*****************************************************************
04/03/07 ****     RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL)       **** VOL 15.78
*****************************************************************
   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 BBC NEWS: Iran talks at critical phase - PM
2 washingtonpost.com: How Bogus Letter Became a Case for War - 
3 AFP: Britain should scale down global role - poll - 
4 Independent: The botched US raid that led to the hostage crisis - 
5 Guardian Unlimited: Iranian Diplomat Seized in Iraq Released
6 Reuters: U.S. could strike Iran but not win - Russian general 
7 Reuters: Pentagon's top official on Asian affairs resigns 
8 AFP: Iran, Britain start talks to end sailor standoff 
9 GU: Foreign secretary warns against hopes of 'swift resolution' to s
10 AFP: Iran close to deal with Russia to end nuclear delays - 
11 YN: Seoul, Beijing agree to double efforts to end Pyongyang's nuclea
12 AFP: US to pursue missile shield with or without Moscow's nod - 
13 UPI: Analysis: Israelis want rematch in Lebanon
 
                         NUCLEAR REACTORS
 
14 US: UC Berkeley: Weighing the financial risks of nuclear power
15 US: newsobserver.com: Regulators say Harris plant no significant ris
16 US: Platts: NRC Commissioner McGaffigan withdraws resignation offer
17 US: Idaho Statesman: Landowner to allow Owyhee nuclear plant
18 US: NRC: NRC Schedules Regulatory Conference and Management Meeting 
19 US: Gristmill: Nuclear shillery and the reporters who buy it 
20 US: Journal News: Indian Point 3 shut down by steam generator proble
21 US: PoughkeepsieJournal.com: Indian Point 3 shut down today
22 US: FR NRC: Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards (ACRS); Subcomm
23 US: FR NRC: STP Nuclear Operating Company; Notice of Withdrawal of 
24 US: FR NRC: Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel; Before the Lice
25 US: FR NRC: Dominion Energy Kewaunee, Inc.; Notice of Withdrawal of 
26 Business Report: Koeberg powers down after turbine trip
27 US: The Mercury: Exelon will use remote heat monitors on spent fuel 
28 NewsRoom Finland: WWF Finland drafts alternative to sixth nuclear st
29 US: MarketWatch: Oil prices, CO2 concerns to spur nuclear renaissanc
30 US: UCS: Supreme Court Rules Government Authorized to Curb Vehicle G
31 The Hindu: Nuclear plant to take up assault issue with State Governm
 
                          NUCLEAR SECURITY
 
 
                          NUCLEAR SAFETY
 
32 US: SF New Mexican: Attorney: Organs lawsuit settled
33 BBC NEWS: Health | Radiation risk 'like pollution'
34 Independent: Britain's dirty cities more dangerous than an A-bomb - 
35 US: Hawk Eye Newspaper: Researchers seek IAAP workers for study
36 US: FR DOE: DU Disposal analysis
37 US: Richmond Register: Safety worries started with whistle blower
38 US: NAS: Project: Gulf War and Health: Updated Literature Review of 
 
                         NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE
 
39 Public Citizen: Groups Challenge Uranium Enrichment Plant's License
40 US: Tri-City Herald: DOE expands comment period by 2 more months
41 US: Eureka Reporter: Spent fuel facility to break ground
42 Croatia: Javno: HSS: We Do Not Need A Nuclear Waste Dump
43 US: Chillicothe Gazette: GNEP comment period extended
44 US: FR DOE: Notice GNEP extension of comments
45 Reuters: U.N. urges checks against radioactive scrap metal 
46 US: AU ABC: Garrett, Rudd still at odds over uranium. 
47 US: Oregon: Daily Vanguard: Tight-lipped toxic truckin? - 
48 US: CBC News: Governments spending $25M to clean up uranium mines
 
                           PEACE
 
49 RIA Novosti: Uzbekistan ratifies treaty on nuclear-free Central Asia
 
                        US DEPT. OF ENERGY
 
50 SF New Mexican: LANL: Bingaman aims to boost lab, science funding
51 Tri-City Herald: Risky Hanford tank emptied (w/ video)
52 Tri-City Herald: DOE relents in dispute with tribes, states
53 KnoxNews: ORNL readies reactor for restart
54 OregonLive.com: DOE will begin Hanford damage review
55 KNDO/KNDU: CH2M Hill Cleans Out Seventh Single-Shelled Tank
56 DOE: DOE Signing Paves the Way for Funding, Construction of 
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
                         FULL NEWS STORIES
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
 1 BBC NEWS: Iran talks at critical phase - PM

Last Updated: Tuesday, 3 April 2007, 16:52 GMT 17:52 UK

Iranian TV has shown previously unseen footage of the personnel

The next two days will be a "fairly critical" phase in the talks to
free the 15 Royal Navy personnel captured by Iran, Tony Blair has
said.

The prime minister said he was "not looking for confrontation" and
"the most important thing is to get the people back safe and sound".

Earlier, a Tehran official said the issue could be resolved by
negotiation.

'Diplomatic talks'

Ali Larijani, of the Supreme National Security Council, hinted on
Tuesday that a new phase in the talks with Britain had been started.

Mr Larijani, who is also Iran's chief nuclear negotiator, told
Iranian state radio: "The British government has started some
diplomatic talks with the Iranian Foreign Ministry. They are only at
the beginning.

Profile: UK captives

"If they continue this path they can change the situation
logically... in such a way that the issue is resolved."

Mr Blair said he had read the transcript of Mr Larijani's speech and
it "seems to offer some prospect but the most important thing is to
get these people back".

He said from the start of the talks, Britain had two tracks -
firstly to make Iran understand that "the pressure is there", and
secondly that the "door is open" to diplomacy.

Later, he added that if "peaceful, calm negotiation" to get the crew
back was not possible the UK would have to take "increasingly
tougher decisions".

After his comments Iranian TV said Mr Blair had taken a "hardline"
stance.

UK VERSION OF EVENTS

1 Crew boards merchant ship 1.7NM inside Iraqi waters
2 HMS Cornwall was south-east of this, and inside Iraqi waters
3 Iran tells UK that merchant ship was at a different point, still
within Iraqi waters
4 After UK points this out, Iran provides alternative position, now
within Iranian waters


Both versions in more detail

Dividing lines of Shatt al-Arab


Meanwhile, Foreign Secretary Margaret Beckett has said "we should be
cautious in thinking that we're likely to see a swift solution in
this issue... diplomatic efforts continue".

She added that "some people have read a lot into the prime
minister's remarks".

"He is not intending to imply anything about military action," she
said, pointing out that the UK shares Mr Larijani's "preference for
bi-lateral discussions".

New photographs of some of the crew, including Leading Seaman Faye
Turney, were released on Tuesday, showing them wearing casual
clothes for the first time.

In one photo some of the Royal Navy personnel are shown sitting on
the floor wearing tracksuits and smiling.

LS Turney is not wearing a headscarf as she has in previous TV
footage released by the Iranians.

Another picture shows two members of the crew playing chess.

Meanwhile, the names of some more of the service personnel being
held have been confirmed.
 
IRANIAN VERSION OF EVENTS

1 Royal Navy crew stray 0.5km inside Iranian waters
2 Iran gives set of co-ordinates to back up their claims
3 According to seized GPS equipment, the Royal Navy crew had
previously entered Iranian waters at several other points
4 Iran informs Britain of the position where the crew were seized,
inside Iranian waters


Profile: Ali Larijani

Iran's centres of power


The BBC can confirm that Leading Seaman Christopher Coe, from the
Dalton area of Huddersfield, is among the captives.

And the family of Operator Maintainer Simon Massey, who is also
being held, said they were going through a "very distressing time"
at the moment.

Meanwhile, the family of Royal Marine Joe Tindall have said they are
"immensely proud" of him.

US President George Bush described the Iranian seizure of the crew
as "indefensible".

"I support the Blair government's attempts to solve this issue
peacefully," he said.

There have been suggestions that the release of five Iranian
officials held by the US since January could positively affect the
navy personnel's case.

The BBC's Jim Muir, in Baghdad, said senior Iraqi officials were
working separately to secure the release of the British crew and the
five Iranians held by the US.

Earlier, Mr Larijani said he was committed to solving the crisis
through diplomacy, and that putting the crew on trial was "not a
priority".

'Guarantee must be given'

But he insisted in an interview with Channel 4 News he was "100%"
sure that the navy crew had been in Iranian waters when they were
picked up in the northern Gulf on 23 March.

"A guarantee must be given that such violations will not be
repeated," he said.

The UK insists they were in Iraqi waters after returning from
searching a merchant vessel.

It is understood that one area that has been under discussion
between the UK and Iran is how future disputes over the contested
waters may be avoided.

Previously unseen images of some of the crew, based on HMS Cornwall,
were aired on Monday but their voices could not be heard.

One of those seen for the first time was 20-year-old Arthur
Batchelor, whose sister told the BBC she was relieved to see him
looking "tired but fine".

The Foreign Office is standing by its view that the crew, serving on
HMS Cornwall, which is based in Plymouth, were detained against
their will in Iraqi territory.

* BBC Copyright Notice
*****************************************************************
 2 washingtonpost.com: How Bogus Letter Became a Case for War - 

Intelligence Failures Surrounded Inquiry on Iraq-Niger Uranium Claim

By Peter Eisner Washington Post Staff Writer

Tuesday, April 3, 2007; Page A01

It was 3 a.m. in Italy on Jan. 29, 2003, when President Bush in 
Washington began reading his State of the Union address that 
included the now famous -- later retracted -- 16 words: "The 
British Government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently 
sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa."

Like most Europeans, Elisabetta Burba, an investigative reporter 
for the Italian newsweekly Panorama, waited until the next day to 
read the newspaper accounts of Bush's remarks. But when she came 
to the 16 words, she recalled, she got a sudden sinking feeling 
in her stomach. She wondered: How could the American president 
have mentioned a uranium sale from Africa?
 

About This Story

This article was adapted from the book "The Italian Letter: How the
Bush Administration Used a Fake Letter to Build the Case for War in
Iraq," by Peter Eisner and Knut Royce, to be published today by
Rodale Press.


Tuesday, April 3 at 1 p.m. ET

Iraq Book: 'The Italian Letter'

Washington Post staff writer Peter Eisner will be online to discuss
his new book, "The Italian Letter: How the Bush Administration Used
a Fake Letter to Build the Case for War in Iraq."



Burba felt uneasy because more than three months earlier, she had
turned over to the U.S. Embassy in Rome documents about an alleged
uranium sale by the central African nation of Niger. And she knew
now that the documents were fraudulent and the 16 words wrong.

Nonetheless, the uranium claim would become a crucial justification
for the invasion of Iraq that began less than two months later. When
occupying troops found no nuclear program, the 16 words and how they
came to be in the speech became a focus for critics in Washington
and foreign capitals to press the case that the White House
manipulated facts to take the United States to war.

Dozens of interviews with current and former intelligence officials
and policymakers in the United States, Britain, France and Italy
show that the Bush administration disregarded key information
available at the time showing that the Iraq-Niger claim was highly
questionable.

In February 2002, the CIA received the verbatim text of one of the
documents, filled with errors easily identifiable through a simple
Internet search, the interviews show. Many low- and mid-level
intelligence officials were already skeptical that Iraq was in
pursuit of nuclear weapons.

The interviews also showed that France, berated by the Bush
administration for opposing the Iraq war, honored a U.S.
intelligence request to investigate the uranium claim. It determined
that its former colony had not sold uranium to Iraq.

Burba, who had no special expertise in Africa or nuclear technology,
was able to quickly unravel the fraud. Yet the claims clung to life
within the Bush administration for months, eventually finding their
way into the State of the Union address.

As a result of the CIA's failure to firmly discredit the document
text it received in February 2002, former U.S. ambassador Joseph C.
Wilson IV was called in to investigate the claim. That decision
eventually led to the special counsel's investigation that exposed
inner workings of the White House and ended with the criminal
conviction of I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, who was forced to resign as
chief of staff to Vice President Cheney.

"You know I feel bad about it," Burba said later, discussing her
frustrations about her role in giving the dossier to the Americans.
"You know the fact is that my documents, with the documents I
brought to them, they justified the war."

The Tip

In early October of 2002, a man mysteriously contacted Elisabetta
Burba at her Milan office.

"Do you remember me?" the deep voice said, without identifying
himself outright. It was Rocco Martino, an old source who had proved
reliable in the past. He was once again trying to sell her
information.


Martino said he had some very interesting documents to show her, 
and asked whether she could fly down to Rome right away.

They met at a restaurant in Rome on Oct. 7, where Martino showed 
Burba a folder filled with documents, most of them in French. One 
of the documents was purportedly sent by the president of Niger 
to Iraqi President Saddam Hussein, confirming a deal to sell 500 
tons of uranium to Iraq annually. This was the smoking gun in the 
package, claiming to show the formal approval of Niger's 
president to supply Iraq with a commodity that would in all 
likelihood only be used for a nuclear weapons program: Iraq had 
no nuclear power plants.
        
Though the document was in French it would later come to be known 
as "The Italian Letter." It was written in all capital letters, 
in the form of an old telex, and bore the letterhead of the 
Republic of Niger. The letter was dated July 27, 2000, and 
included an odd shield on the top, a shining sun surrounded by a 
horned animal head, a star and a bird. The letter was stamped 
Confidential and Urgent.

The letter said that "500 tons of pure uranium per year will be 
delivered in two phases." A seal at the bottom of the page read 
"The Office of the President of the Republic of Niger." 
Superimposed over the seal was a barely legible signature bearing 
the name of the president of Niger, Mamadou Tandja.

Burba listened without saying much as she took a first look at 
the documents. She recognized right away that the material was 
hot, if authentic. But confirming the origin would be difficult, 
she recalled thinking at the time. She didn't want to fall into a 
trap.

Burba and Martino made an agreement; she would take the 
documents, and if they checked out as authentic, then they could 
talk about money.

'Let's Go to the Americans'

Back in her magazine's Milan newsroom, Burba told her editors she 
thought it would make sense to fly to Niger and check around for 
confirmation. The editor of the magazine, Carlo Rossella, agreed. 
He then suggested they simultaneously pursue another tack.

"Let's go to the Americans," Rossella said, "because they are 
focused on looking for weapons of mass destruction more than 
anyone else. Let's see if they can authenticate the documents." 
Rossella called the U.S. Embassy in Rome and alerted officials to 
expect a visit from Burba.

On Wednesday morning, Oct. 9, Burba returned to Rome and took a 
cab to the U.S. Embassy, which is housed at the old Palazzo 
Margherita.

Burba came to a security gate and walked through a magnetometer, 
where an Italian employee of the embassy press department came 
down to meet her.

After a few formalities, an Italian aide introduced her to Ian 
Kelly, the embassy press spokesman. Kelly and Burba walked across 
the embassy's walled grounds and sat down for a cup of coffee in 
the cafeteria.

Burba told Kelly that she had some documents about Iraq and 
uranium shipments and needed help in confirming their 
authenticity and accuracy.

