***************************************************************** 03/14/07 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 15.61 ***************************************************************** 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 UPI: Russia denies Iran paid on nuke plant 2 UPI: Analysis: Iranian official defected? 3 Digital Chosunilbo: No Quick Removal From U.S. Terror List for N.Kor 4 Digital Chosunilbo: N.Korea Starts Shutting Down Nuclear Facilities 5 Korea Times: Washington to Ban US Banks From Business With Macau's B 6 AFP: UN nuclear watchdog upbeat after rare visit to North Korea - 7 Guardian Unlimited: U.S. to Release Disputed N. Korea Money 8 US: ScrippsNews: Keeping the 'public' in public records 9 US: RIA Novosti: U.S. retains right for nuclear tests if necessary - 10 US: Guardian Unlimited: Veto Threats Hang Over House FOIA Bills 11 [southnews] Blair wins nuclear vote despite revolt 12 Guardian Unlimited: MPs are voting for a white elephant. And they kn 13 Guardian Unlimited: Browne: rejecting Trident means unilateral disar 14 Guardian Unlimited: Trident upgrade under way, MoD admits 15 Guardian Unlimited: Browne: rejecting Trident means unilateral disar 16 BBC NEWS: Blair's Trident gift to Brown 17 AFP: Blair facing rebellion over nuclear weapons vote 18 AFP: Blair wins nuclear vote despite revolt 19 Reuters: Parliament debates renewing nuclear weapons 20 Reuters: Britain votes to stay nuclear despite revolt 21 Telegraph: Government brushes off Trident opposition 22 AFP: Pakistan, India predict watershed year for peace - 23 Guardian Unlimited: British Lawmakers Weigh Missile Proposal 24 Guardian Unlimited: Party split as PM wins Trident vote 25 London Times: Brown brings rebel Trident MPs back in fold- NUCLEAR REACTORS 26 US: NRC: NRC to Discuss 2006 Performance at St. Lucie Nuclear Power 27 US: Pantagraph.com: Clinton power station will remain at higher taxa 28 US: San Luis Obispo Tribune: Bill extends life of Diablo Canyon emer 29 Earth Times: Temelin nuclear power plant opponents block four border 30 US: toledoblade.com: A nuclear move 31 US: APP.COM: Oyster Creek nuclear power plant cuts electricity produ 32 US: Burlington Free Press: My Turn: Nuclear power, with a caveat - 33 US: FR NRC: Notice of Opportunity for Comment on Model Safety Evalua 34 US: Reuters: M'bishi Heavy gets $4-5 bln TXU reactor deal-source | 35 UPI: Atomic energy capacity to rise to 7280 Mwe 36 US: Hemscott: Nuke reactor orders seen soon 37 US: AFP: Mitsubishi Heavy set for big US nuclear order 38 www.bbj.hu: EU rejects Balkans nuclear plea 39 US: Portsmouth Herald Local News: Nuclear plant ordered to act 40 US: New London Day: Millstone 3 Is Examined For Potential Welding Fl 41 US: SFSS: Safety review of the St. Lucie nuclear plant set for March 42 US: KNDO/KNDU: Work Begins to Prepare N Reactor for Cocooning NUCLEAR SECURITY 43 US: Guardian Unlimited: Dirty Bomb Materials Remain a Concern 44 US: Guardian Unlimited: Radium Vial Missing From Cleanup Site 45 UPI: Key radiological sites still unsecured NUCLEAR SAFETY 46 US: Poison DUst 47 US: NAS: Project: Gulf War and Health: Updated Literature Review of 48 US: NAS: Project: Beryllium Alloy Exposures in Military Aerospace Ap NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE 49 AU ABC: US waste specialist warns against nuclear energy 50 US: Chillicothe Gazette: Groups push for more input on nuclear partn 51 US: Salt Lake Tribune: Rolly: Does our guv have a secret pal? 52 The Australian: Don't go nuclear, US expert warns 53 Las Vegas CityLife: Up Front: Collision course 54 News & Star: Sellafield to repeat emergency exercise PEACE 55 BBC NEWS: Anti-nuclear protests at dockyard US DEPT. OF ENERGY 56 USATODAY.com: Had to accept 'defeat,' says whistle-blower - 57 Hanford News: How one company lost out on protecting the nation from 58 Hanford News: Proposal riles crowd Annette Cary 59 Hanford News: Vancouver firm gets $8.8 million contract to clean up 60 KnoxNews: Feds pinch pennies while leaving bank vault open 61 Denver Business Journal: Rocky Flats refuge grows with additional la 62 FR DOE: Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board, North 63 KnoxNews: Seqouyah reactor shut down ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** FULL NEWS STORIES ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** 1 UPI: Russia denies Iran paid on nuke plant United Press International - NewsTrack - Published: March 14, 2007 at 4:53 PM MOSCOW, March 14 (UPI) -- Russia's nuclear agency denies Iran's claim that it has paid Russia $12.7 million toward construction of the Bushehr nuclear power plant. "The statement of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran that Tehran transferred $12.7 million March 1 as part of its financing of the construction of the Bushehr NPP is pure nonsense," a spokesman for the Russian Nuclear Power Agency told RIA Novosti. "Russia has not received any money." Iran has denied accusations by the United States and other Western countries that the power plant project is part of a covert atomic weapons program. The United States has said it will support the power plant project only if the Russian-supplied nuclear fuel is used exclusively for peaceful purposes and the spent fuel returned to Russia, the Russian news service said. Copyright 2007 United Press International, Inc. All Rights ***************************************************************** 2 UPI: Analysis: Iranian official defected? United Press International - Intl. Intelligence - 3/13/2007 7:00:00 PM -0400 By OWEN PRASKIEVICZ UPI Correspondent WASHINGTON, March 13 (UPI) -- A senior Iranian official who reportedly defected in Turkey last month may have documents linking Iran to terrorists throughout the Middle East, according to various reports released Sunday. Brig. Gen Ali Reza Asgari, 63, the former deputy defense minister of Iran, is said to be in NATO hands on a base in Germany, the United Kingdom's Times Online reported Sunday, where he is undergoing a debriefing after a planned escape to get him and his family out of Iran. Asgari was believed to have been in possession of documents proving Iran's links to terrorists in the Middle East, the Times reported, though they said he did not have details of the country's nuclear program. According to the Jerusalem Newswire, however, Asgari is familiar with Iran's nuclear and ballistic missile programs, in addition to holding documents firmly connecting the Iranian government to Lebanon's Hezbollah, the Palestinian Islamic Jihad and the two largest militias in Iraq -- the Mahdi Army and the Badr Corps. The reports also indicated that he knew of Tehran's preparations for possible military conflict with the U.S. Asgari served as a high value military commander who acted as a liaison between Tehran's clerics and Lebanon's Hezbollah during the 1980s. Experts say Asgari would have knowledge of Hezbollah's infrastructure and their military capabilities. If Asgari's information is verified, it could help lay the groundwork for changes in U.S. policy toward Iran, though experts say the Asgari situation is overshadowed by other intelligence linking Iran to Iraqi insurgents. "This particular situation is not going to make (the Iranian-U..S relations) worse or better. No conclusive evidence has surfaced so far," said Bilal Saab, a Middle East analyst for the Brookings Institution. "The big story is Iranian involvement in Iraq. There's a lot more credible information in that story." Though Saab said photos and other evidence showing Iran's support of insurgents in Iraq outweighs Asgari's defection, he admitted such a defection would be unusual. "It's very difficult to penetrate Hezbollah, the fact that this could potentially be the first time the U.S. and Western intelligence agencies are able to penetrate, through the Iranian General, Hezbollah's very secretive organizational structure is groundbreaking," Saab said. "This is a man who has occupied high positions inside the Iranian government since the Iran-Iraq War and has had access to intelligence on national security matters," Saab said. Asgari was targeted for defection after Iran's secret service was believed to have suspected he was leaking information. Asgari disappeared under odd circumstances last month while traveling to Turkey from Damascus where he never checked into his hotel, leading to accusations from Tehran that Western intelligence officials orchestrated his kidnapping. An Israeli newspaper, the Yedioth Aharonot, reported over the weekend that Mossad, Israel's external security service, had arranged for Asgari's escape, though it was not evident which intelligence service he was working for. On Feb. 7, four days after arriving in Damascus, Asgari reportedly boarded a flight to Istanbul where he was given a new passport and left Turkey by car. "Asgari is a gold mine for western intelligence," an Israeli defense source told the Times. "We have been following him for years, especially since the late 1980s when he was commander of the Revolutionary Guard in Lebanon." According to the Times, the escape took several months to plan, and at least 10 close members of Asgari's family had to flee the country as well. Asgari has two sons, a daughter and several grandchildren, and all are considered to have escaped Iran. Washington has not made any official comment about Asgari's defection. Copyright 2007 United Press International, Inc. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 3 Digital Chosunilbo: No Quick Removal From U.S. Terror List for N.Korea Updated Mar.14,2007 10:28 KST North Korea will not be easily removed from the U.S. list of states that sponsor terrorism. U.S. State Department spokesman Tom Casey said that taking North Korea off the terrorism blacklist is a process that will require a lot of time and careful reviews. He also made it clear that the process to normalize diplomatic ties between the U.S. and North Korea can move forward only when the North takes steps to make the Korean Peninsula nuclear-free. Casey, seemingly wanting to dampen expectations that the North will be taken off the list quickly, said that Pyongyang should answer questions about why it had been put on the list. North Korea's top nuclear envoy Kim Kye-kwan said recently that the U.S. promised to de-list North Korea. The six-nation agreement reached in Beijing on Feb. 13 requires the U.S. to start the process to remove the North from the terror list in the initial 60-day stage. The U.S. government must report to Congress 45 days before it removes a country from the list. A U.S. lawmaker said that the Bush administration could be flexible in implementing the Feb. 13 agreement, but removing North Korea from the list might take considerable time. (englishnews@chosun.com ) ***************************************************************** 4 Digital Chosunilbo: N.Korea Starts Shutting Down Nuclear Facilities Updated Mar.14,2007 07:43 KST Timed with the arrival in Pyongyang on Tuesday of International Atomic Energy Agency Director-General Mohamed ElBaradei, signs were detected that North Korea had started shutting down its nuclear facilities at Yongbyon. Reuters quoted a U.S. official as saying that North Korea was apparently preparing to shut them down, and a diplomatic source in Seoul said Pyongyang probably did so to negotiate with the IAEA director-general in compliance with the Feb. 13 six-party agreement. A South Korean official said, "If North Korea has suspended operation of its nuclear facilities, its a very positive step indeed." The six-party agreement stipulates that North Korea shuts them down under IAEA supervision by April 13. International Atomic Energy Agency Director-General Mohamed ElBaradeis sits in a car on the way to Beiing Airport before flying to North Korea on Tuesday./REUTERS-Newsis Meanwhile, ElBaradei is accompanied by IAEA Deputy Director-General Olli Heinonen, who has dealt with the North Korean nuclear issue since the first crisis in the 1990s. Since 1992, Heinonen has visited North Korea several times, pointing out significant inconsistencies in North Korea's initial statement on its nuclear facilities by using cutting-edge equipment. The first nuclear crisis erupted when North Korea rejected IAEA special inspections in protest at Heinonen's report. On return to Beijing on Thursday, ElBaradei will meet the top U.S. nuclear negotiator Christopher Hill. (englishnews@chosun.com ) ***************************************************************** 5 Korea Times: Washington to Ban US Banks From Business With Macau's BDA Hankooki.com > The Korea Times > Special The United States has decided to formally bar American banks from doing business with the Macau-based Banco Delta Asia (BDA), suspected of handling illicit North Korean assets, the U.S. Treasury Department said on Tuesday. The U.S. Treasury Department is expected to make an announcement this week that could help overseas regulators identify higher-risk and lower-risk account holders, the Yonhap News Agency quoted a U.S. official as saying. This risk assessment in turn could be used by Macau to release money that has been frozen. The move is expected to clear the way for Macau authorities to decide whether to release millions of dollars in frozen accounts that Pyongyang has been demanding as a condition of negotiations on its nuclear program, Yonhap quoted the official as saying. Some $24 million was frozen in September 2005 when the BDA was designated a ``primary money laundering concern'' abetting North Korea. The BDA was accused of laundering money North Korea earned through illicit financial activities, including the production and circulation of counterfeit American currency and the trafficking of drugs and contraband. As part of a six-nation deal reached Feb. 13 on ending North Korea's nuclear program, the U.S. launched talks with Pyongyang on eventually ending the financial sanctions. Meanwhile, Yonhap, South Korea's semi-official news agency, reported that authorities in Macau could liquidate the BDA if the U.S. designates it as a financial institution that laundered money. The agency quoted a South Korean official as saying that liquidation would mean Pyongyang could recover some or all of the $24 million it had at BDA. ``I believe the owner of BDA would have to take responsibility for what he or she may be found responsible for, based on the outcome of the investigation,'' the official was quoted as saying. ``I think (the issue of) how much money will be released to North Korea is now in the hands of the Macau government.'' 03-14-2007 13:26 ***************************************************************** 6 AFP: UN nuclear watchdog upbeat after rare visit to North Korea - by Robert J. Saiget Wed Mar 14, 1:59 PM ET BEIJING (AFP) - The head of the UN's atomic watchdog said Wednesday his agency's first direct talks with North Korea in more than four years had been useful and the Stalinist nation remained committed to disarming. However International Atomic Energy Agency chief Mohamed ElBaradei also cautioned significant hurdles remained in the long-running international campaign to end North Korea's nuclear weapons programme. "The DPRK (North Korea) said they were committed to the denuclearization of the Korean peninsula. But that won't happen overnight," ElBaradei told reporters in Beijing after his two-day visit to Pyongyang. ElBaradei's visit was his first since North Korea kicked out the atomic watchdog's inspectors in December 2002 and the following month pulled out of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. North Korea then conducted its first atomic test in October last year, but under global pressure returned to six-nation disarmament talks and agreed to give up its nuclear weapons in return for fuel aid and other concessions. ElBaradei said he had met with three of the most senior members of Kim Jong-Il's regime in Pyongyang, and described his visit as "useful." He said he was told North Korea was "fully committed" to the six-nation deal struck on February 13, which would see Pyongyang initially close its main Yongbyon nuclear reactor in exchange for 50,000 tonnes of heavy fuel. But he warned Pyongyang remained insistent that US sanctions imposed on North Korea in 2005 for alleged money laundering and counterfeiting must be lifted if the disarmament deal was to hold. The sanctions have seen 24 million dollars of North Korean funds frozen in Banco Delta Asia, a bank in the southern Chinese territory of Macau. North Korea's demand for the sanctions to be lifted has previously held up disarmament talks, although the United States agreed as part of last month's deal to resolve the issue. Just after Elbaradei's press conference, the US Treasury announced in Washington it would unveil later Wednesday its plan for resolving the sanctions dispute. The Treasury scheduled a press conference for 1700 GMT to make the announcement. Under the six-nation deal, North Korea agreed to close its Yongbyon facility by mid-April and allow IAEA inspectors back into the country to supervise proceedings. Elbaradei gave no indication as to if or when Yongybon would close, nor the timing of the inspectors' return. But, after having so little contact with North Korea since 2002, he said the trip gave him a valuable insight into the isolated nation's position on its nuclear programme. "With the meetings I understood where they are coming from, what are their concerns and hopes," he said. "I hope in the next few weeks, months and years, we will continue to work with the DPRK with the objective we all share, which is to make sure we get rid of the nuclear weapons programme." ElBaradei also dismissed media reports that North Korea's chief nuclear envoy and a vice foreign minister, Kim Kye-Gwan, had snubbed him during his visit on Wednesday with a claim of being "too busy." ElBaradei said Kim was sick. "It's not true to say he was too busy," he said, emphasising he had met with another vice foreign minister, Ri Je-Son, as well as the vice president of the standing committee of North Korea's parliament, Kim Yong-Dae. The third official was the head of North Korea's Atomic Energy General Bureau. Under the terms of last month's agreement, North Korea would eventually receive the equivalent of one million tonnes of fuel aid if it completely disbanded its nuclear weapons programme. The six-nation talks -- which involve the two Koreas, China, Japan, Russia and the United States -- are due to resume in Beijing on Monday. The chief US envoy to the talks, Christopher Hill, arrived in Beijing on Wednesday and said he would meet with ElBaradei on Thursday. AFP Photo: International Atomic Energy Agency director Mohamed ElBaradei addresses a press conference in Beijing. The head... Copyright 2007 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The ***************************************************************** 7 Guardian Unlimited: U.S. to Release Disputed N. Korea Money From the Associated Press Wednesday March 14, 2007 10:16 PM By JEANNINE AVERSA AP Economics Writer WASHINGTON (AP) - The Bush administration announced steps Wednesday that could enable the release of North Korean assets frozen in a Macau bank, an action sought by Pyongyang as part of a nuclear arms deal. In a two-step decision, the Treasury Department also said it is severing ties between Banco Delta Asia and the U.S. financial system because of its alleged money laundering for North Korea. At the same time, however, the department is expected to provide guidance to help overseas regulators identify highest-risk and lower-risk account holders. This risk assessment, in turn, could be used by Macau to release some North Korean money that has been frozen and is being held by the bank. Banco Delta Asia holds roughly $25 million in frozen North Korean assets, the department said. The frozen accounts have been a major sore spot for the North Korean government and so angered Pyongyang that it had refused to participate in six-nation nuclear arms talks for more than a year. The North did return to disarmament talks in December. A deal was struck Feb. 13, in part because of an agreement to resolve the dispute over the frozen funds within 30 days. The United States, which has spent 18 months investigating the bank, said it will share its findings this week with the Macau government, a move that would pave the way for overseas authorities to release any North Korean money that had been frozen. The Associated Press has reported that $8 million to $12 million could be unfrozen by authorities in Macau, a semiautonomous territory of China, following the department's action. It could take weeks to release any money. Treasury Department officials declined to provide any details on the amount of frozen North Korean money that could eventually be released. That decision, they said, is up to the Macau government. ``The Macanese authorities moved to freeze upwards of $25 million held in the bank by clients associated with North Korea,'' said Stuart Levey, Treasury's under secretary for terrorism and financial intelligence. ``We have worked closely with the Macanese on our investigation into the BDA, and this week we are transmitting our findings to the Macanese authorities,'' he said. Details weren't provided. Levey commended Macanese authorities, which took over management of Banco Delta Asia, for ``significant strides in strengthening Macau's anti-money laundering regime'' and for managing the bank ``responsibly'' over the last 18 months. He said Macau has enacted new laws and regulations to safeguard the country from financial crime and developed a specialized money laundering unit within its police force. At the State Department, deputy spokesman Tom Casey said U.S. officials had promised North Korea that they would ``resolve or produce a final ruling'' on the financial sanctions by mid-month. ``Everyone's got obligations. Everyone intends to meet their obligations. At least we do,'' Casey said. The chief U.N. nuclear inspector on Wednesday said North Korea was ``fully committed'' to an agreement that requires it to shutter its main nuclear reactor and let in inspectors as soon as the U.S. drops financial sanctions. Mohamed ElBaradei, head of the Vienna-based International Atomic Energy Agency, described the talks on how North Korea will close its main atomic reactor at Yongbyon as ``quite useful.'' ``They said they are fully committed to the Feb. 13 agreement, that they are ready to work with the agency to make sure that we monitor and verify the shutdown of the Yongbyon facility,'' he said. He added that officials in Pyongyang also ``reiterated they are committed to the denuclearization of the Korean peninsula.'' The U.S. government first took action against Banco Delta Asia in September 2005, calling it a ``willing pawn for the North Korean government to engage in corrupt financial activities.'' At that time, the Treasury Department put the bank on the U.S. government's money-laundering blacklist for what the department determined were lax money-laundering controls. The department also proposed cutting off the bank from the U.S. financial system, a power provided by the USA Patriot Act. The U.S. alleged the bank help North Korea distribute counterfeit currency and cigarettes, and drugs, proliferate weapons of mass destruction and other crimes. Banco Delta Asia has said money might have been laundered at the bank but there was no evidence that the institution was aware it was being used for that purpose. Customers, however, still rushed to withdraw money from the bank, prompting the Macau government to take over management. If the U.S. government's concerns are eventually eased about Banco Delta Asia, the Treasury Department could rescind its order severing the bank from the U.S. financial system, department officials said. Guardian Unlimited Guardian News and Media Limited 2007 ***************************************************************** 8 ScrippsNews: Keeping the 'public' in public records An editorial / By Dale McFeatters Wednesday, March 14, 2007 Since 9/11, the National Archives, the keeper of the nation's records, has quietly removed more than 1.1 million pages of government documents from public view. According to the Associated Press, which broke the story, "entire file boxes were removed without significant review," some of them containing papers more than a century old, because the Archives lacked the time to do a thorough scrutiny. Even the overly secretive Bush administration has occasional justification for secrecy, and at least some of the records at the Archives are a case in point _ files on nuclear, chemical and biological weapons technology, intelligence gathering, blueprints of critical facilities, government contingency plans. But 1.1 million pages worth? And some of the stuff _ maps, photos, even 60-year-old information on biological weapons, current topics in the Mideast _ are very likely accessible on the Internet. One of the reclassified documents was a 1960 map of a Tennessee reservoir; a motivated terrorist could get more up to date information from the local bait and tackle shop. This would not be particularly worrisome if the Archives had not been caught earlier in a secret agreement to allow the CIA and Pentagon to reclassify documents that had already been made public. An audit found that as many as 75 percent of those documents should never have been reclassified. To its credit, the Archives scrapped that arrangement and pledged not to enter any more secret classification agreements and, according to the AP, the number of files being removed from public access has dramatically declined. Researchers can still file Freedom of Information requests for the sequestered files but they need to know precisely which documents have been removed. One open government advocate interviewed by the AP urged that the Archives create a public registry of the documents it has pulled from the shelves, which seems reasonable. Some care needs to be taken but the Archives should be guided by the principle of erring on the side of openness. Other E.W. Scripps Web sites include HGTV | Food Network | ***************************************************************** 9 RIA Novosti: U.S. retains right for nuclear tests if necessary - official 13:57 | 14/ 03/ 2007 MOSCOW, March 14 (RIA Novosti) - The United States reserves the right to conduct nuclear tests in the future, but hopes it will not be necessary, a U.S. government official said Wednesday. U.S. Deputy Secretary of Energy Clay Sell is currently on a visit to Russia to participate in the work of the U.S.-Russia Energy Working Group and to discuss key energy cooperation issues between the two countries. Sell said at a meeting in the Carnegie Center in Moscow that the U.S. will retain its right to test its nuclear weapons, although it hopes such testing will never be necessary. The U.S. is part to the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) that prohibits any nuclear weapon test explosion in any environment, but has not yet ratified the document. Drafted at the Conference on Disarmament in Geneva, and adopted by the U.N. General Assembly September 10, 1996, the treaty was opened for signature September 24, 1996 at the United Nations headquarters in New York. To date, 177 States have signed the CTBT and 138 States have ratified it. To enter into force, however, the CTBT must be signed and ratified by the 44 states listed in Annex 2 to the treaty. Thirty-four of those states have ratified the treaty, including three nuclear weapons states - France, the Russian Federation and the United Kingdom. The 10 remaining states are China, Colombia, the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Egypt, India, Indonesia, the Islamic Republic of Iran, Israel, Pakistan and the United States of America. The U.S. official said that the United States is interested in reducing the number of nuclear weapons in the world, but that while such weapons exist, the country needs to maintain and upgrade its stockpiles. He also addressed the importance of U.S. - Russia nuclear non-proliferation cooperation through the Bratislava Nuclear Security Initiative and Global Nuclear Energy Partnership. Under the 2005 Bratislava Nuclear Security Cooperation Initiative, the United States and Russia agreed to expand bilateral efforts to improve nuclear security by completing security upgrades by the end of 2008, stepping up work on repatriating highly-enriched uranium fuel from research reactors in third countries and converting these reactors to use low-enriched uranium fuel, and cooperating on nuclear emergency response. The Global Nuclear Energy Partnership (GNEP), announced by United States Department of Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman February 6, 2006, is a program to form an international partnership to reprocess spent nuclear fuel and use new proliferation-resistant technologies to recover more energy and reduce waste. The Deputy Energy Secretary said the United States shares Russia's approach to the problem of funding the construction of the Bushehr nuclear power plant in southern Iran, but will support the project only if the Russian nuclear fuel shipped to the NPP is used exclusively for peaceful purposes and spent fuel is returned to Russia. However, Sell reiterated that Iran is seeking to develop nuclear weapons by using modern technologies, which allow spent nuclear fuel from nuclear power plants to be reprocessed into weapon-grade plutonium. The Deputy Secretary's visit to Moscow is the first stop on a trip that will also take him to Ukraine and Georgia, where he will discuss global energy security and nuclear non-proliferation with senior officials. Sell also said that Russia's Minister of Industry and Energy Viktor Khristenko will visit the United States in May to discuss G8 global energy principles in advancing energy security and continuing efforts to ensure strict adherence to the non-proliferation regime. ***************************************************************** 10 Guardian Unlimited: Veto Threats Hang Over House FOIA Bills From the Associated Press Wednesday March 14, 2007 11:16 PM By JIM ABRAMS Associated Press Writer WASHINGTON (AP) - Open-government bills sped to House passage Wednesday as Democrats pushed to make the president and his executive branch more forthcoming about their actions. The White House struck back with veto threats. Aided by substantial Republican support, the Democrats approved legislation to force government agencies to be more responsive to the millions of Freedom of Information Act requests for public documents they receive every year. The House also easily passed bills to require donors to presidential libraries to identify themselves - an issue as President Bush prepares for his own library - and to reverse a 2001 Bush decision making it easier for presidents to keep their records from public scrutiny. The White House, citing the president's constitutional prerogatives, warned that the presidential records bill would be vetoed if it reached his desk. The White House threatened to veto a separate bill, to better protect government whistle-blowers, that was being considered Wednesday. The votes were 390-34 on the presidential library bill; 333-93 on the presidential records bill; and 308-117 on the FOIA legislation. Those three bills and the whistle-blower bill are part of the media-led Sunshine Week. Democrats are using the annual event to highlight what they say is a disturbing level of secrecy in the Bush administration. The Senate Judiciary Committee, meanwhile, heard testimony on a parallel FOIA bill. Introduced by Sens. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., and John Cornyn, R-Texas, it would improve administration of the law and penalize agencies that fail to comply in a timely fashion. Media representatives said seven agencies have gone more than a decade without responding to some requests for information under the law. They endorsed the bill's penalties, its provisions to allow people to track the progress of their requests and its plan to repay attorney fees in successful suits for records that were denied. Tom Curley, president and chief executive of The Associated Press and a member of the media Sunshine in Government Initiative, said AP's legal battles to get information about suspected terrorists detained at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, had cost ``well into six figures,'' but the Pentagon proposed to reimburse only $11,000. Under current law, he said, ``We'll have to sue again to get a higher, fairer number.'' The House bill goes a step further than the Senate version in restoring a ``presumption of disclosure'' standard. That would oblige agencies to release requested information unless there is a finding that such a disclosure could do harm. The requirement would overturn a memo by former Attorney General John Ashcroft after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, advising against the release of information when there was uncertainty over security or law enforcement exemptions. The White House said in a statement it strongly opposed the House provision, contending it would upset the balance between the public's right to know and the need to safeguard certain information. The statement said the administration was against the bill because it was ``premature and counterproductive'' to legislate new requirements on federal agencies before they have a chance to put in place changes the president previously outlined. The 40-year-old FOIA law was a promise that people could find out what their government was doing ``in all but a few kinds of highly sensitive or confidential matters,'' Curley said. ``The law does back them. But in many cases the government doesn't back the law.'' Democrats claimed that situation has worsened under this administration. ``For the past six years, we have had an administration that has tried to operate in secrecy, without transparency, without the public having knowledge about their action,'' said Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee. ``Well, this week, Congress is finally pushing back.'' Caroline Fredrickson, director of the American Civil Liberties Union's Washington legislative office, said the FOIA bill was needed because ``this has been the most secretive administration since the Nixon years. ... It is too easy for the government to defy requests for information it is obligated to turn over.'' The presidential records measure would rescind Bush's 2001 executive order giving current and former presidents and vice presidents authority to withhold presidential records or delay their release indefinitely. The act was passed after Watergate ``to underscore the fact that presidential records belong to the American people, not to the president,'' Waxman said. The presidential directive, he said, ``undermines the entire purpose'' of the act. Sunshine Week, March 11-17, is a three-year-old national initiative led by the American Society of Newspaper Editors. It is intended to open a dialogue about the importance of open government and freedom of information. Participants include print, broadcast and online news media, civic groups, libraries, non-profits, schools and others. The Senate Rules Committee on Wednesday also took up an open-government issue, a bill that would force Senate campaign finance reports to be filed electronically rather than in paper format. House and presidential candidates file electronically, and ``there is no excuse for keeping our own campaign finance information inaccessible to the public,'' said Sen. Russell Feingold, D-Wis. --- Associated Press writer Michael J. Sniffen contributed to this report. ^--- On the Net: Information on the House bills - H.R. 1309 (FOIA); H.R. 1254 (libraries); H.R. 1255 (presidential records); and H.R. 985 (whistle-blowers): http://oversight.house.gov/investigations.asp?Issue=Open+Government Information on the Senate bill, S. 849, can be found at http://thomas.loc.gov Guardian Unlimited Guardian News and Media Limited 2007 ***************************************************************** 11 [southnews] Blair wins nuclear vote despite revolt Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2007 17:50:34 -0500 (CDT) UK Prime Minister Tony Blair won backing for plans to renew Britain's nuclear deterrent Wednesday, but only after an embarrassing revolt from within his own Labour ranks. The motion only passed with the backing of opposition Conservatives, after 95 Labour MPs voted against their own government, according to the BBC. Blair wins nuclear vote despite revolt Thursday March 15, 07:55 AM LONDON (AFP) - Prime Minister Tony Blair won backing for plans to renew Britain's nuclear deterrent Wednesday, but only after an embarrassing revolt from within his own Labour ranks. After a sometimes rowdy debate and the resignation of two more junior government ministers, lawmakers voted by 409 in favour of renewing the US-built Trident missile system, and 161 against. The motion only passed with the backing of opposition Conservatives, after 95 Labour MPs voted against their own government, according to the BBC. The parliamentary rebuff was believed to be the the biggest rebellion within Labour ranks since March 2003, when 138 Labour MPs, including former foreign secretary Robin Cook, voted against invading Iraq. Anti-nuclear campaigners hailed the vote as a success with Kate Hudson of the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (CND) describing it as a "major victory for the peace movement." The leader of the smaller opposition Liberal Democrats, Menzies Campbell, who opposed the decision, said it was a "humiliation" for the government. ADVERTISEMENT "I think the government will be well advised to take account not only of the vote but also of public opinion which is very very doubtful" about the Trident renewal plans, he added. Blair is widely perceived as gradually losing his grip on party discipline as he prepares to step down in the coming months after a decade in power. He is expected to hand over to finance minister Gordon Brown. Before lawmakers debated the issue, Blair told them a future parliament could still decide in 2012-2014 whether or not to put out new contracts for new nuclear submarines that carry the weapons. But it was vital to begin the concept and design process on the vessels immediately as they took 17 years to develop and the four existing submarines were expected to reach the end of their working life by 2024. "I think it's right we take the decision now to begin work on replacing the Trident nuclear submarines. I think that is essential for our security in an uncertain world," Blair said. "I believe it is important that we recognise that although it is impossible to predict the future, the one thing ... that is certain, is the unpredictability of it. "For that reason, I think it is sensible we take this decision today." Blair outlined proposals in December to replace the submarines and extend the shelf-life of the weapons beyond 2050, sparking widespread opposition from the traditional anti-nuclear lobby and many in his own Labour party. Many Labour MPs had indicated they would go against the government over Trident while four junior ministerial aides this week resigned in protest -- including two during the debate itself. Opponents, including Church leaders and unions, dispute government claims it would cost 15-20 billion pounds (22-29.1 billion euros, 29-38.5 billion dollars) to replace. They argue the cost could rise to more than 100 billion pounds if maintenance and other costs are added, that Trident is a Cold War relic and the money could be better spent elsewhere. Opponents say most Britons are against renewing Trident and that in doing so Britain is being hypocritical because of its attempts to prevent Iran and North Korea obtaining nuclear weapons. It could also potentially trigger a new wave of nuclear proliferation, they add. Within Labour, where unilateral nuclear disarmament was party policy in the 1980s, grassroots members and left-wing traditionalists in parliament have accused Blair of stifling debate on the proposals. ***************************************************************** 12 Guardian Unlimited: MPs are voting for a white elephant. And they know it The nuclear deterrent is a cold war relic. Renewing Trident for a hypothetical conflict only deprives the army of basic resources Simon Jenkins Wednesday March 14, 2007 The Guardian I can hardly believe that a majority of British MPs will tonight vote to renew the British nuclear deterrent. Almost all of them, of all parties, know in their heads that it makes no sense. They lack the guts to say so, Labour MPs because they want jobs under Gordon Brown, Conservatives because they love whizzbangs and want to embarrass Tony Blair by keeping him in power, for reasons that pass comprehension. There is no surer sign that the Trident missile system is strategically obsolete than the archaic arguments ranged in its support. It is said to be the ultimate weapon. We have got it and may as well keep it. It is an insurance policy against "the unknown". You never know what the terrorist might get up to. You can't trust the Americans. Trident keeps us a place at the top table. Unlike Blair, I thought unilateral nuclear disarmament during the cold war was misguided. At a time when two centralised states, America and the Soviet Union, had large nuclear arsenals poised in equilibrium, keeping that balance required precision discipline, as did their subsequent dismantling. In 1982, Blair said that to reject unilateralism would be "an error of enormous proportions". He was wrong and irresponsible. Multilateral disarmament yielded treaties on arms reduction and nuclear non-proliferation that helped end the threat of communism and made the world incomparably safer, more than can be said for the west's present generation of leaders. Half the Labour members of the House of Commons, including the prime minister, were members of the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament. They must surely acknowledge that the spirit, if not the actual letter, of the nuclear non-proliferation treaty requires Britain to decommission Trident. While that may make no difference to the nuclear ambition of North Korea or Iran, the sheer hypocrisy of Britain preaching a non-nuclear world while preparing to spend a staggering 70bn buying and running new long-range missiles, warheads and submarine platforms is breathtaking. Trident is like the Olympic games or ID cards, projects whose mindless extravagance stretching beyond parliaments puts them out of reach of sane value-for-money accounting. They demand a quasi-religious "justification by faith", supported by a baying priesthood of weapons contractors, publicists and BAE lobbyists. Trident worshippers are a mystical freemasonry, seemingly obsessed with priapic enhancement and ancestor worship. Their concern is with prestige, not with defence. The case against Trident hardly bears repetition. Its value as a deterrent depends on a coherent enemy with a leadership capable of being deterred. This applied to America and Russia in the cold war. That is now over. Even if Nato restarted it by reckless meddling in southern Asia and the Caucasus, Britain's use of nuclear weapons in such aggression would be unthinkable. As for the west's nuclear shield, that would continue to be supplied by America. The truth is that the west's nuclear status has not deterred any aggressor. It did not deter North Vietnam from invading the south, Galtieri from invading the Falklands, Saddam Hussein from invading America's ally Kuwait, Syria from invading Lebanon or Milosevic from massacring his fellow Yugoslavs. It does not matter how devastating a weapon is. If its use is inconceivable, its deterrent value is zero. These wars were won by troops seizing and holding territory with conventional weapons, which have not changed qualitatively in half a century. Those that pose the biggest threat to the British army are the AK-47 (celebrating its 60th birthday), the rocket-propelled grenade and the explosive roadside device. When these are allied to the suicide bomber, the fanatical preacher and global 24/7 media manipulation, western forces seem to have no answer. The wars being fought by the west's current leaders are "fourth generation" wars, post-conventional, post-nuclear and post-guerrilla. They are not against states but against groups, insurgencies and public opinions. They are fought in cities and through the media, pitting terror against normalcy and surveillance against liberty. They confuse the boundary between civil and military operations. Defence against such aggression requires diplomacy, espionage, special forces and, I have no doubt, secret ruthlessness. The idea that a nuclear weapon might influence such conflict is absurd. Even in the unlikely event of a terror group being able to steal, mobilise and arm a nuclear device, it would not be deterred by a threatened nuclear strike against some distant state. Britain and America dealt a supposedly devastating blow against "terror" by toppling the governments of Afghanistan and Iraq. The effect has been counter-productive. The greatest danger of nuclear weapons is that they tend to make their owners think themselves omnipotent. The non-proliferation treaty is being shot to pieces by America appeasing the nuclear ambitions of Israel, India and Pakistan and goading Iran's fundamentalists into wanting a bomb too. These states want bombs not to threaten the west but, as with the east-west balance in the cold war, to balance regional deterrence. We may not like this but we can't stop it; nor does it threaten Britain or the non-nuclear states that comprise most of the world. We have lived with this appalling weapon for half a century, in which it has never been used in anger. The genie is out of the bottle, and diplomacy is her most effective chaperone. Trident renewal is a classic example of generals fighting the last war but one. Any fool can claim that a nation must be armed against any contingency. But this is a platitude, not a policy. Sound defence is built on prediction and proportion, and must work to budget. Were there money to burn on defence procurement, soldiers might welcome all the kit in the world. As it is, Britain's forces are plainly short of the most basic equipment. In Iraq and Afghanistan the army has reportedly been short of helicopters, safe troop carriers, radios that work, body armour and boots. Above all it has been short of soldiers. I might argue that we should not be fighting these wars, but we are, and those who support them have an even greater responsibility to adjust the defence budget to their priorities. Trident is not remotely a priority. It is a white elephant left over from a war that is past and won. Renewing it for a hypothetical war can only impede the army in fighting one that is all too real. How can any responsible MP vote for it? simon.jenkins@guardian.co.uk Email your comments for publication to: politics.editor@guardianunlimited.co.uk Guardian Unlimited Guardian News and Media Limited 2007 ***************************************************************** 13 Guardian Unlimited: Browne: rejecting Trident means unilateral disarmament for UK MPs vote to renew Trident Deborah Summers, H Mulholland and Matthew Tempest Wednesday March 14, 2007 Stephen Pound, who resigned today over the Trident proposals. Photograph: John Stillwell/PA. David Cameron helped save the government's blushes over the renewal of Trident tonight as the controversial proposals cleared the Commons with the help of Tory support. Despite a massive Labour rebellion, MPs backed Tony Blair's bid to spend between 15bn and 20bn on new submarines to carry the Trident missiles. MPs voted by 409 to 161, majority 248, in favour of the proposals. But around 85 Labour rebels were thought to have disobeyed a three-line whip and voted against the government. In an earlier ballot, MPs voted by 167 votes to 413 - majority 246 - against a rebel amendment to postpone the decision on the renewal of Trident until 2014. Sky News claimed that 93 Labour MPs had voted against the government. Prior to the ballot four members of the government resigned in protest against the plans. Labour MP Chris Ruane tonight resigned as a ministerial aide and announced he would vote against the government over Trident. Earlier today Stephen Pound, the parliamentary private secretary to the Labour chairwoman, Hazel Blears, also quit, saying he could not vote for the policy. "I support nearly everything this government does but I'm simply not convinced renewing the Trident submarines makes the world a safer place," he said. Earlier this week Nigel Griffiths, deputy leader of the house, and Jim Devine, a ministerial aide to health minister Rosie Winterton, also stepped down over the issue. But at prime minister's questions, Mr Blair defended plans for a Trident replacement and warned that the decision had "to be taken now" to ensure Britain had the option of maintaining a nuclear deterrent in the future. The prime minister insisted the vote would not bind future parliaments if a nuclear deterrent no longer seemed the best defence strategy for Britain. Failure to back tonight's motion would in effect mean unilateral disarmament for Britain, he said. "It is a 17-year programme," Mr Blair said. "It has to begin now if we are to maintain a nuclear deterrent. We cannot put this decision off; we have to take it now." John Denham, a former government minister and current chairman of the home affairs select committee, insisted that the vote should not lock the country into having a nuclear deterrent for the next 45 years. The MP tabled one of two amendments to the proposals in an effort to persuade rebel MPs to back the motion. The amendment accepted preparing the way for a new deterrent, but put off a final decision for several years. Mr Denham told Mr Blair that future parliaments should have an opportunity to reconsider whether a nuclear weapons system remained the best defence strategy for Britain. Describing Mr Denham's stance as being at the "reasonable end" of concerns expressed in the Trident debate, Mr Blair replied: "It is absolutely right, of course, that this government cannot bind the decision on future parliaments. "When you get to the gateway stage, between 2012 and 2014, it is always up to parliament to take another decision. "However, the reason why I believe we have to take this decision today is that if you don't start this process now we will not be in a position where, should we want to continue with a nuclear deterrent in 2012-2014, we can." The Tory leader, David Cameron, backed Mr Blair's position, saying that the retention of a nuclear deterrent was in the national interest. Mr Blair rejected Sir Menzies Campbell's claims that committing to a Trident replacement now would weaken the British government in talks in 2010 on the nuclear non-proliferation treaty. The Liberal Democrat leader and Jon Trickett, a Labour rebel, proposed a motion stating that the case for renewing Trident was not proven. But Mr Blair rounded on Sir Menzies over his call for the decision to be deferred until 2014. "I remember him saying a few days ago he will not sit on the fence. I am afraid he is, and it's not a comfortable place to be," said Mr Blair. Earlier today Des Browne, the defence secretary, denied a Guardian story which claimed that the Aldermaston Atomic Weapons Research Establishment was already being refurbished in anticipation of a Trident upgrade. Mr Browne said: "It is not true. The specific issue that the Guardian raises this morning was reported to the select committee in 2005 and is not an upgrading of the system; it is merely making sure that the system works to its maximum efficiency." A mass CND rally was expected in Parliament Square to coincide with the vote, while the protest continued outside the Faslane nuclear base on the Clyde in Scotland - where the nuclear submarines are kept. Four Greenpeace activists mounted a crane outside parliament yesterday, and the Anglican and Catholic churches both oppose upgrading Trident. The issue has also become a major theme in the election campaign for the Scottish parliament. At the Holyrood parliament this morning, three protesters were arrested after scaling the roof and hanging a "No Trident" banner on the building. Labour's working majority is 62, making unpopular government bills more vulnerable to rebellions. The largest Labour rebellion since 1997 was the March 2003 Iraq war vote, which saw 122 Labour MPs vote against the government. Email your comments for publication to: politics.editor@guardianunlimited.co.uk Guardian Unlimited Guardian News and Media Limited 2007 ***************************************************************** 14 Guardian Unlimited: Trident upgrade under way, MoD admits Richard Norton-Taylor Wednesday March 14, 2007 Protest outside Faslane nuclear base, home to Trident submarines. Photograph: Danny Lawson/PA Britain's Trident nuclear weapons are being secretly upgraded to increase their accuracy and ability to attack a wider range of targets, the Guardian has learned. Ministers have repeatedly denied there are plans to refurbish Britain's nuclear warheads, arguing that it will be up to the next parliament to decide whether to do so. However, the MoD has now admitted that a new firing device developed by the US is to be installed in Britain's nuclear weapons system by scientists at the Atomic Weapons Research Establishment at Aldermaston in Berkshire. Analysts said the device - called the Arming, Fusing and Firing (AF&F) system - would make the Trident system more effective because the weapons' power, impact and radioactive fallout could be changed depending on the target. The Mark 4A system is a new version of the older design currently fitted in the Trident missiles. The disclosure angered anti-nuclear campaigners on the eve of a Commons vote today on the government's plans to renew Trident. Labour is likely to suffer a damaging rebellion with backbench MPs questioning the need to renew a 20bn submarine fleet. Two members of the government have already resigned this week to vote against the motion. Joan Ruddock, a Labour MP and longtime opponent of nuclear weapons, said the discreet upgrading of the weapons system belied government claims. "This is further evidence of enhancing the warfighting capability of Trident and gives the lie to the claim in the white paper that it is a matter of simple deterrence." She added that the government had been very coy about whether the Trident weapons system was being designed to carry different yields. "Ministers want to maintain the myth that it is a matter of deterrence and they have no scenario to carry out warfighting," she said. Hans Kristensen, the director of the Federation of American Scientists' Nuclear Information Project, said yesterday: "The bottom line is that the new [device], which we now know is being added to the British system, is part of an effort to increase the warfighting effectiveness [of the Trident D5 missiles]." He added: "It will broaden the range of targets that can be held at risk with the weapon." The new firing mechanism would make the weapon more accurate and nuclear bombs could be exploded with relatively little radioactive fallout, Mr Kristensen said. John Ainslie, coordinator of the Scottish Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament, said it was "astonishing" that the MoD was secretly upgrading the existing Trident warhead without telling parliament. Paul Ingram, senior analyst at the British American Security Information Council, said: "The level and type of investment at Aldermaston of which this is a part indicates that Britain is looking to further upgrade its warheads for a variety of uses beyond simple deterrence." In a statement to the Guardian, an MoD spokesman said: "The Mk 4A Arming, Fusing and Firing system is a non-nuclear component used in the Trident warhead." He added: "This has nothing to do with any potential successor to Trident on which decisions have still to be taken." While there is no risk of the government losing today's vote, it will have to rely on Tory MPs to get it passed. Many backbenchers said they expected the revolt to surpass the 69 MPs who voted against the schools bill last year or the 72 who voted against the government on tuition fees in 2004. A second member of the government resigned yesterday so that he can vote against the motion. Jim Devine quit his post as parliamentary private secretary to health minister Rosie Winterton. His decision followed the resignation of Nigel Griffiths, deputy leader of the house, on Monday. Email your comments for publication to: politics.editor@guardianunlimited.co.uk Guardian Unlimited Guardian News and Media Limited 2007 ***************************************************************** 15 Guardian Unlimited: Browne: rejecting Trident means unilateral disarmament for UK Letters: Reasons to support new Trident system MPs vote to renew Trident Deborah Summers, H Mulholland and Matthew Tempest Wednesday March 14, 2007 Stephen Pound, who resigned today over the Trident proposals. Photograph: John Stillwell/PA. David Cameron helped save the government's blushes over the renewal of Trident tonight as the controversial proposals cleared the Commons with the help of Tory support. Despite a massive Labour rebellion, MPs backed Tony Blair's bid to spend between 15bn and 20bn on new submarines to carry the Trident missiles. MPs voted by 409 to 161, majority 248, in favour of the proposals. But around 85 Labour rebels were thought to have disobeyed a three-line whip and voted against the government. In an earlier ballot, MPs voted by 167 votes to 413 - majority 246 - against a rebel amendment to postpone the decision on the renewal of Trident until 2014. Sky News claimed that 93 Labour MPs had voted against the government. Prior to the ballot four members of the government resigned in protest against the plans. Labour MP Chris Ruane tonight resigned as a ministerial aide and announced he would vote against the government over Trident. Earlier today Stephen Pound, the parliamentary private secretary to the Labour chairwoman, Hazel Blears, also quit, saying he could not vote for the policy. "I support nearly everything this government does but I'm simply not convinced renewing the Trident submarines makes the world a safer place," he said. Earlier this week Nigel Griffiths, deputy leader of the house, and Jim Devine, a ministerial aide to health minister Rosie Winterton, also stepped down over the issue. But at prime minister's questions, Mr Blair defended plans for a Trident replacement and warned that the decision had "to be taken now" to ensure Britain had the option of maintaining a nuclear deterrent in the future. The prime minister insisted the vote would not bind future parliaments if a nuclear deterrent no longer seemed the best defence strategy for Britain. Failure to back tonight's motion would in effect mean unilateral disarmament for Britain, he said. "It is a 17-year programme," Mr Blair said. "It has to begin now if we are to maintain a nuclear deterrent. We cannot put this decision off; we have to take it now." John Denham, a former government minister and current chairman of the home affairs select committee, insisted that the vote should not lock the country into having a nuclear deterrent for the next 45 years. The MP tabled one of two amendments to the proposals in an effort to persuade rebel MPs to back the motion. The amendment accepted preparing the way for a new deterrent, but put off a final decision for several years. Mr Denham told Mr Blair that future parliaments should have an opportunity to reconsider whether a nuclear weapons system remained the best defence strategy for Britain. Describing Mr Denham's stance as being at the "reasonable end" of concerns expressed in the Trident debate, Mr Blair replied: "It is absolutely right, of course, that this government cannot bind the decision on future parliaments. "When you get to the gateway stage, between 2012 and 2014, it is always up to parliament to take another decision. "However, the reason why I believe we have to take this decision today is that if you don't start this process now we will not be in a position where, should we want to continue with a nuclear deterrent in 2012-2014, we can." The Tory leader, David Cameron, backed Mr Blair's position, saying that the retention of a nuclear deterrent was in the national interest. Mr Blair rejected Sir Menzies Campbell's claims that committing to a Trident replacement now would weaken the British government in talks