification for going to war in Iraq.
But it is Iran that is most often cited as the country likely to
threaten our interests if allowed to build nuclear weapons.
Embroiled as it is in middle east politics with a nuclear armed
Israel on one side and a nuclear armed Pakistan on the other, It's
hard to understand why Iran should specifically target Britain.

The third threat posed by the white paper offers an even more
unlikely justification for the renewal of Trident. It is the risk
that countries might sponsor nuclear terrorism from their soil. We
all know terrorists cannot be deterred by nuclear weapons. But it is
inconceivable that we could be so sure of their country of origin as
to launch a retaliatory strike with nuclear weapons - the
precondition of deterrence.

The white paper constantly asserts the unique deterrent value of
Britain's nuclear weapons without advancing a single credible
scenario in which they could be used. New thinking is desperately
needed but has been actively discouraged as the prime minister
attempts to bounce Parliament into a decision before he leaves the
stage.

As Mohamed ElBaradei, head of the UN nuclear watchdog recently
warned, a decision now to renew Trident sends exactly the wrong
message to those countries, such as Iran, we seek to influence. A
decision to commit to becoming a non-nuclear armed state by 2025
would give us a moral authority and many years in which to work with
others to eliminate all nuclear weapons as we promised to in the
2000 conclusions of the Non Proliferation Treaty. Negotiation is the
only intelligent option.

The international community persuaded Libya to forego nuclear
weapons and good progress has been made in North Korea. South Africa
and Ukraine gave up their nuclear weapons and Brazil and Argentina
mutually agreed to abandon their nuclear weapons programmes.

The threats we face are not UK-centric - they are global. Climate
change, international terrorism and the mass migration of people
will be our dominant concerns in the years to come. They will
require international co-operation of a kind we have never seen
before and the UK is well placed to play a leading role.


Guardian Unlimited © Guardian News and Media Limited 2007.
Registered in England and Wales. No. 908396
Registered office: Number 1 Scott Place, Manchester M3 3GG
*****************************************************************
 22 CEP: TRIDENT: AN OPEN LETTER TO PARLIAMENT FROM AMERICA

March 10, 2007

Contact: Stephen G. Erickson, Director Citizens Education Project 
444 Northmont Way Salt Lake City, Utah  84103 (801) 554-9029 
erickson.steve1@comcast.net citizensedproject.org

Honorable Members of Parliament,

We ask that you consider the concerns of the people of Utah and the
Western United States that a decision to replace and up-grade the
Trident missile system would result in a resumption of nuclear
weapons testing in Nevada.

The legacy of illness and death downwind from exposure to radiation
from past nuclear tests conducted by the United Kingdom, United
States, and other nuclear weapons States, still weighs heavily upon
the survivors.  This tragedy is real and continuing today for untold
thousands of people in many parts of the world.

The hurt and the anger and the distrust of government nuclear
weapons policies is felt acutely in Utah, as reflected by the
Resolution of Salt Lake City Mayor Anderson (PDF). Similar
resolutions will be passed and forwarded to you and the Parliament
before March 14.  Over 80% of the people of Utah oppose a resumption
of nuclear weapons testing.  Assurances that new weapons can be
developed without testing and that new nuclear tests can be
conducted safely are not believed and are not credible.

At least twenty-eight joint US-UK nuclear tests have been conducted
in Nevada, nine of which were probable tests of the Trident system
warhead.  A new UK Trident system, with a new warhead jointly
developed by the UK and the US, would almost certainly be tested in
Nevada.

There are many reasons to oppose a new Trident system and these have
been vigorously debated, but it does not appear to us that the
Parliament has considered adequately the human and moral
implications of renewed nuclear testing and the potential of
creating new generations of fallout victims.  We respectfully ask
that you make your fellow Members of Parliament aware of these very
real fears before a vote is taken on Trident and our future.

Respectfully,

Stephen G. Erickson, Director Citizens Education Project 444 
Northmont Way Salt Lake City, Utah  84103 (801) 554-9029 
erickson.steve1@comcast.net citizensedproject.org

*****************************************************************
 23 [NukeNet] CA legislators try to lift nuke ban
 
Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2007 15:34:44 -0800


<x-flowed>


-------- Original Message --------
Subject: 	[NukeNet] CA legislators try to lift nuke ban
Date: 	Sat, 10 Mar 2007 10:46:07 -0500
From: 	Mike Ewall <catalyst@actionpa.org>
To: 	nukenet@energyjustice.net



NukeNet Anti-Nuclear Network (nukenet@energyjustice.net)


Allaince for Nuclear Responsibility
For Immediate Release
Contact: Rochelle Becker, Executive Director 858-337-2703

LEGISLATORS MOVE TO STRIKE DOWN BAN ON NEW NUCLEAR PLANTS IN CALIFORNIA

March 2, 2007
For Immediate Release

Two California State Assembly members have introduced legislation to 
lift the ban on additional nuclear generation in California, despite 
the failure of the federal government to solve the problem that 
caused California to enact the ban.

AB 719 (DeVore, La Malfa) states: "Current California law prohibits 
the permitting of any new commercial nuclear powerplants until an 
approved means of disposal of high-level nuclear waste becomes 
available. With federal efforts well underway to provide an approved 
means of high-level nuclear waste disposal, and given that timelines 
for nuclear powerplant design, permitting, construction, on line 
operation, and first refueling would likely be in excess of 10 years, 
by the time a powerplant would be ready for operation, an approved 
high-level nuclear waste disposal means will be available."

"This cart couldn't be put any farther before the horse," commented 
Rochelle Becker, Executive Director of the California Alliance for 
Nuclear Responsibility. "Federal efforts to find an approved means of 
disposal have been 'well under way' since California's current 
nuclear plants got their permits in the late 60's. Although 
ratepayers have spent over $18 million to date on the search for a 
way to get rid of the waste, federal efforts have proven to be empty 
and expensive promises."

California's 1976 moratorium on nuclear plants has prevented the 
state from coming to resemble the Eastern seaboard and Midwest, which 
are now covered by and dependent on aging nuclear plants. More than 
70,000 tons of high level radioactive waste now sits on fragile 
waterways and seismically active coasts.

According to Platts.com, an industry media outlet, "Pacific Gas & 
Electric Corporation CEO Peter Darbee recently said his company would 
welcome a partner to invest in nuclear generation outside of 
California. Southern California Edison President John Fielder last 
week said his company is tracking developments in the nuclear 
industry."  The Nuclear Regulatory Commission is focusing on existing 
sites for proposed construction of new nuclear plants. The Diablo 
Canyon nuclear facility was originally designed for six nuclear 
reactors. Other existing sites include Rancho Seco, Humboldt and the 
San Onofre Nuclear Generation Station in San Diego County.

The introduction of AB 719 follows the announcement by Fresno Nuclear 
LLC that it has committed 10 million dollars to investigate 
construction of a nuclear plant operating in conjunction with the 
city's waste water facility. One problem with this plan is the 
inability of the nuclear industry to estimate what nuclear power will 
cost when complete, a record on view in California's history with 
nuclear cost overruns. The state's two operating reactor sites, both 
estimated to cost under  $500 million, had final costs ranging from 
just under $5 billion at San Onofre to $5.7 billion at Diablo Canyon.

AB 719 is being touted as the "Zero Carbon Dioxide Emission 
Electrical Generation Act of 2007" by its sponsors. "The mantra that 
nuclear power is the answer to global warming is gaining in 
popularity," notes Becker, "despite the reality that it would take 
2,000 new reactors, built at a cost of trillions of dollars,to make 
any kind of dent in greenhouse gas emissions, and the fact that 
decentralizedclean power and energy efficiency are already 
demonstrating that they deliver far more climate change-fighting bang 
for the buck than nuclear can.

"While we're tempted to join the general sentiment in Sacramento where
the response from legislators has been to laugh this bill off, we are 
reminded that when you say something over and over, and the media 
repeats it, the public begins to believe that rumors are true."

In July, the California Energy Commission will undertake a study of 
the costs, benefits and risks of California's reliance on existing 
nuclear plants.   


_______________________________________________________________________
Subscribe/Unsubscribe Here: http://www.energyjustice.net/nukenet/
Change your settings or access the archives at:
http://mail.energyjustice.net/mailman/listinfo/nukenet_energyjustice.net



</x-flowed>
*****************************************************************
 24 Economic Times: Pace of Indo-US nuke talks stepped up-

NIRMALA GANAPATHY

TIMES NEWS NETWORK[ TUESDAY, MARCH 13, 2007 03:17:08 AM]

NEW DELHI: India and the US have stepped up efforts to increase 
the pace of negotiations on the 123 agreement that will make the 
Indo-US civil nuclear deal operational. In the last two weeks, 
the two sides have been ``actively engaged’’ in a bid to ensure 
that negotiations start either this month or by the next. With 
both countries now in possession of each others’ drafts, the next 
step is to sit down to negotiate the agreement.

Foreign Secretary Shiv Shankar Menon, who handed over the first
draft when he went to the US recently, had a telephonic conversation
with US Under Secretary of State Nicholas Burns early last week.
Sources said that contact at every level has been activated so that
the meeting of the negotiators takes place as soon as possible.

However, sources also said that it is unclear whether negotiations
will be held at the level of the key negotiators — Mr Burns and
Special envoy on the nuclear deal, Shyam Saran — or at the
joint-secretary level.

At this point, the top negotiators would only lead negotiations if
it is felt that there is room to push things forward. This clearly
indicates that differences still haven’t been narrowed down and that
there is some distance to go before the language is finetuned so
that certain provisions are acceptable to both sides.

New Delhi has already voiced its sensitivity on the issue of
reprocessing of spent fuel and the including of voluntary moratorium
on testing in the agreement. There is a note of warning that if the
123 agreement is not completed by this year, then it could
indefinitely postpone the deal.

``We hope that the 123 agreement is completed by the end of April
and the up or down vote by the end of this year. The reality is that
the presidential campaign begins next year and the Congress will be
distracted. Time is not our friend,’’ said Ron Sommers, president of
the US-India Business Council, which has been lobbying hard in
Capitol Hill for the deal.

Mr Sommers, who came to India last week with a host of US nuclear
companies that are eager to do business with India, said the council
and US companies will also lobby the NSG countries to support the
deal.

“We will be playing a role wherever we have access,’’ he said.
However, there is not much movement on the NSG front as a number of
countries are waiting for the IAEA negotiations and the 123
agreement to be concluded before making their positions officially
known.

The NSG plenary meeting, which is held once every year to take
decisions on different matters, is to take place in South Africa
next month. But with no end in sight for the 123 agreement and the
negotiations with the IAEA yet to start formally, it is unlikely
that the matter will be placed on the agenda of the plenary meeting.

nirmala.ganapathy@timesgroup.com


Copyright © 2007 Times Internet Limited. All rights reserved. For
*****************************************************************
 25 AU ABC: Nuclear facility may go ahead despite traditional owners' opposition

ABC Northern Territory  

15:05 (ACDT)Monday, 12 March 2007. 13:05 (AWDT)

Federal Member for Lingiari Warren Snowdon says legislation passed
last year may see a nuclear waste facility go ahead at Muckaty
Station, despite some traditional owners opposing it.

A weekend newspaper reported the Federal Government has offered
traditional owners of the site north of Tennant Creek $9 million
every five years to use their land.

Mr Snowdon says while the Northern Land Council is consulting
traditional owners, the majority view will not necessarily determine
the result.

"The traditional owners who support a proposal could ultimately put
a nomination forward with through the Northern Land Council and the
Commonwealth could accept that nomination even though there may be a
difference of view with other traditional owners and even though the
obligations that would otherwise exist on the Northern Land Council
under the Land Rights Act might not be met," Mr Snowdon said.

*****************************************************************
 26 MDN: Tohoku Electric Power failed to report emergency stoppage of nuclear reactor - 

MSN-Mainichi Daily News

March 13, 2007

The Tohoku Electric Power Co. failed to report to government
authorities an emergency stoppage of a reactor at its nuclear power
plant in 1998, sources have said.

The law regulating nuclear reactors provides that nuclear plant
operators must report to the national government any emergency
stoppage of reactors and any other serious accidents. However, the
statute of limitations for the case has already expired.

Tohoku Electric officials said that the No. 1 reactor came to a halt
at the Onagawa nuclear plant in Miyagi Prefecture on June 11, 1998.
Around that time, the utility company planned to stop the reactor to
inspect a circulation pump and other parts ahead of the heavy demand
for electricity in summer.

Officials separated the reactor from the plant's generation
distribution system at 1 a.m. on the day. While they were lowering
the generation capacity of the reactor to stop its operations, the
reactor automatically came to an emergency halt.

The company failed to report the emergency stoppage to the
government, and said in the day's press release that it had stopped
the reactor's operations as planned. Tohoku Electric resumed
operations on June 17.

Sources said that officials from the company apparently didn't
mention the emergency stoppage in their daily reports. Inspectors
from the national government read the reports.

Tohoku Electric reported the case to the governmental Nuclear and
Industrial Safety Agency on Monday.

"I suspect that officials might have thought that reporting the
emergency stoppage to authorities could lead to time-consuming
inspections and less operation time," said science writer and former
nuclear plant architect Mitsuhiko Tanaka.

Earlier this month, it came to light that Tokyo Electric Power Co.
failed to report emergency stoppages at two nuclear reactors in 1985
and 1992 to the government. (Mainichi)
Click here for the original Japanese story


March 12, 2007


Copyright 2005-2006 THE MAINICHI NEWSPAPERS. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 27 NRC: NRC Issues Confirmatory Action Letters on Welds to Group of PWR 
Nuclear Power Plants

News Release - 2007-07-034 - 

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

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission is issuing Confirmatory Action 
Letters (CALs) to 40 nuclear power plant licensees with 
pressurized water reactors (PWR), confirming commitments from 
those licensees to resolve concerns regarding flaws in certain 
welds in the reactor coolant system (RCS) by the end of the year.

 The CALs ensure the plants will put in place more timely 
inspection and flaw prevention measures, more aggressive 
monitoring of RCS leakage, and more conservative leak rate 
thresholds for a plant to shut down to investigate a possible 
leak. These actions are being taken to assure continued 
operational safety at these facilities. The remaining 29 PWR 
plants have either completed requisite actions or do not have 
welds susceptible to these flaws.

     The CALs resulted from the discovery, last fall, of flaws in 
pressurizer welds at the Wolf Creek reactor near Burlington, Kan. 
The Wolf Creek flaws were repaired and did not affect the safe 
operation of the plant. The nature of the flaws identified at 
Wolf Creek raised further questions regarding those welds at 
other PWRs.

  The CAL officially documents the plant operator&rsquo;s 
commitment to conduct volumetric (e.g., ultrasonic) inspections 
of some RCS welds containing materials known as Alloy 82 and 
Alloy182 or to take action to mitigate the conditions that 
contribute to the flaws. These metal alloy materials have been 
susceptible in the past to cracking due to their chemical makeup, 
residual stresses from the welding process and PWR operating 
conditions.

   The first incidence of these flaws occurred in a U.S. reactor 
in 1993. Since 2000, additional flaws have been documented and 
the NRC and the nuclear industry have progressively increased 
attention to detecting, evaluating and correcting the flaws. The 
size and nature of the Wolf Creek flaws, however, have led NRC 
staff to conclude the industry must accelerate its planned 
actions for the remainder of the affected plants in the PWR 
fleet.

   The CALs confirm commitments by the affected plant operators 
to complete actions by the end of the year and implement enhanced 
leakage monitoring until actions are completed. Plants must be 
shut down to conduct the inspections. For plants having their 
next planned shutdown beyond 2007, operators have committed to 
shut down and resolve concerns with the welds in 2007 if 
additional analyses being performed by industry do not provide 
the NRC with sufficient bases to support extended schedules. 
Plant operators have committed to report inspection results and 
any corrective actions taken within 60 days of a plant returning 
to operation.

     Issuance of these CALs does not preclude the NRC from taking 
stronger actions, if warranted. The CALs are considered an 
interim measure while the American Society of Mechanical 
Engineers incorporates enhanced inspection requirements into the 
society&rsquo;s Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code. The NRC will 
review those enhanced requirements and incorporate them into 
agency requirements, as appropriate.

   The list of plants that will receive a CAL is attached. The 
CALs will be posted on the NRC web site at: 
http://www.nrc.gov/reactors/operating/ops-experience/pressure-boundary
                       -integrity/weld-issues/.

        Plants Receiving a Confirmatory Action Letter from NRC


NRC news releases are available through a free list server 
subscription at the following Web address: 
http://www.nrc.gov/public-involve/listserver.html. The NRC Home 
Page at www.nrc.gov also offers a Subscribe to News link in the 
News & Information menu. E-mail notifications are sent to 
subscribers when news releases are posted to NRC's Web Site.

Monday, March 12, 2007
*****************************************************************
 28 CMD: Moore Spin: Or, How Reporters Learned to Stop Worrying and Love
Nuclear Front Groups - Center for Media and Democracy

Center for Media and Democracy Publishers of PR Watch
 
Submitted by Diane Farsetta on Mon, 03/12/2007 - 13:25.

From a Nuclear Energy Institute ad

"We just find it maddening that Hill & Knowlton, which has an $8 
million account with the nuclear industry, should have such an 
easy time working the press," concluded the Columbia Journalism 
Review in an editorial in its July / August 2006 issue.

The magazine was rightly bemoaning the tendency of news outlets to
present former Greenpeace activist Patrick Moore and former EPA
chief Christine Todd Whitman as environmentalists who support
nuclear power, without noting that both are paid spokespeople for a
group bankrolled by the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI). NEI
represents nuclear power plant operators, plant designers, fuel
suppliers and other sectors of the nuclear power industry. Hill &
Knowlton is NEI's public relations firm, though it's not the only
firm working to build support for nuclear power.

Thanks in part to an ongoing, multifaceted PR push -- along with
very real concerns about energy prices, rising energy demand, aging
infrastructure, sustainability and global warming -- nuclear power
is attracting serious attention from reporters and policymakers
alike. The question is whether a vital public debate over energy
choices is being skewed by deep-pocketed interests with a dog in the
fight.

The dangers of such distortions are especially acute at the state
and local levels. That's where efforts to extend the licenses of
existing nuclear power plants, to maintain or expand nuclear waste
storage facilities, and to site new proposed nuclear power plants,
are made or broken. And that's where pro-nuclear campaigners appear
to be focusing, adopting the mantle and tactics of community groups
while steadfastly refusing to provide details on their operations.

Persistence Pays Off

All manner of businesses promote themselves every day, but the
nuclear power industry's need for good PR is tremendous. No new
nuclear plants have been ordered in the United States since 1979,
the year of the Three Mile Island meltdown. The Yucca Mountain
national repository for nuclear waste -- originally scheduled to
open in 1998 -- is now slated to begin accepting waste in March
2017. Experienced nuclear engineers are becoming scarce; nearly 30
percent of the industry's workforce "will be eligible to retire
within five years," the Scripps Howard News Service reported in
April 2006. And even with what one Forbes columnist described as
"all this corporate welfare," potential "investors remain wary of
construction risks" for new nuclear power plants, explained an
energy sector analyst.

The industry's future is so precarious that Exelon Nuclear's head of
project development warned attendees of the Electric Power 2005
conference, "Inaction is synonymous with being phased out." That's
why years of effort -- not to mention millions of dollars -- have
been invested in nuclear power's PR rebirth as "clean, green and
safe."

The nuclear power industry has been promoting itself as part of the
solution to global warming for a decade. Industry representatives
appeared en masse at a 1998 climate change conference in Buenos
Aires, according to environmental consultant Alan Tate. "They
inundated the international negotiators, including with what
appeared to be a number of front groups like Students for Nuclear
Power," he told reporter Liz Minchin. By 2005, nuclear industry
spokespeople were "giving much more polished performances at climate
meetings and negotiations."

Entergy's Vermont Yankee nuclear power station

Entergy, which owns and operates 10 U.S. nuclear power plants, has
worked with the PR giant Burson-Marsteller for at least five years.
In April 2002, Entergy's communications director told O'Dwyer's PR
Daily that the firm had been hired "mainly for the Indian Point
issues" -- the security and environmental concerns raised by the
company's Indian Point nuclear power plant, located outside New York
City -- "but its work now includes handling the overall image of the
company." In 2003, Entergy created the "Coalition Against Shutting
Down Vermont's Electricity Options" and spent $200,000 to oppose a
citizen campaign to close the company's Vermont Yankee nuclear plant
in 2012.