Kelly interrupted her, realizing he needed help. He made a phone 
call summoning someone else from his staff as well as a political 
officer. Burba recalled a third person being invited, possibly a 
U.S. military attache. She didn't get their names.

"Let's go to my office," Kelly said. They walked past 
antiquities, a tranquil fountain, steps and pieces of marble, all 
set in a tree-lined patio garden.
        
The Italian journalist's chat with Kelly and his colleagues was 
brief. She handed over the papers; Kelly told her the embassy 
would look into the matter. But Kelly had not been briefed on 
what others in the embassy knew.

CIA Role

One person who refused to meet with Burba was the CIA chief of 
station. A few days after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks in the 
United States, Sismi, the Italian intelligence agency, had sent 
along information about the alleged sale of uranium to Iraq. The 
station chief asked for more information and would later consider 
it far-fetched.

On Oct. 15, 2001, the CIA reports officer at the embassy wrote a 
brief summary based on the Sismi intelligence, signed and dated 
it, and routed it to CIA's Operations Directorate in Langley, 
with copies going to the clandestine service's European and Near 
East divisions. The reports officer had limited its distribution 
because the intelligence was uncorroborated; she was aware of 
Sismi's questionable track record and did not believe the report 
merited wider dissemination.

The Operations Directorate then passed the raw intelligence to 
the CIA's Intelligence Directorate and to sister agencies, 
including the Defense Intelligence Agency. A more polished 
document, called a Senior Executive Intelligence Brief, was 
written at Langley three days later in which the CIA mentioned 
the new intelligence but added important caveats. The classified 
document, whose distribution was limited to senior policymakers 
and the congressional intelligence committees, said there was no 
corroboration and noted that Iraq had "no known facilities for 
processing or enriching the material."

Pushing the Africa Claim

Almost four months later, on Feb. 5, 2002, the CIA received more 
information from Sismi, including the verbatim text of one of the 
documents. The CIA failed to recognize that it was riddled with 
errors, including misspellings and the wrong names for key 
officials. But it was a separate DIA report about the claims that 
would lead Cheney to demand further investigation. In response, 
the CIA dispatched Wilson to Niger.

Martino's approach to Burba eight months later with the Italian 
letter coincided with accelerating U.S. preparations for war. On 
Oct. 7, 2002, the same day Martino gave Burba the dossier, 
President Bush launched a new hard-line PR campaign on Iraq. In a 
speech in Cincinnati, he declared that Iraq under Saddam Hussein 
was a "grave threat" to U.S. national security.

"It possesses and produces chemical and biological weapons. It is 
seeking nuclear weapons," the president warned.

CIA Director George J. Tenet had vetted the text of Bush's speech 
and was able to persuade the White House to drop one questionable 
claim: that Iraq was seeking uranium in Africa. The information 
was too fishy, Tenet explained to the National Security Council 
and Bush's speechwriters.

Bush dropped the shopping-for-uranium claim, but ratcheted up the 
bomb threat. He said in Cincinnati that if Hussein obtained 
bomb-grade uranium the size of a softball, he would have a 
nuclear bomb within a year. This particular doomsday scenario had 
first been unveiled several weeks earlier, on Aug. 26, by Cheney. 
In a speech in Nashville to the 103rd national convention of the 
Veterans of Foreign Wars, he declared with no equivocation that 
Hussein had "resumed his efforts to acquire nuclear weapons."

On Oct. 16, Burba sat on a plane on her way to Niger, while in 
Washington, copies of the Italian letter and the accompanying 
dossier were placed on the table at an interagency nuclear 
proliferation meeting hosted by the State Department's Bureau of 
Intelligence and Research.


At this point, State Department analysts had determined the 
documents were phony, and had produced by far the most accurate 
assessment of Iraq's weapons program of the 16 agencies that make 
up the intelligence community. But the department's small 
intelligence unit operated in a bubble. Few administration 
officials -- not even Secretary of State Colin L. Powell -- paid 
much attention to its analytical product, much of which clashed 
with the White House's assumptions.

The State Department bureau, nevertheless, shared the bogus 
documents with those intelligence officials attending the 
meeting, including representatives of the Energy Department, 
National Security Agency and Defense Intelligence Agency. Four 
CIA officials attended, but only one, a clandestine service 
officer, bothered to take a copy of the Italian letter.
        
He returned to his office, filed the material in a safe and 
forgot about it.

The Niger uranium matter was not uppermost in the minds of the 
CIA analysts. Some of them had to deal with the issue in any 
case, largely because Cheney, his aide Libby and some aides at 
the National Security Council had repeatedly demanded more 
information and more analysis.

A Fraud Unravels

Burba arrived in Niamey, Niger's capital, on Oct. 17 and began 
tracking down leads on the Italian letter. Burba's investigation 
followed a series of similar inquiries by Wilson, the former 
ambassador, who investigated on behalf of the CIA eight months 
earlier. It became clear that Niger was not capable of secretly 
shipping yellowcake uranium to Iraq or anywhere else.

Burba found that a French company controlled the uranium trade, 
and any shipment of uranium would have been noticed. If a uranium 
sale had taken place, the logistics would have been daunting. 
"They would have needed hundreds of trucks," she said -- a large 
percentage of all the trucks in Niger. It would have been 
impossible to conceal.

Burba returned to Milan and reported her findings to her bosses 
in detail. She didn't believe the evidence provided by Martino; 
it was impossible. Her editors agreed. There was no story.

Five months later, on March 7, 2003, as preparations for the Iraq 
invasion were in their final stages, the director of the 
International Atomic Energy Agency, Mohamed ElBaradei, told the 
U.N. Security Council that the report that Iraq had been shopping 
for uranium in Niger was based on forged documents. The agency 
had received the document from the United States a few weeks 
earlier.

Not long after the invasion, other news media in Italy, elsewhere 
in Europe and then in the United States reported that the source 
of the information about a Niger yellowcake uranium deal had been 
a batch of bogus letters and other documents passed along several 
months earlier to an unnamed Italian reporter, who in turn handed 
the information over to the United States.

Although Burba knew that the Bush administration had also 
received information about the forged documents from Italian 
intelligence, she wished she could have acted earlier to reveal 
the fraud.

It remains unclear who fabricated the documents. Intelligence 
officials say most likely it was rogue elements in Sismi who 
wanted to make money selling them.

© 2007 The Washington Post Company
*****************************************************************
 3 AFP: Britain should scale down global role - poll - 

Tue Apr 3, 1:22 AM ET

LONDON (AFP) - A majority of Britons want to scale down the 
country's global role, and believe it should not try and punch 
above its weight, a poll published on Tuesday said.

The YouGov survey in The Daily Telegraph also showed that while a
majority of respondents wanted troops brought home "soon" from
Afghanistan and Iraq, a majority were in favour of the country
committing its troops as part of peacekeeping operations.

Some 65 percent of those questioned said that Britain was "already
over-extended" militarily, and should "not seek to have as much
military influence in the world as we have now."

About 55 percent said that Britain should not try and have a bigger
role in the world than its military and economic strength would
indicate.

An overwhelming 84 percent said the armed forces were "probably
overstretched" -- the country has about 7,200 troops in Iraq, but
the govenrment has said it will withdraw about 1,600 this year,
though it has pledged an extra 1,400 troops for Afghanistan, taking
the country's contingent in the NATO-led International Security
Assistance Force to 7,700.

The results of the poll will come as a blow to Prime Minister Tony
Blair, who has advocated a prominent British role in world affairs.

A majority of respondents said that the country's soldiers in Iraq
(59 percent) and Afghanistan (53 percent) should be "brought home
soon," though 54 percent said they supported Britain committing
troops to peacekeeping operations.

Exactly half also said Britain should continue to possess an
independent nuclear deterrent -- parliament passed a bill last month
pledging to renew the country's ageing Trident system.

YouGov questioned 2,042 voters across Britain between March 26 and
28 for the survey.

Copyright © 2007 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 4 Independent: The botched US raid that led to the hostage crisis - 

Exclusive Report: How a bid to kidnap Iranian security officials 
sparked a diplomatic crisis

By Patrick Cockburn

Published: 03 April 2007

A failed American attempt to abduct two senior Iranian security
officers on an official visit to northern Iraq was the starting
pistol for a crisis that 10 weeks later led to Iranians seizing 15
British sailors and Marines.

Early on the morning of 11 January, helicopter-born US forces
launched a surprise raid on a long-established Iranian liaison
office in the city of Arbil in Iraqi Kurdistan. They captured five
relatively junior Iranian officials whom the US accuses of being
intelligence agents and still holds.

In reality the US attack had a far more ambitious objective, The
Independent has learned. The aim of the raid, launched without
informing the Kurdish authorities, was to seize two men at the very
heart of the Iranian security establishment.

Better understanding of the seriousness of the US action in Arbil -
and the angry Iranian response to it - should have led Downing
Street and the Ministry of Defence to realise that Iran was likely
to retaliate against American or British forces such as highly
vulnerable Navy search parties in the Gulf. The two senior Iranian
officers the US sought to capture were Mohammed Jafari, the powerful
deputy head of the Iranian National Security Council, and General
Minojahar Frouzanda, the chief of intelligence of the Iranian
Revolutionary Guard, according to Kurdish officials.

The two men were in Kurdistan on an official visit during which they
met the Iraqi President, Jalal Talabani, and later saw Massoud
Barzani, the President of the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG),
at his mountain headquarters overlooking Arbil.

"They were after Jafari," Fuad Hussein, the chief of staff of
Massoud Barzani, told The Independent. He confirmed that the Iranian
office had been established in Arbil for a long time and was often
visited by Kurds obtaining documents to visit Iran. "The Americans
thought he [Jafari] was there," said Mr Hussein.

Mr Jafari was accompanied by a second, high-ranking Iranian
official. "His name was General Minojahar Frouzanda, the head of
intelligence of the Pasdaran [Iranian Revolutionary Guard]," said
Sadi Ahmed Pire, now head of the Diwan (office) of President
Talabani in Baghdad. Mr Pire previously lived in Arbil, where he
headed the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK), Mr Talabani's
political party.

The attempt by the US to seize the two high-ranking Iranian security
officers openly meeting with Iraqi leaders is somewhat as if Iran
had tried to kidnap the heads of the CIA and MI6 while they were on
an official visit to a country neighbouring Iran, such as Pakistan
or Afghanistan. There is no doubt that Iran believes that Mr Jafari
and Mr Frouzanda were targeted by the Americans. Mr Jafari confirmed
to the official Iranian news agency, IRNA, that he was in Arbil at
the time of the raid.

In a little-noticed remark, Manouchehr Mottaki, the Iranian Foreign
Minister, told IRNA: "The objective of the Americans was to arrest
Iranian security officials who had gone to Iraq to develop
co-operation in the area of bilateral security."

US officials in Washington subsequently claimed that the five
Iranian officials they did seize, who have not been seen since, were
"suspected of being closely tied to activities targeting Iraq and
coalition forces". This explanation never made much sense. No member
of the US-led coalition has been killed in Arbil and there were no
Sunni-Arab insurgents or Shia militiamen there.

The raid on Arbil took place within hours of President George Bush
making an address to the nation on 10 January in which he claimed:
"Iran is providing material support for attacks on American troops."
He identified Iran and Syria as America's main enemies in Iraq
though the four-year-old guerrilla war against US-led forces is
being conducted by the strongly anti-Iranian Sunni-Arab community.
Mr Jafari himself later complained about US allegations. "So far has
there been a single Iranian among suicide bombers in the
war-battered country?" he asked. "Almost all who involved in the
suicide attacks are from Arab countries."

It seemed strange at the time that the US would so openly flout the
authority of the Iraqi President and the head of the KRG simply to
raid an Iranian liaison office that was being upgraded to a
consulate, though this had not yet happened on 11 January. US
officials, who must have been privy to the White House's new
anti-Iranian stance, may have thought that bruised Kurdish pride was
a small price to pay if the US could grab such senior Iranian
officials.

For more than a year the US and its allies have been trying to put
pressure on Iran. Security sources in Iraqi Kurdistan have long said
that the US is backing Iranian Kurdish guerrillas in Iran. The US is
also reportedly backing Sunni Arab dissidents in Khuzestan in
southern Iran who are opposed to the government in Tehran. On 4
February soldiers from the Iraqi army 36th Commando battalion in
Baghdad, considered to be under American control, seized Jalal
Sharafi, an Iranian diplomat.

The raid in Arbil was a far more serious and aggressive act. It was
not carried out by proxies but by US forces directly. The abortive
Arbil raid provoked a dangerous escalation in the confrontation
between the US and Iran which ultimately led to the capture of the
15 British sailors and Marines - apparently considered a more
vulnerable coalition target than their American comrades.

The targeted generals

* MOHAMMED JAFARI

Powerful deputy head of the Iranian National Security Council,
responsible for internal security. He has accused the United States
of seeking to "hold Iran responsible for insecurity in Iraq... and
[US] failure in the country."

* GENERAL MINOJAHAR FROUZANDA

Chief of intelligence of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard, the
military unit which maintains its own intelligence service separate
from the state, as well as a parallel army, navy and air force

© 2007 Independent News and Media Limited
*****************************************************************
 5 Guardian Unlimited: Iranian Diplomat Seized in Iraq Released

From the Associated Press

Tuesday April 3, 2007 12:31 PM

TEHRAN, Iran (AP) - An Iranian diplomat seized two months ago in 
Iraq has been released, Iran's official news agency reported 
Tuesday, citing informed sources in Tehran.

    Jalal Sharafi, the second secretary at the Iranian Embassy in 
Baghdad, will return to the Iranian capital later Tuesday, the 
Islamic Republic News Agency reported.

 The report gave no indication of why or how Sharafi had been 
freed.

   He was seized on Feb. 4 when his car was intercepted by 
vehicles carrying armed men in the Karradah district of Baghdad. 
The gunmen, who wore Iraqi uniforms, forced him into one of their 
two vehicles and sped away.

 Iran said Sharafi had been taken by an Iraqi military unit 
commanded by the U.S. forces, and said it was holding the 
Americans responsible for his safety. The U.S. authorities denied 
any role in his disappearance.

 The Iraqi government said it did not know who had taken Sharafi, 
but Shiite lawmakers said he had been seized by an Iraqi commando 
unit that reports to the U.S. command - an allegation strongly 
denied by U.S. spokesmen.

  Sharafi's disappearance took place as tension mounted between 
Iran and the United States over alleged Iranian support of Shiite 
extremists in Iraq and U.S. efforts to force Tehran to stop 
enriching uranium - a process that can produce material for 
nuclear reactors or bombs.

   It also occurred nearly a month after U.S. troops detained 
five Iranians in northern Iraq and accused them of having links 
to a network backing armed Shiite groups.

Guardian Unlimited © Guardian News and Media Limited 2007
*****************************************************************
 6 Reuters: U.S. could strike Iran but not win - Russian general 

Tue Apr 3, 2007 6:38AM EDT

MOSCOW (Reuters) - The United States cannot inflict a military
defeat on Iran and any attack would be a huge political mistake,
Russia's top general said on Tuesday.