in 2010 on the nuclear non-proliferation treaty. The Liberal Democrat leader and Jon Trickett, a Labour rebel, proposed a motion stating that the case for renewing Trident was not proven. But Mr Blair rounded on Sir Menzies over his call for the decision to be deferred until 2014. "I remember him saying a few days ago he will not sit on the fence. I am afraid he is, and it's not a comfortable place to be," said Mr Blair. Earlier today Des Browne, the defence secretary, denied a Guardian story which claimed that the Aldermaston Atomic Weapons Research Establishment was already being refurbished in anticipation of a Trident upgrade. Mr Browne said: "It is not true. The specific issue that the Guardian raises this morning was reported to the select committee in 2005 and is not an upgrading of the system; it is merely making sure that the system works to its maximum efficiency." A mass CND rally was expected in Parliament Square to coincide with the vote, while the protest continued outside the Faslane nuclear base on the Clyde in Scotland - where the nuclear submarines are kept. Four Greenpeace activists mounted a crane outside parliament yesterday, and the Anglican and Catholic churches both oppose upgrading Trident. The issue has also become a major theme in the election campaign for the Scottish parliament. At the Holyrood parliament this morning, three protesters were arrested after scaling the roof and hanging a "No Trident" banner on the building. Labour's working majority is 62, making unpopular government bills more vulnerable to rebellions. The largest Labour rebellion since 1997 was the March 2003 Iraq war vote, which saw 122 Labour MPs vote against the government. Guardian Unlimited Guardian News and Media Limited 2007 ***************************************************************** 16 BBC NEWS: Blair's Trident gift to Brown Last Updated: Wednesday, 14 March 2007, 11:23 GMT Analysis By Nick Assinder Political correspondent, BBC News website It may run against the popular image of the two men's relationship, but Tony Blair is doing Gordon Brown a big favour by staging the vote on Trident at this time. Mr Blair says Trident decision must be now Few issues can split the Labour Party so bitterly and comprehensively as policy over Britain's nuclear weapons system. So, when Mr Brown carefully revealed his support for its replacement last year, he fanned the flames and infuriated some of his left-wing supporters - notably Clare Short, who declared she could no longer support him as leader. Now, two junior members of the government have quit over the issue with rumblings there may be more to come. It has become one of the battlegrounds in the leadership campaigns with would-be leaders Michael Meacher and John McDonnell, and deputy candidate John Cruddas, opposing the move. There has been a flurry of Commons motions against the government policy as it stands and anti-nuclear groups are staging demonstrations around the country. It all looks set to culminate in a sizeable Labour rebellion and the government once again only getting its way thanks to Conservative support, something no leader likes but which Mr Blair seems to be getting used to. Political warnings The arguments for and against have been well-rehearsed and there is the usual whips operation under way in the Commons to limit the size of the revolt. It is already likely to be split between those opposed outright to the proposal, and those backing a move to simply delay the decision. There have even been suggestions that very junior government members - Parliamentary Private Secretaries - will not be sacked if they abstain rather than vote against the government. Party bosses are still trying to sway some rebels, and there have been warnings about a return to the bad old days of the 1980s when similar rows contributed to Labour's years in opposition. Protests have greeted government policy That is not a package the new leader and prime minister - likely to be Mr Brown - would want to have to deal with in his first months in the job, when he is attempting to impress his party and voters with a radical and positive new programme. So it suits his purposes that the prime minister is arguing that the decision must be taken now, because it will take 17 years to design, build and deploy a new Trident submarine system. Mr Blair seems eager to sort it out on his watch, so it becomes part of his legacy, so both men are winners. Greater debate One of the consequences of pressing the issue now - just as pressing ahead with plans on nuclear power - will be to clear the decks of the issue before the chancellor takes over. That is not to say Mr Brown will not suffer collateral damage from the row. His support for the policy did not surprise most MPs but it still angered many, mainly natural allies, who believe it is the wrong policy for our age, or that it is a decision which needs far greater debate. They believe Mr Brown has acted too quickly and too eagerly. Mr Brown will not want resentment over his decision to linger when he replaces Mr Blair - assuming he does. The other worry for the Brown camp is that, in the final days of the Blair regime, backbenchers get a taste for rebellion. That is partly because of the contentious issues being pushed through in the prime minister's final days but it is also a result of Mr Blair's declining authority. The fear for the next leader will be that, once acquired, the habit of rebellion is hard to kick. * BBC Copyright ***************************************************************** 17 AFP: Blair facing rebellion over nuclear weapons vote by Phil Hazlewood Wed Mar 14, 6:40 AM ET LONDON (AFP) - Prime Minister Tony Blair on Wednesday faced potentially the biggest rebellion from within his own party since the Iraq war as lawmakers vote on renewing Britain's Trident missile nuclear deterrent. Blair has only been defeated four times in parliament since he came to power in 1997, but a sizeable number of rank-and-file Labour lawmakers have indicated they will go against the government in the early evening vote on the issue. Although he is unlikely to lose the vote, political commentators say he will have to rely on the support of the main opposition Conservative Party, which critics say will weaken his position. Outlining his support for renewing Trident last year, Blair told parliament that although the Cold War was over, "new and potentially hazardous threats" to British security from states like Iran and North Korea could emerge. No other nuclear state in the world was considering unilateral disarmament and it would "unwise and dangerous" for Britain not to have such an "insurance policy" against unspecificed future threats, he said. Defence Secretary Des Browne, likely to lead the debate in the lower House of Commons, made a direct appeal to Labour rebels Wednesday, telling BBC radio: "We need to take this decision now. "We need to be clear what this decision means: it's a firm commitment to maintaining our deterrent and that's what I ask members of our party and what I will ask the House of Commons today. Critics of Trident, including church leaders and unions as well as the traditional anti-nuclear lobby, dispute government claims it would cost 15-20 billion pounds (22-29.1 billion euros, 29-38.5 billion dollars) to replace. Instead, they argue the figure could rise to more than 100 billion pounds if maintenance and other costs are added, and that the money could be better spent elsewhere. Opponents say most Britons are against renewing Trident and that in doing so, Britain was being hypocritical because of its attempts to prevent Iran and North Korea obtaining nuclear weapons. It could also potentially trigger a new wave of nuclear proliferation, they add. Within Labour, where unilateral nuclear disarmament was once party policy in the 1980s, grassroots members and left-wing traditionalists in parliament have accused Blair of stifling debate on the proposals and want more discussion. Protests are being held at the Faslane Royal Navy in western Scotland, which houses the four Vanguard-class nuclear submarines that carry the US-built missiles, and outside the Houses of Parliament on Wednesday. Four Greenpeace protesters scaled a crane on the River Thames next to parliament on Tuesday and plan to stay there until the vote is taken while three protesters scaled the parliament building in Edinburgh Wednesday. Two junior ministers in Blair's government quit this week to be able to vote against Blair. More than 100 MPs, including 60 from Labour, have put their names to an amendment to Wednesday's vote aimed at delaying the decision, arguing that the case for renewing Trident is "not yet proven". The biggest rebellion against Blair was in March 2003 over Iraq, when 138 Labour MPs, including the former foreign secretary Robin Cook, supported an amendment opposing the decision to invade. Debate on Trident was due to start around 1230 GMT, with a vote scheduled for around 1900 GMT. Copyright 2007 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 18 AFP: Blair wins nuclear vote despite revolt Wed Mar 14, 7:07 PM ET LONDON (AFP) - Prime Minister Tony Blair won a crucial parliamentary vote to renew Britain's nuclear deterrent Wednesday, but only after a revolt from within his ruling Labour ranks. After a sometimes rowdy debate and the resignation of two more junior government ministers, lawmakers voted by 409 to 161 in favour of renewing the US-built Trident missile system. Blair, who is to stand down within months, told a debate that missiles were essential for Britain's future security. But the motion only passed with the backing of opposition Conservatives, after 87 Labour MPs voted against renewing Trident. Some 95 backed a defeated amendment to delay the decision. The parliamentary rebuff was believed to be the the biggest rebellion within Labour ranks since March 2003, when 138 Labour MPs, including former foreign secretary Robin Cook, voted against invading Iraq. Anti-nuclear campaigners hailed the vote as a success with Kate Hudson of the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (CND) describing it as a "major victory for the peace movement." The leader of the smaller opposition Liberal Democrats, Menzies Campbell, who opposed the decision, said it was a "humiliation" for the government. "I think the government will be well advised to take account not only of the vote but also of public opinion which is very very doubtful" about the Trident renewal plans, he added. Blair is widely perceived as gradually losing his grip on party discipline as he prepares to step down in coming months after a decade in power. He is expected to hand over to finance minister Gordon Brown. Before lawmakers debated the issue, Blair told them a future parliament could still decide in 2012-2014 whether or not to put out new contracts for new nuclear submarines that carry the weapons. But it was vital to begin the concept and design process on the vessels immediately as they took 17 years to develop and the four existing submarines were expected to reach the end of their working life by 2024. "I think it's right we take the decision now to begin work on replacing the Trident nuclear submarines. I think that is essential for our security in an uncertain world," Blair said. "I believe it is important that we recognise that although it is impossible to predict the future, the one thing ... that is certain, is the unpredictability of it. "For that reason, I think it is sensible we take this decision today." Blair outlined proposals in December to replace the submarines and extend the shelf-life of the weapons beyond 2050, sparking widespread opposition from the traditional anti-nuclear lobby and many in his own Labour party. Many Labour MPs had indicated they would go against the government over Trident while four junior ministerial aides this week resigned in protest -- including two during the debate itself. Opponents, including Church leaders and unions, dispute government claims it would cost 15-20 billion pounds (22-29.1 billion euros, 29-38.5 billion dollars) to replace. They argue the cost could rise to more than 100 billion pounds if maintenance and other costs are added, that Trident is a Cold War relic and the money could be better spent elsewhere. Opponents say most Britons are against renewing Trident and that in doing so Britain is being hypocritical because of its attempts to prevent Iran and North Korea obtaining nuclear weapons. It could also potentially trigger a new wave of nuclear proliferation, they add. Within Labour, where unilateral nuclear disarmament was party policy in the 1980s, grassroots members and left-wing traditionalists in parliament have accused Blair of stifling debate on the proposals. Left-wing Labour MP John McDonnell, who has declared his intention to stand for the party's leadership when Blair steps down, said the campaign against Trident would continue. "The scale of this rebellion clearly demonstrates that the prime minister has completely misjudged the overwhelming mood in the party ... This is only the beginning of the campaign against Trident's replacement." Copyright 2007 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 19 Reuters: Parliament debates renewing nuclear weapons Tue Mar 13, 2007 11:46PM GMT (Reuters) - Parliament debates on Wednesday whether to renew the country's nuclear weapons capability beyond 2024. Government plans are likely to be passed because the Conservative Party supports Prime Minister Tony Blair's plan to build new nuclear-armed submarines. But the debate will expose one of the deepest political rifts within the Labour Party, some of whose members are veterans of decades of left-wing anti-nuclear campaigns. Following are some facts about the arsenal and the debate: WHAT IS IT? Britain's nuclear arsenal is the smallest among the five U.N. Security Council permanent members who are legally recognised as nuclear states under the non-proliferation treaty. It consists solely of four British-built Vanguard-class submarines that carry 16 U.S.-supplied Trident long-range missiles, armed with British-built nuclear warheads. Britain considers its arsenal to be the bare minimum needed to act as a deterrent, so that a rational, nuclear-armed enemy would not risk an attack because of the danger of retaliation. Continued... Reuters 2007. All rights reserved. | Learn more about Reuters ***************************************************************** 20 Reuters: Britain votes to stay nuclear despite revolt Wed Mar 14, 2007 6:36PM EDT By Adrian Croft LONDON (Reuters) - Britain's parliament backed Prime Minister Tony Blair's plans to renew the country's nuclear arsenal on Wednesday as opposition votes helped Blair survive a major rebellion by members of his own party. Eighty-seven politicians from Blair's Labour Party voted against his plan to spend 15 to 20 billion pounds ($29 to 39 billion) on new nuclear-armed submarines to replace ones that go out of service in about 2024. It was the biggest rebellion against Blair since a 2003 vote backing war in Iraq and the largest rebellion on a domestic issue in Blair's decade in power. The revolt could have overturned Blair's 67-seat majority in the 646-member lower house of parliament, but backing from the opposition Conservatives helped Blair secure a 409-161 vote in favor of renewing the Trident nuclear weapons system. The rebellion was a further blow to Blair's authority over the party as he prepares to step down in the next few months. Rebel politicians pledged to keep fighting the decision, which will mean Britain keeps a nuclear deterrent into the 2050s. "This is not the end of the story by any means," Labour legislator Jeremy Corbyn told Sky News. "This is a very big rebellion ... in favor of peace." Continued... Reuters 2007. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 21 Telegraph: Government brushes off Trident opposition By Tim Hall and George Jones Last Updated: 1:29am GMT 15/03/2007 Q&A: Why renew Trident Des Browne played down a huge Labour rebellion over Britains nuclear deterrent, insisting the Government would press ahead with plans to renew Trident regardless. Protestors outside the entrance to the naval base at Faslane, Scotland The Defence Secretary told BBC radio that he had anticipated the opposition from disarmament supporters within the party and wanted to put the interests of future generations first. Today, the Commons will vote on whether to spend up to 20bn refurbishing the UKs submarine-based system and so far 62 Labour MPs have joined a revolt against the plan, putting their names to an amendment calling for more discussion time. It means Tony Blair faces the political embarrassment of having to rely on Conservative support in order to avoid defeat. Defying rebel MPs and anti-nuclear protesters, Mr Browne said: Our judgment is that we cant risk the future security of future generations by taking a decision now which would be effectively a unilateral disarmament decision and would deny them the choices we currently have. Mr Browne continued: Since the Cold War it has been more difficult to explain exactly why we need a deterrent and I accept that challenge. However, he said that it was unacceptable for Britain to disarm in an uncertain and very dangerous world. The Commons rebellion is expected to be one of the biggest Mr Blair has faced on a domestic matter. He will only avoid defeat because the Tories have vowed to support the Trident renewal. A junior ministerial aide, Jim Devine, resigned yesterday over the issue - the second member of the Government to quit this week. Mr Devine, 53, MP for Livingston, resigned as unpaid parliamentary aide to Rosie Winterton, a health minister, so he could speak against replacing Trident. He followed Nigel Griffiths, who resigned as deputy leader of the Commons on Monday. Stephen Pound, Parliamentary private secretary to Labour chairman Hazel Blears, is considering his position after saying publicly he could not vote for renewal. In a development which will infuriate opponents of the system, it has been revealed the Ministry of Defence has already begun secretly upgrading Trident. The MoD admitted today that it has bought from the US a new Arming, Fusing and Firing (AF&F) mechanism, which is to be installed in Britains nuclear submarines. The Mark 4A upgrade will allow missiles to be fired more accurately, at a greater range of targets and with smaller amounts of fallout. Critics claim it amounts to the secret refurbishment of Trident, despite repeated promises that it would be up to the next parliament to decide to do so. However, the MoD insisted the AF&F was just a small component of the existing system. A spokesman said: This is not related to todays debate at all. This has nothing to do with any potential successor to Trident, on which decisions have still to be taken. A number of protests are taking place across the country today, including a demonstration in Parliament square. CND will stage a mass lobby of parliament this evening. . © Copyright of Telegraph Media Group Limited 2007. | Terms ***************************************************************** 22 AFP: Pakistan, India predict watershed year for peace - by Masroor Gilani Wed Mar 14, 7:14 AM ET ISLAMABAD (AFP) - Top Indian and Pakistani diplomats said that 2007 could be a "watershed" year for their peace process, with real hope of resolving their rancorous dispute over Kashmir and other issues. Indian foreign secretary Shiv Shankar Menon and his Pakistani counterpart Riaz Mohammad Khan wrapped up two days of talks in Islamabad marking the start of the fourth round of the three-year-old negotiations. "2007 is a critical year and can prove to be a watershed," Khan told a joint news conference at the Pakistani foreign ministry after the talks between the nuclear-armed rivals. Pakistan and India had dealt with "issues that have divided us" and that had "made it possible that we move from problems and disputes management to resolution of problems and disputes," Khan said. The fact that this part of the peace dialogue coincides with the 60th year of India and Pakistan's independence "underscores the need for turning a new page in our relations," he added. India's Menon said that during meetings with Pakistani Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz and Foreign Minister Khurshid Kasuri late Tuesday he found there was "clear political will on both sides to make all-round progress." "We agreed that in the fourth round we anticipate that considerable progress can be made," he added. The diplomats said Wednesday's talks centred on the Himalayan territory of Kashmir. Tuesday's session was devoted to a review of the previous round of talks and on general peace and security including nuclear weapons. Kashmir is split between the two countries and claimed by both in full. The territory has caused two of the three Indo-Pakistani wars since independence in 1947. India and Pakistan were "engaged in the most sustained and intensive dialogue that they ever had" over Kashmir, Menon said. The officials said that while they recognised the need to make progress on a solution to the Kashmir problem, on Wednesdsay they focused on "confidence-building measures" such as transport links created since 2004. Pakistan had also suggested new measures such as sports events, a helicopter service and a postal service in Kashmir, Khan said. He said the two countries' defence secretaries would soon hold talks on ending a 20-year standoff on the Siachen glacier in Kashmir -- dubbed the world's highest battlefield. Kashmir has been the sticking point throughout the peace process which was launched in January 2004, less than two years after India and Pakistan massed hundreds of thousands of troops along their border. The countries also held tit-for-tat nuclear tests in 1998, alarming the world, and fought sporadic clashes in the Kargil region of Kashmir in 1999. The talks in Islamabad follow the February firebombing of a "Friendship Express" train in India that killed 69 passengers, mostly Pakistanis returning to their homeland. But the two countries did not allow the attack to disrupt the peace process, vowing to boost cooperation in the fight against terrorism and to share information. Khan and Menon said that India had given Pakistan a list of passport numbers to help identify 19 of whose who died in the blast. AFP Photo: Indian foreign secretary Shiv Shankar Menon(R) and his Pakistani counterpart Riaz Mohammad Khan(L) arrive for... Copyright 2007 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The ***************************************************************** 23 Guardian Unlimited: British Lawmakers Weigh Missile Proposal From the Associated Press Wednesday March 14, 2007 11:31 AM By DAVID STRINGER Associated Press Writer LONDON (AP) - Lawmakers from Prime Minister Tony Blair's governing Labour party plan a major rebellion Wednesday over proposals for a new multibillion dollar nuclear missile defense system, a program critics claim risks undermining efforts to halt the weapons ambitions of Iran and others. Blair has told the House of Commons that Britain's fleet of four nuclear-armed submarines - due to be phased out from 2022 - should be replaced to meet possible future threats from rogue regimes and state-sponsored terrorists. Blair is likely to win approval for the program that he estimates will cost $40 billion only with the support of the opposition Conservative party, which said it will back him. Around 100 lawmakers, including 60 from Blair's Labour, plan to reject the proposal, instead backing an amendment urging the government to delay ordering replacement nuclear submarines. Two junior members of Blair's government have resigned because of their opposition to the proposal. The Labour Party abandoned its long-held policy of unilateral nuclear disarmament in the late 1980s, but significant numbers of party members continue to press for Britain to scrap its nuclear arsenal. Blair, who has said he will step down by September, has said the country's stock of nuclear warheads would be cut from 200 to 160 - a move aimed at placating detractors. But the issue of replacing current warheads, expected to remain in service until the 2020s, will not be taken before 2009, allowing the leader to dodge the most contentious aspect of his program. Rebels will table a motion claiming the case for renewing the missile system has not been proven, a position supported by ex-Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev. In a letter to the Times of London on March 8, Gorbachev said Blair's ``rush to deploy nuclear missiles whose service life would extend until 2050 is, to say the least, astonishing.'' He claimed the plan risked placing further strain on the Non-Proliferation Treaty and hampering efforts to halt Iran's nuclear program, which Tehran insists seeks to create civilian nuclear power but the U.S. and allies contend is being used as a cover for weapons development. Anti-nuclear campaigners also claim the system could cost three times as much as the government's estimate. Guardian Unlimited Guardian News and Media Limited 2007 ***************************************************************** 24 Guardian Unlimited: Party split as PM wins Trident vote From Press Association Wednesday March 14, 2007 9:53 PM Tony Blair has won House of Commons backing for his plans to replace Britain's Trident nuclear deterrent, despite the biggest Labour backbench revolt since the Iraq war. With the Tories backing the Government, a motion supporting Trident renewal was passed comfortably by by 409 votes to 161, a majority of 248. An amendment tabled by rebel Labour MPs to delay a decision was defeated by a similar margin of 413 to 167 - a 246-vote majority. However the vote left the Labour Party bitterly divided with 95 MPs supporting the rebel amendment and 88 opposing the Government on the main motion. The rebels immediately vowed to carry on their campaign against Trident renewal, leaving Chancellor Gordon Brown - if as expected he succeeds Mr Blair as Prime Minister - with the prospect of more battles ahead. Left-winger John McDonnell, who has said that he intends to run against Mr Brown, said the leadership was out of step with the party, insisting: "The scale of this rebellion clearly demonstrates that the Prime Minister has completely misjudged the overwhelming mood in the party. This is only the beginning of the campaign against Trident's replacement." Armed Forces Minister Adam Ingram, however, denied that the vote had been a setback for the Government, telling Sky News: "I don't see this as a bloody nose. I see this as a very considered opinion by the House of Commons. This was a debate for the nation, not the Labour Party alone." As well as the familiar Government critics, the rebels included former home secretary Charles Clarke and Andrew Smith, another ex-Cabinet minister and close ally of Mr Brown. Earlier two more ministerial aides - Stephen Pound, the parliamentary private secretary (PPS) to Labour Party chairman Hazel Blears, and Chris Ruane, the PPS to Northern Ireland Secretary Peter Hain - resigned in protest. In the Commons, Mr Blair defended the decision to retain Trident and said it was essential a decision to begin work on the design of a new submarine fleet was taken now. "I think that is essential for our security in an uncertain world," he told MPs at Prime Minister's Questions. "We can't put this decision off. We have to take it now." Mr Cameron said that the Tories were supporting the Government on Trident replacement "in the national interest". "In a dangerous and uncertain world, unilateral nuclear disarmament has never been and will never be the right answer," he said. Copyright Press Association Ltd 2007, All Rights Reserved. Guardian Unlimited Guardian News and Media Limited 2007 ***************************************************************** 25 London Times: Brown brings rebel Trident MPs back in fold- March 14, 2007 Greg Hurst and Fran Yeoman Tony Blair is preparing for the last big Commons rebellion of his premiership today as dozens of Labour MPs prepare to protest against his decision to replace Britains independent nuclear deterrent. Mr Blair is almost certain to have to rely on the Conservatives to win approval to build a new fleet of nuclear submarines and to extend the life of their Trident D5 missiles. There were signs last night that ministers had managed to cap the rebellion after a campaign by Gordon Brown, who came out in favour of keeping the strategic deterrent well before a formal decision was taken to replace it. Allies of the Chancellor said that he had swayed at least seven Labour MPs, who had been ready to vote against the Government, to abstain or vote in favour and that he had a long list of people to call. Rebels will be split between an amendment by Jon Trickett, a left-wing Labour MP, that urges a delay and that supporters claimed would be backed by up to 80 Labour MPs, and the option of voting against the government motion that seeks approval to replace Trident. Labour sources said that the biggest revolt would probably be in support of the amendment, but a small group were withholding their support because it was tabled in alliance with the Liberal Democrats. Such MPs will break ranks in a second vote against the Governments motion, although the size of this rebellion is expected to be smaller. Signatories for the amendment include Sir Menzies Campbell, the Lib Dem leader. Compass, the left-wing pressure group chaired by Mr Trickett, announced that all 63 Lib Dem MPs would put their names to it. Stephen Pound, the MP for Ealing North, became the third member of the Government to stand down yesterday when he resigned as ministerial aide to Hazel Blears, the chairman of the Labour Party, in order to vote against renewing Trident. Jim Devine, MP for Living-ston, confirmed that he had given up his post as a ministerial aide. The Chancellor had attempted to talk him round and was also unsuccessful in trying to dissuade Nigel Griffiths, a long-time ally, from resigning from his unpaid post as Deputy Leader of the Commons. Mr Griffiths, whose seat of Edinburgh South has a majority of 405, will make a statement today. It emerged yesterday that, despite claiming that the Cabinet decision to replace Trident had been subject to unprecedented debate, ministers rejected calls from within the National Executive Committee for wider debate within the party, a vote at its national policy forum and a free vote by Labour MPs. Six NEC members voted for such an extended consultation at a private meeting in January but were defeated, according to an account published by Ann Black, a Labour activist. Sunday Times, click here Copyright Times Newspapers Ltd ***************************************************************** 26 NRC: NRC to Discuss 2006 Performance at St. Lucie Nuclear Power Plant News Release - Region II - 2007-04 - U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs, Region II 61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, GA 30303 www.nrc.gov CONTACT: Ken Clark (404) 562-4416 Roger D. Hannah (404) 562-4417 E-mail: opa2@nrc.gov The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff is scheduled to meet with Florida Power & Light officials March 27 to discuss the NRC’s annual assessment of safety performance for 2006 at the St. Lucie nuclear power plant, located at Jensen Beach, Fla, near Ft. Pierce. The 3:00 p.m. meeting at the St. Lucie Energy Encounter Building, located at 6501 S. A1A at Jensen Beach, is open to public observation. Before the meeting ends, NRC staff will be available to answer public questions on the plant’s safety performance, as well as the agency’s role in ensuring safe operation of the facility. “Each year the NRC staff rates the performance of the St. Lucie plant and all of the nation’s other commercial nuclear power plants,” NRC Region II Administrator William Travers said. “This meeting gives us a chance to discuss our assessment with the company, local officials and residents near the plant.” The NRC uses color-coded inspection findings and performance indicators to assess performance. The colors start with “green” and increase to “white,” “yellow” or “red,” commensurate with the safety significance of the issues involved. The NRC said the St. Lucie plant operated safely during the 2006 assessment period, from Jan. 1 through Dec. 31, with all inspection findings being of very low safety significance and all performance indicators indicating performance at levels requiring no additional NRC oversight. As a result, the NRC plans to conduct only routine baseline inspections at the plant during 2007. The NRC staff will also perform inspections of the independent spent fuel storage installation, potential for containment building emergency recirculation sump blockage, followup on steam generator replacement and reactor head replacement. A letter sent from the NRC Region II Office to plant officials addresses the performance of the plant during the period and will serve as the basis for the meeting discussion. It is available on the NRC web site at www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/LETTERS/stl_2006q4.pdf. Current information for the St. Lucie plant is available on the NRC web site at: www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/STL1/stl1_chart.html and www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/STL2/stl2_chart.