And then there's NEI, which exists to do PR and lobbying for the
nuclear industry. In 2004, NEI was embarrassed when the Austin
Chronicle outed one of its PR firms, Potomac Communications Group,
for ghostwriting pro-nuclear op/ed columns. The paper described the
op/ed campaign as "a decades-long, centrally orchestrated plan to
defraud the nation's newspaper readers by misrepresenting the
propaganda of one hired atomic gun as the learned musings of
disparate academics and other nuclear-industry 'experts.'"

In January 2006, NEI signed an $8 million contract with Hill &
Knowlton. The objectives included developing "a national coalition
that would 'activate and expand on' existing nuclear energy
supporters, engaging employees, shareholders, academics, health
experts, and environmental organizations," and "'pre-empting and
offsetting' criticism from opponents," wrote the Holmes Report. With
the firm's help, NEI launched what is possibly its greatest PR
triumph, almost exactly two years after the op/ed controversy.

Building the Nuclear CASE

The Clean and Safe Energy Coalition (CASEnergy) held its inaugural
press conference on April 24, 2006, just two days before the 20th
anniversary of the Chernobyl nuclear power plant disaster. CASEnergy
is fully funded by NEI, and supported by Hill & Knowlton, along with
the polling firm Penn Schoen &amp; Berland.

CASEnergy is not the first business-funded coalition to support
nuclear power. In May 2001, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce formed the
Alliance for Energy &amp; Economic Growth, "to support proposals
that boost [energy] supply, promote investment in the energy
infrastructure, encourage alternative energy sources and efficiency
without mandates, and fund programs to help low-income energy
consumers." The pro-nuclear alliance, whose steering committee
includes NEI, hired former Congresswoman and Vice Presidential
candidate Geraldine Ferraro to lobby for the Yucca Mountain waste
repository. But the alliance never received the attention that
CASEnergy is now enjoying.

From a November 2005 action (Source: Greenpeace)

That's due in large part to the choice of Patrick Moore, a
media-savvy and polarizing figure, as CASEnergy's co-chair and most
public spokesperson. As he explained at the group's launch, Moore's
role is to "speak and write to press the group's agenda, as well as
to coordinate efforts," reported Nucleonics Week. His past work with
Greenpeace has proved an irresistible hook for many reporters, even
though his association with that group ended in 1986. Moore has now
spent more time working as a PR consultant to the logging, mining,
biotech, nuclear and other industries (since at least 1991, or 16
years) than he did as an environmental activist (from 1971 to 1986,
or 15 years).

"Part of the thinking, surely, was that the press would peg [Moore
and fellow co-chair Christie Whitman] as dedicated environmentalists
who have turned into pro-nuke cheerleaders," reasoned the Columbia
Journalism Review. The magazine added, "in some stories, columns and
editorials, the San Francisco Chronicle, the Boston Herald, the
Baltimore Sun, the Richmond Times-Dispatch, the Rocky Mountain News,
The New York Times, and CBS News all referred to Moore as either a
Greenpeace founder or an environmentalist, without mentioning that
he is also a paid spokesman for the nuclear industry."

Both NEI and Moore decline to say how much he's paid; Whitman won't
answer that question either. Presumably, the nuclear industry feels
it's getting its money's worth. A Nexis news database search on
March 1, 2007 identified 302 news items about nuclear power that
cite Moore, since April 2006. Only 37 of those pieces -- 12 percent
of the total -- mention his financial relationship with NEI.

Industry representatives don't just showcase Moore to reporters. In
response to a safety question at a public debate on nuclear power in
Madison, Wis., on December 7, 2006, NEI's Lisa Stiles-Shell said,
"Patrick Moore, the former co-founder of Greenpeace -- he's now very
in favor of nuclear power -- often brings up an example of the
Bhopal incident in India, 1986 -- a huge chemical accident. ... It
was a disaster. But the response was not, 'We have to close down the
chemical industry.' The response was, 'We have to make the chemical
industry safer.' And that's exactly what nuclear has done, after
Chernobyl and after Three Mile Island." She did not disclose Moore's
paid position with NEI. When I asked about it, Stiles-Shell
responded, "You can't change his mind with money."

Current Greenpeace leaders and other environmental activists have
repeatedly distanced themselves from Moore and questioned his
claims. Greenpeace advisor Harvey Wasserman recently wrote, "Moore
exaggerates his role in Greenpeace and his credentials as a
scientist to serve as a public relations hack." But these
protestations have mostly been ignored. When they are raised, Moore
dismisses them as further proof of the irrationality of his former
colleagues.

Taking It to the States

What debate there has been about Moore's nuclear advocacy has
focused on media coverage and national-level issues. Meanwhile, "a
large part of CASEnergy's work" has proceeded "at the state and
local level," as Nucleonics Week reported in April 2006. "The group
is planning four or five 'state-level launches,'" added the trade
publication, quoting a low-profile CASEnergy spokesman -- and Hill &
Knowlton senior vice-president of corporate communications -- Don
Meyer.

"Much of [CASEnergy's] work will be aimed at increasing public
backing and winning support at the 'very local level' for plant
siting and licensing," Environment & Energy News wrote the same
month, also quoting Meyer. In September 2006, National Journal
reported that CASEnergy "will hit the road this fall with town hall
meetings, local press events, and such in New Hampshire, Iowa,
Illinois, and Michigan."

And hit the road they have.

Patrick Moore

In October, Patrick Moore headlined a CASEnergy event in Cedar
Rapids, Iowa. He was joined by local officials and representatives
of business and labor groups at the Duane Arnold Energy Center, the
state's only nuclear power plant. Moore "called on Iowans to join
the CASEnergy Coalition," according to the group's press release,
which referred to the event as "Iowa's CASEnergy kick-off."

Some "15 members of the Iowa House of Representatives Democratic
caucus back the [CASEnergy] coalition," reported the Cedar Rapids
Gazette. One legislator told the paper that "the coalition doesn't
necessarily expect its efforts to yield another nuclear plant in
Iowa," but the state's "first-in-the-nation presidential caucuses
put the group in a position to influence a change in national energy
policy." That's surprising, as federal policy already provides
billions of dollars in nuclear industry subsidies, including for new
nuclear power plants.

Moore was in Detroit the following month, calling on "Michigan
residents to join the CASEnergy Coalition." That event was billed as
CASEnergy's "Michigan kick-off" and also included a state legislator
and representatives of local business and labor groups. Crain's
Detroit Business noted that the pro-nuclear event came as the
state's public service commission was readying its comprehensive
energy plan for the governor.

Patrick Moore has been much busier than these -- the only events
listed on the CASEnergy website -- suggest. He's brought his
pro-nuclear road show to at least 10 other U.S. cities since last
April. (See related SourceWatch article.) And CASEnergy isn't the
only industry-funded group talking up nuclear power around the
country.

In November 2006, Moore traveled to Yonkers, N.Y., to support
extending the Indian Point nuclear power plant's license until 2035.
Also appearing at the pre-Thanksgiving event were Entergy staffers,
Rudy Giuliani (whose Giuliani Partners firm works for Entergy), and
members of the New York Affordable Reliable Electricity Alliance (NY
AREA). In January 2007, Moore was in Montpelier and Brattleboro,
Vt., to speak with the Vermont Energy Partnership. In February, he
returned to New York, to address NY AREA's "2007 Energy Day at
Albany."

One Big, Happy, ProActive Family

The New York and Vermont pro-nuclear groups have more in common 
than Moore's attention. Both list Entergy, which operates nuclear 
plants in both states, as a member. And both groups' websites 
were registered by the same Virginia-based PR firm, ProActive 
Communications.

ProActive has provided other services for NY AREA, including
designing the group's website, logo and newsletter, as well as a
presentation template and DVD packaging (for a video titled, "The
Power Behind a Growing New York"), according to the firm's website.
In November, NY AREA promoted a video news release featuring Moore
that credits "ProActive production services," along with the
broadcast PR firm MultiVu, in its opening frames. (See video below.
Around the same time, NY AREA also had an audio news release with
Moore, but only MultiVu is listed on the "story summary.")



ProActive Communications provided a similar range of website and
design services -- and a very similar look -- to a third pro-nuclear
group, the Boston-based Massachusetts Affordable Reliable
Electricity Alliance (Mass AREA), again according to the firm's
website. Mass AREA's members also include Entergy, which runs the
Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station in Plymouth, Mass.

ProActive founder and president Mark Serrano refused to comment on
his firm's work for Mass AREA, NY AREA or the Vermont Energy
Partnership. After asking me to submit questions by email, he
responded that my questions "relate to assumed business
relationships. Discussing these matters with you or anyone else is
not appropriate."

Yet the role of ProActive Communications and of Entergy is clear.
ProActive lists among its specialties "coalition programs,"
"grassroots mobilizations," and "editorial [media] outreach."
ProActive's program director, James Knubel, joined the PR firm after
serving as senior vice-president for Entergy Nuclear Northeast.
ProActive's Serrano does double duty as NY AREA's president, while
ProActive communications director Paul Steidler also serves as NY
AREA's media contact. Steidler joined the PR firm after leading the
education reform project at the Alexis de Tocqueville Institution,
an industry-funded think tank. (Steidler's name and bio were removed
from the ProActive website shortly after I contacted the firm.)

NY AREA didn't respond to an interview request. Entergy spokesperson
Jim Steets confirmed that the company was "instrumental in the
founding of New York AREA," but said he didn't know "how much of New
York AREA's funding comes from Entergy." He added, "There's no
question that there's a strong association" between Entergy and NY
AREA, but as "membership has grown, we've become just another
dues-paying member." NY AREA is comprised of "independent-minded
people, with interests of their own," he stressed.

Steets described ProActive Communications' work for NY AREA as: "If
there are events or messages, things that we should attend or that
people who agree with us might want to attend, ProActive is helpful
in organizing the grassroots campaign that would demonstrate that
there are people who subscribe to this [NY AREA's] mission. They're
skilled in grassroots organizing and advocacy, very similar to what
the groups who oppose us do."

Phillip Musegaas, a staff attorney at Riverkeeper, a New York-based
environmental group that opposes the Indian Point plant, disagrees.
NY AREA and similar groups "do the public a disservice by the fact
that they're subsidized by Entergy," he said. "We're straighforward
with our campaign, on the other side." Musegaas added, "Exelon,
Entergy and other large companies have a lot of money to spend on
PR. They do that directly with Burston-Marsteller and Giuliani
Parnters, and less directly with these local groups."

Mass AREA communications director Joyce McMahon explained that her
group is "not tied to NY AREA" and is "not just about nuclear
issues." She verified that ProActive Communications does consulting
work for Mass AREA, but declined to describe that work. McMahon also
confirmed that Entergy helps fund Mass AREA, but said the group's
other members also contribute, each giving an amount relative to its
size.

Vermont Energy Partnership executive director Amanda Ibey also
stressed that her group isn't focused solely on nuclear power. In an
email, she wrote, "We have prepared a number of issue briefs on such
topics as hydro power, energy efficiency, nuclear power, LICAP
[incentives to keep New England-based generators], transmission
infrastructure, and wind power." Ibey described the group as
"member-funded" and would not comment on its relationship with
ProActive Communications. She did explain that Patrick Moore "is
paid by the group" as an adviser, but the "terms are proprietary. We
do not work with the Clean and Safe Energy Coalition."

An Industry-Driven Grassroots

Are Vermont Energy Partnership, Mass AREA and NY AREA Entergy-funded
astroturf, or fake grassroots groups? Each publicly lists its
membership, including Entergy, on its website. And each counts among
its members local businesses, unions and individuals that presumably
don't stand to benefit directly from policies favorable to nuclear
power.

Of course, all businesses, groups and individuals have the right to
organize and express their views. But the negative impact of this
nuclear industry-driven PR is already clear. Plans to build new
nuclear power plants are inching forward, while serious questions
and concerns -- not to mention alternative energy policies --
receive little attention. On March 8, the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission issued its first site approval for a new nuclear plant in
over 30 years. Exelon now has 20 years to apply for a license to
build a new reactor in Clinton, Ill.

Entergy and NEI spend millions of dollars doing media outreach,
under their own names. Both spend millions more to lobby federal
officials. From 1998 to 2004, Entergy spent $13.5 million and NEI
spent $9.7 million on federal lobbying, according to the Center for
Public Integrity's LobbyWatch database.

But both, while using solely their own names, failed to garner
significant public support. So both formed "coalitions" and
"alliances," designed to deliver essentially the same pro-nuclear
message. Unlike the funders behind classic front groups, NEI and
Entergy admit their role in CASEnergy or NY AREA, Mass AREA and
Vermont Energy Partnership, respectively. But that disclosure is
done in a whisper, with a nod and wink, and sloppy reporting takes
care of the rest.

The end result is the same -- instead of a fully informed and
vigorous public debate on complex energy issues, the United States
is having a lopsided discussion. And the nuclear power industry
isn't just dominating it; it has several seats at the table.


======================================================================

Diane Farsetta is the Center for Media and Democracy's senior
researcher.

Many of the links in the above article are to articles on
SourceWatch, the Center for Media and Democracy's collaborative
online encyclopedia. SourceWatch volunteer editors can help update,
expand and improve these or any of the other SourceWatch profiles of
people, issues and groups shaping the public agenda. It's free to
sign up, and we'd love to have you join us.

Center for Media and Democracy 520 University Avenue, Suite 227 
Madison, Wisconsin 53703 Phone: 608-260-9713 Email: editor AT 
prwatch.org
*****************************************************************
 29 Platts: NRC and industry reach agreement on inspection of welds

london (Platts)--12Mar2007

THE NRC AND INDUSTRY HAVE REACHED AGREEMENT ON INSPECTION OF 
WELDS between dissimilar metals in reactor coolant piping, NRC 
officials said late this week. 

An industry plan -- developed by the Electric Power Research 
Institute's Materials Reliability Program and the Nuclear Energy 
Institute -- had set the end of 2007 as the deadline for 
inspections of welds in the pressurizer.

Because of its high temperature, the pressurizer is the area of 
the plant considered mostly likely to produce cracking in the 
metal alloys used in the welds. But under the industry's 
self-policing regime, about 10 units had applied for and received 
permission to defer the inspections until their scheduled 
refueling outages in 2008. NRC, however, balked at that plan amid 
concerns raised by the discovery last fall of unexpectedly large 
cracks in pressurizer welds at Wolf Creek. Under the NRC-industry 
agreement, the plants seeking deferral can wait until 2008 if 
they put in place enhanced leakage monitoring in the interim, and 
if a pending study by industry demonstrates that the NRC analyses 
that led to some of the agency's concerns were overly 
conservative. A key NRC concern was that flaws such as the ones 
discovered at Wolf Creek might have little time between leakage 
and rupture, reducing the warning time for operators. An NRC 
official said the agency would issue confirmatory action letters 
to the affected operators but did not plan to issue a generic 
communication.

Copyright © 2007 - Platts, All Rights Reserved
*****************************************************************
 30 Times Argus: Yankee did not exceed limits

Vermont News & Information

March 12, 2007

By David Gram Associated Press

MONTPELIER — The Vermont Yankee nuclear plant most likely did not
exceed state limits for radiation emanating from the Vernon site in
2004, contrary to a state report at the time, a state consultant has
found.

Oak Ridge Associated Universities also recommended that Vermont
"update" its regulations for radiation exposure around Vermont
Yankee, noting that they predate and are five times as stringent as
limits issued by the federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Bill Irwin, chief of radiological health at the state Department of
Health, said in an interview that he agreed that radiation readings
taken in 2004 — which were believed to have exceeded the state limit
of 20 milirems of exposure a year, likely overstated the amount of
radiation emanating from the plant.

"The state agrees with the findings of Oak Ridge that the
measurements reported for 2004 were not as precise or accurate as
they could have been," said Irwin, who joined the Health Department
last year. "Given what we know now we do not believe there was ...
in excess of 20 milirems for 2004."

Radiation emissions were a key issue as the plant sought and won
permission to increase its power output by 20 percent, which it did
a year ago. The Oak Ridge group said the power boost was likely to
add 26 to 30 percent to radiation emissions, and whether the plant
could stay under the state limit came into question. New radiation
shielding was added at the plant last May, the report said.

Vermont Yankee spokesman Robert Williams, in an interview Friday,
said plant officials were "generally pleased" with the report. "It
appears to confirm that the method that is in use here (to measure
radiation) is the appropriate method."

The Oak Ridge Associated Universities group is made up primarily of
academics and researchers and is affiliated with the Oak Ridge
National Laboratory in Tennessee. Founded in 1943 as part of the
Manhattan Project that developed the first atomic bomb, the lab has
been at the forefront of nuclear technology since then.

Williams called the Oak Ridge group "the recognized expert in the
field." But Raymond Shadis, technical adviser to the nuclear
watchdog group New England Coalition, took a more critical view.

"They've never seen a unit of radiation they didn't like," Shadis
said. "Oak Ridge lives and dies on the propagation of the nuclear
industry, the nuclear culture."

Of the group's findings, Shadis added, "What a surprise ... I
haven't seen one of these findings move in a precautionary direction
in decades. It always goes the other way."

Irwin said the state had already taken some of the steps the report
called for in improving its radiation monitoring around Vermont
Yankee. One criticism in the report was that the state relied on
measurements from two testing locations — one in Putney and the
other in Wilmington — to measure the background radiation.

Oak Ridge said the state needed a broader sample to get a more
accurate background reading, and Irwin said it was now averaging
data from all of the 34 measuring stations in an outlying ring
around the plant.

While Irwin said the state generally agreed with the Oak Ridge
findings, he said it's highly unlikely that Vermont will raise its
radiation limit to match those imposed by other states and the NRC.

He called the suggestion from Oak Ridge, "clearly one of the
recommendations of the Oak Ridge report that we will not be adopting.

"We believe it's important to uphold the intent of the regulatory
limit as it was established in the '70s. The limit was established
because the Legislature wanted to have more restrictive public
health exposures than the federal government."

   © 2007 Times Argus
*****************************************************************
 31 Observer-Dispatch: State faces decision on power program

uticaOD.com - Monday, Mar 12, 2007

By JAY GALLAGHER O-D Albany bureau

ALBANY — Is it worth raising the electric bills of most upstate 
residential electric customers by $5 to $10 a month so more cheap 
power is available to retain jobs and even attract new ones to 
the struggling region?

That is the stark choice that could face Gov. Eliot Spitzer and 
state lawmakers later this year as they try to decide what to do 
with a pool of cheap hydropower -- continue giving it to upstate 
utilities to help keep residential costs down or set it aside for 
businesses that use a lot of power?

On the one hand, New Yorkers already pay among the highest rates 
for electricity in the country, and taking away the hydropower 
would make that situation worse.

On the other side, the cost of power is one of the major 
disadvantages companies that are heavy users of electricity have 
in competing against firms in other states — they pay 42 percent 
more than the national average for power, according to the state 
Business Council, a lobbying group.

Spitzer and lawmakers have to decide this year because the major 
job-subsidy-power program expires at the end of June, and the 
contracts for the cheap power for residential customers run out 
on Aug. 31.

The issue came to the fore this week when a group of upstate 
business leaders traveled to the Capitol to lobby for changes in 
state laws to improve the economic climate in their struggling 
region.

One of them, Jay Simonis of Endicott Interconnect, a Broome 
County-based high-tech company, said his firm might look outside 
the state when it considers expanding if it loses its subsidy on 
electric bills.

"We are winning new business, and it's going to require 
investment in new equipment," Simonis said. "We're making 
decisions now to stay in Endicott or move to place with cheaper 
electricity."

A state-subsidy program cuts the annual electric bill of Endicott 
Interconnect, which manufactures electro-mechanical equipment, 
from about $12 million a year to $8 million, he said. The firm, 
which has about 2,000 workers, is the largest manufacturing 
employer in Broome County.

The subsidies help protect about 360,000 jobs across the state, 
many of them highly paid manufacturing positions.