"It is possible to damage Iran's military and industrial potential,
but it is impossible to win," Russian news agencies quoted General
Yuri Baluyevsky, head of the Russian general staff, as saying.

"The United States has a contingent in the region capable of
launching a strike on Iranian territory.

"However, such possible strikes would be a huge political mistake.
Shockwaves from this attack could be felt around the world."

Washington and its Western allies accuse Iran of wanting to build
nuclear bombs, a charge Tehran denies. Tensions have been further
aggravated by Iran's capture of 15 British sailors and marines in
the northern Gulf on March 23.

Russia sells weapons to the Iranian military and is helping Tehran
build a nuclear power station on the Gulf although work there is on
hold over a payment dispute.

Russian media late last month quoted unnamed sources in Russian
military intelligence as saying the United States could launch a
strike on Iran as early as April 6.

RIA news agency quoted a Russian security source as saying Moscow
has military intelligence reports that the U.S. has already approved
a list of Iranian targets for bomb and missile strikes. The source
said a land operation could follow.  Continued...


© Reuters 2007. All rights reserved.

*****************************************************************
 7 Reuters: Pentagon's top official on Asian affairs resigns 

Tue Apr 3, 2007 5:50PM EDT

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Pentagon's top civilian official on Asia
and Pacific affairs, Deputy Under Secretary Richard Lawless, has
resigned, U.S. defense officials said on Tuesday.

Lawless cited personal reasons for his resignation, according to one
official. He will leave his post in a few weeks, that official said.

Lawless, a Korea expert, played a major role in negotiations with
U.S. allies South Korea and Japan over the realignment of U.S.
forces and military bases in those two Asian countries.

His departure comes as defense officials, analysts and lawmakers
focus on China as a potential military peer and possible threat to
the United States. The Pentagon is due to give Congress a report on
China's military power within weeks.

It also comes as American military officials try to improve ties
with the Chinese military, a move to give U.S. officials better
insight into China's strategy and intentions. Efforts during
Lawless' tenure have boosted dialogue between U.S. and Chinese
military officials.

The head of China's naval operations is scheduled to meet Wednesday
at the Pentagon with his U.S. counterpart, Adm. Michael Mullen. They
will likely discuss agreements meant to prevent incidents at sea
from evolving into unintended conflicts, according to a U.S. Navy
official.

(Additional reporting by Paul Eckert)

© Reuters 2007. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 8 AFP: Iran, Britain start talks to end sailor standoff 

by Stuart Williams Tue Apr 3, 5:07 AM ET

TEHRAN (AFP) - Iran and Britain on Tuesday started talks 
described as a first step towards resolving the row over the 
capture of British sailors that has further strained relations 
between Tehran and the West.

Iran's top security official Ali Larijani said the new contacts
could create the conditions for ending the standoff as both sides
toned down rhetoric previously marked by anger and mutual
accusations.

"The British government has started diplomatic discussions with the
foreign ministry to resolve the issue of the British military
personnel," Larijani told state television's central news agency.

"It is at the beginning of the path. If they continue on this path
then logically conditions can change and we can go towards ending
this issue," he added.

"From the start it was intended to resolve this affair through
bilateral contacts and that the other side would recognise its error
but they behaved as if their violation of Iranian waters was
something normal."

Larijani on Monday also gave a rare interview to British television
in an apparent attempt to cool the boiling controversy created by
the capture of the 15 marines and sailors accused of entering
Iranian waters on March 23.

The crisis has come at a perilous time for Iran's relations with the
West, with the United States refusing to rule out military action
over the Iranian nuclear programme and the United Nations imposing
sanctions against Tehran.

Larijani told Britain's Channel Four television there was "no need"
to put the group on trial, describing the stand-off as "quite
resolvable."

"Definitely our priority is to solve the problem through proper
diplomatic channels. We are not interested in having this issue get
further complicated," he said.

A British foreign ministry spokeswoman said on Monday that London
shared Larijani's preference for "early bilateral discussions."

UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon also sought to ease tensions,
saying the "rhetoric should be toned down."

Alaeddin Boroujerdi, head of the Iranian parliament's foreign
affairs commission, said that "to resolve these problems, London
needs to send an official mission to give explanations."

Britain maintains that the group were carrying out routine
anti-smuggling operations in Iraqi waters but Iran says that their
Global Positioning System (GPS) devices show they intruded on
Iranian waters.

Iran's ISNA news agency, without citing its sources, spoke Monday of
a "change" in the British attitude towards resolving the stand-off,
but did not give any details.

The atmosphere has also been soured by Iran's broadcast of televised
"confessions" of the sailors admitting that they crossed into
Iranian waters which have infuriated London.

However, in a possible sign of rapprochement, Iran refrained from
broadcasting the sound on more images of the sailors that were shown
on state television on Tuesday.

State television said all 15 sailors had given "frank confessions,"
and admitted to illegally entering its waters.

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad had been scheduled to give a keenly
anticipated news conference on Tuesday but this has been postponed
until Wednesday "at the request of journalists," an official said.

Even before the standoff over the sailors, Iran had already been the
target of increasing Western impatience over its refusal to suspend
sensitive nuclear work despite two sets of UN sanctions.

US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice repeated her offer that she
was open to direct talks with Iran but only on the condition that it
froze its sensitive uranium enrichment work.

"But what you don't want to do, I think, is make this US-Iranian
negotiations over the Iranian nuclear weapon," she said.

The United States, with whom Iran has no diplomatic relations,
accuses Iran of seeking a nuclear weapon. Iran denies the charges
saying it only wants nuclear energy.

Copyright © 2007 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
 9 GU: Foreign secretary warns against hopes of 'swift resolution' to sailors crisis 

Guardian Unlimited

Beckett spikes optimism over Iran captives

Staff and agencies
Tuesday April 3, 2007

A new picture published in Iran of the captured British military
crew. Photograph: BBC News 24/PA

The foreign secretary, Margaret Beckett, today cautioned against
hopes of a "swift resolution" to the crisis over 15 British sailors
and marines held by Iran, warning that a number of issues remained
to be resolved.

Her comments followed rising optimism that the captives could be
released soon, following some seemingly conciliatory remarks by
Iranian officials. Tony Blair said the next 48 hours would be
"fairly critical".

"I would urge you to be cautious in assuming that we are likely to
see a swift resolution to this issue," Mrs Beckett told reporters in
London, while stressing that Britain wanted to keep talking to Iran.

"We are not seeking confrontation. We are seeking to pursue this
through diplomatic channels," she said, adding that "some
differences" remained between the two countries.

Earlier today, Iran's official news agency defied British calls to
stop publishing images of the captives. It released several still
photographs showing them sitting together dressed in tracksuits,
apparently playing chess.

Leading Seaman Faye Turney, the sole female among the 15, appeared
in the pictures, shown for the first time without a headscarf.

Previous still and video images have shown the captives wearing
their uniforms and "confessing" to being in Iranian waters when they
were seized in the Gulf on March 23.

Earlier today, Iran's first vice-president, Parviz Davoudi, said
Tehran was hopeful the deadlock would end "soon".

"London has changed its attitude for several days now and is acting
on the basis of negotiations," Mr Davoudi told reporters in the
southern city of Bushehr, where he was opening a new installation at
Iran's first nuclear power station.

"London must give guarantees and say that there was a violation and
there will be no other errors in the future. I think that the
problem is heading in this direction and, God willing, will be
resolved soon."

Hopes of a positive outcome were also buoyed by remarks last night
by Iran's top diplomat, Ali Larijani, the secretary of the supreme
national security council.

This morning, Mr Blair told the Glasgow-based broadcaster Real
Radio: "The next 48 hours will be fairly critical. I've read the
transcripts of the interview Mr Larijani gave, and that seems to
offer some prospect, but the most important thing is to get these
people back ... If they want to resolve this in a diplomatic way,
the door is open."

Mrs Beckett said British officials were studying what Mr Larijani
said and would be "following up those remarks with the Iranian
authorities".

"It is clear that there remain some differences between us, but we
certainly share the preference he seemed to express for bilateral
discussions," she added.

In other developments today, Iran's official news agency reported
that an Iranian diplomat kidnapped two months ago in Iraq had been
released.

Jalal Sharafi, the second secretary at the Iranian embassy in
Baghdad, will return to Tehran later today, the Islamic Republic
News Agency reported.

Mr Sharafi was seized early last month when vehicles carrying armed
men in the Karradah district of Baghdad intercepted his car.

Iran said he had been taken by an Iraqi military unit commanded by
US forces; the US authorities denied having any role in his
disappearance.

US forces are still holding five Iranians who were detained in
Irbil, in northern Iraq, in January after the US accused them of
having links to a network backing armed Shia groups.

This afternoon the US president, George Bush, said he agreed with Mr
Blair that there should be "no quid pro quo when it comes to the
hostages".

Last night, Mr Larijani told Channel 4 News Iran wanted to see a
diplomatic solution to the crisis and called for a delegation to
review the alleged violation of Iranian waters and an assurance that
such an incident would not be repeated.

He said that if the British naval personnel were found to have
crossed into Iranian territory, they would be released after an
apology.

Iranian state TV claimed yesterday all 15 of the captured personnel
had now admitted intruding into Iranian territory. Britain remains
adamant they were in Iraqi waters when they were seized.

The personnel were captured after conducting a routine early-morning
anti-smuggling check on a merchant vessel.

Guardian Unlimited © Guardian News and Media Limited 2007
*****************************************************************
 10 AFP: Iran close to deal with Russia to end nuclear delays - 

by Farhad Pouladi Tue Apr 3, 1:29 PM ET

BUSHEHR, Iran (AFP) - A Russian delegation will visit Tehran this 
week to resolve problems holding up the completion of Iran's 
first nuclear power plant, a top Iranian atomic official said on 
Tuesday.

The completion of the Bushehr nuclear power plant being built by
Russia and the delivery of nuclear fuel -- scheduled for this year
-- have been repeatedly delayed amid mutual accusations of financial
problems.

"In the next two or three days the Russians will come to Tehran to
sign an agreement to solve the financial problems of
Atomstroiexport," the Russian firm building the plant, said Gholam
Reza Aghazadeh.

"The Russians have told us that since their company does not have
money 'you need to help us financially'. A framework has been found
to solve their financial problems," added Aghazadeh, the head of
Iran's atomic energy organisation.

Russia's federal atomic energy agency, Rosatom, confirmed that
progress had been made on the payments issue but warned Iran not to
get into arrears again.

"It is a good thing that our Iranian colleagues have overcome their
difficulties in payments for the Bushehr plant and we hope that in
the future Tehran's payments will come in accordance with the agreed
schedule," Rosatom chief Sergei Kirienko told Russian media.

Russia had accused Iran of not paying the amounts agreed upon in a
deal reached last September on the construction and nuclear fuel
supply to the plant, but at the end of March, Moscow acknowledged
that Tehran had relaunched its payments.

"For the first quarter of 2007, Russia received 15 million dollars
(11 million euros) from Iran, 10 million of which came at the end of
March," Kirienko said, pointing out that Tehran had previously
agreed to pay Russia between 23 and 25 million dollars per month.

Under a deal reached between Tehran and Moscow last September,
Russia was to deliver nuclear fuel to Iran in March, the power
station would begin working in September and it would start
producing energy in November.

Aghazadeh said that Russia's slowness in delivering nuclear fuel to
Iran underlined the importance for Tehran of producing the fuel on
its own soil and mastering the controversial process of uranium
enrichment.

"Not giving us the fuel proves our case that you cannot trust the
West to deliver fuel and it also proves we have to seriously pursue
uranium enrichment in order to have a level of security," he said.

The West wants the Islamic republic to suspend uranium enrichment,
which can be used to make both fuel and nuclear weapons, as proof
that it is not seeking an atomic bomb.

Iran has repeatedly said it has no intention of freezing the
activity, despite the UN Security Council sanctions which have been
slapped on Tehran.

Aghazadeh, speaking to reporters on a government plane heading to
the southern city to inaugurate a new electricity installation at
the plant, repeated Tehran's accusations that the issue had been
politicised.

"There is no doubt that the matter of Bushehr has been politicised
but the talk of them not delivering is not true.

Russia has blamed non-existent Iranian payments for the lack of
progress although Iran has hinted that pressure on Moscow from the
United States is to blame.

Washington accuses Iran of seeking nuclear weapons but the Islamic
republic denies the charges, insisting its nuclear programme is
solely aimed at generating energy.

"Our interpretation is the delay on the delivery of the fuel is a
political one but all in all they know we to build more nuclear
power stations and Iran is a sure market for them," said Aghazadeh.

Iran has repeatedly said it wants to build more nuclear power
stations once the reactor in Bushehr goes on line.

"This political error will come to an end and at that time the
government will assess who is more reliable," he said.

Copyright © 2007 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
 11 YN: Seoul, Beijing agree to double efforts to end Pyongyang's nuclear ambitions 

Yonhap News

Foreign Minister Song Min-soon and his Chinese counterpart Li 
Zhaoxing on Tuesday agreed to increase efforts to put an end to 
North Korea's nuclear ambitions while working to improve 
bilateral ties, the Foreign Ministry said.

Song and Li met on the sidelines of the South Asian Association 
for Regional Cooperation meeting in New Delhi, India, where the 
two also discussed Chinese Prime Minister Wen Jiabao's trip to 
Seoul, the ministry said in a press release.

The Chinese prime minister is scheduled to take a two-day trip to 
the South Korean capital from next Tuesday.

"At the meeting, the sides agreed their countries' cooperative 
relations have steadily improved and that they should continue to 
work together to take bilateral ties to the next level," the 
statement said.


The two also agreed to resolve the "technical issues" preventing 
the U.S.-proposed and approved transfer of North Korea's frozen 
funds from a Macau bank under U.S. restrictions, a major obstacle 
to international negotiations on ending North Korea's nuclear 
weapons program, the ministry said.

North Korea is refusing to take initial steps under a February 
disarmament deal until all of its US$25 million at Banco Delta 
Asia (BDA) is sent to its account at a bank in the Chinese 
capital.

The transfer had yet to take place as of Tuesday, but officials 
here believe the issue will be fully resolved before the end of 
this week, possibly setting the stage for talks between top 
nuclear negotiators of the United States and North Korea over the 
weekend.

Under the deal signed Feb. 13, North Korea has to shut down and 
seal its key nuclear facilities, including its only operational 
5-megawatt reactor, within 60 days, namely before April 14.

"The two sides agreed to increase their diplomatic efforts to 
make sure the initial stage measures in the Feb. 13 agreement are 
implemented without delay by resolving the technical problems 
regarding the BDA issue," the ministry statement said.

The nuclear talks are attended by South and North Korea, the 
U.S., Japan, China and Russia.

Song and Li also agreed to hold joint talks with their Japanese 
counterpart, Taro Aso, on the sidelines of the Asia Cooperation 
Dialogue slated for June in South Korea, according to the 
ministry.