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. March 14, 2007 ***************************************************************** 27 Pantagraph.com: Clinton power station will remain at higher taxable value NewsTuesday, March 13, 2007 11:48 PM CDT By Edith Brady-Lunny eblunny@pantagraph.com CLINTON - The taxable value of the Clinton Power Station will remain at $200 million for the current tax year, according to a ruling by the DeWitt County Board of Review. Sandy Moody, the county's supervisor of assessments, said the board has affirmed her decision to set the equalized assessed value of the parcel of land containing the power block for the single-unit nuclear plant at $200 million. Attorneys for plant owner Exelon Nuclear had argued to the board at a March 1 hearing that the plant's value should be set closer to $168 million. Exelon spokesman Bruce Paulsen said Tuesday a decision has not been made on whether the utility will appeal the local decision to the state Property Tax Appeal Board. Exelon has 30 days to file an appeal with the state board. "We need to look at the response and understand it before we decide what we're going to do," said Paulsen. Exelon says Moody erred by factoring the potential for a second power unit at the site into its value. The federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission announced last week that Exelon has been awarded an early site permit, but the permit does not mean the company definitely will build another unit. A lengthy process for construction and operating permits lies ahead for Exelon if a decision is made to add a second unit. Moody said Monday she is pleased with the review board's decision and the early site permit. "The permit is good news for everybody," said Moody. The fair market value of the plant was set at $1.1 billion by Moody and $935 million in Exelon's appraisal. Exelon argues Moody's appraisal would mean a property tax bill of $8.5 million, an increase of 66 percent over 2005 taxes. The Exelon estimate would bump the 2005 tax bill about 34 percent to $7.7 million. "Exelon is willing to pay its fair share of taxes and wants to ensure the plant and property are taxed at a fair rate," said Mike Pacilio, Exelon Nuclear's senior vice president for Midwest operations. In the most recent tax year, Exelon paid $5.1 million in property taxes to seven taxing bodies. The amount of taxes has steadily decreased over the past five years as the taxable value of the plant was reduced under an agreement between plant owners and the taxing bodies. The two sides were involved in negotiations last year that ended when a mutually acceptable value could not be reached. At the March hearing, Exelon pointed out the existing Clinton unit has a 40-year license that will expire in 2026. A decision on whether to apply for an extension of the license has not been considered, said Exelon attorney Terry Moritz. Fred Lane, the Chicago attorney representing DeWitt County and several other taxing bodies, said at the hearing that the Clinton plant is a highly efficient and well-managed facility. Those points make the facility more valuable, he said. The per-kilowatt cost of operating the plant decreased from $2.50 per-kilowatt in 1995 to $1.73-per-kilowatt hour in 2006, said Lane. Lee Illinois Regional Newspapers: Carbondale | Charleston-Mattoon | Decatur | DeKalb Copyright 2007, Pantagraph Publishing Co. and Lee Enterprises. All ***************************************************************** 28 San Luis Obispo Tribune: Bill extends life of Diablo Canyon emergency fund 03/14/2007 | By David Sneed dsneed@thetribunenews.com Photo courtesy of PG&E A photo illustration indicates how the dry cask storage would look, located just uphill from Diablo Canyon nuclear power plant. * Diablo Canyon bill introduced by Sam Blakeslee (pdf) Assemblyman Sam Blakeslee has introduced legislation that would extend to 2019 funding for the county?s emergency preparedness activities for Diablo Canyon nuclear power plant. Every year, the county Office of Emergency Services receives money from Pacific Gas and Electric Co. ratepayers to coordinate preparation by various local agencies for an emergency at the plant. Last year, the county received a little more than $1 million for this purpose. The legislation that created this system will expire in 2009. The bill submitted by Blakeslee, R-San Luis Obispo, would extend the life of the Nuclear Planning Assessment Special Account by a decade. "The county approached us and asked us to work with them on this issue, and we were happy to do so," Blakeslee said. "We want to be sure that our local community has the resources it needs to discharge these very serious responsibilities." Funding from the account is a crucial part of the county Office of Emergency Services budget. Nearly 75 percent of the office?s resources are devoted to Diablo Canyon planning, said Ron Alsop, emergency service coordinator. The money is distributed to 37 different county departments and other local government agencies to fund a variety of programs to protect the public in the event of radiation release at the plant. Activities include drills, training of first responders and updating evacuation plans. As written, Blakeslee?s bill would extend the account at current funding levels. But county officials are negotiating with PG&E to increase it. The funding level can be raised annually according to the California Consumer Price Index, but this has not kept up with the costs of the program, Alsop said. "We don?t have a total we are looking for yet," he said. "We are still crunching the numbers to see how much we are going to need." Funding levels could be changed as the bill wends its way through the legislative process. The bill, AB 292, also covers San Onofre nuclear power plant in northern San Diego County. The legislation is scheduled for hearings in the Assembly?s government organization and commerce and utilities committees staring in April, Blakeslee said. It was submitted Feb. 9. ***************************************************************** 29 Earth Times: Temelin nuclear power plant opponents block four border crossings Posted on : Wed, 14 Mar 2007 10:52:00 GMT | Author : DPA Prague - Austrian anti-nuclear protestors blocked four border crossings to the Czech Republic in an attempt to pressurize their government into suing the country over the controversial Temelin nuclear power plant, reports said Wednesday. About a dozen activists with banners halted traffic for an hour with their cars and trucks at each of the Wullowitz/Dolni Dvoriste, Weischlag/Studanky, Guglwald/Predni Vyton and Gmund/Ceske Velenice crossings, Czech media reported. "We will not take any steps. Our partner is the Austrian government," said Czech foreign ministry spokeswoman Zuzana Opletalova. "We can't allow for a few tractors to disturb the long-term safety dialogue and the good relations, which were set during the recent visit by Austrian chancellor." Opponents of Temelin are dissatisfied with what they see as their governments' mild stance on the controversial power plant. While the Austrian grand coalition's programme calls for the so- called zero option for Temelin, which amounts to ending operations there, Vienna has hesitated to take legal steps against Prague for an alleged breach of the so called Melk treaty signed between the two countries in 2000. In a February 27 visit to Prague, Austrian Chancellor Alfred Gusenbauer and his Czech counterpart Prime Minister Mirek Topolanek agreed to form a joint parliamentary commission on the facility. The fourth blockade within five weeks also comes after two harmless, yet embarrasing, leaks of mildly radioactive cooling water in Temelin's shut-down first unit. The first incident that took place the night before the Austrian chancellor's arrival to Prague angered the Austrian leader, as the Czech authorities failed to inform him about it during his visit. The leaks also invoked a new wave of calls by opposition politicians and Temelin's opponents for their cabinet to take legal action against the Czech Republic for the alleged Melk treaty violation. According to the opposition and anti-nuclear activist, Prague violated the treaty - intended to avoid safety rows by a flow of information on the plant - when the Czech authorities issued Temelin an operating permit last year. The Czech officials have rejected the claim. Copyright 2007 Respective Author (c) 2007 Earthtimes.org, All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 30 toledoblade.com: A nuclear move Article published Wednesday, March 14, 2007 DTE Energy, the parent firm of Detroit Edison, wants to build a new nuclear power plant on the site of its Fermi nuclear complex in Monroe County, replacing the 22-year-old plant now generating energy. The announcement is notable in itself: it will be the first time in more than three decades that anyone has sought a license for a new plant from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Merely applying for a license is a daunting task. DTE officials say they plan to spend $30 million to prepare their application. The new plant itself would cost an estimated $3 billion, and would take years to build. If a license is granted, the soonest a new reactor could be generating energy would be 2013. Applying to build a replacement now seems like a prudent and sensible step. Nuclear power plants are seen as having a normal life span of about 40 years, and while some plants have been granted extensions to operate longer, this is a technology that has benefited from constant improvements in technology and safety procedures. Naturally, there will be some people who will always oppose nuclear power, no matter what. Yet the industry has actually had a remarkable safety record, especially since Pennsylvania's Three Mile Island accident in 1979. The fact is that the nation has ever-increasing energy needs, and is now too dependent on dwindling supplies of fossil fuel, much of it from the terminally unstable Middle East. Paul Block, Jr., our late publisher and a research scientist, often said that nuclear plants should be built precisely when safety was the major concern. Otherwise, he feared that there would be a crash program to build them when fossil fuels suddenly ran out or were cut off, and that this might lead to riskier construction. Nuclear critics have, however, one very valid worry: Disposal of the radioactive spent fuel rods which are piling up at nearly every nuclear plant in the nation. Several years ago, the federal government decided there should be a national nuclear waste fuel depository at Yucca Mountain, Nev. But political and financial concerns have delayed its construction. Most Nevadans don't want it in their backyards, and both parties have been guilty of pandering to what is now a swing state in close presidential elections. The new Senate Majority Leader, Harry Reid, a Nevada Democrat, reportedly has indicated that he will not allow Yucca Mountain to go forward. That may be good politics, but it's hardly responsible public policy. DTE is itself fast running out of storage space for the fuel rods at its Fermi site. The Big Rock nuclear plant in northern Michigan was torn down years ago, but there is still a building on the site housing the spent fuel rods. In an age where terrorism is a concern, America needs a national solution to the worsening nuclear fuel-storage problem, and it needs one soon. 2006 The Blade. By using this service, you accept the terms of The Toledo Blade Company, 541 N. Superior St., Toledo, OH 43660 , (419) 724-6000 ***************************************************************** 31 APP.COM: Oyster Creek nuclear power plant cuts electricity production | Asbury Park Press Online Degraded cooling pump seals cited in power cutback Posted by the Asbury Park Press on 03/14/07 BY NICK CLUNN STAFF WRITER Post Comment LACEY Degraded seals in two pumps that help cool the Oyster Creek power plant's sole nuclear reactor have forced the plant to cut back on power production over the next few weeks, officials said. According to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and plant operator AmerGen Energy Co., Oyster Creek on Tuesday ran at 82 percent of its capacity. The plant will continue to run at varying levels of reduced output until operators shut it down for a scheduled maintenance sometime in April, when AmerGen will attempt to fix both pumps. The plant can operate safely at reduced capacity, officials said. Operators did not shut down the reactor right away to avoid the risk of killing fish and other aquatic life in the canal where cooling water is discharged, said Leslie Cifelli, a plant spokeswoman. Marine animals gather in the canal when the weather is cold because the water there is warmer. When the discharge of warm water is cut abruptly, animals can die because of the drastic temperature change. Power plants do not make as much money when running at reduced output, but the financial impact at Oyster Creek will not be as great as what the loss would be during the summer, when the demand for electricity and its price are higher. "We're taking a financial loss every day we operate at reduced power, but we wanted to live up to our environmental commitments," Cifelli said, explaining that it was difficult to estimate how much AmerGen will lose. Operators dropped output last week after finding a degraded seal in one of the plant's five recirculation pumps. Another recirculation pump remains out of service after operators found it with a degraded seal in December, Cifelli said. With fewer working pumps, less cooling water flows into the reactor, which means that operators need to reduce its temperature to keep adequate safety margins. The lower the temperature of the reactor, the less power it can produce. Oyster Creek can operate at full capacity 650 megawatts with four functioning pumps. With fewer pumps, the plant can safely operate by reducing output. AmerGen in January 2006 shut down the plant for nine days to allow for the repair of two recirculation pumps. One pump had a faulty seal, and the other had a motor problem. Cifelli said the seals on the kind of recirculation pumps used at Oyster Creek have degraded at other nuclear plants. Nick Clunn: (732) 643-4072 or nclunn@app.com Copyright 2007 Asbury Park Press. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 32 Burlington Free Press: My Turn: Nuclear power, with a caveat - John A. Sautter burlingtonfreepress.com | Burlington, Vermont Opinion Wednesday, March 14, 2007 I disagree with the two gentlemen who have written on this topic here due to their apparently overlooking that the entire nuclear fuel cycle needs to be taken into account when calling nuclear "carbon neutral". The enrichment of uranium, which is fueled by two 1000 MW coal fired power stations in the Paducah Kentucky United States Enrichment Corporation releases the worst known ozone destroyer, CFC-114. So,,, while nuclear is not Carbon emitting per se , it is a far greater ozone destroyer than CO2. Additional waste and pollutants from the manufacture of nuclear fuel include mercury, arsenic and cadmium, which are disposed of on and off site, and hydrochloric acid aerosols and chlorine gas, which are released into the air. So much for nuclear as clean. The waste is an issue yet to be effectively handled. Imagining nuclear as clean is ludicrous, no matter how many times one hears J Patrick Moore ( a paid shill of the nuclear industry and decidedly not a founder of Greenpeace), Entergy's well-heeled Public Relations department, or the front group VT Energy Partnership say it in Burlington/Montpelier. If it is safe why do we have evacuation plans, warning sirens, weather alert radios and Potassium iodide available from the state in the emergency zone near the reactor? If it is safe, then why does not every county in the state take responsibility for its amount of waste used while you store it and live next door to it? And can someone please explain to me how anyone can call it carbon neutral if no one can now determine how much Carbon based emissions will be generated storing and protecting the extremely toxic radioactive waste our " Oh so needed increased demand for more electricity" will produce. Posted: Wed Mar 14, 2007 10:42 pm ====================================================================== "Unfortunately, by declaring that the state is essentially anti-wind power, Gov. Jim Douglas has placed a huge obstacle in the path of Vermonters who are pursuing a clean energy future. Given that the Public Service Board was recently forced to reject a two megawatt wind farm, it is difficult to see how the state can replace the 185 megawatts that Vermont Yankee supplies Vermont with clean power in the next five years." Mr. Sautter is correct that Vermont can not replace the power generated by Vermont Yankee with clean energy sources in a 5 year time frame. Although I disagree with Gov Douglas' position on wind power, I also disagree with Sautter that Douglas is the major reason that wind power is developing at a 'snail's pace' in Vermont. That blame can be placed directly on the anti-wind power lobby and Vt's regulatory process. A quick search shows that currently 6 Mw's are being generated by windpower here in the state. Every other project has been shot down, opposed or is in the early planning stages. The chances of any new wind generating power coming online within the next 5 years is.....slim & none. Another check into how much 'cow power' is being generated shows that the most optimistic projection is that 1.5 Mw's will be generated in the state in 2007. Since Vt. continues to lose more farms every year and the development of 'cow power' is limited to the larger operations, it appears that generating electricity from 'cow power' is limited in it's potential. New Hydroelectric power is a non starter due to the regulatory process both on the federal & state levels which make it prohibitive to develop new hydro dams let alone reactivate existing ones. Even if a hydro project was started today, the permit process would take longer than the 5 years needed to bring hydro project online before 2012. What left????? Not much other than fossil fuel generators. Sautter is correct that shut down Vermont Yankee and that lost power....WILL be generated by either Coal or Natural gas. Of course this is what the 'loons' at VPRIG are calling for. The shutdown of Vermont Yankee and replace that power by pulling the magic wand out of their arse...and POOF unlimited clean energy generated by 'wishful thinking'. VRIPG is also under the false impression that somehow we can reduce our power demand to eliminate the need for Nuclear power. The unfortunate reality is that we have several 'dreamers' in Montpelier who buy into VPRIG's nonsense. Sen. Shumlin is the first one who comes to mind. Electric power demand will continue to increase as shown in this link. http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/aeo/pdf/trend_3.pdf We have to be realistic about the future demand of electric power and not base decisions on hysteria and politics. Posted: Wed Mar 14, 2007 12:43 pm ====================================================================== Post a Comment View All Comments A D V E R T I S E M E N T Printer Friendly Version E-mail this article to a friend Website Problems/Feedback Contact Newsroom Subscribe to the Free Press News Week The week in photos RSS Feed More from today's Opinion section: Letter to the Editor: Government confused, twisted, overarched Letter to the Editor: Constitutions protect right to bear arms Letter to the Editor: Vote no on VSECU change Letter to the Editor: Gun ownership not linked to militia Farm bill opportunity to fix dairy policy My Turn: Nuclear power, with a caveat Letters to the Editor Letters to the Editor My Turn: Nuclear power, with a caveat Published: Wednesday, March 14, 2007 By John A. Sautter During the next five years the Vermont Public Service Board will grapple with the problem of whether to put state government support behind nuclear energy. In 2012 Vermont's electricity contract with the only nuclear plant in Vermont will come to a close as the federal operating license for Entergy Vermont Yankee expires. According to a prior agreement, Entergy will pursue re-licensing for the plant only if the state first gives its approval. So the question facing Vermont is: will we support re-licensing? My contention is, yes we should with one important limit: the support lasts only until we can find sufficient carbon-neutral electricity sources to replace Vermont Yankee. Vermont should support re-licensing Vermont Yankee because of the immediate and growing problem of global warming. Vermont recently, and rightly, committed to reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 10 percent over the next decade by signing the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative. If Vermont is to fulfill even this very modest commitment, it cannot afford to lose Vermont Yankee. Vermont Yankee supplies over 30 percent of Vermont's electricity without contributing to the state's greenhouse gas emissions. One very well-informed and thoughtful organization, the Vermont Public Interest Research Group, has estimated that if Vermont abandoned nuclear energy, but developed all viable renewable energy sources while also reducing electricity demand by 5 percent from 2005 levels, the state would still have to buy 20 percent of its electricity off of the New England market. Unfortunately, buying from the New England market essentially means buying from coal or natural gas plants. Coal is the largest source of carbon dioxide in the U.S. Natural gas emits two-thirds as much carbon dioxide as coal. Supplying more electricity from high greenhouse gas sources is not a step toward reducing climate change. The state must support Vermont Yankee's re-licensing in order to retain its low carbon nuclear energy. Instead of abandoning nuclear power as some argue, the state should adopt a "limiting principle" for its support of Vermont Yankee. Government support for nuclear should be limited to the point at which the bulk of the state's fossil fuel electricity generation has been replaced with non-nuclear, low greenhouse gas-emitting alternatives and efficiency measures. Unfortunately, by declaring that the state is essentially anti-wind power, Gov. Jim Douglas has placed a huge obstacle in the path of Vermonters who are pursuing a clean energy future. Given that the Public Service Board was recently forced to reject a two megawatt wind farm, it is difficult to see how the state can replace the 185 megawatts that Vermont Yankee supplies Vermont with clean power in the next five years. Nuclear power provides reliable energy with no carbon emissions. Rejecting nuclear power on the basis of its being "nuclear" is not an energy policy. As soon as there are non-carbon intensive alternatives to nuclear, Vermont should shift to those. If Vermont can develop those alternatives in the next five years, then the state should not support re-licensing Vermont Yankee. I am not advocating a new generation of nuclear; but that we use our current non-carbon sources to bridge us to a carbon neutral, non-nuclear future. That is the hard choice we must be willing to make. John A. Sautter of South Royalton is a research associate at the Vermont Institute for Energy and the Environment. TALK BACK Does nuclear power have a role in Vermont's energy future, and if so, what would be its role? Are safety and disposal of spent fuel being addressed adequately? Join the conversation and send us your opinion to letters@bfp.burlingtonfreepress.com or respond in the online story forum in the Opinion section at www.burlingtonfreepress.com. Printer Friendly Version  E-mail this article to a friend 50F Rain Forecast » view live webcam Find a Job Fill a Job Find a car Sell a car Find a home Rentals Place an ad Buy stuff Sell stuff Shopping Coupons Find a date A D V E R T I S E M E N T Dining Browse a selection of restaurants in Burlington and the surrounding area! Download delight Click here to download the password protected photo. HOME | NEWS | ENTERTAINMENT | CLASSIFIEDS | SHOPPING | JOBS | CARS | HOMES | HELP Classified Partners: Jobs: CareerBuilder.com ? Cars: Cars.com ? Apartments: Apartments.com ? Shopping: ShopLocal.com Customer Service ? Terms of Service ? Privacy Policy ? Send feedback about burlingtonfreepress.com ? Subscribe Now ? Jobs with us Copyright 2007 Burlingtonfreepress.com All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your agreement to the Terms of Service (Terms updated October 7, 2005) ***************************************************************** 33 FR NRC: Notice of Opportunity for Comment on Model Safety Evaluation for Doc E7-4675 [Federal Register: March 14, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 49)] [Notices] [Page 11914-11918] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr14mr07-105] NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Technical Specification Task Force (TSTF) Traveler To Provide Actions for One Steam Supply to Turbine Driven AFW/EFW Pump Inoperable Using the Consolidated Line Item Improvement Process AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission. ACTION: Request for comment. SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the staff of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has prepared a model safety evaluation (SE) relating to proposed changes to Actions in the Standard Technical Specifications (STS) relating to One Steam Supply to Turbine Driven Auxiliary Feedwater / Emergency Feedwater (AFW/EFW) Pump Inoperable. This change would establish a Completion Time in the Standard Technical Specifications for the Condition where one steam supply to the turbine driven AFW/EFW pump is inoperable concurrent with an inoperable motor driven AFW/EFW train. The NRC staff has also prepared a model application and model no significant hazards consideration (NSHC) determination relating to this matter. The purpose of these models is to permit the NRC to efficiently process amendments that propose to adopt the associated changes into plant-specific technical specifications (TS). Licensees of nuclear power reactors to which the models apply can request amendments confirming the applicability of the SE and NSHC determination to their reactors. The NRC staff is requesting comments on the Model SE, Model Application and Model NSHC determination prior to announcing their availability for referencing in license amendment applications. DATES: The comment period expires 30 days from the date of this publication. Comments received after this date will be considered if it is practical to do so, but the Commission can only ensure consideration for comments received on or before this date. ADDRESSES: Comments may be submitted either electronically or via U.S. mail. To submit comments or questions on a proposed standard technical specification change via the Internet, use Form for Sending Comments on NRC Documents, then select Proposed Changes to Technical Specifications. If you are commenting on a proposed change, please match your comments with the correct proposed change by copying the title of the proposed change from column one to the previous table into the appropriate field of the comment form. Submit written comments to: Chief, Rulemaking, Directives and Editing Branch, Division of Administrative Services, Office of Administration, Mail Stop T-6D59, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001. Hand deliver comments to 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland, between 7:45 a.m. and 4:15 p.m. on Federal workdays. Copies of comments received may be examined at the NRC's Public Document Room, located at One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. Comments may be submitted by electronic mail to CLIIP@nrc.gov. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Trent L. Wertz, Technical Specifications Branch, Division of Inspection and Regional Support, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, Mail Stop O-12H2, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, telephone 301-415- 1568. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background Regulatory Issue Summary 2000-06, ``Consolidated Line Item Improvement Process for Adopting Standard Technical Specification Changes for Power Reactors,'' was issued on March 20, 2000. The consolidated line item improvement process (CLIIP) is intended to improve the efficiency and transparency of NRC licensing processes. This is accomplished by processing proposed changes to the Standard Technical Specifications (STS) (NUREGs 1430-1434) in a manner that supports subsequent license amendment applications. The CLIIP includes an opportunity for the public to comment on proposed changes to the STS following a preliminary assessment by the NRC staff and finding that the change will likely be offered for adoption by licensees. The CLIIP directs the NRC staff to evaluate any comments received for a proposed change to the STS and to either reconsider the change or proceed with announcing the availability of the change to licensees. Those licensees opting to apply for the subject change to TS are responsible for reviewing the NRC staff's evaluation, referencing the applicable technical justifications, and providing any necessary plant specific information. Each amendment application submitted in response to the notice of availability would be processed and noticed in accordance with applicable rules and NRC procedures. This notice for comment involves establishing a Completion Time in the Limiting Condition for Operation (LCO) 3.7.5 of the STS for the Condition where one steam supply to the turbine driven AFW/EFW pump is inoperable concurrent with an inoperable motor driven AFW/EFW train. In addition, this notice for comment involves changes to the STS that establish specific Conditions and Action requirements for [[Page 11915]] two motor driven AFW/EFW trains are inoperable at the same time and for when the turbine driven AFW/EFW train is inoperable either (a) due solely to one inoperable steam supply, or (b) due to reasons other than one inoperable steam supply. The changes were proposed by the Technical Specification Task Force (TSTF) in TSTF Traveler TSTF-412, Revision 3, which is accessible electronically from the Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) Public Electronic Reading Room on the Internet at the NRC Web site http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html (Accession No. ML070100363). Persons who do not have access to ADAMS or who encounter problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS, should contact the NRC Public Document Room Reference staff by telephone at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov. Applicability This proposed change to adopt TSTF-412 is applicable to all pressurized water reactors (PWRs) designed by Babcock and Wilcox (B&W), Westinghouse, and Combustion Engineering (CE). If approved, to efficiently process the incoming license amendment applications, the NRC staff will request that each licensee applying for the changes addressed by TSTF-412, Revision 3, use the CLIIP to submit a License Amendment Request (LAR) that conforms to the enclosed Model Application (Enclosure 1). Any deviations from the Model Application should be explained in the licensee's submittal. Significant deviations from the approach, or inclusion of additional changes to the license, will result in staff rejection of the submittal. Instead, licensees desiring significant variations and/or additional changes should submit a LAR that does not claim to adopt TSTF-412. Variations from the approach recommended in this notice may require additional review by the NRC staff and may increase the time and resources needed for the review. Public Notices This notice requests comments from interested members of the public within 30 days of the date of publication in the Federal Register. Following the NRC staff's evaluation of comments received as a result of this notice, the NRC staff may reconsider the proposed change or may proceed with announcing the availability of the change in a subsequent notice (perhaps with some changes to the SE or proposed NSHC determination as a result of public comments). If the NRC staff announces the availability of the change, licensees wishing to adopt the change will submit an application in accordance with applicable rules and other regulatory requirements. The NRC staff will in turn issue for each application a notice of proposed action, which includes a proposed NSHC determination. A notice of issuance of an amendment of operating license will also be issued to announce the adoption of TSTF-412 for each plant that applies for and receives the requested change. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 8th day of March, 2007. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Timothy J. Kobetz, Chief, Technical Specifications Branch, Division of Inspection and Regional Support, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. The following example of a license amendment request (LAR) was prepared by the NRC staff to facilitate the adoption of Technical Specifications Task Force (TSTF) Traveler TSTF-412, Revision 3 ``Provide Actions for One Steam Supply to Turbine Driven AFW/EFW Pump Inoperable.'' The model provides the expected level of detail and content for a LAR to adopt TSTF-412, Revision 3. Licensees remain responsible for ensuring that their plant-specific LAR fulfills their administrative requirements as well as NRC regulations. Proposed Model License Amendment Request U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Document Control Desk Washington, DC 20555 Subject: Plant Name Docket No. 50- Application for Technical Specification Improvement To Revise Actions for One Steam Supply to Turbine Driven Auxiliary Feedwater/ Emergency Feedwater Pump Inoperable Using the Consolidated Line Item Improvement Process Gentlemen: In accordance with the provisions of 10 CFR 50.90 of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), [LICENSEE] is submitting a request for an amendment to the technical specifications (TS) for [PLANT NAME, UNIT NOS.]. The proposed amendment establishes Conditions, Required Actions, and Completion Times in the Standard Technical Specifications (STS) for the Condition where one steam supply to the turbine driven Auxiliary Feedwater/Emergency Feedwater (AFW/EFW) pump is inoperable concurrent with an inoperable motor driven AFW/EFW train. In addition, this amendment establishes changes to the STS that establish specific Actions when two motor driven AFW/EFW trains are inoperable at the same time and the turbine driven AFW/EFW train is inoperable either (a) due solely to one inoperable steam supply, or (b) due to reasons other than one inoperable steam supply. The change is consistent with NRC-approved Technical Specification Task Force (TSTF) Traveler, TSTF-412, Revision 3, ``Provide Actions for One Steam Supply to Turbine Driven AFW/EFW Pump Inoperable.'' The availability of this technical specification improvement was announced in the Federal Register on [DATE OF NOTICE OF AVAILABILITY] as part of the consolidated line item improvement process (CLIIP). Enclosure 1 provides a description of the proposed change and confirmation of applicability. Enclosure 2 provides the existing TS pages marked-up to show the proposed change. Enclosure 3 provides the existing TS Bases pages marked-up to reflect the proposed change. There are no new regulatory commitments associated with this proposed change. [LICENSEE] requests approval of the proposed license amendment by [DATE], with the amendment being implemented [BY DATE OR WITHIN X DAYS]. In accordance with 10 CFR 50.91, a copy of this application, with enclosures, is being provided to the designated [STATE] Official. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America that I am authorized by [LICENSEE] to make this request and that the foregoing is true and correct. [Note that request may be notarized in lieu of using this oath or affirmation statement.] If you should have any questions regarding this submittal, please contact [ ]. Sincerely, Name, Title Enclosures: 1. Description and Assessment 2. Proposed Technical Specification Changes 3. Proposed Technical Specification Bases Changes cc: NRR Project Manager Regional Office Resident Inspector State Contact Enclosure 1 to Model License Amendment Request--Description and Assessment 1.0 Description The proposed License amendment establish a new Completion Time in Standard Technical Specifications Section [3.7.5] where one steam supply to the turbine driven AFW/EFW pump is inoperable concurrent with an inoperable motor driven AFW/EFW train. This amendment also establishes specific Conditions and Action requirements when two motor driven AFW/EFW trains are inoperable at the same time and the turbine driven AFW/EFW train is inoperable either (a) due solely to one inoperable steam supply, or (b) due to reasons other than one inoperable steam supply. [[Page 11916]] The changes are consistent with NRC approved Industry/Technical Specification Task Force (TSTF) Standard Technical Specification Change Traveler, TSTF-412, Revision 3, ``Provide Actions for One Steam Supply to Turbine Driven AFW/EFW Pump Inoperable.'' The availability of this technical specification improvement was announced in the Federal Register on [DATE ] ([xx FR xxxxx]) as part of the consolidated line item improvement process (CLIIP). 2.0 Assessment 2.1 Applicability of Published Safety Evaluation [LICENSEE] has reviewed the safety evaluation published on [DATE ] ([xx FR xxxxx]) as part of the CLIIP. This verification included a review of the NRC staff's evaluation as well as the supporting information provided to support TSTF-412, Revision 3. [LICENSEE] has concluded that the justifications presented in the TSTF proposal and the safety evaluation prepared by the NRC staff are applicable to [PLANT, UNIT NOS.] and justify this amendment for the incorporation of the changes to the [PLANT] Technical Specifications. 2.2 Optional Changes and Variations [LICENSEE] is not proposing any variations or deviations from the technical specification changes described in TSTF-412, Revision 3, or the NRC staff's model safety evaluation published in the Federal Register on [DATE ] ([xx FR xxxxx]). 3.0 Regulatory Analysis 3.1 No Significant Hazards Determination [LICENSEE] has reviewed the proposed no significant hazards consideration determination published on [DATE] as part of the CLIIP. [LICENSEE] has concluded that the proposed determination presented in the notice is applicable to [PLANT] and the determination is hereby incorporated by reference to satisfy the requirements of 10 CFR 50.91(a). 3.2 Verification and Commitments There are no new regulatory commitments associated with this proposed change. 4.0 Environmental Evaluation [LICENSEE] has reviewed the environmental evaluation included in the model safety evaluation published in the Federal Register on [DATE ] ([xx FR xxxxx]) as part of the CLIIP. [LICENSEE] has concluded that the NRC staff's findings presented in that evaluation are applicable to [PLANT] and the evaluation is hereby incorporated by reference for this application. Enclosure 2 to Model License Amendment Request: PROPOSED TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION CHANGES Enclosure 3 to Model License Amendment Request: Changes to TS Bases Pages Proposed Model Safety Evaluation U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, Consolidated Line Item Improvement Technical Specification Task Force Traveler TSTF-412, Revision 3, Provide Actions for One Steam Supply to the Turbine Driven AFW/EFW Pump Inoperable 1.0 Introduction By application dated [DATE], [LICENSEE NAME] (the licensee), submitted a request for changes to the [PLANT NAME], Technical Specifications (TS) (Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) Accession No. [MLxxxxxxxxx]). The requested change would establish a Completion Time for the Condition where one steam supply to the turbine driven AFW/EFW pump is inoperable concurrent with an inoperable motor driven AFW/EFW train and establish specific Conditions and Required Actions when two motor driven AFW/EFW trains are inoperable at the same time and the turbine driven AFW/EFW train is inoperable either (a) due solely to one inoperable steam supply, or (b) due to reasons other than one inoperable steam supply. These changes were described in a Notice of Availability published in the Federal Register on [DATE ] ([xx FR xxxxx]). 2.0 Regulatory Evaluation In 10 CFR 50.36, the Commission established its regulatory requirements related to the content of Technical Specifications (TS). Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.36(c), TS are required to include items in the following categories: (1) Safety limits, limiting safety system settings, and limiting control settings; (2) limiting conditions for operation (LCOs); (3) surveillance requirements (SRs); (4) design features; and (5) administrative controls. The rule does not specify the particular requirements to be included in a plant's TS. 3.0 Technical Evaluation TS 3.7.5, Auxiliary Feedwater (AFW)/Emergency Feedwater (EFW) System The AFW/EFW System is designed to automatically supply sufficient water to the steam generator(s) to remove decay heat upon the loss of normal feedwater supply with steam generator pressure at the set point of the Main Steam Safety Valves (MSSVs). Subsequently, the AFW/EFW System supplies sufficient water to cool the unit to Residual Heat Removal (RHR) System entry conditions, with steam being released through the Atmospheric Dump Valves (ADVs). AFW/EFW Systems typically consist of two motor driven AFW/EFW pumps and one steam turbine driven pump configured into three trains. The capacity of the motor driven and steam driven AFW/EFW pumps can vary by plant. Motor driven pumps typically provide 50% or 100% of the required AFW/EFW flow capacity as assumed in the accident analysis. Motor driven AFW/EFW pumps are typically powered from an independent Class 1E power supply and each pump train typically feeds half of the steam generators, although each pump has the capability to be realigned from the control room to feed other steam generators. The steam turbine driven AFW/EFW pump provides either 100% or 200% of the required capacity to all steam generators. The steam turbine driven pump receives steam from two main steam lines upstream of the main steam isolation valves. Each of the steam feed lines will supply 100% of the requirements of the turbine driven AFW/EFW pump. LCO 3.7.5, Condition A (as Proposed) Condition A is modified to refer to the inoperability of a turbine driven AFW/EFW train due to an inoperable steam supply, instead of referring to the inoperability of a turbine driven AFW/EFW pump. This change is being proposed in order to make Condition A train oriented instead of component oriented, consistent with the other Conditions that are included in STS 3.7.5. The train oriented approach is consistent with the preferred approach that is generally reflected in the STS, and therefore the proposed change is considered to be acceptable. STS 3.7.5, Condition C (as Proposed) A new Condition C with two possible Required Actions (C.1 OR C.2) is proposed for the turbine driven AFW/EFW train being inoperable due to one inoperable steam supply and one motor driven AFW/EFW train being inoperable [[Page 11917]] at the same time. Required Action C.1 requires restoration of the affected steam supply to operable status within either 24 or 48 hours, depending on the capability of the motor driven AFW/EFW train that remains operable. Alternatively, Required Action C.2 requires restoration of the inoperable motor driven AFW/EFW train within either 24 or 48 hours, again depending on the capability of the motor driven AFW/EFW train that remains operable. New Condition C provides two proposed Completion Times that are dependent upon the capacity of the remaining operable motor driven AFW/EFW train to provide AFW/EFW to the steam generators. A proposed 24 hour Completion Time is applicable to plants that may provide insufficient flow to the steam generators (SGs) in accordance with accident analyses assumptions if a main steam line break (MSLB) or feedwater line break (FLB) were to occur that renders the remaining steam supply to the turbine driven AFW/EFW pump inoperable (a concurrent single failure is not assumed). Insufficient feedwater flow could result, for example, if a single motor driven AFW/EFW train does not have sufficient capacity to satisfy accident analyses assumptions, or if the operable pump is feeding the faulted SG (i.e. the SG that is aligned to the operable steam supply for the turbine driven AFW/EFW pump). [This would typically apply to plants with each AFW/EFW motor driven pump having less than 100% of the required flow.] Likewise, a proposed 48 hour Completion Time is applicable when the remaining operable motor driven AFW/EFW train is capable of providing sufficient feedwater flow in accordance with accident analyses assumptions. [This would typically apply to plants with each AFW/EFW motor driven pump having greater than or equal to 100% of the required flow.] The STS typically allows a 72 hour Completion Time for Conditions where the remaining operable equipment is able to mitigate postulated accidents without assuming a concurrent single active failure. In this particular case, a 24 hour Completion Time is proposed for the situation where the AFW/EFW system would be able to perform its function for most postulated events, and would only be challenged by a MSLB or FLB that renders the remaining operable steam supply to the turbine driven AFW/EFW pump inoperable. Additionally, depending on the capacity of the operable motor driven AFW/EFW pump, it may be able to mitigate MSLB and FLB accidents during those instances when it is not aligned to the faulted SG. The selection of 24 hours for the Completion Time is based on the remaining operable steam supply to the turbine driven AFW/EFW pump and the continued functionality of the turbine driven AFW/EFW train, the remaining operable motor driven AFW/EFW train, and the low likelihood of an event occurring during this 24 hour period that would challenge the capability of the AFW/EFW system to provide feedwater to the SGs. The proposed Completion Time for this particular situation is consistent with what was approved for Waterford 3 by License Amendment 173 for a similar Condition (ADAMS Accession No. ML012840538), and it is commensurate with the STS in that the proposed Completion Time is much less than the 72 hours that is allowed for the situation where accident mitigation capability is maintained. Therefore, the NRC staff agrees that the proposed 24 hour Completion Time is acceptable for this particular situation. A 48 hour Completion Time is proposed for the situation where the remaining operable motor driven AFW/EFW train is able to mitigate postulated accidents in accordance with accident analyses assumptions without assuming a concurrent single active failure. The selection of 48 hours is based on the continued capability of the AFW/EFW system to perform its function, while at the same time recognizing that this Condition represents a higher level of degradation than one inoperable AFW/EFW train which is currently allowed for up to 72 hours by STS 3.7.5. The proposed 48 hour Completion Time represents an appropriate balance between the more severe 24 hour situation discussed in the previous paragraph and the less severe Condition that is afforded a 72 hour Completion Time by the current STS. Therefore, the NRC staff agrees that the proposed 48 hour Completion Time is acceptable for this particular situation. STS 3.7.5, Condition D (as Proposed) The current Condition C is renamed as Condition D. This Condition has been modified to incorporate changes brought on by the addition of new Condition C. The first Condition has been modified and now applies to the situation where the Required Action and associated Completion Time of Condition A, B, or C are not met. This section of Condition D is modified to also apply to the new Condition C when the Completion Time that is specified for new Condition C is not met. The NRC staff considers this to be appropriate and consistent with existing STS 3.7.5 requirements to place the plant in a mode where the Condition does not apply when the Required Actions are not met. The second Condition following the first ``OR'' in Condition D is modified from ``Two AFW/EFW trains inoperable in MODE 1, 2, or 3'' to ``Two AFW/EFW trains inoperable in MODE 1, 2, or 3 for reasons other than Condition C.'' This change is necessary to recognize the situation specified by Condition C (as proposed) where one motor driven AFW/EFW train is allowed to be inoperable at the same time that the turbine driven AFW/EFW train is inoperable due to an inoperable steam supply to the pump turbine. Therefore, the NRC staff considers the proposed change to be acceptable. The Required Actions associated with this Condition were renamed from C.1 AND C.2 to D.1 AND D.2 but not otherwise changed. Required Action D.1 requires the plant to be in Mode 3 in 6 hours, and Required Action D.2 requires the plant to be in Mode 4 in 18 hours. This change is purely editorial as no other changes are involved. Therefore, this proposed change is acceptable. STS 3.7.5, Condition E (as Proposed) Because current Condition C is renamed as Condition D, current Condition D is renamed as Condition E. This change is purely editorial as no other changes are involved. Therefore, the proposed change is acceptable. STS 3.7.5, Condition F (as Proposed) Because current Condition D is renamed as Condition E, current Condition E is renamed as Condition F. This change is purely editorial as no other changes are involved. Therefore, the proposed change is acceptable. STS 3.7.5, Bases (as Proposed) Though changes to the STS Bases do not require NRC approval per se, changes to the STS Bases were reviewed to assess their consistency with the proposed changes to STS 3.7.5. The proposed changes to the STS Bases appeared to be consistent with the proposed changes to STS 3.7.5. 4.0 State Consultation In accordance with the Commission's regulations, the [STATE] State official was notified of the proposed issuance of the amendments. The State official had [(1) no comments or (2) the following comments--with subsequent disposition by the NRC staff]. 5.0 Environmental Consideration The amendment changes a requirement with respect to the installation or use of a facility component located within the restricted [[Page 11918]] area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20 and changes surveillance requirements. The NRC staff has determined that the amendment involves no significant increase in the amounts and no significant change in the types of any effluents that may be released offsite, and that there is no significant increase in individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure. The Commission has previously issued a proposed finding that the amendment involves no significant hazards consideration, and there has been [(1) no public comment on such finding (2) the following comments with subsequent disposition by the NRC staff ([xx FR xxxxx, DATE]). Accordingly, the amendment meets the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9). Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b) no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with the issuance of the amendment. 6.0 Conclusion The Commission has concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, that (1) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner, (2) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations, and (3) the issuance of the amendments will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public. The proposed changes are consistent with NRC practices and policies as generally reflected in the STS and as reflected by applicable precedents that have been approved. Therefore, the NRC staff has determined that the proposed changes to STS 3.7.5 should be approved. Model No Significant Hazards Consideration Determination Description of amendment request: The requested change, applicable to all pressurized water reactors (PWRs) designed by Babcock and Wilcox (B&W), Westinghouse, and Combustion Engineering (CE), would provide changes to the Actions in the Standard Technical Specifications (STS) relating to One Steam Supply to Turbine Driven Auxiliary Feedwater/ Emergency Feedwater (AFW/EFW) Pump Inoperable. The proposed change is described in Technical Specification Task Force (TSTF) Standard TS Change Traveler TSTF-412, Revision 3, and was described in the Notice of Availability published in the Federal Register on [DATE] ([xx FR xxxxx]). Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration determination: As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), an analysis of the issue of no significant hazards consideration is presented below: 1. Does the proposed change involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of any accident previously evaluated? Response: No. The Auxiliary/Emergency Feedwater (AFW/EFW) System is not an initiator of any design basis accident or event, and therefore the proposed changes do not increase the probability of any accident previously evaluated. The proposed changes to address the condition of one or two motor driven AFW/EFW trains inoperable and the turbine driven AFW/EFW train inoperable due to one steam supply inoperable do not change the response of the plant to any accidents. The proposed changes do not adversely affect accident initiators or precursors nor alter the design assumptions, conditions, and configuration of the facility or the manner in which the plant is operated and maintained. The proposed changes do not adversely affect the ability of structures, systems, and components (SSCs) to perform their intended safety function to mitigate the consequences of an initiating event within the assumed acceptance limits. The proposed changes do not affect the source term, containment isolation, or radiological release assumptions used in evaluating the radiological consequences of any accident previously evaluated. Further, the proposed changes do not increase the types and amounts of radioactive effluent that may be released offsite, nor significantly increase individual or cumulative occupational/public radiation exposures. Therefore, the changes do not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of any accident previously evaluated. 2. Does the proposed change create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated? Response: No. The proposed changes do not result in a change in the manner in which the AFW/EFW System provides plant protection. The AFW/EFW System will continue to supply water to the steam generators to remove decay heat and other residual heat by delivering at least the minimum required flow rate to the steam generators. There are no design changes associated with the proposed changes. The changes to the Conditions and Required Actions do not change any existing accident scenarios, nor create any new or different accident scenarios. The changes do not involve a physical alteration of the plant (i.e., no new or different type of equipment will be installed) or a change in the methods governing normal plant operation. In addition, the changes do not impose any new or different requirements or eliminate any existing requirements. The changes do not alter assumptions made in the safety analysis. The proposed changes are consistent with the safety analysis assumptions and current plant operating practice. Therefore, the changes do not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated. 3. Does the proposed change involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety? Response: No. The proposed changes do not alter the manner in which safety limits, limiting safety system settings or limiting conditions for operation are determined. The safety analysis acceptance criteria are not impacted by these changes. The proposed changes will not result in plant operation in a configuration outside the design basis. Therefore, it is concluded that the proposed change does not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety. Based on the above, the proposed change involves no significant hazards consideration under the standards set forth in 10 CFR 50.92(c), and accordingly, a finding of no significant hazards consideration is justified. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this xx day of xxxxxxx, 2007. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Project Manager. Plant Licensing Branch [ ], Division of Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. [FR Doc. E7-4675 Filed 3-13-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P ***************************************************************** 34 Reuters: M'bishi Heavy gets $4-5 bln TXU reactor deal-source | Wed Mar 14, 2007 12:39AM EDT TOKYO, March 14 (Reuters) - Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Ltd (7011.T: Quote, Profile, Research) has received an order for two nuclear reactors from U.S. power plant operator TXU Corp. (TXU.N: Quote, Profile, Research) worth 500 billion to 600 billion yen ($4.3 billion to $5.2 billion), a person familiar with the matter said on Wednesday. Such an order would mark the first time a Japanese-made reactor has been exported, and also the first time a Japanese manufacturer of nuclear reactors has won an order on its own to build a U.S. power plant. The order is for two 1.7 million-kilowatt advanced pressurised-water reactors, which would likely come on line some time around 2015, the source said. The Nikkei business daily reported earlier that TXU, which recently agreed to be taken over in a $32 billion deal led by private equity firms and has suspended plans to build coal-fired units, would file a licensing application this autumn. The reactors will be built at the Comanche Peak nuclear power station near Dallas, it said. Mitsubishi Heavy shares were up 2.5 percent at 660 yen at the end of morning trade, making it the biggest percentage gainer among Nikkei 225 stocks. Continued... Reuters 2007. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 35 UPI: Atomic energy capacity to rise to 7280 Mwe United Press International - Energy - 3/14/2007 1:37:00 PM -0400 NEW DELHI, March 14 (UPI) -- India has said its installed atomic energy capacity will rise to 7,280 Mwe from 3,900 Mwe by 2011 when its projects are completed. "The current installed capacity of 3,900 Mwe will reach 7,280 Mwe progressively by March 2011 by completion of projects under construction," Prithviraj Chavan, a junior minister in the Prime Minister's Office told Parliament Wednesday. "The 11th five-year plan proposals envisage start of work on 5,600 Mwe capacity based on indigenous design." The 11th plan begins in April. He said the current initiatives for international cooperation in nuclear energy are aimed at accessing the global market for technologies and fuel. Copyright 2007 United Press International, Inc. All Rights ***************************************************************** 36 Hemscott: Nuke reactor orders seen soon WASHINGTON (AP) - Energy companies could be as close as a year away from ordering the first new nuclear reactors to be built in the U.S. since the 1970s, industry officials said Wednesday. The assessment came after TXU Corp. and Japan's Mitsubishi Heavy Industries reached a nonbinding deal under which TXU would use the Japanese company's design for up to three potential nuclear reactors in Texas. Adrian Heymer, senior director of new plant deployment at the Nuclear Energy Institute, a Washington-based trade group, said in an interview that power companies such as Progress Energy Inc., Duke Energy Corp., Southern Co, Dominion Resources Inc., Entergy Corp., and NRG Energy Inc. are among the companies that could be first to order a reactor -- at an estimated cost of $3.5 billion to $5 billion. Heymer said the first orders could come 12 months to 18 months from now. Still, due to the lengthy approval process and construction schedule, combined with potential political opposition, any new reactor in the U.S. is not likely to start producing power until 2015 at the earliest, industry experts say. Andy White, chief executive of General Electric Co.'s nuclear business, said the first orders for reactors will probably come next year. 'My order book is open and I'm ready to go,' White said. 'We'd love to see people making orders today.' But, White said, U.S. power companies are being cautious as they consider state and federal-level reviews, incentives from the federal government and the reaction of investors. 'It's a big commitment,' White said. 'They're all nervous about what the market reaction is going to be.' Mike Worms, an analyst with BMO Capital Markets, said the construction costs for nuclear plants are so huge, and the regulatory timetable so uncertain, that many companies will be very cautious before committing to build. 'You're talking about an enormous amount in terms of cost,' Worms said, citing soaring prices for construction materials. 'I don't think we have an idea of what the cost of a nuclear plant is going to be.' The federal energy bill passed in 2005 promised financial incentives to companies that propose new nuclear reactors. Regulators expect to receive about 20 applications for new plants over the next three years with at least 30 new reactors. Most of those locations are expected to be in the Southeast. The first applications are expected to start coming in to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission late this year. Energy company officials said they are focused on completing applications and have not made a firm decision to build new reactors. 'We're looking at what materials and components and equipment we're going to need for a new plant,' said Rita Sipe, a spokeswoman for Charlotte-based Duke Energy. 'We have not even made a decision as to whether we're going to build the plant yet.' Diane Park, a spokeswoman for New Orleans-based Entergy, said her company is 'serious about the possibility of building new nuclear units' but said the state and federal-level regulatory picture needs to become more clear before the company would place a new order for a reactor. NRG's chief executive, David Crane, said in a conference call with analysts last month that his company's plan to build two 1,350-megawatt nuclear reactors at a site in Texas 'remains well on track' and said he is 'personally more bullish on this project than ever.' Copyright 2007 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. Hemscott PLC - Serious Investment Research Copyright 2006 Hemscott Group Limited. Hemscott is the UK registered trademark of Hemscott Group Limited. ***************************************************************** 37 AFP: Mitsubishi Heavy set for big US nuclear order Wednesday March 14, 08:51 AM TOKYO (AFP) - Mitsubishi Heavy Industries said Wednesday that it expects an order worth about 5.2 billion dollars for two nuclear reactors from US power giant TXU (NYSE: TXU - news) , breaking new ground for a Japanese company. The two reactors, which have a power generation capacity of 1,700 megawatts, will be constructed once the Texas energy group formally receives permission from US authorities to import them, a spokesman for the Japanese group said. The deal will make Mitsubishi Heavy the first Japanese company to export Japan-made reactors overseas without any third party involvement, he added. Mitsubishi (Berlin: MBI.BE - news) declined to give the exact value of the deal but said the catalogue price for the two was about 600 billion yen (5.17 billion dollars). The heavy machinery manufacturer set up a wholly-owned US unit in July 2006 to market advanced pressurised-water reactors to US power companies. The world market for nuclear power plants is expected to expand rapidly amid higher crude oil prices and calls for a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions. "Dozens of new nuclear plants are expected to be constructed in the United States by about 2030 as the importance of nuclear power generation is increasing against a backdrop of global warming and high crude oil prices," Mitsubishi said in a statement. "Taking advantage of this order, our company will make a more active sales pitch to gain more contracts for our APWR from US power companies," it said. With an eye on the growing US market, Japanese giant Toshiba Corp (Berlin: TSE1.BE - news) . last year bought US nuclear power plant maker Westinghouse for 5.4 billion dollars in one of Japan's largest overseas acquisitions in years. Toshiba's rival Hitachi Ltd (Xetra: 853219 - news) . has also teamed up with General Electric Co. to build nuclear power plants in the United States. ***************************************************************** 38 www.bbj.hu: EU rejects Balkans nuclear plea 14.03.2007 17:56 GOVERNMENT & POLITICS > Energy The European Union has rejected a plea from Balkan countries to restart two reactors at the Kozloduy nuclear plant in Bulgaria to ease power shortages. Five states asked the EU on Monday to allow Bulgaria to resume electricity production at units three and four. The reactors - deemed unsafe by the EU - were closed by Sofia on 1 January, as part of its EU accession treaty. But now Bulgaria says they are safe and would provide much-needed electricity for the Balkans. The European Commission told BBC News that it had not yet considered the Balkan proposal, but Ferran Tarradellas, spokesman for the EU energy commissioner, said that conditions had not changed „Bulgaria has undertaken a commitment to close units three and four in Kozloduy as part of the accession treaty,” Tarradellas said. He added that the EU had already provided hundreds of millions of euros in assistance to Bulgaria to soften the blow of the closure. The chief European Commission representative in Bulgaria, Michael Humphreys, acknowledged that Bulgaria's decision to close the two Soviet-built reactors had been difficult. But he told BBC News that „any request to change that decision would be unacceptable, because it would entail a renegotiation of the accession treaty, a unanimous consent of the 27 member state governments and ratification by 27 parliaments”. Bulgaria also closed down two old reactors at Kozloduy in 2003, leaving just two of the six there still in action. But Bulgaria plans to complete construction of a new nuclear plant at Belene, also by the River Danube. Bulgaria's Economy and Energy Minister, Rumen Ovcharov, expressed his country's preoccupation with the worsening energy situation. Bulgaria, Serbia, the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Albania and Croatia adopted a declaration on Monday in Sofia in which they warned of dire consequences if the two reactors were not reopened. The plant has „We are concerned about the current electricity supply problems of the region, which could result in higher economic and political instability,” the statement said. Bulgaria exported 7.8 billion kilowatt-hours of electricity in 2006, which is roughly what the two nuclear reactors in Kozloduy produced. Albania and Kosovo have experienced power cuts in the last few years, but many of these cuts are caused mainly a by lack of investment in the power infrastructure. The statement issued by the Balkan countries claimed that electricity prices had jumped 80-100% compared with last year. (BBC NEWS) ***************************************************************** 39 Portsmouth Herald Local News: Nuclear plant ordered to act March 14, 2007 By Shir Haberman shaberman@seacoastonline.com SEABROOK -- Problems with welds in the cooling system of a nuclear reactor in Kansas prompted the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to require better monitoring of leaks at 40 nuclear power plants around the country, including Seabrook Station. "These plants will either have to make repairs or demonstrate that they have an effective monitoring system (to ensure the integrity of reactor cooling system welds)," said NRC spokesman Neil Sheehan. "We have no specific information concerning problems at Seabrook Station, and that is why we are issuing the (confirmatory action) letters." The confirmatory action letters 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; however, the nature of the flaws raised further questions regarding the welds at other pressurized water reactors like Seabrook, Sheehan said. Seabrook Station spokesman Alan Griffith said that while the plant has not received its letter yet, personnel there were aware of the action and have already begun to tighten monitoring procedures to conform to the new NRC standards. That agency has determined that nuclear plants must shut down their reactors if a change of more than .1 gallons of water in its cooling system occurs each day for three consecutive days. Griffith said Seabrook plant personnel are sure the cooling system at the local nuclear plant has maintained its integrity. "We're confident that we don't have the same problems as Wolf Creek," Griffith said. "We just had a refueling where we do a lot of maintenance work on the plant, and there was no indication of any kind of reactor cooling system leak." The confirmatory action letters are meant to ensure the plants will put in place more timely inspection and flaw-prevention measures, more aggressive monitoring of reactor cooling system leakage and more conservative leak-rate thresholds for a plant to shut down to investigate a possible leak, a press release from the NRC issued Monday indicates. The letters officially document plant operators' commitment to conduct ultrasonic inspections of some reactor cooling system welds containing materials known as Alloy 82 and Alloy 182 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 pressurized water reactors' operating conditions, the NRC press release states. 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 pressurized water reactor fleet. Seacoast Online is owned and operated by Seacoast Media Group. Copyright 2006 Seacoast Online. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 40 New London Day: Millstone 3 Is Examined For Potential Welding Flaws theday.com ] NRC also seeking corrective action at 39 other nuke plants By Patricia Daddona Click name for author info, most recent articles ... Published on 3/13/2007 in Home »Region »Region News Waterford The owner of the Unit 3 reactor at Millstone Power Station is one of dozens across the country taking action to strengthen metal welds that have the potential to crack and leak. The federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission issued commitment action letters to owners of 40 pressurized water reactors Monday, including Millstone owner Dominion. The letters confirm that reactor owners at most of the plants would inspect and, if necessary, repair or strengthen welds on nozzles used to distribute coolant during planned shutdowns this year. A pressurized reactor superheats water with nuclear fuel but maintains pressure so that the water never boils. The water is converted to steam that turns turbines that generate electricity. Coolant is a liquid used to cool steam generated from fission. The danger of cracking welds, NRC spokesman Neil Sheehan said, is that if some of these welds were to rupture, there could be a loss-of-coolant accident that could pose a challenge to reactor operators as they sought to safely shut down the plant. Millstone has two pressurized reactors on its 524-acre site. Unit 2 has a brand new pressurizer that uses stainless steel nozzle ends and weld material highly resistant to corrosion and cracking, according to a report to the NRC from David A. Christian, Dominion's senior vice president of nuclear operations and chief nuclear officer. Unit 3 has already been inspected and has no flaws, but welds on five nozzles will be buttressed with another corrosion resistant metal this spring just to make sure they're safe, Dominion spokesman Pete Hyde said. Last fall, operators found flaws in welds made of Alloy 82 and 182 metals in the pressurizer at the Wolf Creek reactor near Burlington, Kan. These alloys had been susceptible as far back as 1993 and 2000 to cracking due to their chemical makeup, residual stresses from the welding process and pressurized water reactor operating conditions, the NRC said in a prepared statement. The size and nature of flaws in welds at the Wolf Creek reactor led NRC staff to conclude the industry must accelerate its planned actions for the remainder of the affected plants, the NRC said. The last time Unit 3 was shut down for refueling, Dominion radio-graphed five nozzles at Unit 3 that is, took pictures like X-rays of the metal and found no indication of stress corrosion cracking, Hyde said. Unit 3 (uses) a different metallurgy, and the operating temperatures are different and not as susceptible as other reactor vessel heads in the industry to the cracking, he said. This spring, during another outage, Dominion will strengthen the welds with a more durable metal to ensure they won't leak, he said. This is not just compliance, Hyde said. We're taking the steps to ensure that Unit 3 will operate safely for the foreseeable future. The company has also come up with a plan addressing how it would handle any leaks, should they occur, Christian wrote. Owners of all affected reactors are being asked to produce such plans, Sheehan said. Waterford Privacy Policy | Contact Us at 1 (860) 442-2200 | New London, CT | © 1998-2007 The Day Publishing Co. 102 ***************************************************************** 41 SFSS: Safety review of the St. Lucie nuclear plant set for March 27 South Florida Sun-Sentinel Sun-Sentinel.com Posted March 13 2007, 6:46 PM EDT The Nuclear Regulatory Commission said Tuesday it will hold a meeting with Florida Power & Light Co. officials March 27 to discuss the commission's 2006 safety review of the St. Lucie nuclear plant. The meeting is open to "public observation" which, according to the NRC, means its staff will answer questions form the public at the end of the session. The St. Lucie plant operated safely last year, the NRC said, with "all inspection findings being of very low safety significance." The meeting is scheduled for 3 p.m. at the St. Lucie Energy Encounter Building, 6501 South A1A, Jensen Beach. Copyright 2007, South Florida Sun-Sentinel Copyright 2007, Sun-Sentinel Co. & South Florida Interactive Inc. Sun-Sentinel.com, 200 E. Las Olas Blvd., Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33301 ***************************************************************** 42 KNDO/KNDU: Work Begins to Prepare N Reactor for Cocooning Tri-Cities, Yakima, WA | Cleanup at the N Reactor in Hanford RICHLAND, Wash.- Demolition work begins to prepare Hanford's historic N Reactor for cocooning. Aside from the radioactivity contained in the reactor, most of the steam pipes are insulated with asbestos, there's still lead in some places and they have to make sure all of that's out before they can start demolition. Washington Closure Hanford has issued an $8.8 million contract to remove hazardous materials from the buildings asbestos, lead and hazardous oils, it's all got to come out before the historic reactor can be cocooned. "That's just to make it safe to go in and, and proceed with the next portion of the work, which is the demolition of the 105 and 109-N buildings," said Dennis Reese with Washington Closure Hanford. The reactor's been shut down since 1986. It was the world's first "dual-purpose" reactor. Like Hanford's other facilities, it made plutonium for the nation's weapons program, but it also produced electricity. That makes it bigger than Hanford's other reactors, but demolition experts say it'll probably be easier to enclose. "The N Reactor facility is different than the single-pass reactors, those are, they had a lot of what I call gingerbread or other structures that came off the reactor building. This one will be easier to put a roof on because we're going to have a very low slope roof and pretty much just a single flat," said Daryl Schilperoort with WCH. After the materials are out, they'll tear down all but the core, a process called cocooning. Then it'll sit for 75 years as the radioactivity slowly decays. "We want to have all of the hazardous materials removed out of the building before we start tearing the building down, it just makes that process much more safe," Schilperoort said. Four of Hanford's nine reactors have already been cocooned. The Tri-Party Agreement requires that the N Reactor be done by 2012. Washington Closure Hanford says it'll be done by 2011, maybe even 2010. All content Copyright 2000 - 2007 WorldNow and KNDO/KNDU. All ***************************************************************** 43 Guardian Unlimited: Dirty Bomb Materials Remain a Concern From the Associated Press Wednesday March 14, 2007 3:16 AM By H. JOSEF HEBERT Associated Press Writer WASHINGTON (AP) - The Energy Department has not done enough in Russia and in developing countries to secure radioactive material that could be used to make a so-called dirty bomb, congressional investigators said Tuesday. A report by the Government Accountability Office said that over the past four years security has been improved at hundreds of sites containing radioactive material in 40 countries but ``many of the highest-risk and most dangerous sources still remained unsecured.'' The U.S. program is aimed at providing financial support and technical expertise for securing such devices. The GAO, Congress' investigative arm, said the government has spent $108 million since 2002 on securing such material - some of it abandoned, lost or in poorly guarded waste sites. But there has been ``limited progress securing many of the most dangerous sources,'' especially in Russia where radioactive material is used to power hundreds of small generators in remote sites, the report said. ``Thousands of these sources have been lost, stolen or abandoned,'' said the report sent to Sen. Daniel Akaka, D-Hawaii, who had requested the GAO review. The radioactive materials are used in everything from medical devices and remote generators to oil drilling equipment and to power lighthouses and weather stations. The devices contain such radioactive isotopes as cobalt-60, cesium-137 and strontium-90 in encapsulated or sealed small amounts. But if terrorists obtained a large number of these devices, they could be used to fashion a ``dirty bomb'' that would explode like a conventional explosive, but would scatter radioactive dust and debris. While there is no danger of a nuclear explosion, terrorist experts have said a dirty bomb - though not likely to cause any deaths beyond those from the conventional explosion - could cause panic and result in an expensive cleanup. The GAO report said the U.S. program has focused on securing material at medical facilities, but has made little progress in assuring that other, sometimes more dangerous sources are secure. For example, the GAO said, 16 of 20 waste storage sites containing such material remained unsecured in Russia and Ukraine. It also said 700 remote transformers powered by radioactive material ``remain operational and abandoned'' in Russia. Also strontium-90 in large devices such as generators that power lighthouses and weather stations in remote areas also remain relatively unsecured, the GAO said. In the Republic of Georgia, ``we found that a facility containing (remote generators) which had thousands of curies of cesium-137 had several large openings in the roof,'' the investigators wrote. And in Lithuania, the investigators said they visited an oncology clinic where they observed a cable that was supposed to secure a medical machine with cobalt-60 had been broken for almost a month. ^--- On the Net: Government Accountability Office: http://www.gao.gov Guardian Unlimited Guardian News and Media Limited 2007 ***************************************************************** 44 Guardian Unlimited: Radium Vial Missing From Cleanup Site From the Associated Press Wednesday March 14, 2007 5:31 AM PIKETON, Ohio (AP) - A small bar of radium is missing from a former uranium enrichment plant in southern Ohio, the U.S. Department of Energy reported Tuesday. The radioactive ingot, about the size of a medical gel capsule and stored in a glass vial, is not a health or security threat, said Laura Schachter, an agency spokeswoman. But the department is taking the loss seriously to ensure that the cleanup of the former Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion plant is not compromised, she said. The plant was used to enrich uranium for use in weapons and nuclear power plants. The building is to be turned over to USEC Inc., which is developing a new facility to concentrate uranium into isotopes for fuel. Workers discovered the radium missing Feb. 28. It had been kept in a wooden box encased with lead that was last moved in December to prepare for transport to Nevada. The bar still might be somewhere in the plant or even have been stolen, which Schachter said was unlikely. R. Gregory Evans, director of the Institute for Biosecurity at St. Louis University, said misplacing the radium raises questions about how Energy Department contractors are handling nuclear waste. ``Yes, it's significant that they lost this,'' Evans said. Guardian Unlimited Guardian News and Media Limited 2007 ***************************************************************** 45 UPI: Key radiological sites still unsecured United Press International - Security & Terrorism - 3/14/2007 3:15:00 PM -0400 WASHINGTON, March 14 (UPI) -- Just four of 20 nuclear waste storage sites in Russia and Ukraine have been secured, making the remainder vulnerable to thieves and terrorists. The U.S. Energy Department has spent more than $108 million since 2001 helping secure 368 radiological sites in 40 foreign countries. However, some 70 percent of them are medical sites with a single source of radiation to be secured rather than the higher risk commercial, industrial and waste sites that are more expensive to secure, according to a new report from the Government Accountability Office. Meanwhile, 16 of 20 nuclear waste sites in the former Soviet Union are not secured, and some high-risk countries have not given DOE permission to undertake security upgrades at all. There are also more than 700 highly radioactive radioisotope thermoelectric generators -- which power lighthouses and weather stations -- in the former Soviet Union that are either operational or abandoned, but not secured. "DOE says this probably represents largest supply of unsecured radioactive material in the world," states the report. Loose radioactive materials pose a security concern because with little technological expertise they can be packed in a bomb with conventional explosives and detonated. The radiological fallout could kill additional people beyond the radius of the initial blast, render areas uninhabitable for long periods of time and cause economic devastation. The GAO report says thousands of sealed radioactive sources have been lost, stolen or abandoned, all of which are potential source material for "dirty bombs." The GAO reports the DOE radiological security program may be facing financial problems. "DOE program officials are concerned DOE may not be able to meet outstanding contractual commitments in the countries where it has installed $40 million in security upgrades," the report states. "Recent budget allotments for radiological security activities were reduced and future funding for the program is uncertain." United Press International, UPI, the UPI logo, and other trademarks ***************************************************************** 46 Poison DUst Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2007 13:10:18 -0500 (CDT) www.informationclearinghouse.info Poison DUst Poison DUst tells the story of young soldiers who thought they came home safely from the war, but didn't. Of a veteran's young daughter whose birth defect is strikingly similar to birth defects suffered by many Iraqi children. Of thousands of young vets who are suffering from the symptoms of uranium poisoning, and the thousands more who are likely to find themselves with these ailments in the years to come. Of a government unwilling to admit there might be a problem here. Filmmaker Sue Harris skillfully weaves the stories of these young veterans with scientific explanations of the nature of "DU" and its dangers, including interviews with former U.S. Attorney General Ramsey Clark, New York Daily News reporter Juan Gonzalez, noted physicist Michio Kaku, Dr. Rosalie Bertell, Dr. Helen Caldicott and Major Doug Rokke- the former U.S. Army DU Project head. Every American who cares about our troops should watch this film. Everyone who cares about the innocent civilians who live in the countries where these weapons are used should watch this film. And everyone who cares about the hatred of Americans that may result from the effects of our government's actions in using these weapons, should watch this film. Is there a cover-up? http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article17249.htm ========== ***************************************************************** 47 NAS: Project: Gulf War and Health: Updated Literature Review of Depleted Uranium Major Unit: Institute of Medicine Sub Unit: Board on Population Health and Public Health Practice RSO: Mitchell, Abigail Subject/Focus Area: Project Scope A committee of the Institute of Medicine (IOM) will review, evaluate, and summarize scientific and medical literature regarding the association between exposure to depleted uranium and chronic human health effects. The study committee will focus on literature published since the IOM's 2000 report, Gulf War and Health, Volume 1: Depleted Uranium, Pyridostigmine Bromide, Sarin, and Vaccines was written. The committee will make determinations on the strength of the evidence for associations between exposure to depleted uranium and human health effects. The report might include recommendations for additional scientific studies to resolve areas of continued scientific uncertainty. The findings will not be limited to veterans of the 1991 Gulf War. They also will be applicable to veterans of Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom. This project is sponsored by the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs. The start date for the project is September 18, 2006. A report will be issued at the end of the project in approximately 15 months. Project Duration: 15 months Provide FEEDBACK on this project. Contact the Public Access Records Office to make an inquiry or to schedule an appointment to view project materials available to the public. Meetings Meeting 1 - 03/22/2007 Reports having no URL can be seen at the Public Access Records Office Email: info@nas.edu ***************************************************************** 48 NAS: Project: Beryllium Alloy Exposures in Military Aerospace Applications Major Unit: Division on Earth and Life Studies Sub Unit: Board on Environmental Studies and Toxicology RSO: Martel, Susan Subject/Focus Area: Project Scope An ad hoc committee under the oversight of the standing Committee on Toxicology (COT) will conduct this study. In its first report, the committee will provide an independent review of the toxicologic, epidemiologic, and other relevant data on beryllium. The committee will also review carcinogenic and non-carcinogenic effects. In its second report, the committee will estimate chronic inhalation exposure levels for military personnel and civilian contractor workers that are unlikely to produce adverse health effects. The committee will provide carcinogenic risk estimates for various inhalation exposure levels. The committee will consider genetic susceptibility among worker subpopulations. If sufficient data are available, the committee will evaluate whether beryllium-alloy exposure levels should be different than those of other forms of beryllium because of differences in particle size. The committee will identify specific tests for workers surveillance and biomonitoring. The committee will also comment on the utility of the beryllium lymphocyte proliferation test (BeLPT). Specifically the committee will determine (1) the value of the borderline or a true positive test in predicting CBD, (2) its utility in worker's surveillance, (3) further follow up tests for workers with positive BeLPT (thin slice CT bronchoscopy, biopsy, etc.), (4) the likelihood of developing CBD after a true positive test, and (5) a standardized methodology to achieve consistent test results from different laboratories. The committee will evaluate whether there are more suitable tests that would have more accuracy as screening or surveillance tools. The committee will also identify data gaps relevant to risk assessment of beryllium alloys and make recommendations for further research. The project is sponsored by the U.S. Air Force. Start date: September 29, 2006. The first report will be issued in 12 months, and the final report in approximately 24 months. Project duration: 24 months Provide FEEDBACK on this project. Contact the Public Access Records Office to make an inquiry or to schedule an appointment to view project materials available to the public. Committee Membership Meetings Meeting 1 - 02/05/2007 Reports having no URL can be seen at the Public Access Records Office Email: info@nas.edu ***************************************************************** 49 AU ABC: US waste specialist warns against nuclear energy ABC Queensland 11:31 (ACDT)Tuesday, 13 March 2007. 