Last December, a state panel came up with recommendations on what 
to do about the subsidy programs.

The key idea: take 500 megawatts (enough energy to power 500,000 
homes) of cheap power generated by the Niagara and St. Lawrence 
hydroelectric plants that now go to three upstate utilities 
(Rochester Gas and Electric, National Grid and New York State 
Electric and Gas) and set that power aside for businesses.

The utilities now spread the power among their residential 
customers, which helps to hold down rates. But that has to 
change, a business advocate said.

"We have to do this to protect manufacturing we have left," said 
the Business Council's Kenneth Pokalsky. "Energy-dependent 
companies need this badly."

But Democratic members of the panel dissented on the report, in 
part because the group had "no specific voice for residential or 
agriculture customers who have benefited form this (current) 
power allocation at the table."

Instead, they recommended the state find $300 million from a 
number of sources, including tax money, to continue existing 
subsidies while the matter is studied further.

Spitzer has said that he wants to use the state's cheap 
hydropower "more efficiently," but hasn't detailed what that 
means. Spokesman Marc Violette said Friday he had no comment on 
the panel's recommendation to redirect the cheap power.

"We're waiting for the governor's recommendation on this," said 
Senate Energy Committee Chairman James Wright, R-Watertown, 
Jefferson County. But he said he thinks some other 
recommendations in the report - including eliminating subsidies 
for some not-for-profit organizations and universities that now 
get cheap power - provide a useful starting point for 
discussions.

He said any plan that includes raising the bills of residential 
customers would be a "last resort."

The state's electricity is more expensive than in any other state 
except Hawaii in part because more power plants are fueled by oil 
and natural gas than in most other parts of the country, where 
cheaper coal is the dominant fuel. State taxes and charges on 
utility bills in New York are also among the highest in the 
country.

That in part is what makes hydropower, which supplies about 20 
percent of power generated in the state and is by far the 
cheapest way to generate electricity, so valuable. By law, much 
of the output of the two big hydro plants owned by the state 
Power Authority in Niagara Falls and Messina is reserved for 
local industries. The rest has been allocated under various laws 
and contracts all over the state.

The state launched its Power for Jobs program, through the Power 
Authority, in 1997. It was intended to act as a three-year bridge 
to continue supplying relatively low-cost power to 
energy-intensive industries until the newly deregulated market 
drove down prices across the board.

Instead, prices went up, and the program was extended in several 
stages to its current expiration date of June 30.

A problem has been that originally half of the electricity for 
the jobs program came from the Power Authority's Fitzpatrick 
nuclear plant in Oswego. But in 2000 the authority sold the plant 
(as well as Indian Point 3 in Buchanan, Westchester County), 
losing a large source of relatively cheap power. Contracts with 
the new owner, Entergy Nuclear Northeast, to provide low-cost 
power that were part of the original deal expired in 2005.

Simonis, the Endicott Interconnect executive, said if the 
electric-price issue isn't resolved, other state efforts to 
improve the business climate, like reforming the 
workers'-compensation system and liability laws, won't do his 
firm any good.

"If I don't have low-cost source for electricity, I don't even 
get to that point of worrying about those other things," he said.

ELECTRIC RATES


Here is how New York's electric rates compared to other 
neighboring states, according to a 2005 federal Department of 
Energy survey. New York ranked second nationally.


AVERAGE COST PER KILOWATT HOUR IN CENTS.


Hawaii: 		18.33


New York: 	13.95


Mass.: 		12.18


Conn.: 		12.06


New Jersey: 	10.98


Vermont: 	10.95


Pa.: 		8.27


U.S. average: 	8.14


Ohio: 		7.08


West Virginia: 	5.15


Source: 2005 federal Department of Energy survey

Copyright ©2007 uticaOD.com All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 32 IRNA: Saeedi to brief MPs on Russian compliance with undertaking to
construct Bushehr power plant - Irna

Tehran, March 12, IRNA

Iran-Russia-Bushehr

The Atomic Energy Organization of Iran's (AEOI) Deputy for
International Affairs Mohammad Saeedi is to a attend session of the
Majlis National Security and Foreign Policy Commission on Monday to
brief MPs of Russia's compliance with its undertaking to construct
the Bushehr nuclear power plant.

Saeedi, in the session, will also report on latest developments in
the Iran nuclear issue and answer questions raised by MPs.

A Russian delegation comprising officials and experts of
Atomstroiexport, the company that is building the Bushehr nuclear
power plant, arrived Monday in Tehran to settle a dispute over an
alleged default in payment by Iran for the plant.

Atomstroiexport is Russia's national agent and general contractor
for the nuclear power plant that is currently in the final stage of
construction in southern Iran.

The company recently announced that inauguration of the plant could
again be delayed as well as supply of nuclear fuel for the plant
following Iran's failure to settle its financial account.

Based on an agreement reached by the two sides in September 2006,
the plant was to be test-operated in September 2007 and the fuel
needed by the plant transferred to Iran by end of March.

Iranian officials, however, insist Tehran has faithfully complied
with its financial obligations as stipulated in the contract.


*****************************************************************
 33 Prague Daily Monitor: Bursik wants to sack nuclear safety office head over Temelin -

by Prague Daily Monitor/CTK / published 12 March 2007

Prague, March 11 (CTK) - Czech Environment Minister Martin Bursik
wants to remove Dana Drabova from the post of head of the State
Authority for Nuclear Safety (SUJB) because of recent defects at the
Temelin nuclear power station, the Czech Television said in its
evening newscast today.

"It is time for Mrs Drabova to get nervous at least," Bursik told
CT, adding Drabova was responsible for the defects and should have
proposed specific steps instead of disparaging the problems.

Some 2,000 litres of slightly radioactive water leaked in Temelin
two weeks ago. Another 1,000 litres leaked last Tuesday, forcing
Austria, a fervent critic of the power station, say it is planning
an international lawsuit against Temelin.

Drabova said government supervision must aim at balance. "Our steps
must indeed reflect the real situation and not its portrait in the
media," she added.

Bursik criticised the SUJB for a failure to fine Temelin because of
the defects. The SUJB is still reluctant to impose fines. Temelin
chief executive Vladimir Hlavinka said he was planning unspecified
organisational changes.

Industry and Trade Minister Martin Riman will meet Drabova and
Martin Roman, chief executive at state-run power producer CEZ which
runs Temelin, next week.

"In terms of nuclear safety, these defects are unimportant, but
Temelin is a very sensitive topic. The situation must be
investigated, and we must take steps to make these things happen as
seldom as possible," Riman said earlier.

This story copyright 2007 CTK Czech News Agency
The Prague Daily Monitor and Monitor CE are not responsible for its
content.

Receive the Prague Daily Monitor
*****************************************************************
 34 Guardian Unlimited: Russians: Iran Nuke Plant to Be Delayed 

From the Associated Press

Monday March 12, 2007 3:46 PM

By VLADIMIR ISACHENKOV Associated Press Writer

MOSCOW (AP) - The state-run Russian company building Iran's first 
nuclear power plant said Monday that the reactor's launch will be 
postponed because of Iranian payment delays.

   Russian media reports, meanwhile, indicated that the Kremlin 
was growing tired of Iran's nuclear defiance in the face of U.N. 
Security Council sanctions, with three agencies citing an 
unidentified official warning Iran to cooperate and stop playing 
``anti-American games.''

     Russia, which has remained close to Iran even as the Islamic 
republic defied international demands to stop enriching uranium 
and answer questions about its nuclear program, has accused Iran 
of paying only a fraction of the $25 million monthly payments for 
construction work at the Bushehr reactor in recent months. 
Officials have warned that the funding delays would push back 
both the launch - originally planned for September - and the 
delivery of the uranium fuel needed to power the reactor.

   ``It will be impossible to launch the reactor in September, 
and there can be no talk about supplying fuel this month,'' 
Atomstroiexport said in a statement that followed the collapse of 
bilateral talks last week on the funding dispute. It accused the 
Iranians of failing to give a written obligation to resume 
funding for the project.

   Iran has urged Russia to speed up the fuel delivery, but 
Russian officials said it would only be delivered six months 
before the plant's launch.

  Three-day talks last week between Atomstroiexport officials and 
an Iranian delegation led by Mohammed Saeedi, the vice president 
of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran, ended in failure.

  Saeedi denied any payment delays, but said that Iran was ready 
to provide more funds.

   Under pressure from Russia, the U.N. Security Council removed 
a reference to Bushehr from sanctions against Iran over its 
atomic program. The Kremlin then supported limited sanctions 
against Iran over its refusal to suspend uranium enrichment.

 The Security Council is debating new sanctions against Iran but 
the five veto-wielding permanent members - the U.S., Russia, 
China, Britain and France - and Germany failed to agree in a 
meeting late Sunday.

    In a surprise announcement Sunday, the Iranian government 
said President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad wants to put his country's 
case for a nuclear program before the Security Council.

   The sanctions imposed in December ordered all countries to 
stop supplying Iran with materials and technology that could 
contribute to its nuclear and missile programs and to freeze 
assets of 10 key Iranian companies and 12 individuals related to 
those programs.

  The council warned it would adopt further nonmilitary sanctions 
if Iran refused to comply.

 Iran not only refused to suspend its enrichment program but 
expanded it. So the six key nations that have been trying to rein 
in Iran's nuclear program started discussing possible new 
sanctions including a travel ban, an arms embargo, trade 
restrictions and an expanded list of people and companies subject 
to an asset freeze.

 Russian Foreign Ministry spokesman Mikhail Kamynin said the 
parties in the six-way talks are proceeding from ``common goals 
... in ensuring nuclear non-proliferation,'' but he added that a 
new U.N. Security Council resolution must not hurt the Iranian 
people, the ITAR-Tass news agency reported.

  In a signal that Russia could be close to yielding to Western 
push for stronger sanctions, Russian news agencies reported 
Monday that the country's support for Iran could end if it 
continues to ignore international demands to freeze enrichment.

 ITAR-Tass, Interfax and RIA-Novosti all carried identical 
remarks by an unidentified official, who warned that Iran must 
answer the U.N. nuclear watchdog's queries about its nuclear 
program, which the United States and others say is aimed at 
building an atomic bomb.

    Russia's leadership often uses remarks by anonymous sources 
to convey its position on sensitive issues.

 The source said that Iran's continued defiance has damaged 
Russia's image and that Russia would not ``play anti-American 
games'' with Iran.

   Iran sternly urged Russia Sunday to deliver the fuel this 
month.

 ``We hope the Russians won't politicize (the fuel shipment),'' 
said Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Mohammad Ali Hosseini. 
``This (shipment) should be done within the next two weeks. We 
expect the Russians to fulfill their commitments.''

                                 ---

 Associated Press Writer Edith M. Lederer contributed to this 
report.

Guardian Unlimited © Guardian News and Media Limited 2007
*****************************************************************
 35 AFP: Libya may ask for US help on nuclear power - 

Mon Mar 12, 5:08 PM ET

TRIPOLI (AFP) - Libya may approach the United States for talks on 
constructing the country's first nuclear power plant, a senior 
official indicated on Monday.

The government "has given the green light to enter into negotiations
on this question and to discuss with the United States with the aim
of reaching an agreement on developing and cooperating on the
peaceful use of nuclear power," a senior official told AFP on
condition of anonymity.

In Washington, there was no confirmation of any proposed deal.

"I'm certainly aware of no plans for the United States to
participate in nuclear programmes with Libya," State Department
deputy spokesman Tom Casey said.

Earlier, the official JANA news agency reported that the Libyan
parliament or General People's Committee (GPC) had given its
approval for the foreign ministry to sign such a deal.

"The GPC authorised on Sunday the GPC for Foreign Liaison and
International Cooperation to sign the agreement related (to) the
Libyan-American cooperation in peaceful use of nuclear energy
offered by the United States," the agency said in an
English-language dispatch.

"The agreement aims at establishing a nuclear station in Libya to
produce electricity, desalting water, and developing the
radiochemistry performance at energy researches centre."

The draft agreement approved by MPs also provides for Libyan
students to receive training in nuclear technology in the United
States and for the establishment in Libya of a regional centre for
nuclear medicine, JANA said.

Libya was long accused by Western governments of seeking to acquire
weapons of mass destruction.

But in late 2003 Libyan leader Moamer Kadhafi renounced all attempts
to develop a non-conventional arsenal, clearing the way for the
restoration of diplomatic relations with the United States in May
last year.

Any proposed agreement between the United States and its longtime
enemy Libya would come at a time when Washington is intensifying its
campaign against the nuclear programme of its arch-foe Iran.

Iran's programme, which the Islamic republic insists is entirely
peaceful, has prompted a number of Arab states to announce plans to
work on civil nuclear energy, including pro-Western Egypt and the
six oil-rich Gulf states.

Earlier this month, Kadhafi complained that Libya had not been
adequately compensated for abandoning nuclear weapons.

"Libya has not been properly compensated, so other countries, like
Iran and North Korea, will not follow his lead," the Libyan leader
said in an interview with the BBC.

"Libya is disappointed because the promises given by America and
Britain were not fulfilled," he said.

Kadhafi was for decades an international pariah because of his
opposition to the West and his alleged backing for terrorism, before
the pledge to give up attempts to develop weapons of mass
destruction.

That led to a normalisation of ties with Britain and France as well
as the United States. After 20 years of isolation, foreign companies
are now in fierce competition to clinch oil deals in Libya.

But Kadhafi told the BBC in Sebha, where on March 2 he celebrated
the 30th anniversary of Libya's Jamahiriyah, or State of the Masses
political system, there had been a lack of British, European Union
or US investment since.

Kadhafi said he thought it was still possible for Libya to work with
the West for mutual benefit, but the lack of foreign cash did not
mean his country would slip back into its old ways.

"Libya will never go back. I believe that the era of hostility and
confrontation is behind us," he was quoted as saying.

Copyright © 2007 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
 36 Libyan Jamahiriya: Libya, US to cooperate in peaceful use of nuclear energy

2007-03-12

The General People’s Committee has given the Secretariat of Foreign
Liaison and International Cooperation the go-ahead to sign the
agreement related to the Libyan American Cooperation in peaceful use
of nuclear energy.

The agreement was offered by the United States of America to Libya.
It aims at establishing a Nuclear Station in Libya to produce
electricity , desalting water, and developing the radiochemistry
performance at Energy Researches Center.

The draft Agreement provides for opening the study in Nuclear Energy
fields at the American Universities for Libyan Students, and for
training and qualifying the Libyan national elements in these fields.

The two countries, according to this agreement, will hold joint
researches and technical projects, establish a regional center for
the nuclear medicine, exchange the technical expertise and encourage
the linking of the American Libyan research and technical
institutions.

It also includes the promotion of cooperation in world peace and the
peaceful use of nuclear energy in the fields of energy, water,
medicine, agriculture, industry, and environment to realize the
common interest of both countries.


*****************************************************************
 37 AFP: Russia foresees two month delay for Iran nuclear station - 

Monday March 12, 03:00 PM

MOSCOW (AFP) - The launch of Iran's first nuclear power station, 
scheduled for September, will likely be delayed two months, a 
spokeswoman for Russian contractor Atomstroiexport told AFP 
Monday.

"Insufficient financing of the project means that there is a real 
delay in the timetable. The delay will probably be two months, 
according to experts," spokeswoman Irina Yesipova said by 
telephone.

Russia is close to completing Iran's first nuclear power station 
in the southern city of Bushehr.

Under current terms the first nuclear fuel was due to be delivered
from Russia in March, with the plant's reactor being fired up in
September.

Yesipova indicated that delivery of fuel was also likely to be later
than planned. "The fuel must be delivered six months before the
launch."

The Bushehr station is the jewel in the crown of Iran's nuclear
ambitions.

The Islamic republic says it needs to generate more electricity, but
the United States accuses Tehran of hiding a secret military
programme and has urged Moscow to back away from the project.

News of the delay came as representatives from Atomostroiexport
arrived in Iran for negotiations aimed at resolving a squabble over
finances for Bushehr.

On Sunday, Iran complained that Russian financial problems were to
blame and expressed concern that Moscow might yield to US pressure
to halt the work. However, Russian officials blame Iran for making
late payments.

Earlier Monday, the three main Russian news agencies quoted an
unnamed source close to the authorities saying that Moscow was
losing patience with Iran.

"Most unfortunately, the Iranians are abusing our constructive
relations," the unnamed source told the state-run ITAR-TASS and RIA
Novosti news agencies, as well as the Interfax agency.

"We absolutely do not need Iran getting a nuclear bomb or the
potential to make one," the "informed source" was quoted as saying.
"We will not play any kind of anti-American games with them."

Iran has repeatedly refused to give into the key demand made by the
United Nations that it suspend uranium enrichment, a process that
the West fears could be diverted to make nuclear weapons.

The UN Security Council in December punished Iran's defiance by
imposing its first ever sanctions against Tehran and is currently
discussing a draft resolution that would step up the measures.

Russia, while keen to maintain good ties with the United States, has
traditionally had a strong economic relationship with Iran and acted
to soften the UN Security Council's measures against its nuclear
programme.

AFP
*****************************************************************
 38 IAEA: Nuclear Energy and Safety Issues on Topical Agendas

IAEA.org

Upcoming Conferences in Japan, France, and Czech Republic

Staff Report

12 March 2007

Nuclear energy´s future role for the production of electricity and
other applications is at the forefront of a number of international
conferences in April and May 2007. (Photo: D. Calma/IAEA)

Upcoming conferences and symposia in Asia and Europe are taking
close looks at prospects and plans for nuclear power, in the context
of global energy, environmental, and economic issues.
* In Japan, 16-19 April, experts are examining the status and
  prospects for nuclear applications beyond the production of
  electricity. Applications include the coupling of advanced nuclear
  power plants that feed high-temperature steam for the production
  of hydrogen, and to supply low-temperature steam for seawater
  desalination units producing potable water. The International
  Conference on Non-Electric Applications of Nuclear Power: Seawater
  Desalination, Hydrogen Production, and Other Industrial
  Applications features experts and speakers from the IAEA, Nuclear
  Energy Agency of the OECD, Japan, France, Russia, the Netherlands,
  Indonesia, Republic of Korea, and other countries.


* In France, 23-27 April, the focus is on nuclear safety and the
  important roles of Technical and Scientific Support Organizations
  (TSOs) in regulatory and related areas. The conference is the
  first one internationally to address TSOs, and provides a platform
  for further promoting and strengthening international cooperation
  in areas of nuclear and radiation safety. Participating countries
  include the United States, Canada, Germany, Sweden, India, Brazil,
  Nigeria, Spain, South Africa, Cuba, France, and Finland.


* In Prague, 3-4 May, Europe´s evolving energy scene is examined
  from the standpoint of issues facing nuclear power´s growth and
  investment. The European Nuclear Power Conference also features a
  session on nuclear fusion and the IAEA-supported ITER Project
  designed to demonstrate the scientific and technological
  feasibility of a full-scale fusion power reactor.


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:
*****************************************************************
 39 Vermont Guardian: Report: State radiation measurements at VY inaccurate

By Shay Totten | Vermont Guardian

Posted March 12, 2007

BURLINGTON &mdash; For more than 30 years, the state Health
Department has over-estimated the public levels of radiation doses
from the Vermont Yankee nuclear power station, according to a new
report.

State officials said the independent study from Oak Ridge Associate
Universities (ORAU) resolves a years-long dispute between the state
and Vermont Yankee over how to best measure radiation exposure to
the public from the Vernon plant.

ORAU began the study in late 2005. The state chose the contractor
and managed the contract but Entergy &mdash; which owns VY &mdash;
paid for the study. The cost of the study was approximately
$156,000, health department officials said.

The report found that Vermont Yankee&rsquo;s (VY) methods were more
accurate than those used by the state.

VY officials were pleased with the report&rsquo;s findings, although
they had not yet fully completed reading it.

&ldquo;It does confirm that the method we&rsquo;ve been using here
is the best approach moving forward,&rdquo; said Rob Williams, a VY
spokesman. &ldquo;We&rsquo;ve had good cooperation amongst the
parties involved here and we look forward to continuing to work with
them. I think the changes will result in a better, more scientific,
mean of measuring.&rdquo;

Ray Shadis, a consultant for the New England Coalition, an
anti-nuclear group that is challenging Entergy&rsquo;s request to
extend its operating license beyond 2012, said the report&rsquo;s
findings should be a surprise, given the source.