Diplomatic sources in Beijing, meanwhile, said Daniel Glaser, 
deputy assistant secretary for terrorist financing and financial 
crimes, is currently engaged in talks to resolve the BDA issue.

Qin Gang, the spokesman for China's foreign ministry, said the 
U.S. Treasury Department official is in the Chinese capital, and 
hinted that the purpose of his visit is to handle the transfer of 
the BDA funds.

Amid all sides pushing to eliminate obstacles to the talks, the 
visit by Glaser is seen as a sign that some sort of settlement is 
near at hand.

Qin added that all parties to the six-ways nuclear talks are 
doing everything possible to get negotiations moving forward 
again.

Seoul, April 3 (Yonhap News)

Posted on : Apr.3,2007 20:36 KST

© 2006 The Hankyoreh Media Company. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 12 AFP: US to pursue missile shield with or without Moscow's nod - 

Tue Apr 3, 5:46 PM ET

WASHINGTON (AFP) - Washington hopes to find common ground with 
Russia on a controversial US missile defense shield in eastern 
Europe but will go ahead with its plans anyway if no deal can be 
reached, a senior defense official said Tuesday.

"We want to cooperate with Russia," said Eric Edelman, 
undersecretary of defense for policy.

"But that being said, I don't think if for some reason we're unable
to reach a commonly agreed way ahead, that we would want to accede
to Russia being able to dictate what we do bilaterally with other
countries or what NATO does as an alliance.

"So I'm still very hopeful we will be able to reach some
understandings with Russia that will allay their concerns," he added.

Russia has strongly objected to a US plan to put a radar system in
the Czech Republic and missiles in neighboring Poland to defend
against what Washington says are potential attacks from "rogue"
states such as Iran or North Korea.

Both the Czech Republic and Poland were under Moscow's control in
Soviet times but they are now members of the NATO military alliance
and have said that Russia has no say in their security arrangements.

The United States believes that the "threat" posed by Iran "starts
to mature in around 2015," Edelman said.

"And that's one of the reasons we're moving ahead now is we want to
have a capability in place to meet that threat and the timeline it's
developing on."

Edelman recalled that Russia has, under the Anti-Ballistic Missile
Treaty, the right to maintain around 100 interceptors around Moscow.

"I think they've got about, I think 85 or 86 nuclear-tipped
interceptors deployed. Don't see how that's been a threat to the
stability of Europe over the last 35 years," Edelman said.

"The fact that we're going to have potentially 10 ... non-nuclear,
non-explosive kinetic vehicles in Poland -- I don't think that's a
threat to Russia."

EU foreign ministers have said they will await NATO talks with
Russia on April 19, at which a US delegation is to ask for Russian
cooperation, before formally discussing US plans for the
anti-missile shield.

Russia's foreign minister on Saturday denied that Russia was ready
to let the United States place part of its controversial missile
defense shield on Russian territory.

Earlier, a foreign ministry official had said anonymously that
Russia would consider allowing the deployment on its territory of
elements of a collective missile defense shield for the European
continent, with US participation.

Parts of the US missile shield are already in place in the United
States, Britain and Greenland, and Pentagon officials say the plan
is to have the system operational by 2013.

Copyright © 2007 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
 13 UPI: Analysis: Israelis want rematch in Lebanon

United Press International - Security & Terrorism - 

4/3/2007 2:28:00 PM -0400

By SHAUN WATERMAN UPI Homeland and National Security Editor

WASHINGTON, April 3 (UPI) -- It seems as though some Israeli
military and political leaders are champing at the bit for a rematch
with Hezbollah in southern Lebanon after the bloody nose the Israeli
Defense Forces got there last summer.

The difference this time around? The IDF will go into Gaza, too --
and it is all part of a plan to neutralize Iranian proxies on
Israel's borders, one element of a strategic effort to prevent Iran
getting nuclear weapons and overthrow the mullahs in Tehran.

The plan was laid out in Washington last month by Effie Eitam, a
hawkish former general and darling of the orthodox hard right who
now leads a small religious splinter group in the Knesset.

But Eitam is also head of the Knesset subcommittee overseeing the
IDF's lessons-learned exercise following the disastrous IDF
operation in southern Lebanon last year, and on this issue, some
analysts say, he speaks for a significant current of opinion within
the Israeli military.

What he has to say might sound scary to U.S. ears.

Hamas in Gaza and Hezbollah in Southern Lebanon "are not separate
issues," he said, either from each other, or from the strategic
challenge posed by Iran. "They are part of a terroristic system
inspired, financed and directed by Iran," he said, citing the recent
testimony of Israeli officials about Tehran's support for Hamas.

"They are part of a bigger plan," he told United Press International
by telephone from Jerusalem, to use the threat of "deterrence and
retaliation" to constrain Israeli options in confronting the mullahs.

The freedom these groups had to operate just outside the frontiers
of the Jewish state, Eitam said, meant "they are actually Iran on
the Israeli border."

Islamic militants equipped with anti-tank weapons and
surface-to-surface missiles like those being stockpiled in Gaza and
south Lebanon, he said, were "something like Iranian missile
batteries and Iranian infantry divisions."

He called Gaza and south Lebanon "two arms of Tehran closing around
us."

"The question is when and how those arms will be dealt with," he
said, adding it would be answered "in the context of how we are
going to defeat the whole ideological system" the Iranian revolution
had spawned.

"If we don't defeat this regime, this ideology," and Iran is able to
develop nuclear weapons, "there will not be even one safe place" in
the whole world.

For this reason, he said, the question was "not only an Israeli one,
although we are at the front line."

The mullahs "have to know that, if diplomacy fails, the alternative
of a nuclear Iran is not acceptable."

"Within the planning for that" confrontation, "we will have to give
consideration to their proxies here."

Eitam said that a U.S. withdrawal from Iraq "before defeating the
Iranian regime ... (would have) enormous strategic consequences."

"We would witness a total collapse of U.S. credibility," he
predicted.

"The only way to bring about strategic change in the region is to
defeat the Ayatollahs," he said, advocating "use (of) all means"
including diplomatic measures and economic sanctions. But "some
military action is almost inevitable," he warned.

"Israel has full right, morally, militarily and legally to pre-empt
the installation" of long-range missiles by terrorists in either
Gaza or south Lebanon.

"I don't mean we should attack tomorrow," he said. "We have some
time," he added, referring to the range of five to 15 years various
analyses estimate it could take Tehran to develop a nuclear weapon.

But "the window of opportunity for action is narrowing, and it could
close" unexpectedly if there were any sudden breakthroughs by
Tehran, Eitam said.

The experience in south Lebanon, which he said was in part the fruit
of a failure to deal with a festering problem, teaches that "The
longer we wait, the tougher, the harder, the worse in terms of loss
of life," the eventual reckoning will be.

However alarming such views might be in Washington, analyst and
former Israeli official Daniel Levy told UPI that, when it comes to
Gaza and more especially South Lebanon, Eitam represents a
significant current of opinion within the military establishment.
Some officers, he said, were "champing at the bit to go back into
South Lebanon" to dispel the widespread impression that they had
suffered a bloody nose last summer.

"In terms of (his) assessment that there is a need to go back into
South Lebanon, and perhaps into Gaza too, as part of a necessary
process of 'de-fanging' Iran and neutralizing what (he sees) as its
proxies (Hezbollah and Hamas), he represents more than just the
leader of a three-member breakaway faction from the religious
right," Levy said.

If the right wing is able to form a government, he added, Eitam
could well get a Cabinet post. In any case, there would be a
continuing demand for more aggressive action against alleged terror
bases.

"Some in the military are keen to show that they have learned the
lessons from last summer. There will be pressure on the political
echelon to let them go back," Levy said.

But he added that "in Israel as a whole, and certainly in today's
Knesset, that thinking is still a minority current."

"There is a lot of resistance in Israeli society to the idea of
re-occupation," said Levy, adding that there was also a widespread
perception that the failure to respond robustly enough to the rocket
attacks and logistical buildup engineered by Hezbollah in southern
Lebanon had set the IDF up for failure last summer. "If you can
present this as a robust response to provocation" it would be
possible to build a political consensus behind it, he said.

© Copyright 2007 United Press International, Inc. All Rights
Reserved.
*****************************************************************
 14 UC Berkeley: Weighing the financial risks of nuclear power

04.02.2007 - 

UC Berkeley Press Release

By Robert Sanders, Media Relations | 02 April 2007

BERKELEY – Enticed by the gleam of government subsidies, many
companies are rushing to invest in nuclear power, expecting that new
technology and safer reactors will make them as good an investment
as other types of power plants.

A new study appearing in the April 1 issue of the journal
Environmental Science and Technology notes, however, that the
country's history of unexpected cost overruns when building nuclear
plants should sound a cautionary note for power companies that
nuclear power may not be financially attractive.

"For energy security and carbon emission concerns, nuclear power is
very much back on the national and international agenda," said study
co-author Dan Kammen, UC Berkeley professor of energy and resources
and of public policy. "To evaluate nuclear power's future, it is
critical that we understand what the costs and the risks of this
technology have been. To this point, it has been very difficult to
obtain an accurate set of costs from the U. S. fleet of nuclear
power plants."

The study, conducted by a research team from Georgetown University,
Stanford University and UC Berkeley, analyzes the costs of
electricity from existing U.S. nuclear reactors and discusses the
possibility for cost "surprises" in new energy technologies,
including next-generation nuclear power.

What they found was a range of electricity costs, from 3 cents per
kilowatt hour to nearly 14 cents per kilowatt hour, with the higher
costs attributed to such problems as poor plant operation or
unanticipated security costs.

"In the long term, whether these plants are 4 cents or 8 cents per
kilowatt hour, they are still a good deal, if you think carbon is an
issue," Kammen said, referring to the carbon dioxide emissions from
oil, coal and gas-fueled power plants that exacerbate global
warming. "If the argument is that cost really needs to be important,
then I'm not sure nuclear competes that well."

Some politicians also tout the increased security benefits of having
domestic sources of energy, but this doesn't translate into
decreased risk for investors, the study notes.

"In a deregulated electricity environment, investors will
increasingly share the financial risks of underperformance of
generation assets," said co-author Nathan Hultman, assistant
professor of science, technology and international affairs at
Georgetown University in Washington, D.C., and a visiting fellow at
the James Martin Institute for Science and Civilization at the
University of Oxford. "We don't have a good way of forecasting these
risks yet, but looking at the historical data can be one way to
understand the possibilities and scenarios for the future."

No new nuclear power plants have been built in the United States in
29 years, in part because they've proved to be poor investments,
producing far more expensive electricity than originally promised.
In 2005, about 19 percent of U.S. electricity generation was
produced by 104 nuclear reactors.

The Energy Policy Act of 2005 and the Advanced Energy Initiative of
2006 sought to change that, offering financial incentives for new
plant construction that employs new reactor and new safe-operating
technologies. Current nuclear plant operators have given notice that
they intend to apply for approval of 27 new "generation III+"
reactors.

But Kammen points out that in the past, when U.S. companies have
introduced new technologies, they've run into unexpected costs that
have kept electricity prices high. France, on the other hand,
standardized the design of its nuclear power plants and encountered
fewer cost surprises.

"Some U.S. plants were really well done, and they happen to be the
older ones," he said. "If we can learn the lessons from those
plants, which are often simplicity of design and standardization of
design, then I think nuclear could make a comeback."

New and safer technologies are essential to making nuclear power
more acceptable, he said, but "we need to optimize a few designs, we
don't need a proliferation of types of plants, because we have
proven we are not good at managing them."

The answer to the increased riskiness is not more government
subsidization, he added, but more savvy investment decisions by the
companies interested in nuclear power.

The project leader for the study was Jon Koomey, a staff scientist
at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory and a consulting professor
in the department of civil and environmental engineering at Stanford
University. Additional aspects of this large study will be published
later this year in Environmental Research Letters, an open-access
journal published by the London-based Institute of Physics.


UC Berkeley | NewsCenter | A-Z List of Web Sites | People Finder
Comments? E-mail newscenter@berkeley.edu
Copyright UC Regents
*****************************************************************
 15 newsobserver.com: Regulators say Harris plant no significant risk

Tuesday, April 3, 2007

Raleigh · Durham · Cary · Chapel Hill

By John Murawski, Staff Writer

Federal regulators have rejected a claim by nuclear power critics
that Progress Energy's Shearon Harris nuclear plant in Wake County
is so vulnerable to fire risk that it should be immediately shut
down.

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission said that the plant poses no
significant public health risk. The NRC's Division of Operating
Reactor Licensing distributed its proposed decision on Monday to the
Raleigh utility as well as to the nuclear critics who sought to
close down the plant. The division's director will issue a final
decision within 75 days.

N.C. Waste Awareness and Reduction Network, the Durham group that
has long opposed the Shearon Harris plant, also asked the regulatory
agency to fine Progress Energy $130,000 per day until the company
meets all federal standards for fire safety. The NRC rejected that
contention as well.

The NRC's decision comes at a time of intense scrutiny of Progress
Energy's nuclear safety. The company is seeking a 20-year license
extension for Shearon Harris, whose license currently set to expire
in 2026.

A license extension would allow Progress Energy to operate the plant
into the middle of the century. Progress Energy will also seek a
federal license to build a new nuclear reactor at the site, about 20
miles southwest of Raleigh.

Concerns over fire safety at Shearon Harris date back to 1989, two
years after the plant began operating. The power plant uses a
fire-retardant wrapping to protect electrical cables that operate
emergency safety equipment. The wrapping material shrunk in
laboratory tests under intense heat, exposing power cables
underneath. But the NRC noted that the utility has made major
modifications over the years and also has taken compensatory
measures, such as round-the-clock foot patrols.

The NRC has repeatedly ruled that the modifications and other
measures are adequate while Progress Energy conducts tests and works
on a permanent solution to the plant's cable insulation, known as
Hemyc. Shearon Harris has 6,500 feet of cable wrapped in Hemyc, more
than any other nuclear plant in the nation. Shutting down the plant
to replace the insulation would cost millions of dollars.

The petition was filed in September by NC WARN as well as by the
Nuclear Information and Resource Service in Maryland, NC Fair Share
in Raleigh, Students United for a Responsible Global Environment in
Chapel Hill and the Union of Concerned Scientists in Massachusetts.

In 2004, the NRC amended its fire-protection rule and designated
Shearon Harris as a pilot plant to test the new rule. In 2005 the
NRC granted Shearon Harris another extension — until June 2008 — to
conduct risk assessments and explain how the plant would comply with
the new standard.

The new rule is more flexible, establishing varying standards of
fire resistance throughout the plant. In areas of the plant where
there's no combustible material to keep a fire burning, the
insulation wouldn't have to withstand heat as long as in other areas.

 
Staff Writer John Murawski can be reached at 829-8932 or
john.murawski@newsobserver.com.