09:31 (AWDT) An American anti-nuclear watchdog warns nuclear energy would be too expensive and take too long to establish to play a genuine role in reducing Australia's carbon emissions. US nuclear waste specialist Kevin Kamps began a national tour yesterday with a forum in Mackay, in north Queensland, warning of the health risks and waste disposal obligations associated with nuclear energy. Mr Kamps says in the the US the nuclear energy industry is propped up by billion-dollar government subsidies and renewable energy industries such as wind power are growing quickly. "Wind is the fastest growing new source of electricity in the United States," he said. "You can put up wind turbines in a matter of months, where it takes years and years [for a nuclear reactor], the last built reactor in the United States cost $7 billion and took 23 years to build and we need to act in the near term to address the climate crisis - we can't wait for nuclear power." ***************************************************************** 50 Chillicothe Gazette: Groups push for more input on nuclear partnership www.chillicothegazette.com - Chillicothe, OH Wednesday, March 14, 2007 By ASHLEY LYKINS Gazette Staff Writer Community groups from all over America want more time for public input regarding the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership. In a letter addressed to Energy Secretary Samuel W. Bodman and signed by group representatives from New Mexico to Washington D.C., a 60-day extension is requested for the public scoping period. Public scoping is being used for GNEP's programmatic environmental impact statement, and the process includes public Energy Department meetings being conducted. The meetings have been near sites that could potentially host GNEP facilities, which consist of a nuclear fuel recycling center and an advanced recycling reactor. One of these sites is the Energy Department reservation in Piketon. Delegates from two local groups signed the letter: Geoffrey Sea, co-founder of Southern Ohio Neighbors Group, and Vina Colley, director of Portsmouth/Piketon Residents for Environmental Safety and Security. "It'll get more time to get more people involved and let them know what's going on," said Colley, who used to work at the Piketon plant before she got sick. "People live so far away, and people don't have computers." The impact statement will analyze environmental affects GNEP may have and will include alternative plans of action. Issues that have been listed as being addressed in the statement include impacts from terrorism or sabotage and socioeconomic effects and impacts from treatment, storage and disposal of radioactive materials. The statement, which the Energy Department plans on publishing a draft of later this year, may use information from a detailed siting study being prepared by Southern Ohio Nuclear Integration Cooperative. The cooperative is a joint effort between Southern Ohio Diversification Initiative and the Piketon Initiative for Nuclear Independence. The letter, signed by more than 30 groups, states "it is important that the public comment period for scoping be extended to allow the public, states, tribes and other government agencies reasonable opportunity to scrutinize the detailed site reports." The scoping period is scheduled to end April 4, while the siting study is due for submission by May 31. "This thing will move at a glacial pace," said Dan Moore, president of SONIC. "There are 13 sites. There will be tons of public comment." Additionally, Moore said he expects the reports will be made public and the Energy Department won't make up its mind until the end of the summer. "There will be plenty of time for posturing," he said, noting most of the content in the reports will be fact-based information that can't really be argued against. The letter also states an extended scoping period would allow "public and other government agencies . . . to review those reports and provide . . . more timely, accurate and relevant scoping comments." Sea said the only reason his group signed the letter was for other proposed sites - he and other SONG members want Piketon removed from the roster of potential GNEP sites altogether. "We want the Piketon study to be canceled," he said, noting he believes there wasn't appropriate community support that warranted a grant for the study. "For the rest of the sites, it should go on and should be extended." Sea said SONG also plans to have its own public hearing at a later date, and comments made by participants will be submitted to the Energy Department. SONIC, which supports the potential presence of GNEP in southern Ohio, will be holding a series of meetings beginning 6:30 p.m. March 20 at The Ohio State University Endeavor Center. "We want to make sure our process allows for a community dialogue and meaningful input into the process," said Greg Simonton, director of SODI. "Our hope is that questions, comments and support we gather will be taken into account in the (environmental impact statement) process." He said comments from the meeting will also be taken into account and submitted. A representative from the Energy Department couldn't be reached for comment regarding the request for an extension. (Lykins can be reached at 772-9376 or via e-mail at anlykins@nncogannett.com) Copyright 2007 Chillicothe Gazette All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 51 Salt Lake Tribune: Rolly: Does our guv have a secret pal? Tribune Columnist Article Last Updated: 03/14/2007 12:51:48 AM MDT Earlier this month, when Republican presidential candidate John McCain was in Salt Lake City to raise money with the help of his supporter Gov. Jon Huntsman Jr., EnergySolutions president Steve Creamer got a call from a coordinator of the fundraiser. According to sources close to the governor's office, the radioactive-waste storage executive was asked not to attend the fundraiser. In short, they still wanted his money, but not him, with all those cameras around. Huntsman seems to be steering clear of EnergySolutions brass these days, especially after the criticism he took for not vetoing a bill limiting regulatory oversight of the waste facility in Tooele County. He didn't sign the bill, but allowed it to become law. That was because of a deal Huntsman made with EnergySolutions-fawning legislators so they would pass his all-day kindergarten bill. Huntsman then said he would send a letter to a federal compact requesting nuclear waste be capped in Utah. Creamer reportedly had sought a meeting with Huntsman to work out their differences, but if it took place, it was conducted in the utmost secrecy, perhaps with Groucho Marx masks. Worried about a fair fight? Sean Hannity already is trying to manipulate the rules for the anticipated debate with Salt Lake City Mayor Rocky Anderson. The right-wing talk show host, in an e-mail to Anderson, is demanding that Fox News and KSL Radio be the only electronic media allowed to cover the debate. Hannity is employed by Fox News and his syndicated radio show airs on KSL. When Fox News canceled Anderson's planned appearance on Hannity's show, Hannity said he would debate Anderson in Salt Lake City. Anderson says he will not agree to keep all the media other than Hannity's employers out of the debate. He says it should be open to everybody. Getting more bizarre: Salt Lake City Prosecutor Sim Gill filed trespassing charges against Republican dissident Mike Ridgway on Tuesday. This despite Salt Lake County Republican Chairman James Evans' fear that Ridgway, a persistent thorn in the party's side, would escape charges because Gill is a Democrat. Ridgway, who ran for the U.S. Senate in 2006, was booked into the Salt Lake County jail on Friday on charges of violating a protective order, stalking and criminal trespass. He was arrested when Republican officials solicited help from the police to remove him from a GOP executive committee meeting. Because of his alleged disruptive behavior, he has been banned from leadership positions in the party and banished from their meetings. One party activist has a protective order requiring Ridgway to stay away from him and his family. I erroneously said in my blog Monday that Ridgway had bailed out. Actually, he has remained in jail since Friday. prolly@ sltrib.com © Copyright 2007, The Salt Lake Tribune. ***************************************************************** 52 The Australian: Don't go nuclear, US expert warns NEWS.com.au | * March 14, 2007 This story is from our news.com.au network Source: AAP * By Rosemary Desmond AUSTRALIA could face serious environmental problems if it went ahead with a nuclear power industry, a visiting American expert has warned. Kevin Kamps, a nuclear waste specialist at the Nuclear Information and Resource Service in Washington DC, said marine life would suffer if superheated water used to cool nuclear reactors built on the coast was released back into the sea. Mr Kamps said there could be no safe disposal of nuclear waste. Prime Minister John Howard has backed a nuclear power industry, saying it is a long-term solution to cutting greenhouse gas emissions. Mr Kamps said Australians should "nip this proposal in the bud". "Nuclear reactors in Australia would be de facto permanent waste dumps until a nuclear sacrifice site was made somewhere in the country," Mr Kamps said. In the US, a proposed nuclear waste dump at Yucca Mountain in Nevada, had so far cost $US9 billion ($11.53 billion) and 25 years work to set up. "The earliest they can open it is 2021, but it's looking more and more likely it may never open now, so it's back to square one with our dilemma," Mr Kamps said. The Prime Minister's nuclear taskforce has said 25 nuclear power plants in Australia would generate 45,000 tonnes of high-level radioactive waste. But this was almost as much as America's estimated 60,000 tonnes after 50 years of nuclear power, Mr Kamps said. Nuclear waste remained a deadly poison in the environment for up to a million years. A study has identified cities such as Townsville, Mackay and Brisbane as potential sites for nuclear reactors because of the coastal cities' proximity to power and water. But the US experience had been that marine life was seriously affected by coast-based nuclear plants, Mr Kamps said. "Even large animals like endangered sea turtles are sucked into these cooling systems," he said. "In one year, 933 endangered sea turtles were sucked into a reactor in Florida. "Sixteen of these were killed and many of the others were injured or traumatised, so it's having very serious impacts on endangered species on the sea coasts." The Australian ***************************************************************** 53 Las Vegas CityLife: Up Front: Collision course Thursday, March 08, 2007 . Railroad workers worry about the safety of Las Vegas Valley's toxic trains Railroad workers say Union Pacific would love to land the contract to ship nuclear waste to Yucca Mountain. Problem is, say the workers, the railroad is not prepared to handle the contract. Mark Davis, spokesman for Union Pacific, says the railroad is studying Yucca Mountain with the Department of Energy and would be able to handle the contract if awarded it. One local railroad worker, who requested anonymity, says freight cars containing electronics, sporting goods and other products are monitored more closely than tankers containing hazardous materials. There are three rail yards and a Union Pacific administrative office in the Las Vegas Valley. In Arden yard, located near Blue Diamond Road and South Jones Boulevard, tanker cars containing chlorine and other dangerous chemicals often sit unattended for hours and even days, say local railroad workers. by Matt O'Brien When the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review published a five-part series on railroad safety and security, including some alarming information about Southern Nevada, it seemed to draw little more than yawns. "That series is just one of a number of articles that have talked about transportation issues," said Larry Casey, executive director of the Nevada Homeland Security Commission. "Folks that work transportation security are very cognizant of that type of threat. Those kind of articles are out there all the time. I wouldn't say that it immeditately got everybody fired up and ready to go down range and look at stuff. It's just another piece of information we have to take a look at and analyze." The series, which ran in the Tribune-Review on Jan. 14 and 15 and was picked up by media outlets throughout the country, did resonate with one group of locals: railroad workers. They talked about it in the locker rooms, rail yards and locomotives. On the rails, in the lodges and in restaurants. In bars, at home (on the rare occasions they were there) and in union halls. The consensus: The series was dead-on -- but there's a lot more to the story. Five years after 9/11, Pittsburgh Tribune-Review investigative reporter Carl Prine sought to find out how well U.S. railroads and railroad plants protect hazardous materials. The short answer: not very well. Using information provided by the Federal Railroad Administration as a road map, Prine accessed more than 45 plants and the rail lines that serve them, in areas including Atlanta, Seattle and San Francisco. In the Las Vegas area, he accessed 11 hazmat tankers in plants or on the rails. "All these reporters get plum assignments and I always get sent to do the worst things possible," said Prine, who was embedded in Iraq from July 2005-July 2006. "I'm always the guy crawling through a crack house or getting shot at in Iraq. I finally get to the place I think I'm going to have a great assignment, Las Vegas, and what do I do? I spend all my time in industrial plants and on the railroads." Prine was in Las Vegas from Oct. 13-18. He infiltrated the Thatcher Company and Pioneer Companies chemical plants in the Henderson area, then followed the Union Pacific railroad into Vegas proper. He left his business card on rail cars, as if planting an improvised explosive device. The materials he accessed include chlorine gas, anhydrous ammonia and sulfuric acid. The railroad cuts through neighborhoods in Green Valley, passes within yards of CityLife's offices, skirts McCarran International Airport and runs parallel to the Strip. Downtown, it borders the Clark County Government Center and the Plaza hotel-casino. Trains can have more than 100 rail cars and each car can hold more than 30,000 gallons of materials. Prine said security was "pretty good" in the Northeast United States, particularly in New Jersey. But it was "universally bad" on the West Coast and in the Southwest. "I just walked right in and put my business card on the [rail-car] placards, rode the rails and walk around," said Prine. He added that the Las Vegas Valley's wide-open spaces make finding and accessing the materials relatively easy. All you have to be able to do, he said, is read a placard. "Any casino parking lot in the state is safer than any rail yard in the state," said Joe Carter, Nevada legislative director of the Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers. "Every yard is wide open. You can walk right into them. There are no fences. There are no cameras. There's no security." Added Jack Fetters, state legislative director of the United Transportation Union: "You can walk right into the yards and walk around. You can spend the day in there, if you want. You can watch the trains go by, watch the guys switch cars, whatever. There's no such thing as security in the rail yards." Union Pacific, the main railroad in Southern Nevada, has its own police force. It -- not Metro, the Henderson Police Department or the North Las Vegas Police Department -- is responsible for patrolling the yards and rails. However, said Fetters, there are no Union Pacific railroad cops stationed in Southern Nevada. The nearest railroad cop is in West Colton, Calif., he said, about 190 miles away. There's another cop in Sparks, he said, who covers more than 500 miles of rail. "They used to have a couple of cops stationed here," said Fetters, who has been a conductor for more than 25 years, "up until about four or five years ago. For whatever reason, they're not here anymore." But Carter, an engineer, said there are three Union Pacific railroad cops in Nevada. There's one in Sparks, he said, who works from 9 a.m.-5 p.m. Monday through Friday. "He's on call the rest of the time," said Carter, "but good luck reaching him." There are two railroad cops in Southern Nevada, said Carter. One of them works full time, he said, the other part time. "They may or may not be around on a regular basis," said Carter. "I don't know what their territory is, but I assume it at least goes to Yermo, Calif. I can see how Jack would think there aren't any stationed here, because you never see them around. They're always gone." One local rail worker, who requested anonymity, said he only sees the railroad cops after something bad happens. For example, he said, after a drifter gets hit by a train, the cops will show up and sweep the area. The next day, he said, they may bust some teenagers spray-painting along the tracks. "From what I've seen," he said, "it's a Band-Aid approach. If there's an incident, there's a small show of force. They'll make themselves a little more visible for a few days." Mark Davis, spokesman for Union Pacific, said the duties of railroad workers include reporting anyone suspicious in the yards and on the rails. It's not only a safety issue, Davis said, but a security issue. "Part of our duties from a safety standpoint, even before 9/11, were to let management know when someone suspicious was around," said Davis, "so you could get the railroad police and have the person removed from the area. After 9/11, we reminded all employees of that and encouraged them to contact a dispatcher or a manager, who would contact the railroad police." Since 9/11, said Davis, Union Pacific has installed surveillance cameras in yards and on rails. But, he said, the eyes and ears of the workers are our "first line of defense." "They tell us to report any suspicious people," said Fetters, "but how do we know who's suspicious or not? There are kids riding dirt bikes along the rails. There are rail buffs who come up to the trains and take pictures. Unless a guy's wearing a turban or something, it probably wouldn't raise my suspicion." How many railroad cops are stationed in Southern Nevada? "We don't like to talk numbers," said Davis, "but we do have an adequate number of railroad police across the system. We also rely on local, county and state law enforcement. We have help from federal agencies. "Railroad security is extremely well staffed across the country." Local railroad workers have many safety and security concerns. They include easy access to the locomotives, which are not locked, poor maintenance of the trains and rails, and poor training. But they have two main concerns, said Carter: access to the yards and rails and worker fatigue. Fetters said airline pilots can only work 80 hours a month. Some conductors and engineers, he said, work 80 hours a week. "When you get on a train," said Fetters, "you never know when you're going to get off work. You never know when you're going to come home." A conductor or engineer can arrive at a yard in Milford, Utah, at 10 a.m. He leaves the yard at 11:30 a.m. and arrives in Las Vegas around 10 p.m. He ties down the train, then heads home or to a motel. He can be called back to work as soon as six and a half hours later, said one rail worker. "It's not fun," he said. "A lot of guys are tired, real tired. It's the schedule. A lot of guys try to have normal lives, but it's tough when you don't know when you're going to work. We all knew what we were signing up for. There were no illusions about the schedule and how hard it would be, but it's still tough." Federal law says conductors and engineers can only work 12 hours a shift. But, said Fetters, there's no weekly or monthly limit to how many hours they can work. "You can work 12-hour shifts for 1,000 days in a row," said Fetters. "You can make a lot of money, but you'll work your ass off. You'll be a dead man walking in two weeks." There are times, said Fetters, when the conductor wakes up and finds the engineer asleep. "Running a train is not real hard," he said, "but it's time-consuming and, at times, very boring. You're looking out the window -- and the next thing you know, you've been on duty for six hours. Your mind starts to wander. You've worked 12-hour shifts for five or six days in a row. You just fall asleep. It's Circadian rhythms." Added the rail worker, "The joke is that the downhill indicator is when the engineer's chin is against his chest. The uphill indicator is when his chin's in the air. That's our grade indicator." Fetters knows conductors and engineers who have run stop signals. "You're running a 10,000-ton train that's going 50 miles per hour," said Fetters. "You don't stop it like you would a Volkswagen. You need to be on top of the game a couple miles ahead of when you think you're going to need to stop." Davis said fatigue is a concern and Union Pacific has been addressing it since the mid-1990s. The company even has an expert who focuses on it, he said. "Because of the varied work cycles, we tell our employees to get proper rest," said Davis. "Science has told us that a proper diet is important, exercise, your surroundings. We work with the motels and lodges to make sure the insulation in the walls is thick and that the curtains block the light. We've really worked hard on those kinds of things." Davis said Union Pacific has studied schedules and found that most employees work a "reasonable number of hours a month." It also found that less than 10 percent of its employees work overtime, he said. And they, said Davis, worked overtime because they wanted to. "The one thing we hear when we cut back hours is that someone is going to be making less money," said Davis. Giving employees a regular schedule is tough, he said, because we never know when a train is going to arrive. "Safety is always No. 1 at Union Pacific," said Davis. "It comes first and it's something we're very proud of. We wouldn't put anything ahead of safety. This company just doesn't do that." Carter and Fetters aren't convinced. They said Union Pacific and other railroads are driven by profits -- the coal in the engine. They put their stakeholders ahead of their employees. They're greedy. "We need to talk vested interests," said Carter. "Our vested interest is the safety of our members and the safety of the community. Remember, we live here. The railroads' vested interest is money and return to their shareholders. They have a vested interest to short-cut safety. They do it all the time. They'll tell you that safety is No. 1, but they're showing you something entirely different." In January, Union Pacific reported a fourth-quarter net income of $485 million. Its fourth-quarter commodity revenue was a record $3.8 billion, up 9 percent. Added Fetters, noting that Union Pacific isn't the only culprit: "It's like with most industries. They'll wait until something bad happens and then say, 'Well, maybe we should've done this or done that.'" Fetters said the United Transportation Union once proposed a bill in Carson City to fence all yards and rails in Nevada. Union Pacific did the math, he said: 1,000 miles of track at $8,000 a mile. The railroad decided not to support the bill and it didn't pass. Carter and Fetters said if the railroads were serious about safety and security, they would at least fence the yards, create checkpoints (Carter said he hasn't had to show his Union Pacific ID in 11 years), install surveillance cameras and hire security guards. Carter also said local police and firefighters, who support the railroad cops, need training on how to communicate with rail workers and how to handle hazardous materials. "Say we have a carload of alcohol that's on fire," said Carter, "and a carload of propane gas next to it. The conductor and the engineer are incapacitated. Who's going to separate the cars and pull the train ahead? The railroad cops aren't around. The regular cops don't know how to do it. The firemen don't know how to do it. That's another part of the problem." Calls to Metro were not returned. Henderson Police Department spokesman Keith Paul said its officers have hazmat training, but are not trained to work the rails. "If something like that happened," said Paul, "we'd contact the railroad. All of our officers are equipped with gas masks and suits to handle any sort of explosion or derailment. As first responders, we would go to the scene and I imagine that everybody else would go to it as well. It wouldn't just be a Henderson issue or a railroad issue. It would be a community issue and we'd all work together to solve it." That's of little comfort to Carter, Fetters and many other railroad workers in Southern Nevada. They want to see safety and security improvements -- and fast. "I think the railroads know it's only a matter of time before something happens," said Carter. "But it's too expensive for them and their shareholders to provide the security that's needed. It's all a matter of money and risk. They've done the risk assessment and determined that it's cheaper to pay for the dead bodies than to fix the problem." Matt O'Brien is CityLife's news editor. He can be reached at 871-6780 ext. 350 or mobrien@lvcitylife.com. Copyright , Las Vegas CityLife Stephens Media ***************************************************************** 54 News & Star: Sellafield to repeat emergency exercise Published on 14/03/2007 Atomic alert: Although the exercise went well, problems were uncovered which will now be addressed By Staff Reporter SELLAFIELD chiefs have been ordered to reenact an emergency scenario after a mock exercise found staff not properly prepared for an atomic alert. The Nuclear Industry Inspectorate (NII) was not satisfied with the speed of evacuation from the complex during the exercise in November. Although this was the only major failing revealed in the mock alert, the whole scenario will now be repeated in June. Details emerged at a meeting of the West Cumbria Site Stakeholder Group emergency planning sub-committee in Cleator on Monday. Sellafield site emergency planning officer Norman McPhail said: “Due to the failure of the critical reception centre to quickly process staff, serious knock-on effects were caused to the emergency response. As a consequence, Nll did not consider this exercise to be an acceptable demonstration of the site’s emergency preparedness.” But Mr McPhail reported that, overall, the exercise went well and inspectors considered it to be realistic and challenging with staff well-prepared. Problems highlighted were the lack of command and control leading to a failure to give sufficient priority to monitoring key personnel. Communications between the site emergency control and incident control centres, also broke down. More than 1,100 people took part in the eight-hour exercise, which involved the civil nuclear constabulary, Cumbria Police and other emergency services. In a separate exercise, the site’s annual anti-terrorist exercise was held in September, witnessed by inspectors from the Office for Civil Nuclear Security. ***************************************************************** 55 BBC NEWS: Anti-nuclear protests at dockyard Last Updated: Wednesday, 14 March 2007, 20:05 GMT Protesters handed leaflets to dockyard workers Anti-nuclear protestors demonstrated outside a Devon dockyard ahead of a Commons decision to approve updating the UK's Trident nuclear weapons. Plymouth's Devonport Dockyard refits the current missile submarine fleet. Protesters handed leaflets to dockyard workers and presented a mock Asbo to police and security staff at the yard. It forms an absolute bedrock of our business Dr Dennis Gilbert, DML The government plans to spend 20bn to replace the existing Vanguard fleet of four submarines which operate the Trident missiles. It is estimated for every 1 spent on building a submarine, 3 is spent maintaining it throughout its service life. Yard bosses said Trident refits would continue to pump more than 74m a year into the regional economy. Devonport Management Ltd (DML) chief executive Dr Dennis Gilbert said: "In terms of employment, it's