ORAU has long been the hub of nuclear technology research for the
private sector and the military, Shadis notes.

&ldquo;If you had gone to Jimmy the Greek to take bets on how this
report would come out, it would have been 99 to 1 that it would have
come out on the side that it did come out,&rdquo; said Shadis.
&ldquo;When is the last time we have seen something like this come
before us where it has been conservative and protective of public
health? And, when is the last time we&rsquo;ve upped these standards?

ORAU reviewed more than 35 years of Vermont Yankee site boundary
dose measurements and regulatory compliance reports. The report
recommended changes to the way the Health Department and VY measure
and interpret site boundary doses.

Bill Irwin, the state&rsquo;s radiological chief, said the state is
unlikely to change the dose limits from its more restrictive level
to those adopted by other states that are more favorable to power
plant owners.

&ldquo;The report suggests that we consider adopting limits similar
to other states, but that&rsquo;s not in our interest,&rdquo; said
Irwin. &ldquo;The things that may change are the way we use the
measurements we get.&rdquo;

That means not only using different ways of calculating the
background radiation, but also how the radiation levels are
extrapolated to determine what an accurate dose of radiation that
would equal.

The state monitors the plant 24 hours a day using 70
thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs). As a result of the report, it
will now incorporate &ldquo;main steam line&rdquo; radiation
measurements as part of its overall assessment of radiation dose at
the site boundary. TLDs will continue to be used, but as part of a
wider array of dose determination methods.

The measurement methodology used by state was less accurate, the
report concluded, because it did not account for background
radiation adequately &mdash; this led to inaccurate estimates of
radiation dose from the plant. Previous assessments, the report
states, also did not accurately account for differences between what
people might be exposed to and what people actually absorb as dose.

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission limits radiation doses for the
general public to 100 millirem per year. The limit set by the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency is 25 millirem per year from
radioactivity in water, air and soil. The state limits are more
restrictive &ndash; 20 millirem per year.

According to state standards, VY exceeded the maximum fence line
radiation exposure of 20 millirems annually. A rem is a unit of
ionizing radiation equal to the amount that produces the same damage
to humans as one roentgen of high-voltage x-rays. A millirem is
one-thousandth of a rem. Twenty millirems is roughly the same dosage
as a dental x-ray.

According to state regulations, one unit of absorbed radiation
equals one unit of radiation dose. However, Vermont Yankee uses an
NRC- approved conversion factor that assumes that one unit of
absorbed radiation equals 71 percent of a unit of radiation dose.

In the past nine years, the state has found that VY exceeded the
state&rsquo;s 20-millirem limit three times: 1998 (20.2), 2000
(23.8), and 2004 (24.9).

In the department&rsquo;s release announcing the report&rsquo;s
findings, it issued this caveat: &ldquo;At no time has the dosage
from the Vermont Yankee plant posed a measurable risk to public
health.&rdquo;

Shadis said that statement is pure poppycock.

&ldquo;That&rsquo;s just wrong, unless its meant to be one of those
sophisticated lies where you need to then further define
&lsquo;measurable,&rsquo;&rdquo; said Shadis.

Shadis said a recent report from the National Academy of Sciences
found there is no threshold where the biological effects of ionizing
radiation are risk-free. And, the EPA has said that even a
25-millirem standard does not adequately protect human health.

The ORAU study, Shadis added, shows why VY has fought the state
tooth and nail on its radiation measurement program.

&ldquo;Radiation protection equals expense,&rdquo; said Shadis.
&ldquo;Doctors offices put lead in the walls of their clinics so
people in the waiting room don&rsquo;t get dosed by the X-ray
machine, and it would cost money to put extra shielding in at VY to
protect the public.&rdquo;

Northern Vermont: 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/032007/VYFenceLine.shtml
*****************************************************************
 40 SPIEGEL: Interview With the EU's Environment Commissioner

: 'I Don't Understand Why Bush Refuses to Take The Obvious Steps' 
- International - SPIEGEL ONLINE - News

March 12, 2007

The European Union's Commissioner for the Environment Stavros 
Dimas made headlines recently with his decision to swap his 
Mercedes for a Japanese hybrid. DER SPIEGEL spoke with him about 
the climate deal reached at last week's EU summit, the US's 
contribution to global warming, and why the Germans don't make 
environmentally friendly cars.

AP

European Union Commissioner for the Environment Stavros Dimas made
headlines recently when he announced he was going to use a Japanese
hybrid for his work.

SPIEGEL: Mr. Dimas, at the Brussels summit the Europeans agreed, by
the skin of their teeth, to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases and
focus more on renewable energy sources. The participants gave
themselves a hearty pat on the pack for this achievement. Has the
world's climate now been saved?

Dimas: We have completed important steps on the road to limiting
global warming as much as possible. But of course it will take many
other measures as well.

SPIEGEL: Environmental groups are calling it window dressing.

Dimas: It's obvious that what we have done just now won't be enough.
But let's take a look at the facts. We intend to satisfy 10 percent
of our fuel consumption needs from renewable raw materials in the
future. We are placing our bets on renewable energy sources, and we
have committed to a 20 percent reduction (relative to 1990 levels)
in greenhouse gas emissions by 2020. If we compare this to what
seemed possible two years ago, these are revolutionary advances...

SPIEGEL: ... that exist only on paper so far. The EU has made many
resolutions in the past that have been quickly forgotten.

Dimas: No-one will be able to ignore these binding resolutions that
easily. We will certainly encounter setbacks along the way, but the
train is already in motion, and all 27 EU countries are on board.
The EU Commission will now begin directly transforming the
agreements into law.

SPIEGEL: Many elements of the climate package that the EU heads of
state have now approved are questionable in substance and
controversial when it comes to implementation. For example, it still
remains completely unclear, now that the summit has ended, exactly
which countries are to save how much carbon dioxide.

FROM THE MAGAZINE


Find out how you can reprint this DER SPIEGEL article in your
publication.


Dimas: Unfortunately that's the way it sometimes goes in the EU.
Everyone wants action. But when it comes down to it, implementation
is a problem for some. That's when it becomes clear that there is
also a lot of hypocrisy. But I am aware of this, and yet I remain
convinced that in the foreseeable future we will come to agreement
over the issues that are currently unresolved. The pressures of
reality force us to act. If we do not do something about climate
change today our children will pay the price in the future.

SPIEGEL: Experts predict that the EU will not even attain the meager
targets of the 1997 Kyoto protocol.

Dimas: Some member states, like Germany, will make it. Others will
not. Those are the ones we have to work on. More has to be done, and
this is where I place a great deal of faith in the presiding
president of the European Council, German Chancellor Angela Merkel.

SPIEGEL: Do you and the chancellor also agree that one shouldn't be
too hasty about abandoning nuclear energy?

Dimas: The EU Commission does not give recommendations as to how
each of the 27 member states should structure its energy supply.
Some countries, like France, derive up to 80 percent of their
electricity from nuclear power plants. Finland is in the process of
building a new one. Sweden and Germany plan to phase out their
nuclear power plants, and others don't have any at all.

SPIEGEL: But EU Energy Commissioner Andris Piebalgs says that
adequate climate protection cannot be achieved without nuclear
energy.

Dimas: I disagree. We cannot ignore nuclear energy, but neither is
it a magical solution to all of our problems.

SPIEGEL: The proponents of nuclear power plants say that they
produce cheap electricity without emitting any greenhouse gases. Is
this incorrect?

Dimas: Yes, because it isn't the whole story. First of all, the
disposal of radioactive waste remains an unresolved issue. Second,
the eventual demolition and safe removal of nuclear facilities is
not only an ecological, but also a significant economic problem.
Third, it is unclear how we can guarantee the safety of nuclear
waste over the course of many generations. Who will pay for it, and
who will manage it?

SPIEGEL: The industry has established billions in reserves
specifically for that purpose.

Dimas: It will hardly be sufficient. We are talking about centuries
in which we will have nuclear waste. Besides, nuclear energy is just
as non-renewable as oil or gas, because uranium reserves are also
limited.

SPIEGEL: What is your recommendation when it comes to the energy mix?

Dimas: The expansion of renewable forms of energy, such as biomass,
solar, wind and water, seems inevitable to me.

SPIEGEL: What about coal?

Dimas: We have been quite successful at making modern coal power
plants cleaner. Nevertheless, carbon dioxide is still a problem when
it comes to burning brown coal. The costly method of underground
sequestration, which is now being tested, can also be little more
than an interim solution. Perhaps we will discover better ways to
turn coal into electricity one day without imposing such a heavy
burden on the environment. Otherwise coal will remain a highly
problematic source of energy.

SPIEGEL: A new coal power plant goes on line almost every week in
China. Doesn't this cancel out all European efforts to protect the
climate?

Dimas: This is a big problem. But even China has now recognized the
environmental catastrophe it is headed for as a result of the
unrestrained exploitation of natural resources. You don't just smell
the air pollution in Beijing; you can actually touch it. Without
radical measures, emerging nations like China and India will be
pumping more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere in 2020 than all
current industrialized nations combined.

SPIEGEL: What role does the United States play in your scenario?


DPA

Stavros Dimas, 65, has been the European Union's Commissioner for
the Environment since 2004. Dimas was born in Athens and is a lawyer
by profession. He has also worked for the World Bank and a Wall
Street legal firm. As a member of the conservative New Democracy
party, he was elected to the Greek parliament ten times in a row
starting in 1977.


Dimas: The United States is now the country with the world's highest
emissions of carbon dioxide, and energy use continues to grow. The
effects are devastating. Because the United States did not ratify
the Kyoto Protocol, other countries like China, Brazil, Mexico and
India have been hesitant to enact urgently needed climate protection
measures.

SPIEGEL: Will this change with the next administration in Washington?

Dimas: I am certain of that. And I don't understand why the Bush
administration still refuses to take the steps that are obvious to
anyone. A more climate-neutral economy holds great promise, not just
for the environment. This is now clear to many US politicians.

SPIEGEL: But it doesn't seem to be as clear to the German automobile
industry. Otherwise it wouldn't oppose your environmental
requirements so vehemently. Is the German automobile industry behind
the times?

Dimas: No, I have great confidence in the German auto industry. The
car was invented in Germany, after all.

SPIEGEL: But filters for diesel exhaust particles were long used
primarily in French and Japanese cars. Both countries also build
some of the most environmentally friendly cars. Why?

Dimas: I also wonder where German engineers, with their tremendous
history, are when it comes to incorporating the latest in exhaust
gas filtering into vehicles. As it happens, others are making the
money in this field. It's clear that the old technology will not
survive.

SPIEGEL: Perhaps carmakers will continue to achieve nice little
compromises, just as they have done in the past, so that they won't
have to do too much.

Dimas: I don't think so. Things are different now, because too many
people now recognize the fatal consequences we could face if we do
not act now. For example, particulate matter from automobile exhaust
fumes claims about 300,000 lives in the EU each year, from
respiratory illnesses and their consequences. Under these
circumstances, there can be no compromises with the automobile
industry that come at the cost of health.


SPIEGEL: Is that why you are now switching to a Japanese car?

Dimas: My driver told me three months ago that we should lease a new
car for official business. Of course, the car we ordered was a
Toyota Prius with an environmentally friendly hybrid engine.

SPIEGEL: Can an EU commissioner really drive a Japanese car?

Dimas: Of course. This hybrid is at the top of the German Automobile
Club's list of the most environmentally friendly cars.

SPIEGEL: But the VW Polo BlueMotion is also on that list.

Dimas: The Polo is an excellent car, but I need a vehicle for long
journeys which, like the Prius, is also big enough to work in. But I
do wonder why there isn't a German, Italian or French hybrid that I
could drive.

Interview conducted by Sebastian Knauer, Hans-Jürgen Schlamp, and
Markus Verbeet

© SPIEGEL ONLINE 2007
*****************************************************************
 41 Herald Sun: N-giant in Canberra talks | 

March 13, 2007 12:00am


ONE of the world's biggest suppliers of nuclear power stations has
had talks with the Federal Government on "near-term opportunities".
Westinghouse Electric also said it had been approached by
Australians looking to set up nuclear power facilities.

Westinghouse spokesman Scott Shaw said his company supported the
Howard Government in the nuclear debate.

"Westinghouse recently visited Australia to discuss near-term
opportunities with the Government and regulatory authorities," Mr
Shaw said.

Westinghouse pioneered nuclear plants, building the world's first
commercial plant in the US in 1957.



© Herald and Weekly Times. All times AEDT (GMT + 10).

*****************************************************************
 42 Morning Call: Why is thyroid cancer rate up?
 
Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2007 15:31:47 -0800


<x-flowed>

 From The Morning Call
March 11, 2007


  Why is thyroid cancer rate up?

One research group thinks it knows the answer: fallout from nuclear 
power plants.
By Ann Wlazelek Of The Morning Call this year, which is about 2 percent 
of all cancer diagnoses. It's rarely fatal but in 2005 claimed the life 
of Supreme Court Justice William H. Rehnquist. The latest snapshot of n
A private research group that gained national attention three years ago 
for finding evidence of nuclear fallout in baby teeth is now linking 
power plant emissions to Pennsylvania's relatively high rate of thyroid 
cancer.

The Norristown group, the Radiation and Public Health Project Inc., 
plotted nuclear reactors on a map with counties reporting the highest 
rates of thyroid cancer and found a ''remarkable pattern.''

Three of the four nuclear plants are in or near 13 of 14 counties with 
the highest cancer rates.

''This finding raises the theory that thyroid cancer risk has been 
raised by exposure to radioactive iodine, which is routinely released as 
airborne particles from each plant,'' said Joe Mangano, the group's 
executive director.

Mangano, who holds a master's degree in public health and has had 
previous reports published in medical journals, brought his findings to 
The Morning Call because Lehigh County's average rate of thyroid cancer 
for 1997 through 2003 exceeded the state's. Pennsylvania's rate at 9.89 
per 100,000 population is the highest in the country, he said, and 
Lehigh County's rate is 16.4 per 100,000.

His theory deserves further study, Mangano said, because radiation is 
the cancer's primary risk factor and the state has a lot of reactors.

Cancer experts puzzled

Cancer experts don't know why the rates vary geographically, why 
Pennsylvania's rate of thyroid cancer, for example, is twice that of 
North Carolina's, which has the lowest rate in the country. But they are 
reluctant to blame emissions.

''There are excruciatingly low levels of radiation coming from power 
plants,'' said Gene Weinberg, an epidemiologist with the Pennsylvania 
Department of Health's cancer control program. He said the average 
person is exposed to about 150 to 300 millirems a year, but only about 
one ten-thousandth of that comes from nuclear plants. People are exposed 
to radiation every day from the soil, sun and electrical devices such as 
TVs and computers.

PPL, the principal owner of the Susquehanna nuclear power plant in 
Luzerne County, was unaware of Mangano's report but said an independent 
study conducted by the American Academy of Natural Sciences found ''no 
known environmental or human health impact'' from the reactor's 
radioactive releases. The study was conducted over 25 years and was 
published in a health physics publication last year, said plant 
spokesman Lou Ramos.

''We know of no studies that show increased cancer around nuclear 
plants,'' he said.

Mangano said his theory that emissions contribute to thyroid cancer is 
plausible because the reactors have been operating for years and 
radiation exposure is cumulative. He would like the help of physicians 
in continuing the research for publication.

Low-level exposures have not been proven to heighten the risk of thyroid 
cancer, according to the American Cancer Society. However, several 
studies have linked radioactive fallout from nuclear weapons and power 
plant accidents, such as Chernobyl, to a higher risk.

Radiation exposure is chief risk

''There are not that many well-known risk factors,'' said Dr. Elaine 
Ron, a thyroid expert at the National Cancer Institute. ''The main one 
is [a history of] radiation exposure in childhood.''

Ron referred to a risk in the 1950s, when doctors sometimes used 
radiation to treat a child's acne, scalp fungus infections, enlarged 
thymus gland or to shrink tonsils and adenoids.

Those treatments are no longer performed, and researchers believe the 
increase in thyroid cancer from such exposures passed by the late 1980s.

But the number of new thyroid cancers diagnosed continue to rise 
nationwide and at an accelerated pace.

''We've been seeing a steady ratcheting-up,'' said Brenda Edwards, a 
statistician with the National Cancer Institute. The annual rate 
increase doubled from 2 percent in the 1980s to 4.6 percent in the 1990s 
and about 9 percent today, she said.

''Is there something there we are all being exposed to or is the 
increase amplified because of surveillance?'' Edwards asked.

Conventional wisdom, she said, points to more Americans being probed, 
screened and scanned, leading to more diagnoses.

Better testing

Dr. Rena Sellin, a professor and thyroid cancer expert at the M.D. 
Anderson Cancer Center in Texas, said Americans are benefitting from 
more sensitive and sophisticated diagnostic equipment than in previous 
decades. By undergoing MRIs, CT scans, PET scans and ultrasound 
screenings, she said, many patients are discovering thyroid conditions.

Most are accidental or incidental findings, Sellin said, as in church 
members getting a free screening of their carotid (neck) arteries and 
being told they have a nodule on their thyroid gland.

AMA findings

A May 10 article in the journal of the American Medical Association came 
to the same conclusion: that the increasing incidence of thyroid cancer 
is ''predominantly due to the increased detection of small–cancers.''

The fact that the cancers are being found at a small or early stage, 
researchers say, lends itself to the theory that the caseload may not be 
increasing as much as are doctors diagnosing the disease.

Mangano contends the geographic variances suggest more than good detection.

''Are doctors in Pennsylvania twice as good at detecting than in North 
Carolina?'' he asked.

Maybe, said the state cancer program's Weinberg. Pennsylvania has more 
medical schools than most other states, he said.

But, he continued, ''It's an interesting cancer. When you see changes in 
such a short period it's generally an indication that something out 
there has changed as well. It lends one to think it's something more 
universal, not just a power plant here or a power plant there.''

An uncommon cancer

Although the fastest-rising cancer in the country, thyroid cancer 
continues to be a largely uncommon and slow-growing cancer. The American 
Cancer Society estimates it will strike 33,550 Americans – mostly women 
– A noticeable change

Logical explanation?

Mangano believes radioactive particles carried downwind of the nuclear 
plants is a logical explanation for the increase. People inhale or 
ingest the fallout by drinking water from water supplies or milk from 
cows in the vicinity, he said.

Although emitted at low levels, radiation can have a cumulative effect.

Pennsylvania experienced the Three Mile Island nuclear accident in 1979 
and has five plants with nine out of 12 reactors still functioning, he 
said.Besides Three Mile Island in Dauphin County and Susquehanna in 
Luzerne, those plants include Limerick in Montgomery, Peach Bottom in 
York and Beaver Valley in Beaver counties.

Mangano said his group is not anti-nuclear but is composed of 
physicists, nurses and researchers interested in radiation's impact on 
health. The staff has published other studies on thyroid cancer and 
Chernobyl but is probably best known for a 10-year study completed 
recently in which some 5,000 baby teeth were tested for a chemical 
produced by nuclear power plants. The study found the highest amounts in 
the teeth of children who lived closest to the reactors. It received 
widespread media attention, with articles in The New York Times, USA 
Today and on network news channels, but little attention from the 
scientific establishment.

Mangano said the fact that others in public health are not interested or 
critical of his work hits him like ''cold water splashed in my face.''

''We're looking for answers,'' he said. ''There's a terrible cancer 
epidemic in this country.''

ann.wlazelek@mcall.com <mailto:ann.wlazelek@mcall.com>

610-820-6745
Copyright © 2007, The Morning Call <http://www.mcall.com/>

A private research group that gained national attention three 
years ago for finding evidence of nuclear fallout in baby teeth 
is now linking power plant emissions to Pennsylvania's relatively 
high rate of thyroid cancer.

The Norristown group, the 
Radiation and Public Health Project Inc., plotted nuclear 
reactors on a map with counties reporting the highest rates of 
thyroid cancer and found a ''remarkable pattern.''

Three of the four nuclear plants are in or near 13 of 14 coun 
ties with the highest cancer rates.