© Copyright 2007, The News & Observer Publishing Company
A subsidiary of The McClatchy Company

newsobserver.com
*****************************************************************
 16 Platts: NRC Commissioner McGaffigan withdraws resignation offer

Washington (Platts)--2Apr2007

NRC Commissioner Edward McGaffigan has withdrawn his offer to 
resign from the agency because the treatment he is undergoing for 
metastatic melanoma has been effective. In a March 27 letter to 
the White House, McGaffigan said there has been a "significant 
improvement in my health prospects" since he notified President 
George W. Bush in early January that he would step down once a 
successor was confirmed. An NRC spokesman told Platts April 2 
that McGaffigan's treatment has slowed the progression of the 
disease, and he feels well enough to continue serving.





Copyright © 2007 - Platts, All Rights Reserved
 




*****************************************************************
 17 Idaho Statesman: Landowner to allow Owyhee nuclear plant

Edition Date: 04/03/07

The Lynchberg, Va.-based company that wants to build a nuclear power
plant in Owyhee County has secured the land where the proposed plant
would be built.

Alternate Energy Holdings President and CEO Don Gillispie said the
company would use a portion of 4,000 acres of land owned by James C.
Hilliard to build a 1,600-megawatt energy complex that would include
a nuclear and biofuels plant.

In return for use of his land, Gillispie said Hilliard has agreed to
become a major investor in the company.

"I look forward to working with Alternate Energy Holdings on the
Idaho Energy Complex — this will bring jobs and economic
security to all of Southwest Idaho," Hilliard, who was raised in
Nampa, said in a statement. "Farming communities and urban centers
will benefit from continued access to reliable, inexpensive power,
and farmers will have another market for their crops and ag waste."

Hilliard, who now lives in Florida, has been involved in a number of
business ventures across the United States. He owns radio stations
in New Mexico, Dallas and Florida.

If the company is successful and builds the plants, Gillespie said
it would create about 500 jobs and provide enough power for about
1.5 million homes.

But before that can happen the company has to receive many local,
state and federal approvals. The company also has yet to raise the
more than $1.5 billion it would need to build the plants.

Gillispie's company trades on the over-the-counter market — a
market where most start-up companies begin because they don't meet
the listing requirements of the larger public stock markets like the
Nasdaq and the New York Stock Exchange. The company trades under the
symbol AEHI.PK. On Monday, the company's stock closed at 46 cents a
share, down 14 cents.

IdahoStatesman.com
*****************************************************************
 18 NRC: NRC Schedules Regulatory Conference and Management Meeting to 
Discuss Brunswick Nuclear Plant

News Release - Region II - 2007-0007 - 

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 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission has scheduled a regulatory 
conference with officials of Progress Energy on Thursday, April 
5, in Atlanta to discuss inspection findings related to one of 
the emergency diesel generators at the Brunswick nuclear power 
plant, located near Southport on the southern coast of North 
Carolina.

  NRC and Progress Energy officials will discuss the significance 
of findings involving a repeat failure of a bearing on one of 
four emergency diesel generators at the plant, as well as the 
failure to follow procedures during maintenance and implement 
actions to prevent that same generator from shutting down on low 
oil pressure.

 The NRC evaluates regulatory performance at commercial nuclear 
power plants with a color- coded system which classifies findings 
as either green, white, yellow or red, in increasing order of 
safety significance. The NRC’s preliminary evaluation 
determined that this issue at Brunswick is “white,” 
meaning it is of low to moderate safety significance.

  No decisions on final safety significance, any apparent 
violations or possible enforcement action will be made at the 
conference. Those decisions will be made by NRC officials at a 
later time.

    In addition to the regulatory conference, Progress Energy 
also requested a management meeting with NRC officials to discuss 
emergency diesel generator improvements and other issues.

    The regulatory conference is scheduled for 10:00 a.m. and the 
management meeting is slated for 1:00 p.m. Both meetings will be 
in the NRC’s Region II office, located on the 24th floor of 
the Atlanta Federal Center at 61 Forsyth Street SW in Atlanta. 
The public is invited to observe and will have one or more 
opportunities to talk with NRC officials after the business 
portion, but before the meeting is adjourned. Persons wishing to 
participate in this meeting by toll-free audio teleconference 
should contact the NRC’s Randy Musser at 404-562-4603 or 
RXM1@nrc.gov.

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.

April 03, 2007
*****************************************************************
 19 Gristmill: Nuclear shillery and the reporters who buy it 

The environmental news blog | Grist

Posted by David Roberts at 10:34 AM on 03 Apr 2007

I'm way, way, waaay behind on this one, but I nonetheless want to
draw your attention to two pieces on the massive, ongoing PR push
from the nuclear industry.

The first is an Columbia Journalism Review on the maddening
phenomenon of mainstream news reporters accepting the claims of paid
shills (i.e., Patrick Moore and Christie Todd Whitman) at face
value, without making clear their relationship to the nuclear
industry.

The second is a more extensive and well-documented piece called
"Moore Spin: Or, How Reporters Learned to Stop Worrying and Love
Nuclear Front Groups," by Diane Farsetta. It surveys the entire
panoply of PR efforts underway by the nuke industry -- and quite a
panoply it is. You'd almost have to admire it, if it didn't make you
want to puke. And by "you" I mean "me."

Here's the kick-ass conclusion to this kick-ass piece:

Entergy [owner/operator of 10 nuke plants] and NEI [nuke industry
group] spend millions of dollars doing media outreach, under their
own names. Both spend millions more to lobby federal officials. From
1998 to 2004, Entergy spent $13.5 million and NEI spent $9.7 million
on federal lobbying, according to the Center for Public Integrity's
LobbyWatch database.

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

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

Read-the-whole-thing'o'meter: pegged. Especially if you're a
mainstream reporter. Yeah, I'm looking at you.


< Pressure's On | 'Climate change': too big and too little >


Thank you

I really appreciate your pointing out how our environment of "lazy"
media (or simply cost constrained) fails to point out logical
connections between paid spokespersons and industry interest lobby
groups.

by disdaniel at 2:58 PM on 03 Apr 2007

Grist: Environmental News and Commentary
©2007. Grist Magazine, Inc. All rights reserved. Gloom and doom with
*****************************************************************
 20 Journal News: Indian Point 3 shut down by steam generator problem

Tuesday, April 3, 2007

Greg Clary

BUCHANAN - Indian Point 3 workers shut down the nuclear plant at
4:15 this morning, an unplanned stoppage that was caused by low
water levels in the plant's steam generators.

There was no release of radioactivity and no threat to worker or
public health, according to Indian Point spokesman Jim Steets.

The plant had just returned to service Saturday, following a 24-day
refueling outage when workers replaced about half of the fuel
assemblies used to power the nuclear reactor.

Steets said Indian Point 3 had reached about 60 percent of its power
during the restarting, when the water level problems showed up.

Workers shut the plant down manually, according to Nuclear
Regulatory Commission.

Copyright © 2006 The Journal News, a Gannett Co. Inc. newspaper
serving Westchester, Rockland and
Putnam Counties in New York.
*****************************************************************
 21 PoughkeepsieJournal.com: Indian Point 3 shut down today

  Tuesday, April 3, 2007

BUCHANAN - Indian Point 3 workers shut down the nuclear plant at
4:15 this morning, an unplanned stoppage that was caused by low
water levels in the plant's steam generators.

There was no release of radioactivity and no threat to worker or
public health, according to Indian Point spokesman Jim Steets.

The plant had just returned to service Saturday, following a 24-day
refueling outage when workers replaced about half of the fuel
assemblies used to power the nuclear reactor.

Steets said Indian Point 3 had reached about 60 percent of its power
during the restarting, when the water level problems showed up.

Workers shut the plant down manually, according to Nuclear
Regulatory Commission.


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

 Not to sound rude, but don't we already know what the worst case
scenario would be..

With that being said, I totally agree with the previous comments
contained within the last post. Furthermore, I'd like to add that I
believe this site really needs non-stop independent review, as many
issues have occurred over the past few years...

But at this point, I wouldn't be so quick to actually go to the
extremes of calling for the N.R.C. to shut this site down; just step
up the observations on the Federal level.

Posted: Tue Apr 03, 2007 11:35 pm

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

 Im relieved residents have never been in danger by any of these
shutdowns. Shouldnt the public know what the worst case scenario's
might be

Posted: Tue Apr 03, 2007 8:48 pm

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

   Copyright © 2006 PoughkeepsieJournal.com
All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 22 FR NRC: Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards (ACRS); Subcommittee 
Meeting on Thermal-Hydraulic Phenomena; Notice of Meeting

Doc E7-6077

[Federal Register: April 3, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 63)] 
[Notices] [Page 15914] From the Federal Register Online via GPO 
Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr03ap07-91]                         

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

    The ACRS Subcommittee on Thermal-Hydraulic Phenomena will hold a 
meeting on April 19-20, 2007, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 
in Room T-2B3.
    The entire meeting will be open to public attendance, with the 
exception of portions that may be closed to discuss General Electric 
proprietary information pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(4).
    The agenda for the subject meeting shall be as follows:
    Thursday, April 19, 2007--8:30 a.m. until the conclusion of 
business.
    Friday, April 20, 2007--8:30 a.m. until the conclusion of business.
    The Subcommittee will review the staff evaluation of the MELLLA+, 
GE Methods, and GE DSS-CD Topical Reports. The Subcommittee will gather 
information, analyze relevant issues and facts, and formulate proposed 
positions and actions, as appropriate, for deliberation by the full 
Committee.
    Members of the public desiring to provide oral statements and/or 
written comments should notify the Designated Federal Official, Mr. 
Ralph Caruso (Telephone: 301-415-8065) five days prior to the meeting, 
if possible, so that appropriate arrangements can be made. Electronic 
recordings will be permitted.
    Further information regarding this meeting can be obtained by 
contacting the Designated Federal Official between 7:30 a.m. and 4:15 
p.m. (ET). Persons planning to attend this meeting are urged to contact 
the above named individual at least two working days prior to the 
meeting to be advised of any potential changes to the agenda.

    Dated: March 27, 2007.
Cayetano Santos,
Acting Branch Chief, ACRS.
[FR Doc. E7-6077 Filed 4-2-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590-01-P


*****************************************************************
 23 FR NRC: STP Nuclear Operating Company; Notice of Withdrawal of 
Application for Amendments to Facility Operating Licenses

Doc E7-6086

[Federal Register: April 3, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 63)] 
[Notices] [Page 15914] From the Federal Register Online via GPO 
Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr03ap07-90]                         

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket Nos. 50-498 and 50-499]

    The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) has granted 
the request of STP Nuclear Operating Company (the licensee) to withdraw 
its January 31, 2006, application for proposed amendments to Facility 
Operating Licenses numbered NPF-76 and NPF-80, respectively, for the 
South Texas Project, Units 1 and 2, located in Matagorda County. The 
proposed amendments would have revised the Technical Specification 
3.8.3.1, ``Onsite Power Distribution--Operating.''
    The Commission had previously issued a Notice of Consideration of 
Issuance of Amendments published in the Federal Register on February 
28, 2006 (71 FR 10077). However, by letter dated March 26, 2007, the 
licensee withdrew the proposed change.
    For further details with respect to this action, see the 
application for amendment dated January 31, 2006, and the licensee's 
letter dated March 26, 2007, which withdrew the application for license 
amendment. Documents may be examined, and/or copied for a fee, at the 
NRC's Public Document Room (PDR), located at One White Flint North, 
Public File Area O1 F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, 
Maryland. Publicly available records will be accessible electronically 
from the Agencywide Documents Access and Management Systems (ADAMS) 
Public Electronic Reading Room on the Internet at the NRC Web site, 
http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm.html. Persons who do not have access to 

ADAMS or who encounter problems in accessing the documents located in 
ADAMS should contact the NRC PDR Reference staff by telephone at 1-800-
397-4209, or 301-415-4737 or by e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 27th day of March 2007.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Mohan C. Thadani,
Senior Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch IV, Division of 
Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. E7-6086 Filed 4-2-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590-01-P


*****************************************************************
 24 FR NRC: Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel; Before the Licensing 

Doc E7-6130

Board: G. Paul Bollwerk, III, Chairman, Nicholas G. Trikouros, Dr. 
James F. Jackson; In the Matter of Southern Nuclear Operating Co. 
(Early Site Permit for Vogtle ESP Site); Notice of Hearing (Application 
for Early Site Permit)

[Federal Register: April 3, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 63)] 
[Notices] [Page 15913-15914] From the Federal Register Online via 
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr03ap07-89]                         

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

 [Docket No. 52-011-ESP; ASLBP No. 07-850-01-ESP-BD01]

 

March 28, 2007.
    This proceeding concerns the August 15, 2006 application of 
Southern Nuclear Operating Company (SNC) for a 10 CFR Part 52 early 
site permit (ESP). The ESP application seeks approval for use of the 
existing Vogtle Electric Generating Plant site near Waynesboro, 
Georgia, for the possible construction of two new nuclear reactors. In 
response to an October 5, 2006 notice of hearing and opportunity to 
petition for leave to intervene, 71 FR 60,195 (Oct. 12, 2006), on 
December 11, 2006, the Center for a Sustainable Coast, Savannah 
Riverkeeper, Southern Alliance for Clean Energy, Atlanta Women's Action 
for New Directions, and Blue Ridge Environmental Defense League 
(collectively the Joint Petitioners) filed a timely request for hearing 
and petition to intervene contesting the SNC ESP application. On 
December 13, 2006, the Commission referred the petition to the Atomic 
Safety and Licensing Board Panel to conduct any subsequent 
adjudication. On December 15, 2006, a three-member Atomic Safety and 
Licensing Board was established to adjudicate this ESP proceeding. See 
71 FR 77,071 (Dec. 22, 2006).
    On February 13, 2007, the Board conducted a one-day initial 
prehearing conference in Waynesboro, Georgia, during which it heard 
oral presentations regarding the standing of the Joint Petitioners and 
the admissibility of their seven proffered contentions. Thereafter, in 
a March 12, 2007 issuance, finding that each of the Joint Petitioners 
had established the requisite standing to intervene in this proceeding 
and that they had submitted two admissible contentions concerning the 
SNC ESP application, the Board admitted them as parties to this 
proceeding. See Southern Nuclear Operating Co. (Early Site Permit for 
Vogtle ESP Site), LBP-07-03, 65 NRC (Mar. 12, 2006).
    In light of the foregoing, please take notice that a hearing will 
be conducted in this proceeding. Subject to any Board determination 
regarding any request to utilize formal hearing procedures under 10 CFR 
part 2, Subpart G, see 10 CFR 2.310(d), the hearing on contested 
matters will be governed by the informal hearing procedures set forth 
in 10 CFR part 2, subparts C and L, 10 CFR 2.300-2.390, 2.1200-12.1213. 
Further, in accordance with the October 2006 notice regarding the SNC 
ESP application, 71 FR at 60,195, and 10 CFR 52.21, in the context of a 
hearing on uncontested matters, the Licensing Board will:
    (1) Consider whether the issuance of an ESP will not be inimical to 
the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the 
public (Safety Issue 1);
    (2) Determine whether, taking into consideration the site criteria 
contained in 10 CFR part 100, a reactor, or reactors, having 
characteristics that fall within the parameters for the site, can be 
constructed and operated without undue risk to the health and safety of 
the public (Safety Issue 2); and
    (3) Consider whether, in accordance with the requirements of 
subpart A of 10 CFR part 51, the ESP should be issued as proposed.
    Additionally, in accord with the October 2006 notice, the Board 
will:
    (1) Determine whether the requirements of sections 102(2)(A), (C), 
and (E) of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 and 10 CFR 
Part 51, Subpart A, have been complied with in the proceeding;
    (2) Independently consider the final balance among conflicting 
factors contained in the record of proceeding with a view to 
determining the appropriate action to be taken; and
    (3) Determine, after considering reasonable alternatives, whether a 
license should be issued, denied, or appropriately conditioned to 
protect environmental values.
    During the course of this proceeding, the Board may conduct an oral 
argument, as provided in 10 CFR 2.331, may hold additional prehearing 
conferences pursuant to 10 CFR 2.329, and may conduct evidentiary 
hearings in accordance with 10 CFR 2.327-2.328, 2.1206-2.1208. The 
public is invited to attend any oral argument, prehearing conference, 
or evidentiary hearing. Notices of those sessions will be published in 
the Federal Register and/or made available to the public at the NRC 
Public Document Room (PDR), located at One White Flint North, 11555 
Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland, and through the NRC 
Web site, http://www.nrc.gov.