important; in terms of our skills and facilities, it's obviously important, and it forms an absolute bedrock of our business." The Prospect union said it could also support Plymouth's case in the MoD's naval base review. But members of the Trident Ploughshares protest group say this is not enough to warrant the new system. Devonport is the sole UK refitter for nuclear missile submarines Protester Shirley Law said: "Some people would say that we're wasting our time. "At least if it does go ahead we can say that with our consciences we stood up and said 'No, the money could be used for better things'." The existing refit work will begin to tail off within eight or nine years, but there could be more in the pipeline if the operational lives of the current submarines are extended. It would take at least 17 years to design and build the new vessels. Defence Secretary Des Browne said recently he had not discounted the option of extending the life of the current vessels by 30 or 40 years. Tony Blair tonight survived, with Tory support, a major Labour backbench revolt over renewing Trident. After a bid to delay a decision - backed by Labour rebels and the Liberal Democrats - was defeated, the vote to actually update the system saw a majority of 248 as 409 MPs supported the proposals, and 161 said they were against. The vote followed a six-hour debate and protests outside Parliament. * BBC Copyright Notice ***************************************************************** 56 USATODAY.com: Had to accept 'defeat,' says whistle-blower - By Peter Eisler, USA TODAY Police officer Mathew Zipoli had two years of service and a key job on the security force at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory when he contacted federal authorities in 2001 to report safety and security lapses at the nuclear weapons facility, legal records show. Seven months later, many of Zipoli's concerns had been confirmed by a federal investigation. The University of California, which runs the government lab, had promised to fix the problems. And Zipoli had been fired wrongly, a state arbitrator later ruled. U.S. sanctions agreements Whistle-blowers lose jobs It took nearly three years for the university to settle Zipoli's claim that he was terminated illegally in retaliation for whistle-blowing. But the $175,000 offer had a catch: The decorated Air Force veteran had to agree to give up his job and never work for the university again. Lab spokeswoman Lynda Seaver says the employment ban was "a mutual decision." Zipoli, who was on the lab's SWAT team, sees it differently. "It's a victory in which you must accept defeat," he says. "I was under huge financial pressure because of the debt I incurred while I was unemployed. I had to sell my house. If I hadn't taken (the settlement), it would have taken decades to unbury myself." Congress has passed a series of laws aimed at protecting whistle-blowers from retaliation when they expose safety and security problems at nuclear and hazardous waste sites. The Labor Department must approve settlements when retaliation is alleged to ensure that the agreements are in the public interest. Zipoli's settlement is one of 45 since 2000 that were approved with lifetime employment bans. The settlements were among 73 obtained by the Government Accountability Project (GAP), a whistle-blower advocacy group, under the Freedom of Information Act. GAP and Rep. John Dingell, who chairs the House Energy and Commerce Committee, want the department to prohibit employment bans in settlements. The department has promised to study the issue. GAP gave USA TODAY access to the settlements it received. Among those with employment bans: Donna Trueblood, who worked at a private hazardous waste incineration plant in East Liverpool, Ohio. She was fired after telling state and federal environmental officials that toxic material was not being handled according to legal requirements. A judge ruled that her employer, Von Roll America, had illegally retaliated. The settlement, for an undisclosed sum, barred Trueblood from working at the site. Steve and Ginny Wallace, who worked for a private contractor handling high-level nuclear waste at the government's Hanford nuclear weapons reservation in Washington. They were fired in 2003 after reporting that workers were being exposed to toxic fumes. After federal and state investigations, the contractor, CH2M HILL, was directed to bolster worker safeguards. The settlement of the Wallaces' wrongful termination claim barred them from work at Hanford. Both settlements bar all parties from discussing the agreements' terms. Gregory Keating, a labor lawyer for employers, says companies have a legal right to put whistle-blower complaints behind them. "The employer is saying, 'We've cooperated with the government, we're willing to resolve this and pay you X amount,'" he says. Catherine Fisk, who teaches labor law at Duke University Law School, counters, "There's a public interest in not getting rid of employees who are watchdogs." Zipoli, who now owns a restaurant outside Hartford, Conn., says he applied for law enforcement jobs but gave up. "It always boiled down to what took place at Livermore," he says. "You're seen as a troublemaker instead of someone with honor and integrity." Copyright 2007 USA TODAY, a division of Gannett Co. Inc. ***************************************************************** 57 Hanford News: How one company lost out on protecting the nation from terrorists This story was published Wednesday, March 14th, 2007 By Greg Gordon, McClatchy Newspapers WASHINGTON - At first, Richard Hollis thought his firm would be a "poster child" for the government's BioShield program to stockpile medical antidotes in case terrorists attack with nuclear, biological or chemical weapons. Hollis-Eden Pharmaceuticals had a breakthrough drug that promised to keep some people alive after strong doses of radiation and the government said it would provide the market. But after nearly six years of research and an investment of more than $85 million, Hollis, the drug maker's chairman and CEO, now calls the San Diego company a "poster child" for everything that's wrong with BioShield. Last week, the Department of Health and Human Services rejected its drug for failing to meet "technical requirements." The agency said it would start a fresh search for another treatment of radiation poisoning. HHS declined to elaborate further. In just two days, the company's stock plunged from over $5.70 a share to $2.83. Since Hollis-Eden's radiation treatment first stirred excitement with private investors in 2003, its market value plummeted by $700 million, to under $70 million. Now, company executives are trying to assure Wall Street that they have enough cash to stay afloat. The experiences of the drug maker, corporate officials say, were an "unfair" bait-and-switch and call into question the government's massive effort to protect the public from the health effects of a nuclear attack. Congressional committees, disturbed by the development, are expected to conduct hearings soon examining the procurement and the entire BioShield program, which also recently halted an $877.5 million contract for a second-generation anthrax vaccine and another pending award for a third-generation anthrax vaccine. The latest decision left HHS, the nation's lead agency for emergency preparedness, with no immediate prospect of a drug that might limit fatalities in a radiological or nuclear attack. It also sheds light on the starts and stops that have plagued the BioShield program and threatens to shrink participation from the biotech industry. Researchers at the Armed Forces Radiobiology Research Institute first approached Hollis-Eden in the summer of 2001 about joining in development of the drug for revitalizing bone marrow, the body tissue most vulnerable to radiation. Hollis said the Sept. 11 terror attacks soon persuaded him there might be a market. "The Department of Defense asked us to develop it because it was the most promising drug against the No. 1 threat," he said. In animal tests, the drug not only had boosted production of white blood cells that fight infection, but also increased platelets that protect against unchecked bleeding. After the United States dropped atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Japan, in 1945, many people died of infections or bled to death because of depleted platelet levels. In a series of recent interviews, Hollis recounted his company's odyssey. In early 2003, Hollis attended a conference of top officers of biotech firms where President Bush and then-Commissioner Mark McClellan of the Food and Drug Administration described the government's plan to create BioShield to woo private investors into footing the heavy costs of developing medicines for victims of weapons of mass destruction. "The cornerstone of the bill was to guarantee there would be a market for drugs for WMDs" - the government, Hollis said. "We were a poster child for the bill." Seeing the Pentagon's interest, Hollis-Eden began the rigorous and expensive testing needed to bring it to market. In early 2004, Hollis said, "HHS told us that when BioShield was approved by Congress, they would give us a contract." He said Stewart Simonson, the HHS assistant secretary for emergency preparedness at the time, was so excited about the drug that he said "he would write up the contract himself." It wouldn't be that simple. After Congress created BioShield in June 2004, Hollis said, HHS officials told the company it must file an Investigational New Drug application with the FDA. And agency officials declined to divulge how many doses they ultimately would buy, saying the Department of Homeland Security first must complete a threat assessment on the risk of a radiological "dirty bomb" or nuclear attack, he said. Hollis said he asked whether the company should hold off its research until that was done, but was encouraged to proceed. He was comforted that the agency was buying millions of doses of drugs for anthrax and smallpox. Then in late 2004, the agency issued a request for interest from all companies that have anti-radiation drugs that boosted white blood cell and platelet counts. Hollis said he was sure his firm had the only one. HHS issued a solicitation for bids in late 2005, but it sought only enough medicine to treat 100,000 people, too little for the company to recover its development costs. Hollis said HHS assured him this was an "initial" purchase. The agency also dropped the requirement that the drug boost platelets, a change that opened the door to competitors. Hollis said the revision seemed inconsistent with the FDA's position that a new radiation drug had to boost people's survival prospects because people need platelets to stay alive. On Tuesday, HHS officials told the company that a major issue was that tests showed the drug to be effective only if it is administered within four hours of radiation exposure, a company spokesman said. That would leave emergency personnel little time to give the drug. The government, in its formal procurement request, however, set a minimum time frame. The company argues the drug could be deployed in advance, would be an aid against a radioactive "dirty bomb" and could be given to people fleeing the blast or a plume of radioactive fallout who wouldn't know for sure whether they were exposed to radiation. Hollis-Eden says the agency has bought other anti-radiation drugs, such as potassium iodide to protect the thyroid gland, that also must be taken within a few hours. Bone marrow experts stress that early treatment for acute radiation syndrome is critical. Over the last year, Hollis said, HHS officials on multiple occasions told the firm it was "within the competitive range." But the agency kept delaying a contract decision until last week's communique. Hollis also said the National Institute for Allergies and Infectious Diseases has set up a program that has distributed $94 million in grants for anti-radiation research over the last two years. Now, Hollis said Congress is moving to fund research on new BioShield drugs. "The only companies that are going to be willing to participate in this today," he said, "are going to be companies interested in getting grants from the government. They're not going to use investor money." David Grdina, a professor of radiation and cellular oncology at the University of Chicago who is developing another drug for radiation victims, also worries that the private market will lose interest in developing new drugs. The abrupt ending and apparent communication breakdown, he said, "is a very serious concern for any other commercial entity that wants to develop a product under project BioShield." © 2007 Tri-City Herald. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 58 Hanford News: Proposal riles crowd Annette Cary This story was published Wednesday, March 14th, 2007 Herald staff writer Both sides claimed the moral imperative at an overflow hearing Tuesday night to discuss Hanford's possible role in a proposed new national nuclear energy program to reuse spent commercial reactor fuel. The Department of Energy is considering the Hanford nuclear reservation among other sites across the nation for a center to recycle used nuclear fuel, a reactor to burn the recycled fuel to reduce waste and produce electricity and a research center for the project. About 300 people packed the hearing in Pasco, with crowd sentiment favoring those who spoke in favor of a new production mission for Hanford. "The world is going nuclear and America should as well," Benton County Commissioner Claude Oliver said to enthusiastic applause. He was the first of 60 people signed up to speak. But the crowd also was sprinkled with a few Mid-Columbians, along with people from Oregon and western Washington, who oppose Hanford as the site of the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership, or GNEP. Hanford's mission is cleaning up contamination left from the past production of plutonium for the nation's nuclear weapons program. The Bush administration has proposed GNEP as a way to reduce the amount of waste that must be disposed of from nuclear reactors, to increase energy production without the greenhouse gas of fossil fuels and to help limit access to weapons-grade nuclear material elsewhere in the world. As part of GNEP's international reach, fuel services would be supplied worldwide for generating nuclear energy without spreading enrichment and reprocessing technologies. The program could help bring power to a huge segment of the world living in poverty, said Gerald Woodcock, speaking for the Eastern Washington Section of the American Nuclear Society. Using Hanford facilities that taxpayers already have paid for makes economic sense, he said. "Recognize that Hanford can walk and chew gum at the same time," he said. Cleanup and a fuel recycling program can complement each other, he said. Among proposals that could be considered at Hanford is a restart of the Fast Flux Test Facility, which is being permanently shut down. Nuclear recycling cannot be done without testing first and without Hanford's research reactor, FFTF, the program will have to look overseas, said Alan Waltar, the former head of the nuclear engineering at Texas A&M University. An old and possibly too-small Russian reactor could be the only choice for testing. Many supporters of restarting the FFTF believe it also could be used to produce medical isotopes for new cancer treatments. "The plant is very robust, flexible and forgiving," said Sol Guttenberg, a retired manager at the reactor. DOE has a chance to rectify one of its worst decisions, shutting the reactor down, he said. Former U.S. Rep. Sid Morrison, who serves on the executive board of Energy Northwest, said he's long been frustrated that the nation has failed to apply modern science to handle nuclear fuel. Hanford is an ideal choice for the project, because of infrastructure already there, including at Energy Northwest. "This is the place," he said. "We're ready to be players." But opponents of the GNEP project at Hanford questioned whether more waste should be brought to Hanford while DOE struggles to clean up the waste already there. Gerald Pollet, executive director of Heart of America Northwest, predicted that DOE would use the program to import huge volumes of spent nuclear waste it has no place to store it and leave it at Hanford for decades. Jack Dresser of Veterans for Peace, one of nine people who came to the meeting from Eugene, Ore., said an increase in nuclear production would add to the use of depleted uranium for weapons production. It's the Agent Orange of the current generation, he said. "Anyone who produces nuclear fuel plays a role in that crime," he said. DOE expects to make a decision on whether and how to proceed with the fuel recycling initiative by June 2008. The recycling facilities and reactor could be in full operation between 2020 and 2025. An Oregon meeting has been added to the public hearing schedule. It will be held at 6 p.m. March 26 at the Best Western Hood River Inn in Hood River. DOE also is accepting written comments. They may be sent to Timothy Frazier, GNEP PEIS Document Manager, Office of Nuclear Energy, Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Ave. SW, Washington, D.C. 20585-0119, or e-mailed to GNEP-PEIS@nuclear.energy.gov. Mark envelopes and e-mails as "GNEP PEIS Comments." © 2007 Tri-City Herald. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 59 Hanford News: Vancouver firm gets $8.8 million contract to clean up N Reactor This story was published Wednesday, March 14th, 2007 Annette Cary, Herald staff writer Washington Closure Hanford has awarded an $8.8 million subcontract to a small business in Vancouver, Wash., to remove some hazardous materials at N Reactor. NCES-PAS JV, a joint venture between NetCompliance Environmental Services and Performance Abatement Services, was awarded the contract. The Department of Energy has cocooned five of the nine reactors along the Columbia River that once made plutonium for the nation's nuclear weapons project. They've been torn down to their thick concrete shield walls surrounding the reactor core and the remaining structure has been sealed up to allow radiation to decay over the next 75 years while a final plan is developed. N Reactor is the next reactor scheduled for cocooning. It was the only reactor at Hanford to also include heat exchangers and steam generators to produce steam for electricity while plutonium was being produced. NCES-PAS JV will be responsible for removing asbestos and other hazardous material from the reactor building, the heat exchanger and steam generator building and three smaller support buildings. Hazardous materials may include oils, refrigerants, hydraulic fluids, lead shielding and light ballasts. The subcontractor is expected to begin work on the heat exchanger building as early as next month, then the reactor building in October. It should finish work on all five buildings by mid-2008. Work will start on the heat exchanger and reactor buildings because of the amount of additional work required there after hazardous materials are removed. The reactor building will be torn down to its shield walls, then all openings will be sealed and a new roof placed on the facility. Heat and moisture sensors will be installed to allow remote monitoring after it is locked up. Every five years workers will enter the building to inspect it and do any needed maintenance. Unlike the other reactors, the steam generator and heat exchanger building also will be cocooned. The support buildings at the site, which include an array of shops, maintenance bays, offices and warehouses, will be torn down. A subcontract to tear down the three support buildings in the NCES-PAS subcontract and to cocoon the N Reactor and heat exchanger building is planned to be awarded in 2008. Most of the hazardous materials removed by NCES-PAS will be sent to the Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility in central Hanford for disposal. N Reactor is scheduled to be cocooned by 2011, along with the K East and K West reactors. With the C, D, DR, F and H reactors already cocooned, that will leave only B Reactor in near-original condition. It's being evaluated by the National Park Service for possible preservation as a museum. Washington Closure has awarded more than $90 million in subcontracts to small businesses since it took over cleanup work along the Columbia River, according to the company. About 85 percent of subcontracted work has gone to small businesses, it said. © 2007 Tri-City Herald. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 60 KnoxNews: Feds pinch pennies while leaving bank vault open By FRANK MUNGER, munger@knews.com March 14, 2007 Even after 25 years of covering the government operations in Oak Ridge, I am still amazed at how much money is spent there. At least a couple of billion dollars is funneled to Oak Ridge on an annual basis. With that much federal money floating around, you'd think there'd be enough for just about everything. Not so, and I'm totally befuddled about how the feds establish their spending priorities. Some things just don't make sense - at least not to me. For instance, the National Nuclear Security Administration is spending an estimated $500 million (the price tag keeps going up) to build and equip a new storehouse for highly enriched uranium at the Y-12 nuclear weapons plant. The NNSA also proposes to spend about $1 billion to build and equip a new Uranium Processing Facility, which would become the Oak Ridge plant's hub for manufacturing warheads. That's just a piece of the overall modernization effort at Y-12, which could eventually cost several billion dollars. That's a lot of money, of course, and whether you think that's worth the investment probably depends on your view of nuclear weapons and their necessity. What I don't understand is how the federal government and its contractors can spend that much money on new facilities and not fix the existing ones that are desperately in need of repair. I refer, in part, to the continuing problems at the wet-chemistry operations at Y-12. These are processes necessary to recycle and purify uranium stocks for storage or use in weapons or other purposes. These six processes have not been fully operable for sustained periods for at least a decade and probably a lot longer than that. The equipment is reported to be vintage Cold War stuff, and according to one former worker, the newest equipment was installed there in the 1980s. BWXT, the plant's managing contractor, and federal overseers are obviously reluctant to invest big bucks in fixing facilities that will be replaced by new ones, but the Uranium Processing Facility at Y-12 is not scheduled to come online until at least 2015. And, depending on the whims of Congress, etc., it could be a lot later than that. In the meantime, you have situations such as the one reported last week that involved two leaks of enriched uranium solution from a storage tank tied to the wet-chemistry operations. In one case, an evening inspection of the facility found two gallons of the uranium solution on the floor. A Y-12 spokesman said the situation did not pose a threat of criticality - an uncontrolled nuclear chain reaction. Regardless, it cannot possibly be a good nuclear safety practice to have fissile material rolling around on the floor. What's worse is that the storage tank was known to leak, and Y-12 workers were simply trying to work around the problem. "Certain glass section flanges had previously been known to leak, and tank levels were purposely kept below the glass section of those tanks," the Oak Ridge staff of the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board said in a memo to their bosses in Washington, D.C. That's ridiculous. If the government can spend billions on new facilities, why not spend $5 million, $10 million or $50 million - whatever it takes - to replace old equipment of questionable integrity? How do you make a credible case for bringing new programs to Y-12, such as its role in building the Reliable Replacement Warhead, when there are continuing incidents like this? Senior writer Frank Munger covers the Department of Energy for the News Sentinel. He may be reached at 865-342-6329 or at munger@knews.com. Copyright 2007, Knoxville News Sentinel Co. ***************************************************************** 61 Denver Business Journal: Rocky Flats refuge grows with additional land The Denver Business Journal - 2:40 PM MDT Tuesday, March 13, 2007 Another 25,413 acres of the Rocky Flats Superfund site will be transferred to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The Superfund site is being transformed into a national wildlife refuge. The federal government at the end of 2005 certified the cleanup of a former nuclear weapons plant outside of Denver as complete. Rocky Flats produced the trigger weapon for every nuclear weapon built in the United States between 1951 and 1989. The plant was contaminated by radioactive waste. The Environmental Protection Agency said Tuesday it proposes deleting 25,413 acres of the site in Jefferson and Boulder counties from the Superfund list, which would allow the U.S. Department of Energy to hand the property over to Fish and Wildlife. The areas included in the DOE's decision consist of open space, residential development and agricultural lands. The DOE will keep 1,308 acres in the center of the site for long-term surveillance and maintenance. Congress in 2000 proposed transforming Rocky Flats into a wildlife refuge, putting aside 6,400 acres for that purpose after the land was cleaned up. The last contaminated building was removed in 2003. 2007 American City Business Journals, Inc. and its licensors. ***************************************************************** 62 FR DOE: Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board, Northern New Mexico Doc E7-4641 [Federal Register: March 14, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 49)] [Notices] [Page 11854-11855] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr14mr07-33] 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), Northern New Mexico. 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, April 10, 2007. 2 p.m.-8:30 p.m. ADDRESSES: Jemez Complex, Santa Fe Community College, 6401 Richards Avenue, Santa Fe, New Mexico. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Menice Santistevan, Northern New Mexico Citizens' Advisory Board, 1660 Old Pecos Trail, Suite B, Santa Fe, NM 87505. Phone (505) 995-0393; Fax (505) 989-1752 or E-mail: msantistevan@doeal.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Purpose of the Board: The purpose of the Board is to make recommendations to DOE in the areas of environmental [[Page 11855]] restoration, waste management, and related activities. Tentative Agenda: 2 p.m. Call to Order by Deputy Designated Federal Officer (DDFO), Christina Houston Establishment of a Quorum Welcome and Introductions by Chair, J. D. Campbell Approval of Agenda 2:30 p.m. Board Business/Reports Old Business, Chair, J. D. Campbell Report from Chair, J. D. Campbell Report from Department of Energy (DOE) Report from Executive Director, Menice Santistevan Other Matters, Board Members New Business 3 p.m. Break 3:15 p.m. Committee Business/Reports: A. Environmental Monitoring, Surveillance and Remediation Committee, Pam Henline B. Waste Management Committee, J. D. Campbell, Interim Chair C. Ad Hoc Committee on Bylaws, Presentation of Proposed Amendments for Final Action, J. D. Campbell, Interim Chair D. Report from Ad Hoc Committee on Annual Retreat, J. D. Campbell E. Facilitated Discussion on Technical vs. Non-Technical Work of the Citizens' Advisory Board Meeting, Grace Perez/Pam Henline 4:15 p.m. Reports from Liaison Members: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Rich Mayer, DOE, George Rael, Los Alamos National Security (LANS), Andy Phelps New Mexico Environment Department (NMED), James Bearzi 5 p.m. Dinner Break 6 p.m. Public Comment 6:15 p.m. Consideration and Action on Recommendations to DOE 7 p.m. Presentation on Environmental Management at Los Alamos National Laboratory 8 p.m. Round Robin on Board Meeting and Presentations, Board Members 8:15 p.m. Recap of Meeting: Issuance of Press Releases, Editorials, etc., J. D. Campbell 8:30 p.m. Adjourn, Christina Houston This agenda is subject to change at least one day in advance of the meeting. 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 Menice Santistevan 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: 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 at the Public Reading Room located at the Board's office at 1660 Old Pecos Trail, Suite B, Santa Fe, NM. Hours of operation for the Public Reading Room are 9 a.m.-4 p.m. on Monday through Friday. Minutes will also be made available by writing or calling Menice Santistevan at the Board's office address or telephone number listed above. Minutes and other Board documents are on the Internet at: http://www.nnmcab.org . Issued at Washington, DC on March 8, 2007. Rachel Samuel, Deputy Advisory Committee Management Officer. [FR Doc. E7-4641 Filed 3-13-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6405-01-P ***************************************************************** 63 KnoxNews: Seqouyah reactor shut down By ANDREW EDER, edera@knews.com March 14, 2007 The Unit 2 reactor at Sequoyah Nuclear Plant was manually shut down Tuesday because of a malfunctioning feedwater pump. TVA spokesman John Moulton said operators at the federal utility?s plant in Soddy-Daisy, Tenn., noticed the pump, which supplies water to a steam generator, was decreasing in speed about 3:30 p.m. Tuesday. Moulton said the operators shut down the reactor as a precaution. The incident caused no danger to employees or the public, Moulton said. More details as they develop online and in Thursday's News Sentinel. Business writer Andrew Eder may be reached at 865-342-6318. Copyright 2007, Knoxville News Sentinel Co. 2007 - Knoxville News Sentinel ***************************************************************** NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 this material is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. For more information go to: *****************************************************************