''This finding raises the theory that thyroid cancer risk has 
been raised by exposure to radioactive iodine, which is routinely 
released as airborne particles from each plant,'' said Joe 
Mangano, the group's executive director.

Mangano, who holds a master's degree in public health and has had 
previous reports published in medical journals, brought his 
findings to The Morning Call because Lehigh County's average rate 
of thyroid cancer for 1997 through 2003 ex ceeded the state's. 
Pennsylvania's rate at 9.89 per 100,000 population is the highest 
in the country, he said, and Lehigh County's rate is 16.4 per 
100,000.

His theory deserves further study, Mangano said, because 
radiation is the cancer's primary risk factor and the state has a 
lot of reactors.

Cancer experts puzzled

Cancer experts don't know why the rates vary geographically, why 
Pennsylvania's rate of thyroid cancer, for example, is twice that 
of North Carolina's, which has the lowes t rate in the country. 
But they are reluctant to blame emissions.

''There are excruciatingly low levels of radiation coming from 
power plants,'' said Gene Weinberg, an epidemiologist with the 
Pennsylvania Department of Health's cancer control program. He 
said the average person is exposed to about 150 to 300 millirems 
a year, but only about one ten-thousandth of that comes from 
nuclear plants. People are exposed to radiation every day from 
the soil, sun and electrical devices such as TVs and computer s.

PPL, the principal owner of the Susquehanna nuclear power plant 
in Luzerne County, was unaware of Mangano's report but said an 
independent study conducted by the American Academy of Natural 
Sciences found ''no known environmental or human health impact'' 
from the reactor's radioactive releases. The study was conducted 
over 25 years and was published in a health physics publication 
last year, said plant spokesman Lou Ramos.

''We know of no studies that show increased cancer around nuclear 
pl ants,'' he said.

Mangano said his theory that emissions contribute to thyroid 
cancer is plausible because the reactors have been operating for 
years and radiation exposure is cumulative. He would like the 
help of physicians in continuing the research for publication.

Low-level exposures have not been proven to heighten the risk of 
thyroid cancer, according to the American Cancer Society. 
However, several studies have linked radioactive fallout from 
nuclear weapons and power plant accidents, su ch as Chernobyl, to 
a higher risk.

Radiation exposure is chief risk

''There are not that many well-known risk factors,'' said Dr. 
Elaine Ron, a thyroid expert at the National Cancer Institute. 
''The main one is [a history of] radiation exposure in 
childhood.''

Ron referred to a risk in the 1950s, when doctors sometimes used 
radiation to treat a child's acne, scalp fungus infections, 
enlarged thymus gland or to shrink tonsils and adenoids.

Those treatments are no longer performed, and researchers believe 
the increase in thyroid cancer from such exposures passed by the 
late 1980s.

But the number of new thyroid cancers diagnosed continue to rise 
nationwide and at an accelerated pace.

''We've been seeing a steady ratcheting-up,'' said Brenda 
Edwards, a statistician with the National Cancer Institute. The 
annual rate increase doubled from 2 percent in the 1980s to 4.6 
percent in the 1990s and about 9 percent today, she said.

''Is there something there we are all bei ng exposed to or is the 
increase amplified because of surveillance?'' Edwards asked. 

Conventional wisdom, she said, points to more Americans being 
probed, screened and scanned, leading to more diagnoses.

Better testing



Dr. Rena Sellin, a professor and thyroid cancer expert at the 
M.D. Anderson Cancer Center in Texas, said Americans are 
benefitting from more sensitive and sophisticated diagnostic 
equipment than in previous decades. By undergoing MRIs, CT scans, 
PET scans and ultrasound screenings, she said, many patients are 
discovering thyroid conditions.Most are accidental or incidental 
findings, Sellin said, as in church members getting a free 
screening of their carotid (neck) arteries and being told they 
have a nodule on their thyroid gland.

AMA findings

A May 10 article in the journal of the American Medical 
Association came to the same conclusion: that the increasing 
incidence of thyroid cancer is ''predominantly due to the 
increased detection of small–cancers. ''

The fact that the cancers arre being found at a small or early 
stage, researchers say, lends itself to the theory that the 
caseload may not be increasing as much as are doctors diagnosing 
the disease.

Mangano contends the geographic variances suggest more than good 
detection.

''Are doctors in Pennsylvania twice as good at detecting than in 
North Carolina?'' he asked.

Maybe, said the state cancer program's Weinberg. Pennsylvania has 
more medical schools than most other states, he said.

But, he continued, ''It's an interesting cancer. When you see 
changes in such a short period it's generally an indication that 
something out there has changed as well. It lends one to think 
it's something more universal, not just a power plant here or a 
power plant there.''

An uncommon cancer

Although the fastest-rising cancer in the country, thyroid cancer 
continues to be a largely uncommon and slow-growing cancer. The 
American Cancer Society estimates it will strike 33,550 Am 
ericans – mostly women – A noticeable change

Logical expexplanation?

Mangano believes radioactive particles carried downwind of the 
nuclear plants is a logical explanation for the increase. People 
inhale or ingest the fallout by drinking water from water 
supplies or milk from cows in the vicinity, he said.

Although emitted at low levels, radiation can have a cumulative 
effect.

Pennsylvania experienced the Three Mile Island nuclear accident 
in 1979 and has five plants with nine ou t of 12 reactors still 
functioning, he said.Besides Three Mile Island in Dauphin County 
and Susquehanna in Luzerne, those plants include Limerick in 
Montgomery, Peach Bottom in York and Beaver Valley in Beaver 
counties.

Mangano said his group is not anti-nuclear but is composed of 
physicists, nurses and researchers interested in radiation's 
impact on health. The staff has published other studies on 
thyroid cancer and Chernobyl but is probably best known for a 
10-year study completed recently in which some 5,000 baby teeth 
were tested for a chemical produced by nuclear power plants. The 
study found the highest amounts in the teeth of children who 
lived closest to the reactors. It received widespread media 
attention, with articles in The New York Times, USA Today and on 
network news channels, but little attention from the scientific 
establishment.

Mangano said the fact that others in public health are not 
interested or critical of his work hits him like ''cold water 
splashed in my face.''

' 'We're looking for answers,'' he said. ''There's a terrible 
cancer epidemic in this country.''

***************************************************************** 
43 Please sign radiation standards letter--if you haven't already
 
Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2007 15:22:02 -0800


<x-flowed>


-------- Original Message --------
Subject: 	Please sign radiation standards letter--if you haven't already
Date: 	Mon, 12 Mar 2007 16:48:34 -0400
From: 	Michael Mariotte <nirsnet@nirs.org>
To: 	<rogerh@energy-net.org>



*ALERT REMINDER*

* *

*Please sign radiation standards letter if you haven’t already!*

See the original action alert and letter at 
http://www.nirs.org/alerts/02-21-2007/1

*Deadline is March 14, 2007*

*Demand radiation standards that follow the precautionary principle*

A radiation exposure-setting body, the International Commission on 
Radiological Protection (ICRP), is poised to release their report, 
/Recommendations,/ to allow more and higher radiation exposures to 
people, animals and the environment. ICRP says it is accepting comments 
on their document /Draft ICRP Recommendations,/ but they are not issuing 
an official comment period. Further, /Recommendations/ is missing its 
abstract, editorial and summary. Since these are the portions that many 
of the public and press will read, it should go without saying they need 
to be included for comment /before/ this document is approved and 
finalized.

To sign on, send your name, organization (if one), city, state and 
country (if outside the U.S, to:

Cindy Folkers

Nuclear Information and Resource Service

cindyf@nirs.org <mailto:cindyf@nirs.org>

Thanks your support!

___________________________________________________________

This is the NIRS E-Mail Alert list. You are on this list because you 
signed up on our website, at a NIRS table at a concert or other event, 
on a petition, or directly to NIRS. Your name and address are never 
sold, rented, or traded with anyone for any reason.

For address changes or to unsubscribe, just send an e-mail to 
nirsnet@nirs.org. If you have friends or colleagues who would like to be 
on this list, have them send a note to nirsnet@nirs.org 
<mailto:nirsnet@nirs.org>

You can support Nuclear Information and Resource Service (NIRS) every 
time you search on the internet. Just use http://www.goodsearch.com 
<http://www.goodsearch.com/>. When it asks you “who do you goodsearch 
for” type in “nuclear” and you’ll see our name pop up. Then, every time 
you use goodsearch, you’ll be donating to NIRS! It’s a painless way to 
support our work to end nuclear power and build a safe, clean, 
sustainable energy future.

</x-flowed>
*****************************************************************
 44 NRC: NRC Schedules Public Meeting March 21 on Honeywell Uranium 
Processing Plant Performance

News Release - 2007-II-003 - 

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

NRC SCHEDULES PUBLIC MEETING MARCH 21

Nuclear Regulatory Commission officials will meet with management 
of the Honeywell Specialty Chemicals company on Wednesday, March 
21, to discuss details of a recent NRC review of safety 
performance at the company&rsquo;s uranium processing plant near 
Metropolis, Il.

     The meeting will begin at 7:00 p.m. (CDT) in the Metropolis 
Community Center, located at 516 Superman Square. The meeting is 
open to the public for observation, and NRC personnel will be 
available to answer questions from interested observers after the 
business portion of the meeting but before it is adjourned.

 NRC officials said in a Feb. 23 report to the company that 
Honeywell safely conducted licensed activities during the review 
period from Dec.10, 2005, to Dec. 22, 2006.

      However, the NRC will continue heightened oversight of the 
plant&rsquo;s licensed operations, with special emphasis 
primarily in the areas of plant operations and management 
organization and controls, The NRC will also continue close 
scrutiny of the plant&rsquo;s corrective action program and 
efforts to bring about a safety culture with a disciplined 
approach to development of, and adherence to, plant procedures. 
In addition, the agency will continue to closely monitor the 
plant&rsquo;s implementation of its long-term improvement plan.

  Interested parties may obtain a copy of the Feb. 23 NRC report 
by contacting the NRC Public Document Room toll free in 
Washington, D. C. at 1-800-397-4209, or from the NRC internet web 
site at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html

NRC news releases are available through a free list server 
subscription at the following Web address: 
http://www.nrc.gov/public-involve/listserver.html. The NRC Home 
Page at www.nrc.gov also offers a Subscribe to News link in the 
News & Information menu. E-mail notifications are sent to 
subscribers when news releases are posted to NRC's Web Site.


Monday, March 12, 2007
*****************************************************************
 45 IndyStar.com: Nuclear detectors being fine-tuned 

  March 11, 2007

  By Beverley Lumpkin

  Associated Press

  WASHINGTON -- At a busy border crossing, a truck passing 
through a radiation scanner sets off an alarm. It could be a 
nuclear device, but it's far more likely to be kitty litter, 
ceramic tile or a load of bananas.

  The machines, first installed after the Sept. 11, 2001, 
terrorist attacks, measure gamma radiation but cannot distinguish 
between low levels of gamma rays that occur naturally in innocent 
materials and the makings for nuclear weapons.

  So the inspectors must pull the truck aside for an inspection 
with a hand-held scanner, which can lead to backups that anger 
drivers and slow commerce.

  That's the dilemma of protecting the United States from nuclear 
terrorism: a trade-off among accuracy, inconvenience and the 
expense to taxpayers.

  About 600 scanners have been installed at ports and border 
crossings around the country.

  Government officials are working with several companies to 
develop new nuclear detectors that won't waste time and that can 
actually differentiate the potassium in a banana from that in 
highly enriched uranium.

  Tests being conducted in Nevada this month will determine 
whether the higher accuracy the makers claim of the new machines 
is enough to justify their higher cost: about $377,000 each, more 
than six times the cost of the older models.

  This spring, the new machines will undergo a real-world test on 
the New York waterfront so Customs officers can judge whether 
they're an improvement.

  Some investigators question whether cutting the time wasted by 
false alarms might actually increase the deadly possibility of 
nuclear material slipping by an inspector.

  Copyright 2007 IndyStar.com. All rights reserved
*****************************************************************
 46 SA: The Citizen: Nuke workers to take legal action

12 p nuke workers

  Tuesday March 13/
  
By TSHIFHIWA SHONISANI

JOHANNESBURG &#x2013; Former employees of the Phelindaba nuclear
plant decided yesterday to take the company to court after their
negotiations to get compensations for their ill workers did not
materialise.

About nine former employees have been diagnosed with leukaemia after
they were allegedly exposed to the radiation at the plant.

The decision to take legal action was made during their meeting at
Makhaza sports ground in Atteridgeville, west of Pretoria.

Former employees&#x2019; representative Mashile Phalane said the
Legal Resources Centre was busy finalising their papers.

&#x201C;We hope the court will be able to help solve the ongoing
battle started a few years ago.

&#x201C;The company does not want former employees to take private
medical consultation but wants them to consult with their
staff,&#x201D; Phalane said.

He said the company also wants to deal with cases individually and
not with the employees&#x2019; organisations.

&#x201C;We will continue to fight until our demands are met,&#x201D;
said Phalane.

tshifhiwas@citizen.co.za

 Last updated 
 12/03/2007 15:34:09 
  
© 2004 The Citizen
*****************************************************************
 47 FR NRC: Honolulu FONSI 

Doc E7-4415

[Federal Register: March 12, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 47)] 
[Notices] [Page 11060-11061] From the Federal Register Online via 
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr12mr07-137]                         


NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket No. 030-36585]

 
Issuance of Environmental Assessment and Finding of No 
Significant Impact to Byproduct Materials License 53-27775-01 for 
Covance Clinical Research Unit, Inc., Honolulu, HI

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

ACTION: Issuance of environmental assessment and finding of no 
significant impact for license amendment.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rachel S. Browder, M.S., Health 
Physicist, Nuclear Materials Licensing Branch, Division of 
Nuclear Materials Safety, Region IV, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 
Commission, Arlington, Texas 76011. Telephone: (817) 276-6552; 
fax number: (817) 860-8188; or by e-mail: rsb3@nrc.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Introduction

    The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is considering 
the issuance of an amendment to NRC Byproduct Materials License 
No. 53- 27775-01, which was originally issued on July 13, 2004, 
pursuant to 10 CFR part 30. This license is held by Covance 
Clinical Research Unit, Inc., (Licensee), and authorizes the 
possession and use of carbon-14 in pre-packaged capsules at the 
Licensee's laboratory located at 401 Kamakee Street, in Honolulu, 
Hawaii (the facility), a commercial area of Honolulu. The 
facility in which all licensed radioactive materials were kept 
and used is a room approximately 7' x 12.5' with a ceiling height 
of 8.5', and contains a sink and ventilation hood. By letter 
dated October 10, 2006, the Licensee stated that use of carbon-14 
had been discontinued at their facility, and accordingly 
requested that the facility be released for unrestricted use, and 
that the NRC license be terminated. The NRC has prepared an 
Environmental Assessment (EA) in support of the 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 is to 
approve the Licensee's October 10, 2006, license amendment 
request to release the facility for unrestricted use and 
terminate the license. Licensed activities at the facility were 
limited to conducting research trials, in which a pre-packaged, 
pharmaceutical capsule with approximately 100 microcuries 
([mu]Ci) of tagged carbon-14 was given to each trial subject. The 
licensee conducted three separate research trials under the 
license, with the final trial being conducted in February 2006. 
Each trial consisted of approximately eight to nine subjects. 
Upon completion of each trial, the facility (where the subjects 
remained during each trial) was surveyed and documented to 
contain less than background levels of radiation. The subjects 
remained at the facility until approximately 80-90% of the 
excretion was collected. The uptake, excretion and distribution 
of the pharmaceutical in the respective subjects were observed 
and measured. The samples were collected by the licensee and 
analyzed by a liquid scintillation counter, and subsequently 
disposed of in the sanitary sewerage. The total activity of 
carbon-14 ordered by the licensee was 5,089 [mu]Ci, of which 
2,494 [mu]Ci was used during the Phase one trials. The remainder 
of the radioactive material was either returned to the sponsor or 
transferred to a licensed recipient. Based on the use of the 
radioactive materials in accordance with 10 CFR 30.36(g), the 
Licensee was not required to submit a decommissioning plan to the 
NRC since any decommissioning activities and procedures 
implemented were consistent with those approved for routine 
operations. The Need for the Proposed Action: The Licensee has 
ceased licensed activities at the facility and seeks to release 
the facility for unrestricted use and subsequent license 
termination. Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action: The 
historical review of licensed activities conducted at the 
facility documents that the activities involved the use of only 
carbon-14 as a tagged pharmaceutical in a pre- packaged capsule. 
The quantity amount in each capsule was approximately 100 [mu]Ci 
and the last use of licensed material was conducted in February 
2006. During the research trials, the Licensee disposed of the 
excretion samples into the sanitary sewerage in accordance with 
the regulatory requirements in 10 CFR 20.2003. The licensee has 
requested termination of the license because all work with 
radioactive materials at the facility have been discontinued. The 
proposed release of the licensee's facility for unrestricted use 
does not effect any environmental resource, since there are no 
remediation requirements for the facility or potential release of 
radioactive materials to the environment. The Licensee conducted 
a final status survey of the facility during August 2006. The 
final status survey report was submitted on October 10, 2006, as 
part of the license amendment request. The submitted results were 
not statistically significant from background and therefore, the 
net results did not contain any activity above background. The 
NRC allows licensees to demonstrate compliance with the 
radiological criteria for unrestricted use as specified in 10 CFR 
20.1402 by using the screening approach described in NUREG-1757, 
``Consolidated NMSS Decommissioning Guidance,'' Volume 2. The 
Licensee's results did not contain any activity above background 
and therefore were below any NRC criteria and were 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 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-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 
licensee's 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.

[[Page 11061]]

    The NRC staff finds that the proposed release of the facility 
for unrestricted use and the termination of the NRC license are 
in compliance with 10 CFR 20.1402. Based on its review, the staff 
considered the impact of any residual radioactivity in the 
laboratory 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 deny 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 release of the facility 
meets the requirements of 10 CFR 20.1402 for unrestricted use. 
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 use 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 
Contacted: NRC provided a draft of this EA to the State of Hawaii 
for review on January 22, 2006. The State of Hawaii did not 
provide any comments to the draft EA. 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 amendment and supporting documentation, are available 
electronically at the NRC's Electronic Reading Room at 
http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm.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. NRC, ``Generic Environmental Impact Statement in 
Support of Rulemaking on Radiological Criteria for License 
Termination of NRC- Licensed Nuclear Facilities,'' NUREG-1496, 
July 1997 (ML042310492, ML042320379, and ML042330385). 2. NRC, 
``Consolidated NMSS Decommissioning Guidance,'' NUREG-1757, 
Volume 1, Revision 1, September 2003 (ML053260027). 3. Title 10 
Code of Federal Regulations, Part 20, Subpart E, ``Radiological 
Criteria for License Termination.'' 4. Title 10, Code of Federal 
Regulations, Part 51, ``Environmental Protection Regulations for 
Domestic Licensing and Related Regulatory Functions.'' 5. Jacobs, 
Mark, Covance Clinical Research Unit, Inc., Decommissioning 
Report, October 10, 2006 (ML062900229). 6. Browder, Rachel S., 
Acknowledgment of Receipt of Final Status Survey, October 31, 
2006 (ML063040400). 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 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 Arlington, Texas, this 2nd day of March 2007.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. D. Blair Spitzberg, 
Chief, Fuel Cycle Decommissioning Branch, Division of Nuclear 
Materials Safety, Region IV. [FR Doc. E7-4415 Filed 3-9-07; 8:45 
am]

BILLING CODE 7590-01-P


*****************************************************************
 48 AU ABC: Govt urged to ease access to payouts for veterans affected by
nuclear tests. 

12/03/2007. ABC News Online

Veterans who say they were affected by nuclear tests 50 years ago in
South Australia and the Monte Bello Islands say the Federal
Government is making it difficult for them to access financial help
for their health costs.

A 'white card' scheme established a year ago by the Veterans Affairs
Minister, Bruce Billson, requires applicants to have been within a
certain set distance of the British nuclear tests.

Ric Johnstone from the Australian Nuclear Veterans Association says
the criteria are very strict.