    Additionally, as provided in 10 CFR 2.315(a), any person not a 
party to the proceeding may submit a written limited appearance 
statement. Limited appearance statements, which are placed in the 
docket for the hearing, provide members of the public with an 
opportunity to make the Board and/or the participants aware of their 
concerns about matters at issue in the proceeding. A written limited 
appearance statement can be submitted at any time and should be sent to 
the Office of the Secretary using one of the methods prescribed below:
    Mail to: Office of the Secretary, Rulemakings and Adjudications 
Staff, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001.
    Fax to: (301) 415-1101 (verification (301) 415-1966).
    E-mail to: hearingdocket@nrc.gov.
    In addition, a copy of the limited appearance statement should be 
sent to the Licensing Board Chairman using the same method at the 
address below:
    Mail to: Administrative Judge G. Paul Bollwerk, III, Atomic Safety 
and Licensing Board Panel, Mail Stop T-3F23, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 
Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001.
    Fax to: (301) 415-5599 (verification (301) 415-7550).
    E-mail to: gpb@nrc.gov.
    At a later date, the Board may entertain oral limited appearance 
statements at a location, or locations, in the vicinity of the proposed 
Vogtle ESP site. Notice of any oral limited appearance sessions will be 
published in the Federal Register and/or made available to the public 
at the NRC PDR and on the NRC Web site, http://www.nrc.gov.

    Documents relating to this proceeding are available for public 
inspection at the Commission's PDR or electronically from the publicly 
available records

[[Page 15914]]

component of NRC's document system (ADAMS). ADAMS is accessible from 
the NRC Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html (the 

Public Electronic Reading Room). Persons who do not have access to 
ADAMS, or who encounter problems in accessing the documents located in 
ADAMS, should contact the NRC PDR Reference staff by telephone at 1-
800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov.
    It is so ordered.

    March 28, 2007.

    For The Atomic Safety and Licensing Board.*
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \*\ Copies of this notice of hearing were sent this date by 
Internet e-mail transmission and the agency's E-Submittal system to 
counsel for (1) applicant SNC.; (2) the Joint Petitioners; and (3) 
the NRC staff.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

G. Paul Bollwerk, III,
Chairman, Rockville, Maryland.
 [FR Doc. E7-6130 Filed 4-2-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590-01-P


*****************************************************************
 25 FR NRC: Dominion Energy Kewaunee, Inc.; Notice of Withdrawal of 
Application for Amendment to Facility Operating License

Doc E7-6138

[Federal Register: April 3, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 63)] 
[Notices] [Page 15912-15913] From the Federal Register Online via 
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr03ap07-88]                         

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50-305]


    The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) has granted 
the request of Dominion Energy Kewaunee, Inc. (the licensee) to 
withdraw its April 6, 2006, application for proposed amendment to 
Facility Operating License No. DPR-43 for the Kewaunee Power Station, 
located in Kewaunee County, Wisconsin.
    The proposed amendment would have revised the facility Updated 
Safety Analysis Report to allow the use of a different methodology for 
determining the design requirements necessary for protecting safety-
related equipment from damage by tornado generated missiles.
    The Commission had previously issued a Notice of Consideration of 
Issuance of Amendment published in the Federal Register on May 23, 2006 
(71 FR 29673). However, by letter dated March 19, 2007, the licensee 
withdrew the proposed change.
    For further details with respect to this action, see the 
application for amendment dated April 6, 2006, and the licensee's 
letter dated March 19, 2007, which withdrew the application for license 
amendment. Documents may be examined, and/or copied for a fee, at the 
NRC's Public Document Room (PDR), located at One White Flint North, 
Public File Area O1 F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, 
Maryland. Publicly available records will be accessible electronically 
from the Agencywide Documents Access and

[[Page 15913]]

Management Systems (ADAMS) Public Electronic Reading Room on the 
internet at the NRC Web site, http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm.html. 

Persons who do not have access to ADAMS or who encounter problems in 
accessing the documents located in ADAMS should contact the NRC PDR 
Reference staff by telephone at 1-800-397-4209, or 301-415-4737 or by 
e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 26th day of March 2007.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Robert F. Kuntz,
Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch III-1, Division of Operating 
Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
 [FR Doc. E7-6138 Filed 4-2-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590-01-P


*****************************************************************
 26 Business Report: Koeberg powers down after turbine trip

    April 3, 2007

    By Samantha Enslin

    Durban - Koeberg, Eskom's 1 800 megawatt nuclear power plant, 
is not yet fully operational after an incident last week, giving 
the power utility a potential headache and raising the risk of 
countrywide power outages.

    Eskom said in a statement yesterday that the start-up process 
on Koeberg unit 2, which takes 48 hours, began at the weekend.

    It was synchronised to the national grid at 5am yesterday, 
but as the power supply increased, unit 2 tripped.

    Eskom said: "In accordance with the normal operating 
procedures, the reactor has been placed in a safe mode while the 
cause of the turbine trip is being investigated."

    Koeberg's unit 1 continues to operate at full power.

    This incident at Koeberg is the third in 16 months.

    Electricity demand in the Western Cape is about 4 000MW, of 
which 1 800MW is supplied by the Koeberg plant. The balance comes 
from power stations in the north.

    There have been no power supply interruptions in the Western 
Cape since Koeberg's unit 2 was manually shut down on Thursday 
last week.

    The Western Cape is supplied by one unit at Koeberg and by 
power stations in the north. But if units at other power stations 
fail, then power cuts could follow.

    Jacob Maroga, the managing director for the transmission 
division and chief executive-designate of Eskom, said the risk of 
power supply interruptions to the Cape would increase should any 
of the available generation and transmission plants experience 
faults.

    "We are able to meet the demand for the Cape, but the system 
will remain tight until the return to service of unit 2," said 
Maroga.


©2007 Business Report & Independent Online (Pty) Ltd. All rights
*****************************************************************
 27 The Mercury: Exelon will use remote heat monitors on spent fuel rods

Evan Brandt, ebrandt@pottsmerc.com

04/03/2007

LIMERICK -- Exelon Nuclear has reversed a previous position and 
decided to install remote heat monitors at the spent nuclear fuel 
storage depot it is building at the Limerick Generating Station.

In addition to remaining radioactive for hundreds of years, the 
spent fuel from the nuclear reactor also generates heat and an 
increase in temperature around the casks could indicate a problem 
inside.

Exelon?s decision comes two months after the company received a 
letter from the Pottstown Environmental Advisory Commission and 
authorized by Pottstown Borough Council, asking for exactly that.

However, it was not that request that spurred the decision to
install the monitors, but safety concerns for plant workers, said
April D. Schilpp, manager of MidAtlantic Nuclear Communi-cations for
Exelon.

"There were some site issues that contributed to this decision," she
said.

In essence, the location of high voltage wires near to where some of
the steel casks filled with spent nuclear fuel will be located had
caused Exelon officials to re-think having workers regularly
visiting the area to check temperature measurements, said Schilpp.

"It has to do with the way the operators have to access the
temperature readings," Schilpp said. "They have to be on top of the
casks and that just reduces our safety margin so we decided to look
at other options."

She emphasized that the change was not made as a result of
Pottstown?s request.

Last year, Pottstown had also asked for remote, real-time radiation
monitoring of the dry cask fuel storage site, a request Exelon also
rejected.

"There was no technical reason for it and it was not required," she
said.

Don Read, chairman of Pottstown?s EAC, said he was pleased the
additional monitoring would be done, no matter the reason.

"Hey, anything that gets the job done works for us," he said.

The fuel to be stored outside the building has been cooling in a
pool inside the reactor building for at least five years. It will be
loaded into a steel canister now being manufactured in Japan and
placed inside concrete housing.

Steve Minnick, project manager for the effort, said ground has
broken on the concrete slab on which the casks will be stored. That
part of the project, which was approved in July by the Limerick
Board of Supervisors, is the only part over which local officials
had any oversight.

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has issued a blanket permit for
the type of dry-cask storage system being used at the plant -- the
NuHOM system built by a firm called Transnuclear -- and so no new
permitting was needed for the project at Limerick.

Schilpp said the Limerick plant has received little in the way of
public feedback about the dry cask storage project "and it?s not as
if we haven?t been asking."

She said Exelon would have taken public concerns into account "if
there had been a bigger outcry, but we just hear from Don Read."

Limerick Township, where the plant is located, has not communicated
any concerns, not have any other surrounding towns, other than
Pottstown, said Schilpp.

Limerick Supervisors? Chairman David Kane said his board has kept up
with the concerns raised about the plant.

"We have been in touch with the NRC and we had been educating
ourselves about just what jurisdiction we have," Kane said.

"Our hope is that the people charged with this on the federal level
will treat this project with the same concern for safety as we would
if it were in our jurisdiction," said Kane. "All we can do is
educate ourselves and request."

However, some towns may soon start getting into the act.

With borough council?s approval, the Pottstown EAC sent letters to
numerous townships March 13, suggesting they might want to take a
closer look at the fuel storage project "since your municipality is
located within the evacuation zone for Limerick Nuclear Generating
Station."

Although the storage of the fuel outside the reactor building is
considered temporary by Exelon, the letter notes that the fuel?s
eventual destination -- buried at the controversial and long-delayed
Yucca Mountain project in Nevada -- may of "decades away from
accepting nuclear waste it if ever, in fact is approved to do so."

The letter than outlines the attempts EAC has made to have
additional heat and radiation monitoring installed.

"It is the opinion of the Pottstown EAC that once this fuel is
loaded into the NRC approved storage containers in Limerick, it will
be there for a very long time," Read wrote in the letter.

"As a community located within the Limerick Nuclear Generating
Station evacuation zone, we believe you should be aware of our
attempts to enhance and ensure public safety related to the dry cask
storage project," Read wrote. "We invite your input and
participation in our ongoing dialogue with Exelon."

©The Mercury 2007

Limerick Station

How can it be considered "temporary storage" when we know it will be
there for decades? Why go to meetings or try to get answers about
this project, they'll do what they want with or without our wishes.
The majority no longer rules in our country.

Robert Baker, Birchrunville, PA

©2006 Pottstown Mercury - a Journal Register Property. All Rights 
reserved.
*****************************************************************
 28 NewsRoom Finland: WWF Finland drafts alternative to sixth nuclear station

3.4.2007 at 11:05

WWF Finland quoted its report as saying on Monday that improving
energy efficiency and utilising renewable energy sources offered a
cost-effective alternative to a sixth nuclear power station.

According to the report, capacity equivalent to a new nuclear power
station could be replaced within six to ten years if tangible action
was taken at once.

WWF Finland called for strict energy efficiency criteria and an
increase in the use of ecologically produced power for the public
sector, subsidies for fitting 250,000 one-family houses with heat
pumps, a sharp rise in the share of bio-energy, especially in
combined heat and power generation, and the construction of 250 new
wind power stations.

"If Finland builds a sixth nuclear power station, more than half of
our electricity would be generated with nuclear and electricity
generation would become significantly more lopsided, which would
increase the vulnerability of power generation" Peter Lund, a
professor at the Helsinki University of Technology, said in a WWF
Finland statement.

"Power generation resting on renewable energy would not benefit from
an expanded market and therefore a domestic market for new energy
technology would not be born in Finland. Thus Finland's chances of
grabbing a slice of the rapidly growing global environmental
technology market would weaken further."

Finnish utilities Fortum and announced last week they were starting
environmental impact assessment processes on possibly building the
country´s sixth nuclear power station.


/STT/

© Copyright STT 2007

© 1995 – 2005, Virtual Finland
Produced by: Ministry for Foreign Affairs of Finland
Department for Communication and Culture/Unit for Promotion and
*****************************************************************
 29 MarketWatch: Oil prices, CO2 concerns to spur nuclear renaissance - CERA -

By Ian Talley

Last Update: 7:51 PM ET Apr 2, 2007

WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) -- High fossil fuel prices and a global
push for cleaner energy have created an environment ripe for a
nuclear renaissance, Cambridge Energy Research Associates said in a
report published Monday.

Despite obstacles such as high-level radioactive waste disposal,
non-proliferation concerns, high investment costs and engineering
shortages, CERA Senior Director Jone-Lin Wang and Associate Director
Christopher Hansen said in their report, "The nuclear renaissance is
real."

"Over the past few years, high fossil fuel prices, energy security
and climate change concerns and increasing urgency about reducing
greenhouse gas emissions have all converged to improve the position
of nuclear power relative to other options," the two authors said in
a press release.

The report said the trends, along with "excellent performance of the
existing nuclear fleet and financial incentives in the Energy Policy
Act of 2005," have led to a race to develop new nuclear power
reactors in the U.S.

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission recently awarded two separate
early site permits to Entergy Corp. (ETR :
ETR

, , ) have also applied for early site permits for nuclear power
plants. No new nuclear plants have been built in the U.S. for 28
years.

The Bush administration, however, is facing mounting pressure to
resolve a growing stockpile of spent nuclear fuel - currently stored
temporarily at sites across the country - as plans for a national
storage site at Yucca Mountain, Nev., have faced continuous legal
and political hurdles, delays and projected budget expansions.

The CERA report noted that in Asia, where new nuclear plant
construction has continued for years, several countries have
recently raised their target for new nuclear capacity. In Western
Europe, a new reactor is under construction for the first time in
more than a decade, a second one is planned, and there are growing
political calls for nuclear power as a key way to diversify away
from natural gas dependency.

CERA said nuclear component manufacturing capacity and a dearth of
skilled personnel could constrain nuclear capacity growth over the
next several years, "but these are short-term growing pains similar
to those faced by other industries and other segments of the energy
industry."

It said recent worldwide trends toward higher fossil fuel prices,
combined with low interest rates, low inflation, and the increasing
importance of carbon dioxide emissions as a direct power generation
cost, have improved the relative economics of nuclear power.