"This all happened 50 years ago and people at the tests were not
running around with measuring tapes or rulers or distances to try
and work out where they were at any given time, they just tried to
make sure they weren't under the site when it went off," he said.

The Opposition's veteran affairs spokesman, Alan Griffin, says the
Government should come clean about why people are being refused the
white card.

"It's very disturbing that with a new scheme coming into place, that
so many people are applying and yet being rejected," he said.

"We've sought details from the Government regarding the operation of
this scheme because we think they need to come clean about why the
level of rejection is so high."

But Mr Billson says out of more than 1,000 applications only 103
were rejected, because they were either outside the geographical
criteria or the applicants already had other government assistance.

He says anyone who falls outside the designated area but has health
concerns can apply for assistance through a number of other avenues.

"The zones have been designed to accommodate the most generous
interpretation of where radiation contamination may have travelled,"
he said.

"This is a scientific exercise that has been peer reviewed and found
to be accurate and reflecting the actual nature of the blasts
themselves, the type of the blast and the distance the contamination
may have travelled."

*****************************************************************
 49 ABC News: Neutralizing a Nuclear Nightmare -

March 13, 2007 | Local News and Weather

Federal Agency Creates Web Site for Treating Victims of Dirty 
Bombs and Other Forms of Radioactive Terrorism

A new government Web site outlines how how health workers should 
treat victims of radiological disaster. (AP)

March 12, 2007 ? An explosion rocks a local high school. Minutes
later, casualties flood into a hospital emergency room.

Only after the first wave of wounded arrive is the hospital informed
that the explosion was a result of a dirty bomb &mdash; a weapon
designed to scatter radioactive material throughout its blast radius.


And one by one, weaknesses in the system take their toll on
emergency efforts.

Hospital administrators call their local radiation safety officer,
but he is on vacation and can't be reached.

Health workers search for but cannot locate radiation meters that
could help them determine which patients suffered the highest degree
of contamination.

Confusion builds as medical professionals wonder about the
appropriate way to deal with so many patients as radioactive
patients lay waiting for appropriate treatment, possibly
contaminating other patients and health professionals.

At the climax of the disaster, the emergency bays of the hospital
close down. The system of medical treatment grinds to a halt. All
that remains now is a slim hope that casualties and contamination
can somehow be kept to a minimum.

Fortunately, the above was just a drill &mdash; one of many
conducted in communities across the country since the 9/11 attacks.

But the scenario was frighteningly realistic. And the ways in which
the situation was mishandled exposed the weak spots in the medical
system of one county when it came to a possible radiological
disaster.

"They flubbed it terribly," says Dr. John Moulder, professor of
radiation oncology at the Medical College of Wisconsin in Milwaukee.
Moulder, who did not reveal the location of the scenario described
above, says the missteps in the response could have happened
anywhere else in the country.

It is a nightmarish scenario. But federal officials hope a new
online tool could help health professionals cope with such an
episode more effectively.

Preparing for Impending Disaster

The words "dirty bomb" have been on the lips of health and law
enforcement officials since the terrorist attacks of 2001. But even
now, a surefire solution for dealing with such a catastrophe has
been elusive.
Moulder was part of the team that developed a new resource - a 
Web site conceived by the U.S. Department of Health and Human 
Services - that provides a readily accessible plan of action.

"The need for this resource was first discussed within a couple 
of months of 9/11," Moulder says. "It has taken this long to 
develop because it is a federal document."

    * Related: Ask Dr. Tim Tell Your Story | More to say? SEND A 
VIDEO


The need for such a resource is clear, he says.

"Most medical professionals do not know how to deal with 
radiation injuries," Moulder says. "And since they will probably 
never see one, they have little incentive to spend days learning 
the material."

Other health experts in the field of radiation treatment say the 
Web site, which includes detailed guidelines for triage and 
treatment of patients, is a welcome resource.

"I must admit I am very impressed by this Web site," says Dr. 
Jack Little, professor of radiobiology at the Harvard School of 
Public Health.

"In the best of all possible worlds, one would never need to 
consult it. However, having it there and widely available on the 
Internet is, to my mind, a great service."

But before the algorithms and guidelines of the site can be 
applied, health professionals must first be familiar with the 
site. If they are not, the Web site may not be the first stop for 
useful information.

Web Site May Frighten Public

But while the Web site may represent a boon for health workers, 
for the public, it may give a terrifying peek into the difficult 
decisions that would have to be made in the event of a 
radioactive disaster.

The site is laced with euphemisms. "Expectant" patients are those 
"who are seriously injured and in whom survivability is poor &"

Recommended treatment: "Provide comfort care."

Numerous flowcharts branch downward into frightening conclusions. 
Treatment of survivors. Management of the deceased.

Follow the link of the latter possibility, and receive this 
guidance: "If an autopsy is necessary, refrigerate the decedent 
and defer the procedure until a health physicist can assist in 
planning."

For this reason, Moulder says, the site may be best left to 
health professionals.

"Scattered within the site is stuff at the lay consumer level, 
but most of the resources in there assume some knowledge of 
medicine," he says.

    * Related: Ask Dr. Tim Tell Your Story | More to say? SEND A 
VIDEO


Other health experts agree. "I am not sure it is meant for lay 
people. It is pretty specialized and detailed," says Dr. Ziad 
Kazzi, medical toxicologist at the University of Alabama 
department of emergency medicine in Birmingham.

"Radiation is not user-friendly, in general," he adds.

Bobby Scott, senior scientist at the Lovelace Respiratory 
Research Institute in Albuquerque, N.M., says public worries at 
the idea of measures that would have to be taken after such an 
event are to be expected.

"The very thought of having to prepare for the possibility of a 
nuclear- or radiological-weapon-associated mass casualty event in 
the U.S. is likely to frighten many members of the public," he 
says.

But he adds that certain features of the site are not likely to 
leave lay readers with a feeling of warm reassurance.

"The public may also find somewhat disconcerting the disclaimer 
statement 'Neither the U.S. government nor any agency thereof, 
nor any of their employees, make any warranty, express or 
implied, or assumes any legal responsibility for the accuracy, 
completeness, or usefulness of any information disclosed,'" Scott 
says.

Are We Prepared?

Moulder says the Web site is a step in the right direction, but 
he believes there is still a long way to go before health workers 
and the government are fully prepared for the unthinkable.

"It's better than anything else we've had before, but I don't 
think it's good enough yet," he says. "We are not currently 
equipped to deal with radiation mass casualties.

"Let's hope it's always scenarios and never the real thing."

To visit the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services' 
Radiation Event Medical Management site, click here. 


Copyright © 2007 ABCNews Internet Ventures



*****************************************************************
 50 [NukeNet] Enron prosecutor takes on Navajo uranium cleanup
 
Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2007 15:34:27 -0800


<x-flowed>

  http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/asection/la-na-navajo25feb25,1,3354149.story?coll=la-news-a_section


  Enron prosecutor takes on Navajo uranium cleanup

The tribe hires John C. Hueston to press the U.S. to remove toxic 
material from its land.
By Judy Pasternak, Times Staff Writer
February 25, 2007

The Southern California lawyer who successfully prosecuted top Enron 
executives has been hired by the Navajo tribal government to seek a full 
cleanup of the old uranium mines contaminating the country's largest 
reservation.

John C. Hueston, who gained fame for his questioning of Enron founder 
Kenneth L. Lay, contacted the tribe in November after reading articles 
in The Times about the poisoning of the Navajo homeland as the 
government mined uranium for use in nuclear weapons. The reports 
detailed how residents had been exposed to radiation and toxic heavy 
metals in their air, water, soil and even the walls and floors of their 
homes.

The tribe retained the former federal prosecutor Thursday to coordinate 
an effort to finish the cleanup and eventually to help Navajos made ill 
by exposure. Hueston, whose wife is Navajo, recently returned to private 
practice at Irell & Manella, which is based in Los Angeles and Newport 
Beach.

"There's a sense of urgency now, of no more excuses," Hueston said, 
pledging to work toward "a historic settlement and, if necessary, court 
action." He said he would try to persuade the U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency to document the remaining hazards, and the uranium 
industry to finance repair of that damage.

The tribe also wants to find permanent remedies for hundreds of 
reclaimed mines that are once more radioactive because of erosion.

More than 1,000 old uranium mines and four abandoned processing mills 
are scattered across the Navajo Nation, which spans parts of Arizona, 
New Mexico and Utah. From 1944 to 1986, 3.9 million tons of uranium ore 
were extracted by private companies from the region.

As the Cold War threat diminished and the boom slowed, federal 
inspectors let the companies leave without sealing mine portals, filling 
in pits or removing waste. The Navajos' subsequent pleas for help 
prompted government surveys showing dangerous levels of uranium and 
other toxics, but little was done about it.

"We hope to be the moving force this time," said Navajo Atty. Gen. Louis 
Denetsosie. "We can't wait for them to do it for us."

EPA representatives are to meet in March with Hueston and tribal attorneys.

The federal agency has said it didn't have the funds to address the 
problems. Hueston said if the EPA couldn't find the funds, he would ask 
Congress for help. He said he would also press uranium companies to 
contribute to "a permanent and effective cleanup."

------------------------------------------------------------------------
/judy.pasternak@latimes.com/


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
"He who is not angry when there is just cause for anger is immoral. Why? 
Because anger looks to the good of justice. And if you can live amid 
injustice without anger, you are immoral as well as unjust." Aquinas

"It is vital that our state understand that once PG&E and SCE are no 
longer generating electricity from Diablo Canyon and San Onofre, 
high-level radioactive waste will be left on our coast vulnerable to 
attack. No longer will it be a matter of 'We need the power so the risk 
is worth it.' The utility - the jobs, property taxes and donations to 
the community will be gone. Only the risk will remain for our children 
and grandchildren." - Rochelle Becker, Alliance for Nuclear Responsibility

Molly Johnson 6290 Hawk Ridge Place San Miguel, CA 93451


NukeNet Anti-Nuclear Network (nukenet@energyjustice.net)



</x-flowed>
*****************************************************************
 51 Tucson Citizen: No room at the inn for Tucson nuclear convention |
www.tucsoncitizen.com ®

Published: 03.12.2007

Waste Management Symposium leaving for lack of downtown hotel rooms

TEYA VITU

Downtown now has its poster child for the lack of high-quality
hotels and restaurants there in the departure of the biggest
money-generating conference for the Tucson Convention Center.

The Waste Management Symposium, which wrapped up its most recent
nuclear waste conference March 1 with 2,500 attendees from 34
countries, will meet for at least the next five years at the Phoenix
Convention Center, where 1,100 rooms could be booked within a block
of the center.

WMSymposia, a Tucson-based nonprofit dedicated to education for the
safe management of nuclear waste, has put on the world's most
significant conference for nuclear waste management for 33 years at
TCC. But Rio Nuevo's lack of action for the past five years and
unpromising future on the hotel-restaurant front will likely keep
the conference out of Tucson, said James Voss, the organization's
managing director.

"Our attendees are not going to stay at freeway motels," Voss said.

The closure of the Santa Rita Hotel in 2005 made it a priority to
leave Tucson. Voss also has doubts about the Hotel Arizona expansion
and the frequent management changes at the Doubletree at Reid Park,
where the symposia books rooms twice a year.

The conference brings $345,000 in rentals, parking fees and meals to
TCC, and has an overall economic impact estimated at $2 million, TCC
and tourism officials said.

"It's a clear signal that we have to get serious about providing a
quality environment," City Manager Mike Hein said.

The city is at least two years away from substantial improvements at
TCC and neighboring Hotel Arizona.

Hotel Arizona has 307 rooms and is proposing to add 400 at a cost of
more than $100 million. No other major hotel projects are in
discussion. Phoenix has nearly 1,600 hotel rooms within walking
distance of its convention center.

1. Comment by Jade S. (#2276) — March 12,2007 @ 12:10PM

Build, Build, Build. Whine, whine, whine. Never Satisfied until 
every inch of ground is paved. 2. Comment by Gary R. 
(wildcat5121) — March 12,2007 @ 3:12PM

www.tucsoncitizen.com | Copyright © 2007 Tucson Citizen
All Rights Reserved. Terms of Service. Privacy Policy
*****************************************************************
 52 SF New Mexican: Uranium plant construction fuels quick growth for oilpatch town

Mon Mar 12, 2007 5:59 pm
 
By TIM KORTE | Associated Press

EUNICE, N.M. (AP) - There's a saying in these parts: "Where oil
flows, a city grows."

Yet more than just oil and gas is fueling a recent growth spurt for
the southeastern New Mexico town, whose 2,700 residents have begun
to feel the initial impact of a $1.5 billion uranium enrichment
plant going up nearby. Situated on 640 acres just east of town near
the Texas border, the first major nuclear facility to be licensed in
the United States in three decades has meant lightning-fast change
for tidy, stoplight-free Eunice in the months since the facility's
groundbreaking last summer.

And while the fields of black pumpjacks _ clustered like little
forests ringing the town _ aren't likely to go away, there's a clear
and palpable sense that the community won't ever be the same.

"There's more going on right now than your mind can manage," said
Tom Hastings, an oilfield services worker who was sipping coffee
recently at the Bakery and More Cafe. "It has been like an ant bed.
Everything has exploded."

Mayor Matt White needs no reminder of that fact. He's leading a
drive to install updated water lines, hire more police officers and,
above all, build more housing. The town is growing so fast that one
recently hired officer, unable to find a rental unit, had to live in
the mayor's recreational vehicle.

Over the past six months or so, Mayor White said recently, about 300
new workers have arrived. He predicts the town could add another 700
to 800 workers within the next year.

"The studies tell us we'd need 220 more houses without the LES
(Louisiana Energy Services) plant," said the mayor, a retired Air
Force and Southwest Airlines pilot. "With LES, it's closer to 400.
The first project is for 60 units. We'll be building apartments,
too."

Manufactured housing is one short-term option to house officers,
said Police Chief Kevin Burnam, who oversees a staff of seven patrol
officers and one narcotics officer.

The town also recently raised water rates to finance a 24-inch line
that will replace smaller pipes that were installed half a century
ago; the $12 million project is partially funded by legislative
allocations. LES is paying for a five-mile extension that will
provide water to its facility.

Work also is ready to begin this year on a new $6 million wastewater
treatment plant, and city officials have collected just over $1
million in municipal and state funds for a downtown beautification
project.

And don't forget the swimming pool. The old municipal pool closed
five years ago, a crumbling concrete mess, but Eunice recently
secured $1.4 million _ including a $60,000 contribution from LES _
to renovate it. LES also pledged $150,000 a year for three years to
help fund two new police positions _ one is the officer who had to
live in the mayor's RV. The allocation funds salaries, patrol cars
and other expenses.

The enrichment plant, slated to open in 2009, will employ 1,000
workers during construction and up to 350 when operational. A
security firm plans to hire another 70 guards and other employees.

Among the challenges spurred by Eunice's growth, the most pressing
is a shortage of construction workers. The mayor said an oil boom
that has boosted New Mexico's economy in recent years has sapped up
most of the available work force.

Collectively, these issues have turned one of the most apparent
concerns about building a uranium enrichment plant _ the nuclear
question _ into something of an afterthought for many Eunice
residents.

While the plant secured the needed authorizations by federal and
state regulators, environmental groups worry about health risks and
argue there's no safe way to dispose of waste the facility will
generate.

But that talk is yesterday's news to most Eunice residents.

Community leaders from towns around Lea County have traveled to The
Netherlands to tour a similar uranium plant operated by Urenco, the
European-based parent company for LES. Mayor White said his concerns
were satisfied by what he saw and learned during his trip, and he
said LES officials in Eunice and Urenco representatives overseas
have been accessible and accountable.

"I can pick up the phone and call their CEO anytime. He knows he can
come see me right away, too," White said.

White believes Eunice's ties to oil and gas _ the ranching village
boomed when petroleum was discovered during the 1940s _ helped
residents comprehend nuclear technology, easing the change toward
another energy arm.

As for potential risks from the uranium plant, residents agree that
everyone in Eunice understands the dangers of the oilpatch, from the
high-risk jobs to homes routinely built near natural gas wells that
bleed off deadly hydrogen sulfide.

By comparison, the mayor said, uranium production is arguably safer.

"We're talking about nuclear material. If you didn't say you were
concerned, you'd be crazy," White said. "But when people ask us
about radiation risks, we know there's already a lot of worse stuff
around here."

The culture of Eunice is changing, too. It has become common for
engineers and planners from faraway places like Scotland and Austria
to meet for lunch at the Bakery and More, mixing their accents among
the Texas drawl heard for decades around town.

Tony King, chief financial officer for the LES plant, moved in
September from Maidenhead, England, 20 miles west of London, to
nearby Hobbs, which with about 30,000 residents is the largest town
in Lea County.

"We sure would love to have some fish and chips," King said with a
smile.

But he said he was thrilled when Stilton cheese _ traditional
English fare at Christmas _ shipped to his local supermarket in
December.

"When the employees learned my wife was English, the manager
introduced himself and told her, 'If there's anything you miss, let
us know.' He said they would try to get it," King said. "They've
been very accommodating."

National Enrichment Facility: http://www.nefnm.com

Privacy Policy / Terms of Use | ©2007, Santa Fe New Mexican, all
*****************************************************************
 53 Las Cruces Sun-News: Uranium plant fuels growth for oil town

By The Associated Press

Article Launched: 03/12/2007 01:00:00 AM MDT

People walk down a street as an oil pump jack churns away in 
Eunice on Feb. 2. The energy industry suddenly means more than 
oil and gas for the 2,700 residents of Eunice, the southeastern 
New Mexico site for a $1.5 billion uranium enrichment plant 
&mdash; the first major nuclear facility to be licensed in the 
United States in three decades.

EUNICE &mdash; There's a saying in these parts: "Where oil flows, a
city grows."

Yet more than just oil and gas is fueling a recent growth spurt for
the southeastern New Mexico town, whose 2,700 residents have begun
to feel the initial impact of a $1.5 billion uranium enrichment
plant going up nearby. Situated on 640 acres just east of town near
the Texas border, the first major nuclear facility to be licensed in
the United States in three decades has meant lightning-fast change
for tidy, stoplight-free Eunice in the months since the facility's
groundbreaking last summer.

And while the fields of black pumpjacks &mdash; clustered like
little forests ringing the town &mdash; aren't likely to go away,
there's a clear and palpable sense that the community won't ever be
the same.

"There's more going on right now than your mind can manage," said
Tom Hastings, an oilfield services worker who was sipping coffee
recently at the Bakery and More Cafe. "It has been like an ant bed.
Everything has exploded."

Mayor Matt White needs no reminder of that fact. He's leading a 
drive to install updated water lines, hire more police officers 
and, above all, build more housing. The town is growing so fast 
that one recently hired officer, unable to find a rental unit, 
had to live in the mayor's recreational vehicle.

Over the past six months or so, Mayor White said recently, about 300
new workers have arrived. He predicts the town could add another 700
to 800 workers within the next year.

"The studies tell us we'd need 220 more houses without the LES
(Louisiana Energy Services) plant," said the mayor, a retired Air
Force and Southwest Airlines pilot. "With LES, it's closer to 400.
The first project is for 60 units. We'll be building apartments,
too."

Manufactured housing is one short-term option to house officers,
said Police Chief Kevin Burnam, who oversees a staff of seven patrol
officers and one narcotics officer.

The town also recently raised water rates to finance a 24-inch line
that will replace smaller pipes that were installed half a century
ago; the $12 million project is partially funded by legislative
allocations. LES is paying for a five-mile extension that will
provide water to its facility.

Work also is ready to begin this year on a new $6 million wastewater
treatment plant, and city officials have collected just over $1
million in municipal and state funds for a downtown beautification
project.

And don't forget the swimming pool. The old municipal pool closed
five years ago, a crumbling concrete mess, but Eunice recently
secured $1.4 million &mdash; including a $60,000 contribution from
LES &mdash; to renovate it. LES also pledged $150,000 a year for
three years to help fund two new police positions &mdash; one is the
officer who had to live in the mayor's RV. The allocation funds
salaries, patrol cars and other expenses.

The enrichment plant, slated to open in 2009, will employ 1,000
workers during construction and up to 350 when operational. A
security firm plans to hire another 70 guards and other employees.

Among the challenges spurred by Eunice's growth, the most pressing
is a shortage of construction workers. The mayor said an oil boom
that has boosted New Mexico's economy in recent years has sapped up
most of the available work force.

Collectively, these issues have turned one of the most apparent
concerns about building a uranium enrichment plant &mdash; the
nuclear question &mdash; into something of an afterthought for many
Eunice residents.

While the plant secured the needed authorizations by federal and
state regulators, environmental groups worry about health risks and
argue there's no safe way to dispose of waste the facility will
generate.

But that talk is yesterday's news to most Eunice residents.

Community leaders from towns around Lea County have traveled to The
Netherlands to tour a similar uranium plant operated by Urenco, the
European-based parent company for LES. Mayor White said his concerns
were satisfied by what he saw and learned during his trip, and he
said LES officials in Eunice and Urenco representatives overseas
have been accessible and accountable.

"I can pick up the phone and call their CEO anytime. He knows he can
come see me right away, too," White said.

White believes Eunice's ties to oil and gas &mdash; the ranching
village boomed when petroleum was discovered during the 1940s
&mdash; helped residents comprehend nuclear technology, easing the
change toward another energy arm.

As for potential risks from the uranium plant, residents agree that
everyone in Eunice understands the dangers of the oilpatch, from the
high-risk jobs to homes routinely built near natural gas wells that
bleed off deadly hydrogen sulfide.

By comparison, the mayor said, uranium production is arguably safer.

"We're talking about nuclear material. If you didn't say you were
concerned, you'd be crazy," White said. "But when people ask us
about radiation risks, we know there's already a lot of worse stuff
around here."

The culture of Eunice is changing, too. It has become common for
engineers and planners from faraway places like Scotland and Austria
to meet for lunch at the Bakery and More, mixing their accents among
the Texas drawl heard for decades around town.

Tony King, chief financial officer for the LES plant, moved in
September from Maidenhead, England, 20 miles west of London, to
nearby Hobbs, which with about 30,000 residents is the largest town
in Lea County.

"We sure would love to have some fish and chips," King said with a
smile.

But he said he was thrilled when Stilton cheese &mdash; traditional
English fare at Christmas &mdash; shipped to his local supermarket
in December.

"When the employees learned my wife was English, the manager
introduced himself and told her, 'If there's anything you miss, let
us know.' He said they would try to get it," King said. "They've
been very accommodating."Uranium plant fuels growth for oil town

Copyright © 2006 Las Cruces Sun-News, a MediaNews Group Newspaper.

*****************************************************************
 54 AU ABC: Nuclear facility may go ahead despite traditional owners' opposition

  Monday, 12 March 2007, 15:02:32  AEDT

Federal Member for Lingiari Warren Snowdon says legislation passed
last year may see a nuclear waste facility go ahead at Muckaty
Station, despite some traditional owners opposing it.

A weekend newspaper reported the Federal Government has offered
traditional owners of the site north of Tennant Creek $9 million
every five years to use their land.

Mr Snowdon says while the Northern Land Council is consulting
traditional owners, the majority view will not necessarily determine
the result.

"The traditional owners who support a proposal could ultimately put
a nomination forward with through the Northern Land Council and the
Commonwealth could accept that nomination even though there may be a
difference of view with other traditional owners and even though the
obligations that would otherwise exist on the Northern Land Council
under the Land Rights Act might not be met," Mr Snowdon said.

*****************************************************************
 55 The Mercury: A new wrinkle in spent fuel rod debate

Evan Brandt, ebrandt@pottsmerc.com

03/12/2007

 The cooling towers of the Limerick Nuclear Generating Station 
can be seen from most places in the Pottstown area. Photo by John 
Strickler/The Mercury 

LIMERICK -- Where you live will determine how closely the effect 
of a terrorist attack on a nearby nuclear fuel storage facility 
is examined by the federal government, thanks to federal reaction 
to a recent court ruling.

Despite a recent U.S. Supreme Court action requiring that the
potential for a terrorist attack be considered in siting a spent
nuclear fuel storage facility in California, the federal government
will impose no similar requirements on a project proposed for Exelon
Nuclear?s Limerick Generating Station.

That was confirmed by Nuclear Regulatory Agency spokesman Neil
Sheehan and Exelon spokeswoman Elizabeth Rapczynski.

Refusing to hear an appeal, the Supreme Court on Jan. 16 left intact
a ruling by the federal Ninth Circuit Appeals Court in San Francisco
that the NRC must consider the damage a terrorist attack on the
proposed Diablo Canyon spent fuel facility would cause as part of
its environmental review. The NRC has taken the position that the
decision applies only to that plant in that state, Sheehan confirmed.

Dry cask storage is a method for storing nuclear fuel that while
still radioactive is no longer useful as fuel for the reactor.
Stored for years in a pool while it cools, the older fuel will be
moved to steel canisters, encased in concrete and set on a concrete
pad outside the reactor building under the Exelon plan approved last
July by the Limerick Board of Supervisors.

According to a Feb. 26 memo, the NRC instructed its staff to prepare
a terrorism review for California?s Diablo Canyon plant under the
National Environmental Policy Act, something the San Luis Obispo
Mothers for Peace pursued in the federal lawsuit they filed against
the plant?s owner, Pacific Gas & Electric. No policy was issued for
similar projects in other parts of the country -- Limerick being
among them -- and the NRC made it clear none should be expected.

In a memo issued the day after the ruling, NRC lawyers wrote:
"Respectfully, we disagree with the Ninth Circuit?s view."

As part of a response to a similar request made by the New Jersey
attorney general to consider terrorism in an environmental review of
the relicensing of the Oyster Creek Nuclear Plant, the NRC wrote of
the Ninth Circuit decision: "the NRC is not obliged to adhere, in
all of its proceedings, to the first court of appeals? decision to
address a controversial question."

"That decision only applies in the Ninth Circuit," Sheehan said.

Sheehan said the Supreme Court will only be involved again if there
is a conflict in decisions on the same subject between two court
circuits and, as of yet, that has not happened.

"Whether or not a (court) challenge is mounted in any of those other
circuits remains to be seen," Sheehan said.

Anyone considering mounting such a challenge had better open their
wallet. Diane Curran is the Washington, D.C., lawyer who represented
the Mothers for Peace in their court case regarding the Diablo
Canyon project. Curran said the trip through the federal court
system cost that group more than $100,000 in legal fees.

"It is very expensive" to mount such a challenge, she said.

To have spent that money and pursued the case as far as the Supreme
Court, and then have NRC apply the result only to one project in one
state "is pretty discouraging," Curran said.

Less discouraged is Exelon, which has taken the position since it
first proposed its dry cask storage facility at Limerick that it
will follow the guidelines issued by the NRC.

With no change in the NRC?s East Coast position expected as a result
of the West Coast court decision, Exelon did not need to make any
changes to its plans.

"Exelon Nuclear takes the safety and environmental protection very
seriously," Rapczysnki said. "Our No. 1 priority is the health and
safety of our employees and the public."

Similarly, the NRC takes issue with the suggestion that its refusal
to apply terrorism scenarios to the environmental review is a
failing in its dedication to public safety.

"NRC goes to great lengths to protect the nation from terrorism,
including terrorism directed at nuclear facilities," the NRC wrote
in its brief, filed jointly with the U.S. Justice Department, to the
Supreme Court. "But (the National Environmental Policy Act) has a
narrower and different focus."

That focus was not too narrow for the U.S. Department of Energy,
which operates a number of nuclear research labs and weapons
facilities. In a Dec. 1 memo provided by Curran, issued before the
Supreme Court?s refusal to let the Ninth Circuit?s Diablo Canyon
decision stand, the Department of Energy adopted the position that
the Diablo Canyon decision needed to be applied to all its
facilities.

Citing the Diablo Canyon case and another case brought against the
DOE in the Ninth Circuit that specifically cited the Diablo Canyon
case as the basis for its decision, the DOE issued a guidance
adopting the standard.

"This approach may be appropriate for many, if not most, situations
where the potential sabotage or terrorist scenarios and the accident
scenarios involve similar physical initiating events or forces (e.g.
fires, explosions, drops, punctures, aircraft crashes)," the DOE
memo noted. "This approach may not encompass potential threats posed
by intentional destructive acts."

Asked for comment, Sheehan responded that he would not comment on
actions taken by other agencies but did point out that, unlike the
NRC, the Department of Energy operates nuclear facilities as well as
regulates them.


©The Mercury 2007
 
©2006 Pottstown Mercury - a Journal Register Property. All Rights 
reserved.

*****************************************************************
 56 Press TV: Russia urges Israel to join NPT

Mon, 12 Mar 2007 11:47:33

Russia's ambassador to Jordan has urged Israel to join the
Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).

Alexander Calugin said, "In order to guarantee a Middle East without
weapons of mass destruction, Israel should be a signatory to the
NPT."

Calugin made his comments at the Quds Political Research Center in
Amman, according to IRNA.

Israel is thought to possess more than 200 nuclear warheads but has
consistently refused to join the NPT and has kept the doors to its
nuclear facilities closed to inspectors of the International Atomic
Energy Agency.

Observers say Israel wants to maintain a 'policy of ambiguity'
regarding its nuclear arsenal.

Late last year, however, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert made an
apparent slip of the tongue by admitting that Israel maintains
nuclear warheads.

His inadvertent remark, made in an interview during a visit to
Europe, broke a decades-long silence from Israel over its possession
of nuclear weapons.

MM/MR/BG


© Press TV 2007. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 57 Alert: Tell DOE what you think of radwaste reprocessing!
 
Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2007 15:23:16 -0800


<x-flowed>


-------- Original Message --------
Subject: 	Alert: Tell DOE what you think of radwaste reprocessing!
Date: 	Mon, 12 Mar 2007 15:22:33 -0400
From: 	Michael Mariotte <nirsnet@nirs.org>
To: 	<rogerh@energy-net.org>



*Tell the Energy Department That You Oppose Reprocessing Radioactive Waste!*

Dear Friend:

Below is an Alert from our friends at Public Citizen. The GNEP public 
comment process is underway with public meetings and the opportunity to 
comment to DOE. You can get a list of the meetings, find out more about 
GNEP, and e-mail your comments directly to DOE from this website: 
http://www.citizen.org/cmep/energy_enviro_nuclear/nuclear_power_plants/nukewaste/reprocessing/articles.cfm?ID=16102 


Michael Mariotte

Executive Director

Nuclear Information and Resource Service

Announced by the Bush Administration in February 2006, the Global 
Nuclear Energy Partnership (GNEP) is a sweeping proposal to restart 
nuclear waste reprocessing in the United States. 
Reprocessing—incorrectly called “recycling” by the Energy Department—is 
expensive and polluting, and poses a serious risk to U.S. national 
security and global efforts to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons.

The Energy Department, which is responsible for implementing GNEP, is 
required to request comments from the public about what issues should be 
part of its analysis of the program. Use the sample letter below to tell 
the Energy Department why it should abandon the dangerous and polluting 
GNEP program.

DOE is holding public meetings in or near the 11 sites that are 
potential candidates for the siting of GNEP facilities, which include:

· indefinite spent fuel storage at the site,

· a reprocessing plant <link to 
http://www.citizen.org/documents/reprocessingfactsheet.pdf >, and

· a fast reactor <link to 
http://www.citizen.org/documents/FastReactors.pdf >.

If you live near one of these sites, attend the meeting and tell the 
Energy Department in person that you do not want radioactive waste 
transported into your community.

For the list of candidate sites and public meetings, click here <link to 
http://www.citizen.org/cmep/energy_enviro_nuclear/nuclear_power_plants/nukewaste/reprocessing/articles.cfm?ID=16102 
 >.

*Sample Letter:*

Re: GNEP PEIS Comments

Dear Timothy A. Frazier,

The Department of Energy’s proposed Global Nuclear Energy Partnership 
(GNEP), a program to restart nuclear waste reprocessing in the United 
States, poses a threat to local communities and to global security. 
Instead of pursuing the dangerous and expensive GNEP program, DOE should 
store nuclear waste at reactor sites and safeguard it from terrorist 
attack.

DOE’s proposed scope and environmental issues of its Programmatic 
Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS) is woefully inadequate. A PEIS 
analysis requires that DOE consider the full GNEP proposal, which 
includes importing foreign fuel to the United States, not just the three 
facilities that DOE is proposing to build now.

In particular, DOE must describe how it is to going to manage and 
protect the public and workers from the many radioactive and hazardous 
waste streams that result from reprocessing. Just some of these waste 
streams include strontium, cesium, radioactive lanthanides, technetium, 
uranium, and krypton gas. DOE must also consider all of the 
environmental, safety, and security impacts from the transportation and 
/indefinite/ storage of U.S. and foreign spent nuclear fuel and 
reprocessing waste at all of the possible reprocessing plants and fast 
reactors required to implement the full GNEP program.

DOE must analyze the total lifecycle cost of GNEP, including all of the 
reprocessing facilities, fast reactors and fuel fabrication facilities 
required to fully implement GNEP. This analysis must include clean-up of 
the reprocessing facilities, as well as decommissioning of fast reactors 
and fuel fabrication facilities.

DOE must also analyze the impacts of GNEP on U.S. and global security. 
Reprocessing will increase the amount of bomb-usable material that could 
be stolen by terrorists or diverted by nations for nuclear weapons. 
Reprocessed plutonium is much easier to steal compared to plutonium that 
is kept in highly radioactive spent fuel. In addition, the dissemination 
of technical experts and specialized equipment could lead to the spread 
of weapons programs in countries that currently do not have nuclear weapons.

Reprocessing is polluting and expensive, and a threat to U.S. national 
security. DOE should abandon the dangerous GNEP proposal and focus 
instead on safeguarding nuclear waste at reactor sites.

Sincerely,

</x-flowed>
*****************************************************************
 58 reviewjournal.com: Test site manager sees challenges ahead

Mar. 12, 2007

From Thermos-5 to bunker buster

REVIEW-JOURNAL

Gerald Talbot listens to a question Thursday in his North Las 
Vegas office about the challenges he faces as the new manager of 
the National Nuclear Security Administration's Nevada Site 
Office. Photo by John Locher.

With a retired Navy rear admiral now charting the course for the 
Nevada Test Site, historians will look back at the first months 
of Gerald L. Talbot's turn at the wheel and see he navigated 
through a non-nuclear blast that was canceled, continued the 
quest for a reliable Trident submarine warhead and launched a new 
era for checking the integrity of plutonium in the stockpile.

They are so small compared even to subcritical experiments that 
they can be conducted, as their name implies, in a vessel the 
size of a coffee thermos.

"I would say we have a number of experiments of varying magnitude 
that we will conduct," Talbot said Thursday.

At the time, scientists from the nuclear weapons lab in Los 
Alamos, N.M., were busy conducting Thermos-5 experiments in an 
underground chamber at the test site, 85 miles northwest of Las 
Vegas.

Subcritical experiments involve small amounts of nuclear materials
and are designed to stop short of triggering nuclear chain
reactions. They allow scientists to study how materials, such as
plutonium, blow apart when detonated by explosives.

Thermos experiments are similar but smaller. They involve gram-size
amounts of plutonium and are designed to produce data on
temperatures and pressures instead of data about geometrical changes
a chunk of aging plutonium undergoes when shocked by high explosives
in a subcritical experiment.

Talbot said Thermos experiments let scientists explore what happens
with plutonium immediately after it is detonated.

"There is no nuclear yield out of this. So, we're trying to
determine what the material properties of plutonium are at higher
temperatures and pressures," he said.

Darwin Morgan, spokesman for the National Nuclear Security
Administration, said Thermos-5, the fourth in a series, was
conducted Thursday. The first, Thermos-2, was set off Feb. 7.

Thermos-1 was damaged in transport from the Los Alamos lab, he said,
explaining the difference in the numbering.

Talbot, a career nuclear Navy sailor, took over as manager of the
National Nuclear Security Administration's Nevada Site Office on
Dec. 11 while in Washington, D.C., and arrived for his first day at
the North Las Vegas office on Jan. 8. He replaced Kathy A. Carlson,
who retired as manager in May 2006.

Talbot on Thursday discussed the challenges of his new job
overseeing the test site's $400 million budget and more than 125
federal employees, backed by 2,500 contractor personnel.

Only a week before, news that the Lawrence Livermore lab's design
for the Reliable Replacement Warhead had been chosen over one by the
Los Alamos lab made national headlines. Weighing heavily in the
NNSA's decision was that the Livermore design required no full-scale
testing.

Talbot said the design eventually will lead to development and
production of the RRW-1, a single nuclear bomb, or "physics
package," that will be delivered by D-5 missile systems on the
nation's 14 Trident submarines.

The D-5 is an intercontinental, submarine-launched ballistic missile
with a range of more than 4,000 miles.

"Since we eliminated testing as part of the test ban treaty back
when we did our last test in September of 1992, we have accumulated
a tremendous amount of science and understanding about the systems,
not only the physics package but all the supporting infrastructure
associated with that delivery system," Talbot said.

"That has provided for us the level of confidence and understanding
of how to manufacture a nuclear weapon that doesn't require
confirmatory testing.

"I think that is a real vote of confidence for the science program
and the experimental program ... to make it very clear that we are
actually not going to test RRW in its production cycle," he said.

Meanwhile, he said, work using the test site's high-tech physics
tools and subcritical experiments will continue to ensure that the
stockpile is safe and reliable.

"But the Nevada Test Site has a very diverse outlook," Talbot said.
"The global war on terrorism and supporting homeland security is a
tremendous amount of work that is uniquely done only at the Nevada
Test Site."

He was referring to one project aimed at detecting nuclear material,
say for a so-called dirty bomb, that a terrorist might try to sneak
into the country.

"Homeland Security has made a very large investment out here in a
facility, in fact two facilities, and we're continuing to support
that effort," he said.

Another "customer" at the test site, Talbot said, is the Defense
Threat Reduction Agency, the Pentagon agency that has conducted more
than 40 non-nuclear tests in an effort to develop a bunker-buster
bomb for crushing deep tunnels in limestone where an enemy could
store weapons of mass destruction.

The agency abruptly canceled the final and largest test of the
series, dubbed Divine Strake, on Feb. 22 amid opposition from
downwinders, politicians and environmentalists. They feared the
blast's mushroom cloud would carry dust laced with radioactive
particles from historic nuclear tests off the Nevada Test Site.

In announcing the cancellation, agency chief James Tegnelia said his
scientists will try to get the data that was expected from Divine
Strake by conducting "confirmatory experiments at a much smaller
scale."

"That's in the progress of being put together, and Dr. Tegnelia's
organization is working on that right now. And that may be future
work at the Nevada Test Site," Talbot said.

Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal, 1997 - 2007
Stephens Media | Privacy Statement
*****************************************************************
 59 DOE: DOE Seeking Input on Alternative Uses of Nickel Inventory

March 9, 2007

WASHINGTON, DC – The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) is seeking
input from industry representatives on the safe disposition of
approximately 15,300 tons of nickel scrap recovered from uranium
enrichment process equipment at the Department’s Oak Ridge, TN, and
Paducah, KY, facilities.  The Expression of Interest (EOI), released
today, will assist in DOE’s evaluation of restricted uses of its
nickel material for controlled radiological applications.  These
restricted uses could include use in commercial nuclear power
plants, DOE nuclear facilities, or by the U.S. Navy.  The Department
will solicit input through May 8, 2007. 

All qualified interested parties will be required to demonstrate
their ability to obtain all required authorizations, licenses,
personnel, and equipment to (1) accept and declassify any classified
nickel scrap at a DOE approved facility; (2) transport, store, and
process radioactively-contaminated nickel at a licensed radioactive
materials facility; (3) disposition the unclassified and
decontaminated nickel scrap into products suitable for use only in
controlled government and/or commercial radiological applications;
and (4) disposition all byproducts and residual wastes.

DOE will evaluate alternatives submitted through the EOI only for
restricted and regulated use of its processed DOE nickel.  DOE will
determine its future acquisition plans, if any, after reviewing the
responses to the request for EOI and consistent with the outcome of
the appropriate environmental review under the National
Environmental Policy Act. 