Longer-term issues involving spent fuel storage and the risk of
proliferation need to be addressed and will require the
implementation of international conventions. One of the Bush
administration's top international energy priorities is the Global
Nuclear Energy Project, or GNEP. The DOE said the program seeks to
encourage the development of nuclear power by helping countries such
as Russia, China and India handle spent nuclear fuel in a safe and
proliferation-resistant manner while providing the opportunity to
dramatically influence nuclear energy policy abroad.

Among the report's key conclusions are that governments will be
unable to curtail rapidly rising global carbon dioxide emissions
without expanding nuclear power generation, and so government
support was essential.

"Success in capital-intensive projects like nuclear power requires a
stable and predictable investment climate, which in turn requires
efficient and stable government licensing and regulatory processes
as well as a predictable structure for power markets," it said.

As a result of a projected renaissance, higher uranium prices and
increased demand should lead to substantial mining capacity
expansion.

It also warned that a major nuclear accident or an incident of
nuclear terrorism "would put the brakes on new plant development,"
and was a "low probability, but high-consequence event."

-Contact: 201-938-5400

Dow Jones Online Network

Copyright © 2007 MarketWatch, Inc. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 30 UCS: Supreme Court Rules Government Authorized to Curb Vehicle Global Warming Pollution

April 2, 2007

Supreme Court Rules Government Authorized to Curb Vehicle Global
Warming Pollution

5-4 Decision 'Came Down on the Side of Common Sense,' Science Group
Says

WASHINGTON (April 2, 2007) &ndash; By ruling today that the
Environmental Protection Agency has the authority to regulate carbon
dioxide and other global warming pollutants from cars and trucks,
the U.S. Supreme Court "came down on the side of common sense,"
according to the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS).

The case, Massachusetts v. EPA, was filed by Massachusetts and 11
other states, a number of cities, as well as environmental and
science organizations, including UCS.

"The Supreme Court came down today on the side of common sense,"
said Alden Meyer, policy director at UCS. "The language of the Clean
Air Act clearly includes carbon dioxide and other global warming
emissions as pollutants, and it's the EPA's job to protect the
public from them. The Bush administration wasted six years hiding
behind this indefensible position, and we don't have time to waste.
They're literally fiddling around while the planet is burning.

"We have the technology today to dramatically reduce tailpipe
pollution, so it's time to bench the lawyers and bring in the
engineers," he added. "The federal government should join the dozen
states that have passed laws curbing vehicle global warming
pollution."

The Bush administration had argued that global warming emissions
such as carbon dioxide do not meet the Clean Air Act's definition of
an "air pollutant" and therefore cannot be regulated. That position
contradicts the EPA's previous interpretation of the law. The Clean
Air Act, however, states that an air pollutant is any "physical,
chemical, biological (or) radioactive substance or matter [that] is
emitted or otherwise enters the ambient air."

Moreover, the Clean Air Act authorizes the EPA to regulate any
pollutant that the agency determines to "cause, or contribute to,
air pollution which may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public
health or welfare." The act specifically defines "welfare" to
include adverse effects on "weather" and "climate."

For general media inquiries, please call our press office at 
202-331-5420.

Press Contacts:

EMILY ROBINSON Press Secretary 202-331-5427 erobinson@ucsusa.org

AARON HUERTAS Assistant Press Secretary 202-331-5458 
ahuertas@ucsusa.org

ELLIOTT NEGIN Media Director 202-331-5439 enegin@ucsusa.org

© Union of Concerned Scientists

Page Last Revised: 04/03/07
*****************************************************************
 31 The Hindu: Nuclear plant to take up assault issue with State Government

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Wednesday, Apr 04, 2007

P. Sudhakar

 Attack on employees of Koodankulam nuclear power project "Some
tough strategies" to be evolved at Mumbai meet


TIRUNELVELI: The Nuclear Power Corporation of India Limited (NPCIL)
has decided to take up the recent attack on its vehicles carrying
the employees of Koodankulam Nuclear Power Project (KKNPP) with the
Chief Secretary and the Energy Secretary, Government of Tamil Nadu,
in the next few days.

A high-level meeting held at KKNPP on Sunday resolved to take up the
matter with the "top bureaucrats" of the Centre "to ensure the
safety and security of the employees and the nuclear reactors under
construction".

"Since the assailants have threatened the staff of an imminent
attack on Anu Vijay Township (the residential colony of KKNPP
workers) and also on the reactors with explosives, the latest
development has necessitated some obstinate measures, which cannot
be discussed here. However, I can assure that we'll take really firm
steps in the next few days to ensure the safety of workers and our
material," the Director (Projects), S.K. Agrawal, told The Hindu on
Monday before having a second round of discussion at KKNPP site.

Sources said another round of discussion within the core group of
NPCIL would be held in Mumbai to finalise "some tough strategies" to
be taken against the attackers.

"The Mumbai meeting will certainly decide to take up the matter with
the Union Home Secretary and the Cabinet Secretary," another top
NPCIL official said.

Police clueless

Since the police are still clueless about the gang, the KKNPP on
Monday transported its employees from Anu Vijay Township to the
project site in TNSTC buses with police protection.

Copyright © 2007, The Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the
*****************************************************************
 32 SF New Mexican: Attorney: Organs lawsuit settled

By THE NEW MEXICAN

April 3, 2007

The final settlement has been reached in a class-action lawsuit over
a government program that harvested human organs from dead people in
an effort to study how plutonium was absorbed in the human body, a
plaintiff's lawyer announced Monday.

The organs were harvested at the Los Alamos Medical Center during
autopsies performed there from 1959 to the early 1980s, court
records show.

Dr. Michael W. Stewart, who worked at the Los Alamos Medical Center,
has agreed to pay out $800,000 to families of 304 people whose
organs were taken, plaintiff's attorney John Bienvenu said. Overall,
he said, organs and tissues were taken from more than 400 dead
people without permission from their families.

"It appears that little or no effort was made to obtain the informed
consent either of the decedents before their deaths or their
families," Judge James J. Wechsler wrote in a 2005 state Court of
Appeals opinion.


Stewart's lawyer could not immediately be reached for comment
Monday. Stewart had argued that the claims made against him were
barred by the statute of limitations, court records show.


Copyright 2007 The New Mexican, Inc.

*****************************************************************
 33 BBC NEWS: Health | Radiation risk 'like pollution'

Last Updated: Tuesday, 3 April 2007, 07:07 GMT 08:07 UK

The damaged reactor at Chernobyl

Air pollution may be a bigger risk to health than exposure to 
radiation, such as that after the Chernobyl disaster, a study 
suggests.

Researchers examined the health impact of the meltdown of the 
Chernobyl nuclear power plant, and the atomic bombs dropped on 
Japan in 1945.

They concluded the risks were probably no greater than those 
posed by obesity, smoking and urban pollution.

I'm not sure that it helps to compare the health risks from 
radiation among survivors of the atomic bombings in Japan with 
the risks from obesity or smoking

Dr Michael Clark, Health Protection Agency

He said the risks posed by radiation were not comparable to those
from other sources.

Researcher Dr Jim Smith, from the Centre for Ecology and Hydrology,
said exposure to radiation took fewer years off life expectancy than
heavy smoking or severely obese.

He calculated that someone who was exposed to radiation after the
Chernobyl incident had around a one in 100 chance of contracting a
fatal cancer in later life as a direct result - in effect the
mortality risk was increased by 1%.

Dr Smith estimated that exposure to air pollution, or passive
smoking had a similar impact.

He conceded that the exact risk linked to pollution or passive
smoking was harder to pin down.

But he said people living unofficially within the Chernobyl
exclusion zone may have a lower health risk than if they were being
exposed to the air pollution in a large nearby city such as Kiev.

Dr Smith said: "The perception is that there are big risks to public
health from radiation exposure.

"This study shows that for the population exposed to significant
doses of radiation from the Chernobyl incident, the risks of
premature death are no greater than those of being subjected to
prolonged passive smoking or of constantly over-eating.

"We can all face such health risks just going about our daily lives."

Fears and perceptions

He said people's fears or perceptions of the health risks they were
exposed to after Chernobyl could prompt people to behave in ways
which would actually have more impact on their health - such as
becoming a heavy smoker.

But Dr Michael Clark, a radiation expert at the Health Protection
Agency, said: "Comparing risks can give a helpful perspective but it
needs to be done with care.

"Comparing the radiation risks of living near Chernobyl with the
risk from air pollution in nearby Kiev may be relevant.

"However I'm not sure that it helps to compare the health risks from
radiation among survivors of the atomic bombings in Japan with the
risks from obesity or smoking.

"One is an extreme involuntary risk, the others are self imposed."

A UN report estimated around 9,000 people exposed to radiation in
the Chernobyl incident in 1986 would die from cancer, although
Greenpeace has said the number of deaths linked to the incident
could be closer to 90,000.

The atomic bomb dropped on the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and
Nagasaki are estimated to have killed a combined total of more than
200,000 people.

* BBC Copyright Notice

*****************************************************************
 34 Independent: Britain's dirty cities more dangerous than an A-bomb - 

By Thair Shaikh

Published: 03 April 2007

Air pollution in major cities is potentially more damaging to health
than being exposed to the radioactive fallout of an atomic bomb,
according to a report published today.

The study suggests that high levels of urban air pollution cut life
expectancy by more than the radiation exposure of emergency workers
sent into the 19-mile exclusion zone around the Chernobyl disaster.

Millions of people were exposed to dangerous levels of radiation
when the former Soviet nuclear power plant in what is now the
Ukraine exploded on 26 April 1986. But the latest findings suggest
that the consequences of radiation exposure suffered by survivors of
the incident, or the nuclear bombs dropped on Japan by the US in
1945, may be less damaging than previously thought.

Although 30 people died immediately in the two explosions at
Chernobyl and up to 16,000 deaths have been linked to the radiation
plume that spread across Europe, the research found that moving from
Inverness to London could have a worse effect on your health than
moving to Chernobyl.

The study follows a report last month from The Royal Commission on
Environmental Pollution, which said air pollution was responsible
for 24,000 premature deaths in Britain every year. Sir John Lawton,
chairman of the commission, said the Government had consistently
failed to tackle rising levels of chemicals in the atmosphere of
cities.

Other findings showed that women living in areas of higher pollution
were at greater risk of heart disease and death, while children
living within 500 metres of motorways suffered more permanent lung
damage and lower life expectancy, probably because of their greater
exposure to pollutants in vehicle fumes.

Jim Smith, a scientist at the Centre for Ecology and Hydrology, who
carried out the research, assessed the health risks faced by those
at Chernobyl directly after the explosion and those who set up home
in the exclusion zone afterwards. He compared them with air
pollution, obesity and passive and active smoking.

He concluded the Chernobyl group absorbed radiation equivalent to
more than the amount emitted during 1,200 chest x-rays, which was
likely to cause one extra death in a hundred by increasing the risk
of cancer.

The health risks associated with air pollution and passive smoking
appear more severe. Pollution in central London increased mortality
due to heart disease by 2.8 per cent compared with Inverness,
Britain's least polluted city, while living with a smoker increases
mortality by 1.7 per cent, the study found.

Writing in the journal BMC Public Health, Dr Smith said: "It is well
known that radiation can potentially cause fatal cancers in people,
even at relatively low doses. But our understandable fear of
radiation needs to be placed in the context of other risks.

"The immediate effects of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki atomic bombs
led to approximately 210,000 deaths. However, radiation exposures
experienced by the most exposed group of survivors led to an average
loss of life expectancy significantly lower than that caused by
severe obesity or active smoking."

However, Dr Smith said his calculations were limited by the fact
that they excluded wider social and lifestyle factors, which could
have an impact on health.

site: Independent.co.uk

© 2007 Independent News and Media Limited
*****************************************************************
 35 Hawk Eye Newspaper: Researchers seek IAAP workers for study

Sunday, April 1, 2007

Local screening set for April 10.

The Hawk Eye

MOUNT PLEASANT ? Medical researchers at the University of Iowa
College of Public Health are asking local residents to participate
in the Iowa Army Ammunition Plant Munitions Workers Study.

The study intends to assess beryllium exposure among conventional
weapons workers at the Middletown munitions plant.

Selected workers will complete a questionnaire and provide a blood
sample for analysis of beryllium sensitivity using a test called the
beryllium lymphocyte proliferation test.

Past and current workers representing various job categories will be
selected and offered the test based on job title, work practice or
job descriptions.

Since even a single exposure to beryllium may cause some people to
show beryllium sensitivity, workers from all areas of the plant ?
including those who worked there only briefly ? are eligible for the
study.

All study participants will receive $25. Follow?up medical
evaluations will be offered for those who screen positive for
beryllium sensitization.

Letters inviting participation have been mailed to some workers.

Lar Fuortes, a Iowa professor of occupational and environmental
health leading the study, said additional invitations will go out
soon.

Fuortes asks that recipients return the participation form that
accompanies the letter to indicate their interest and identify
convenient times to participate.

A local screening for Mount Pleasant residents is scheduled for
April 10 in the meeting room on the second floor of the Mount
Pleasant Public Library and Civic Center.

Study participation will require a 30? to 45?minute time commitment.

Those with questions can call toll?free (866) 282?5818 or visit the
Web site www.iowamunitionsworkersstudy.org.

The Hawk Eye 800 S. Main St., Burlington, Iowa 52601 319-754-8461 
· 1-800-397-1708 · FAX 319-754-6824 · Problems? contact the 
webmaster.
*****************************************************************
 36 FR DOE: DU Disposal analysis

Doc E7-6039

[Federal Register: April 3, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 63)] 
[Notices] [Page 15869-15871] From the Federal Register Online via 
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr03ap07-45]                         

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

 
Notice of Availability of a Draft Supplement Analysis for 
Disposal of Depleted Uranium Oxide Conversion Product Generated From 
Doe's Inventory of Depleted Uranium Hexafluoride

AGENCY: Department of Energy.

ACTION: Notice of availability of a draft supplement analysis.