An information meeting in Oak Ridge, TN, is tentatively scheduled
for April 3, 2007, for registered participants.  An information
meeting in Paducah, KY, is scheduled for April 5, 2007, and includes
a short tour to view the inventory.

For more information on the EOI or on the information meetings,
access www.fedbizopps.gov.

Media contact(s): Megan Barnett, (202) 586-4940 

 U.S. Department of Energy | 1000 Independence Ave., SW | 
Washington, DC 20585 1-800-dial-DOE | f/202-586-4403

*****************************************************************
 60 DOE: Deputy Secretary Sell Highlights Cooperation in Global 
Energy Security and Nuclear Non-Proliferation in Moscow

March 12, 2007

Co-Chairs U.S. – Russia Energy Working Group on First Stop on Three
Nation Swing

MOSCOW, Russia – U.S. Deputy Secretary of Energy Clay Sell today
participated in the U.S. – Russia Energy Working Group with Russian
co-chair Ivan Materov, Deputy Minister of Industry and Energy, to
discuss key energy cooperation between the nations.  Deputy
Secretary Sell is in Russia until Wednesday on the first stop of his
three-nation swing, which will also take him to Ukraine and Georgia,
to promote global energy security and nuclear non-proliferation. 
While in Russia, Deputy Secretary Sell is meeting with senior
Russian officials and leaders of world energy companies and, on
Wednesday, will deliver remarks on global perspectives on energy at
the Carnegie Moscow Center.  In addition, Deputy Secretary Sell is
discussing the importance of promoting policies to ensure stable
energy markets and a transparent global investment climate, and
continued cooperation in combating nuclear terrorism.

“As international energy partners, the United States and Russia have
a global obligation to advance global energy security and nuclear
non-proliferation,” Deputy Secretary Sell said.  “With the world’s
appetite for energy increasing, we must continue to work together to
embrace technology and investment, diversify our energy sources, and
promote practices that increase transparency and predictability in
the global energy market.”

During the Energy Working Group, the two countries discussed
advancements in energy efficiency programs and critical
infrastructure investments that promote economic growth.  The two
parties also discussed the importance of a continued focus on energy
information exchange and on utilizing technologies that will lead to
greater energy efficiency.

Deputy Secretary Sell also met this morning with Viktor Khristenko,
Russia’s Minister of Industry and Energy, where he highlighted the
importance of G8 global energy principles in advancing energy
security.  Deputy Secretary Sell discussed the continued need for
open and competitive markets for energy production, enhancing energy
efficiency and energy saving measures, and improving the investment
climate in the energy sector.

Earlier today, Deputy Secretary Sell met with the American Chamber
of Commerce in Russia and leaders of world energy companies where
they discussed short and long term goals and objectives to increase
investment in energy resources. Deputy Secretary Sell highlighted
the importance of promoting reliability, diversity, efficiency, and
transparency in meeting long term energy commitments and advancing
global energy security.

During his visit to Russia, Deputy Secretary Sell is expected to
meet with Rosatom Director Sergei Kiriyenko where they will discuss
the U.S. - Russia Civil Nuclear Energy Working Group and the
recently completed report on The Bratislava Nuclear Security
Initiatives to Presidents Bush and Putin.   Deputy Secretary Sell is
expected to address the importance of U.S. - Russia nuclear
non-proliferation cooperation through the Bratislava Nuclear
Security Initiative and Global Nuclear Energy Partnership.

On Wednesday, Deputy Secretary Sell will deliver remarks at the
Carnegie Moscow Center where he will highlight U.S. – Russia
cooperation to advance global energy security and nuclear
non-proliferation.  The Center, which was established by the
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, accommodates foreign and
Russian researchers on a broad range of policy issues, including
energy development and non-proliferation.

The Deputy Secretary’s visit to Moscow is the first stop on a trip
that will also take him to Kiev, Ukraine, and Tbilisi, Georgia.  In
the other two countries, he will meet with senior officials on a
variety of energy security issues, including the development of
greater diversity of energy supplies and suppliers, expansion of
regional cooperation, and promotion of market transparency and
investment.

Media contact(s): Craig Stevens, (202) 586-4940 

U.S. Department of Energy | 1000 Independence Ave., SW | 
Washington, DC 20585 1-800-dial-DOE | f/202-586-4403
*****************************************************************
 61 Hanford News: Hearing set on Bush plan to tap nuclear energy

This story was published Monday, March 12th, 2007

Annette Cary, Herald staff writer

Northwest residents will have their chance Tuesday in Pasco to 
discuss the Bush administration's proposed fuel recycling program 
to expand the use of nuclear energy.

The Department of Energy plans to take comments on the Global
Nuclear Energy Partnership before preparing an environmental study,
and this is one of several public hearings scheduled across the
nation.

DOE is looking at the Hanford nuclear reservation for three new
facilities for the project: A nuclear fuel recycling center, an
advanced recycling reactor and an advanced fuel cycle research
facility that could involve Hanford's Fast Flux Test Facility.

Public comment at the hearing could be lively. Activists are
organizing a caravan to the meeting from Eugene, Ore., to be led by
a vegetable-oil powered bus with Veterans for Peace. The group is
concerned about the dangers of nuclear power, nuclear weapons,
transportation issues and nuclear waste.

Tri-City supporters of either the Fast Flux Test Facility or nuclear
energy also have been urging those with similar interests to attend
the hearing.

The Global Nuclear Energy Partnership is being proposed as a way to
dramatically expand nuclear energy.

In the next 50 years, world energy demand is expected to double,
Clay Sell, deputy secretary of energy, said at a media briefing last
month. Nuclear power is the only large, mature technology capable of
meeting that demand without producing the greenhouse gases of fossil
fuels, he said.

"The world has recognized that nuclear power must play a significant
role in meeting this demand," Sell said.

He pointed out that 130 nuclear power reactors are under
construction, in the planning stage or under consideration in other
countries.

"We can either be a part of it or we can observe," he said.

The Bush administration is proposing a program to recycle used
nuclear fuel to reduce waste. That has not been done in the United
States since the 1970s.

But now, reprocessing technology is being considered that would
combine plutonium with other actinides and uranium so that it would
be difficult to use in nuclear weapons.

Not only would the United States reuse fuel that otherwise would be
planned for disposal at Yucca Mountain, Nev., but it also would be
part of an international program to lease fuel to nations interested
in developing nuclear reactors without them pursuing enrichment
facilities to produce their own fuel.

When the cycle is completed, the amount and radiotoxicity of the
used fuel would be greatly reduced and fewer national repositories
such as Yucca Mountain would have to be built to hold it, Sell said.
In the past, Hanford has been considered as a potential site for a
national repository.

The Tri-City Industrial Council has been given a $1 million grant to
look at whether Hanford should be the site of an initial center to
recycle used nuclear fuel and a reactor that would consume the fuel
- producing electricity and consuming long-lived radioactive
elements to reduce nuclear waste.

It believes Hanford has several advantages over most other sites
being considered, including a wide array of infrastructure such as
roads, railroads, sewage treatment, power and usable buildings. It
also has lay-down yards for nuclear fuel and a ready supply of fuel
from Energy Northwest to begin the processing.

In addition, Hanford is being considered as the site for a research
center for GNEP. Columbia Basin Consulting Group is working with
TRIDEC under the grant to see if Hanford's Fast Flux Test Facility
could be restarted and nearby buildings could be used for the
research center.

After a five-day workshop with scientists and engineers involved in
the startup and operations of the reactor, the consulting group
believes FFTF could be restarted in less than six years for about
$750 million. The condition of the reactor has been a concern after
liquid sodium used to cool the reactor was drained as part of what
was planned as a permanent shutdown of the reactor.

Supporters of a restart of the reactor hope that a role in GNEP also
could lead to a second use for the reactor - producing radioactive
isotopes for new treatments for cancer and other diseases.

Rep. Doc Hastings, R-Wash., has supported TRIDEC in its efforts to
study Hanford as a site for any or all of the proposed GNEP
facilities.

But others have raised concerns about transportation of nuclear
waste. Rep. Zach Wamp, R-Tenn., has questioned whether the Oak Ridge
National Laboratory, another site being considered by DOE, should be
a candidate. The laboratory should be getting rid of waste, not
accepting more nuclear waste to process, he said.

Public comments on the GNEP environmental study can be submitted to
Timothy Frazier, GNEP PEIS Document Manager, Office of Nuclear
Energy, Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Ave., S.W.,
Washington, D.C. 20585-0119, or e-mailed to GNEP-PEIS@
nuclear.energy.gov.

Mark envelopes and e-mails as "GNEP PEIS Comments."

&copy 2007 Tri-City Herald. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 62 FR DOE: Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board, Hanford

Doc E7-4332

[Federal Register: March 12, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 47)] 
[Notices] [Page 11003] From the Federal Register Online via GPO 
Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr12mr07-52]                         

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY


AGENCY: Department of Energy.

ACTION: Notice of Open Meeting.

SUMMARY: This notice announces a meeting of the Environmental 
Management Site-Specific Advisory Board (EM SSAB), Hanford. The 
Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. No. 92-463, 86 Stat. 770) 
requires that public notice of this meeting be announced in the 
Federal Register.

DATES: Thursday, April 5, 2007, 9 a.m.-5 p.m.; Friday, April 6, 
2007, 8:30 a.m.-4 p.m.

ADDRESSES: Monarch Hotel, 12566 Southeast 93rd Avenue, Clackamas, 
Oregon 97015, Phone: (503) 652-1515, Fax: (503) 652-7609.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Erik Olds, Federal Coordinator, 
Department of Energy Richland Operations Office, 2440 Stevens 
Drive, P.O. Box 450, H6-60, Richland, WA 99352; Phone: (509) 
376-8656; Fax: (509) 376-1214.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Purpose of the Board: The purpose of 
the Board is to make recommendations to DOE in the areas of 
environmental restoration, waste management, and related 
activities. Tentative Agenda: Update from the River and Plateau 
Committee on 100 Area cleanup status. Presentation from the 
Columbia River Toxics Program. Advice from the Health, Safety and 
Environmental Protection Committee on workers' compensation 
programs. Advice from the Budgets and Contracts Committee on 
Fiscal Year 2007, 2008 and 2009 allocations and funding. Tank 
Waste Committee report on Tank Farm System Integration Issue 
Manager work towards Hanford Advisory Board Advice 192. Tank 
Waste Committee report on Double-Shell Tank Integrity Issue 
Manager work. Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental 
Impact Statement update. Public Participation: The meeting is 
open to the public. Written statements may be filed with the 
Board either before or after the meeting. Individuals who wish to 
make oral statements pertaining to agenda items should contact 
Erik Olds' office at the address or telephone number listed 
above. Requests must be received five days prior to the meeting 
and reasonable provision will be made to include the presentation 
in the agenda. The Deputy Designated Federal Officer is empowered 
to conduct the meeting in a fashion that will facilitate the 
orderly conduct of business. Individuals wishing to make public 
comment will be provided a maximum of five minutes to present 
their comments. Minutes: The minutes of this meeting will be 
available for public review and copying at the U.S. Department of 
Energy's Freedom of Information Public Reading Room, 1E-190, 
Forrestal Building, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 
20585 between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday-Friday, except Federal 
holidays. Minutes will also be available by writing to Erik Olds' 
office at the address or telephone number listed above.

    Issued at Washington, DC on March 6, 2007. Rachel M. Samuel, 
Deputy Advisory Committee Management Officer. [FR Doc. E7-4332 
Filed 3-9-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6450-01-P


*****************************************************************
 63 FR DOE: Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board, Idaho 

Doc E7-4370

[Federal Register: March 12, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 47)] 
[Notices] [Page 11003-11004] From the Federal Register Online via 
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr12mr07-53]                         

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

 
National Laboratory

AGENCY: Department of Energy.

ACTION: Notice of Open Meeting.

SUMMARY: This notice announces a meeting of the Environmental 
Management Site-Specific Advisory Board (EM SSAB), Idaho National 
Laboratory. The Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. No. 92-463, 86 
Stat. 770) requires that public notice of this meeting be announced in 
the Federal Register.

DATES: Tuesday, March 20, 2007, 8 a.m.-5 p.m.; Wednesday, March 21, 
2007, 8 a.m.-12 p.m.
    Opportunities for public participation will be held Tuesday, March 
20, from 1 p.m. to 1:15 p.m. and 3:45 p.m. to 4 p.m.; and Wednesday, 
March 21, from 9:15 a.m. to 9:30 a.m.
    These times are subject to change; please contact the Federal 
Coordinator (below) for confirmation of times prior to the meeting.

ADDRESSES: Red Lion Hotel, 1555 Pocatello Creek Road, Pocatello, Idaho 
83201.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert L. Pence, Federal Coordinator, 
Department of Energy, Idaho Operations Office, 1955 Fremont Avenue, MS-
1203, Idaho Falls, ID 83415. Phone (208) 526-6518; Fax (208) 526-8789 
or e-mail: pencerl@id.doe.gov or visit the Board's Internet home page 
at: http://www.inlemcab.org.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Purpose of the Board: The purpose of the Board is to make 
recommendations to DOE in the areas of environmental restoration, waste 
management, and related activities.
    Tentative Topics (agenda topics may change up to the day of the 
meeting; please contact Robert L. Pence for the most current agenda):
     TAN-607 Hot Shop Engineering Evaluation/Cost Analysis (EE/
CA).
     Yucca Mountain Briefing.
     General EE/CA Philosophy.
     Spent Nuclear Fuel Next Steps and Plan.
     Subsurface Disposal Area Draft Feasibility Study.
     Budget Discussions.
    Public Participation: The meeting is open to the public. Written 
statements may be filed with the Board either before or after the 
meeting. Individuals who wish to make oral presentations pertaining to 
agenda items should contact Robert L. Pence at the address or telephone 
number listed above. The request must be received five days prior to 
the meeting and reasonable provision will be made to include the 
presentation in the agenda. The Deputy Designated Federal Officer is 
empowered to conduct the meeting in a fashion that will facilitate the 
orderly conduct of business. Individuals wishing to make public comment 
will be provided a maximum of five minutes to present their comments. 
This notice is being published less than 15 days prior to the meeting 
date due to programmatic issues that had to be resolved prior to the 
meeting date.
    Minutes: The minutes of this meeting will be available for public 
review and copying at the U.S. Department of Energy's Freedom of 
Information Public Reading Room, 1E-190, Forrestal Building, 1000 
Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585 between 9

[[Page 11004]]

a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. 
Minutes will also be available by writing to Robert L. Pence, Federal 
Coordinator, at the address and phone number listed above.

    Issued at Washington, DC on March 6, 2007.
Rachel Samuel,
Deputy Advisory Committee Management Officer.
 [FR Doc. E7-4370 Filed 3-9-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6450-01-P


*****************************************************************
 64 FR DOE: Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board, Savannah 
River Site

Doc E7-4374

[Federal Register: March 12, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 47)] 
[Notices] [Page 11004] From the Federal Register Online via GPO 
Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr12mr07-54]                         

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

AGENCY: Department of Energy.

ACTION: Notice of Open Meeting.

SUMMARY: This notice announces a meeting of the Environmental 
Management Site-Specific Advisory Board (EM SSAB), Savannah River Site. 
The Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. No. 92-463, 86 Stat. 770) 
requires that public notice of this meeting be announced in the Federal 
Register.

DATES: Monday, March 26, 2007, 1 p.m.-5 p.m.; Tuesday, March 27, 2007, 
8:30 a.m.-4 p.m.

ADDRESSES: North Augusta Community Center, 495 Brookside Avenue, North 
Augusta, South Carolina 29961.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gerri Flemming, Closure Project 
Office, Department of Energy Savannah River Operations Office, P.O. Box 
A, Aiken, SC 29802; Phone: (803) 952-7886.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Purpose of the Board: The purpose of the Board is to make 
recommendations to DOE in the areas of environmental restoration, waste 
management, and related activities.
    Tentative Agenda:

Monday, March 26, 2007
    1 p.m.--Combined Committee Session.
    5 p.m.--Adjourn.

Tuesday, March 27, 2007
    8:30 a.m.--Approval of Minutes, Agency Updates.
    9:45 a.m.--Public Comment Session.
    10 a.m.--Chair and Facilitator Update.
    10:45 a.m.--Strategic & Legacy Management Committee Report.
    11:45 a.m.--Public Comment Session.
    12 p.m.--Lunch Break.
    1 p.m.--Nuclear Materials Committee Report.
    2 p.m.--Waste Management Committee Report.
    2:30 p.m.--Public Comment Session.
    2:45 p.m.--Facility Disposition & Site Remediation Committee 
Report.
    3:15 p.m.--Administrative Committee Report.
    4 p.m.--Adjourn.

    If needed, time will be allotted after public comments for items 
added to the agenda and administrative details. A final agenda will be 
available at the meeting Monday, March 26, 2007.
    Public Participation: The meeting is open to the public. Written 
statements may be filed with the Board either before or after the 
meeting. Individuals who wish to make oral statements pertaining to 
agenda items should contact Gerri Flemming's office at the address or 
telephone listed above. Requests must be received five days prior to 
the meeting and reasonable provision will be made to include the 
presentation in the agenda. The Deputy Designated Federal Officer is 
empowered to conduct the meeting in a fashion that will facilitate the 
orderly conduct of business. Individuals wishing to make public comment 
will be provided a maximum of five minutes to present their comments.
    Minutes: The minutes of this meeting will be available for public 
review and copying at the U.S. Department of Energy's Freedom of 
Information Public Reading Room, 1E-190, Forrestal Building, 1000 
Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585 between 9 a.m. and 4 
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. Minutes will also 
be available by writing to Gerri Flemming, Department of Energy 
Savannah River Operations Office, P.O. Box A, Aiken, SC 29802, or by 
calling her at (803) 952-7886.

    Issued at Washington, DC on March 6, 2007.
Rachel M. Samuel,
Deputy Advisory Committee Management Officer.
 [FR Doc. E7-4374 Filed 3-9-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6450-01-P


*****************************************************************
 65 KnoxNews: Museum in K-25 building would thrive, early study results show

By BOB FOWLER, fowlerb@knews.com

March 12, 2007

OAK RIDGE - A firm that helps launch new museums forecasts that 
200,000 people a year would visit a formerly super-secret 
building where uranium was enriched during the effort to build 
the world's first atomic bomb.

Access Museum Services President Johnny Gruber says that's a 
"very conservative'' estimate of the potential tourist draw for a 
visitors center in a small part of what was once the world's 
largest building.

Such a center showing the role of the mile-long K-25 building in
World War II's Manhattan Project "has very significant potential,''
according to Gruber's evaluation.

The half-mile-long legs of the building are being decontaminated and
razed as part of a program to clean up the site and convert it to
private-sector use.

The Department of Energy has agreed to leave the base of the
U-shaped K-25 building intact while its potential as a tourist
attraction is studied.

The Atomic Heritage Foundation was awarded a $340,000 DOE grant to
fund that study.

Preliminary results of those evaluations, done by Access Museum
Services and architectural firm Tuck-Hinton, both of Nashville, were
released recently in a series of meetings.

Those sessions "were to give the community a sense of where we
are,'' said Cindy Kelly, foundation president.

Next up, she said: more detailed studies.

Gruber's evaluation puts a $13.3 million estimated price tag on
converting a small part of the remaining K-25 building into a
visitors center.

Fundraising would be "a national effort,'' Kelly said. "Some (money)
would come from public sources, some private,'' she said.

Kelly said the new visitors center could form partnerships with the
American Museum of Science & Energy and the Children's Museum of Oak
Ridge in a push to market Oak Ridge as a heritage tourism site.

Under that scenario, Kelly said, "suddenly, everybody's visitation
goes up.''

Gruber said his firm has been involved in opening more than 75
museums nationwide, including the Women's Basketball Hall of Fame in
Knoxville.

"We predict that this unique facility and historic property could
become an economically successful and international significant
heritage tourism destination,'' Access Museum Services' evaluation
states of the K-25 building proposal.

Bob Fowler, News Sentinel Anderson County editor, may be reached at
865-481-3625.



 Copyright 2007, Knoxville News Sentinel Co.
    
*****************************************************************

NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 this 
material is distributed without profit or payment to those who 
have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for 
non-profit research and educational purposes only. For more 
information go to: 
<http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml> 
    
*****************************************************************