SUMMARY: DOE has prepared a Draft Supplement Analysis (SA) pursuant to 
DOE regulations implementing the National Environmental Policy Act 
(NEPA), 10 CFR 1021.314. The draft SA addresses DOE's proposal to 
dispose of the depleted uranium oxide conversion product at either the 
DOE-owned low-level radioactive waste disposal facility at the Nevada 
Test Site (NTS) or at EnergySolutions LLC, a commercial low-level waste 
disposal facility in Clive, Utah (EnergySolutions; formerly known as 
Envirocare of Utah, Inc.).
    In April 1999, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) published a 
Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS) for management of 
its Depleted Uranium Hexafluoride (DUF6) inventory. The PEIS 
included a generic assessment of the disposal of depleted uranium oxide 
conversion product (as U3O8 or UO2) 
and concluded that disposal of either product in shallow earthen 
structures, vaults, or mines would adequately protect human health and 
the environment over the time period considered, as long as the 
disposal facility is located in a dry environment and appropriately 
engineered (e.g., the cover material is maintained). Subsequently, DOE 
prepared site-specific final Environmental Impact Statements (EISs) for 
construction and operation of DUF6 conversion facilities at 
the DOE's Paducah, Kentucky, and Portsmouth, Ohio, sites in the Final 
Environmental Impact Statement for Construction and Operation of a 
Depleted Uranium Hexafluoride Conversion Facility at the Paducah, 
Kentucky Site, DOE/EIS-0359, and the Final Environmental Impact 
Statement for Construction and Operation of a Depleted Uranium 
Hexafluoride Conversion Facility at the Portsmouth, Ohio Site, DOE/EIS-
0360. DOE published its Record of Decision for Construction and 
Operation of a Depleted Uranium Hexafluoride Conversion Facility at the 
Paducah, Kentucky Site, and Record of Decision for Construction and 
Operation of a Depleted Uranium Hexafluoride Conversion Facility at the 
Portsmouth,

[[Page 15870]]

Ohio Site (RODs) on July 27, 2004 (69 FR 44649 and 69 FR 44654).
    In each site-specific ROD, DOE announced its decision to implement 
the actions described as the preferred alternative in the corresponding 
conversion facility EIS, which included the following actions:
     DOE will construct and operate a conversion facility at 
Location A within each of the Paducah and Portsmouth sites.
     All shipments to and from the conversion facility sites, 
including any potential shipments of non-DUF6 cylinders 
currently stored at the East Tennessee Technology Park (ETTP), will be 
conducted by either truck or rail, as appropriate. Cylinders will be 
shipped in a manner that is consistent with U.S. Department of 
Transportation (DOT) regulations for the shipment of UF6 
cylinders.
     Current cylinder management activities (handling, 
inspection, monitoring, and maintenance) will continue, consistent with 
Cylinder Project Management Plan for Depleted Uranium Hexafluoride, 
effective October 2003, which covers actions needed to meet safety and 
environmental requirements, until conversion can be accomplished.
     The aqueous hydrofluoric acid (HF) produced during 
conversion will be sold for use. If necessary, calcium fluoride 
(CaF2) will be produced and reused, or disposed of as 
appropriate.
     The depleted uranium oxide conversion product will be 
reused to the extent possible or packaged in emptied cylinders for 
disposal at an appropriate disposal facility. DOE plans to decide the 
specific disposal location(s) for the depleted uranium oxide conversion 
product after additional appropriate NEPA review. Accordingly, DOE will 
continue to evaluate its disposal options and will consider any further 
information or comments relevant to that decision. DOE will give a 
minimum 45-day notice before making the specific disposal decision and 
will provide any supplemental NEPA analysis for public review and 
comment.
    The conversion facility RODs did not declare a decision regarding 
the location for disposal of depleted uranium oxide conversion product. 
The reason DOE did not make its disposal decision at the time it issued 
the RODs for construction and operation of the two DUF6 conversion 
facilities is that it discovered that it had, through an oversight, not 
served copies of the draft and final site-specific EISs (DOE 2004a, b) 
to the States of Utah, home of EnergySolutions, and Nevada, home of 
NTS, as required in 40 CFR 1502.19. As a result, each ROD states DOE's 
intention to decide the specific disposal location(s) for the depleted 
uranium oxide conversion product after additional appropriate NEPA 
review.
    This draft SA addresses the additional appropriate NEPA review 
committed to in the earlier RODs. The draft SA identifies no 
significant new circumstances or information relevant to environmental 
concerns that bear on DOE's decisions on disposal locations or the 
impacts of those decisions. Based on the draft SA that is the subject 
of this Notice, DOE believes that a supplemental EIS is not needed to 
support amending the conversion facility RODs to decide the disposal 
location for the depleted uranium oxide conversion product. The 
depleted uranium oxide conversion product may be disposed either at the 
EnergySolutions low-level waste disposal facility or at the NTS low-
level waste disposal facility. DOE plans to issue amended RODs under 
the conversion facility EISs no sooner than 45 days from the 
publication of this Notice.

DATES: DOE will consider all public comments on this matter submitted 
by May 18, 2007.

ADDRESSES: Comments should be submitted electronically via the Web at 
http://web.ead.anl.gov/uranium/ or by regular mail. Written comments 

can be mailed to: DU Disposal Supplement Analysis Comment, Argonne 
National Laboratory, Building 900, Mail Stop 3, 9700 S. Cass Avenue, 
Argonne, IL 60439.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Copies of the Supplement Analysis for 
Disposal of Depleted Uranium Oxide Conversion Product Generated From 
DOE's Inventory of Depleted Uranium Hexafluoride (DOE/EIS-0359/0360-SA-
001) is available on the Depleted UF6 Management Information 
Network at: http://web.ead.anl.gov/uranium/, and on DOE's NEPA Web site at http://www.eh.doe.gov/nepa/whatsnew.html. To request printed copies 
st printed copies 
of this document, please write: DU Disposal Supplement Analysis 
Comment, Argonne National Laboratory, Building 900, Mail Stop 3, 9700 
S. Cass Avenue, Argonne, IL 60439.
    For further information on DOE's NEPA process, contact: Ms. Carol 
Borgstrom, Director, Office of NEPA Policy and Compliance, GC-20, U.S. 
Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 
20585, Telephone: 202-586-4600, or leave a message at 1-800-472-2756.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Uranium Disposition Services, LLC (UDS) 
began construction of the DUF6 conversion facilities at 
Paducah, Kentucky and Portsmouth, Ohio in July 2004. The main products 
from the conversion of DOE's inventory of DUF6 will be 
depleted uranium oxide conversion product and aqueous hydrogen fluoride 
(HF). The quantities of depleted uranium oxide conversion product 
produced annually will be approximately 10,800 metric tons (t) (11,800 
tons) at Portsmouth and 14,300 t (15,800 tons) at Paducah. UDS is 
planning to sell the HF product to a commercial user.
    In addition to depleted uranium oxide conversion product, two other 
products from the conversion process require disposal: (1) Emptied 
DUF6 cylinders and (2) a relatively small quantity of 
CaF2 (approximately 18 t [20 tons] at Portsmouth and 24 t 
[26 tons] at Paducah annually). UDS is planning to use the emptied 
cylinders as disposal containers for the depleted uranium oxide 
conversion product. Therefore, the emptied cylinders would become part 
of the depleted uranium oxide waste stream. Any cylinders not used as 
disposal containers would be disposed of as low-level waste at an 
appropriate facility in compliance with applicable regulations. The 
small quantity of CaF2 would be disposed with the unused 
depleted uranium oxide. Therefore, the unused depleted uranium oxide, 
most of the emptied cylinders, and the small quantity of 
CaF2 would be sent to the same disposal facility.
    The PEIS considered the environmental impacts of six alternative 
strategies for long-term management of DOE's DUF6 inventory. 
The alternative strategies included: (1) Options for continued storage 
of DUF6 in cylinders at the three sites where it was stored 
(Paducah, KY, Portsmouth, OH, and ETTP in Oak Ridge, TN); (2) long-term 
storage as DUF6 at a consolidated site; (3) conversion of 
the DUF6 to an oxide followed by long-term storage; (4) 
conversion to an oxide or depleted uranium metal followed by use; (5) 
conversion to an oxide followed by disposal; and (6) no action. The 
analyses of the long-term storage and disposal alternatives included 
the transportation of the depleted uranium oxide to generic storage or 
disposal sites located 155 mi (250 km), 620 mi (1,000 km), or 3,100 mi 
(5,000 km) from the conversion facilities. DOE analyzed the impacts of 
depleted uranium conversion product disposal using generic assumptions 
about disposal site characteristics, rather than actual characteristics 
for any particular disposal site. A technical

[[Page 15871]]

support document for the PEIS investigated the feasibility of depleted 
uranium disposal at six low-level waste disposal facilities based on 
waste acceptance criteria, available capacity, and disposal cost 
(Depleted Uranium Storage and Disposal Trade Study: Summary Report, 
ORNL/TM-2000/10). This document and subsequent follow-up studies have 
verified that the only currently operating dry-environment, low-level 
waste disposal facilities that are feasible for disposal of the 
depleted uranium oxide conversion product are the NTS and 
EnergySolutions facilities.
    Like the PEIS, site-specific EISs for each conversion facility 
assumed that depleted uranium oxide would be classified as low-level 
waste. This assumption is consistent with a recent ruling by the U.S. 
Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) in the licensing proceeding for a 
commercial uranium enrichment facility (NRC 2005a,b,c,d and 2006a,b). 
The site-specific EISs stated that the disposal facility (or 
facilities) would be (1) selected in a manner consistent with DOE 
policies and orders, and (2) authorized or licensed to receive the 
conversion products by DOE (in conformance with DOE orders), the NRC 
(in conformance with NRC regulations), or an NRC agreement state agency 
(in conformance with state laws and regulations determined to be 
equivalent to NRC regulations).
    DOE is now proposing to amend the site-specific RODs to decide that 
the depleted uranium oxide conversion product may be disposed of at 
either the NTS or the EnergySolutions low-level waste disposal 
facilities. Accordingly, DOE has prepared the draft SA that is the 
subject of this Notice. All other aspects of the depleted 
DUF6 conversion program remain as previously described in 
the site-specific EISs and RODs.
    The draft SA identifies no significant new circumstances or 
information relevant to environmental concerns that bear on DOE's 
decisions on disposal locations or the impacts of those decisions. 
Since issuance of the two site-specific DUF6 conversion 
facility final EISs, the following circumstances have changed. In May 
2006, a contract was signed with Solvay Fluorides, a commercial vendor, 
for purchase of the HF co-product. On June 2, 2006, the NRC issued an 
order that determined that the Envirocare (now EnergySolutions) site 
near Clive, Utah, appears to be suitable for near-term disposal of 
depleted uranium. The transportation campaign has been slightly 
modified to include more cylinders per railcar with fewer shipments per 
year. Impacts from the modified campaign for both operations and 
accident scenarios are projected to be about the same as those 
presented in the site-specific EISs.
    DOE believes, based on the analysis in the draft SA, that disposal 
at either NTS or EnergySolutions low-level waste disposal facilities 
are reasonable alternatives. Regarding the alternative of disposal at 
the EnergySolutions facility, DOE believes that adequate NEPA 
documentation exists to support disposal of any unused depleted uranium 
oxide conversion product as well as for emptied DUF6 
cylinders that would be used for disposal containers and the small 
quantity of CaF2 that would be generated during the 
conversion process. With respect to NTS low-level waste facility, the 
draft SA analyses show that there is adequate NEPA coverage for all 
actions leading up to delivery at the NTS and that site-specific NEPA 
coverage at the NTS is adequate for disposal of up to 60,000 
m3 of unused depleted uranium oxide conversion product. 
Furthermore, upcoming reviews of the NTS site-wide EIS will evaluate 
disposal of additional uranium oxide conversion product volumes at NTS. 
Accordingly, DOE believes that a supplemental EIS (or an environmental 
assessment) is not needed to support amending the site-specific RODs to 
address disposal of the depleted uranium oxide conversion product.
    DOE plans to issue amended RODs under the conversion facility EISs 
no sooner than 30 days after issuance of the final SA. DOE will 
consider all public comments on the draft SA submitted by May 18, 2007.

    Issued in Washington, DC, March 27, 2007.
Mark W. Frei,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Program Planning and Budget.
 [FR Doc. E7-6039 Filed 4-2-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6450-01-P


*****************************************************************
 37 Richmond Register: Safety worries started with whistle blower

Published: April 03, 2007 08:40 am         

By Bryan Marshall Register News Writer

Two or three other employees of the Blue Grass Army Depot have
joined a former worker-turned whistle blower who raised questions
about the plant’s safety.

As an air-monitoring unit operator, Donald Van Winkle of Berea
released an official affidavit Aug. 25, 2005, summarizing his
concerns that leak detection devices for the deadly VX agent at the
depot were not working properly. His complaint was filed under the
Clean Air Act and the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act.

“In February or March of this year, I, along with other BGAD
employees, attended training sessions with the manufacturer of the
air-monitoring equipment we use,” Van Winkle wrote in his affidavit.
“During our training, we learned that the (air) sampling (methods)
being used at BGAD to monitor the seven igloos that store munitions
containing agent VX were incorrect.”

In his affidavit, Van Winkle also revealed that:

• The supervisor of lab operations admitted, in a meeting with more
than a dozen employees, ordering the change in monitors to increase
ease of access even though it was known that the change would
compromise leak detection.

• Conversion pads in the monitors have an effective life of between
10 and 30 days, but are often changed far less frequently.

• Air-monitoring equipment at the depot are at times so poorly
maintained that the units are not fit for operation.

As many as three other employees have contacted Public Employees for
Environmental Responsibility (PEER) — a Washington D.C.-based group
that helps whistle blowers — confirming aspects of Van Winkle’s
claims and raising their own concerns, said Richard Condit, general
counsel for PEER, who would not name the other employees or when
they raised questions.

“There have been some other folks who have raised concerns about how
the laboratory is functioned, whether or not there have been proper
ventilation of hazardous substances through the lab and whether
people have been exposed,” Condit said.

“There are several people at the facility who are concerned about
health issues that they’re seeing in some of their colleagues, some
cancers and other things,” he said. “I don’t know if a health study
is needed or whatever kinds of things are needed to really scope out
what’s going on there.”

PEER began looking closely at the depot about two years ago, Condit
said, after “being tipped off by some folks at the chemical activity
part of (the depot) about monitoring problems and possible exposures
of workers to some forms of chemical warfare agents in storage
there.”

The group ultimately came to represent Van Winkle, who, after filing
his complaint, was only allowed to work on assignments that did not
involve access to areas where chemical warfare agents are stored.

He also was suspended from the Army’s personal liability program,
which requires employees to be emotionally stable, physically
capable and demonstrate reliability and professional competence.

Van Winkle, who left the depot on his own about five months ago,
filed a whistle-blower complaint under the Clean Air Act and the
Re-source Conserv-ation and Re-covery Act.

“Once he began raising these concerns, he was not viewed as being a
team player,” Condit said.

“He basically felt like his job was in jeopardy because, without
that clearance, and without the ability to work in the chemical
area, there were very limited things he could do,” he said. “As a
result, he ended up in a situation where he was very compromised.”

Condit was not surprised that a grand jury has been convened by the
U.S. Justice Department to look into reports of possible criminal
wrongdoing involving chemical weapons storage operations at the
depot.

“(I am) not (surprised) from the concerns we were hearing about the
way the monitoring is done, the issues of following standard
operating procedures and whether or not there was accurate reporting
of the reliability of the monitoring instruments (at the depot,)” he
said. “I think there were enough concerns that anyone who has an
authority to look into the situation is probably going to find some
things that need to be explained.”

Bryan Marshall can be reached at bmarshall@richmondregister.com or
624-6691.
        
© 2006, CNHI

Community Newspaper Holdings, Inc. ? CNHI
*****************************************************************
 38 NAS: Project: Gulf War and Health: Updated Literature Review of Depleted Uranium

PIN: PHPH-H-06-01-A        

Major Unit:

 Institute of Medicine

Sub Unit: Board on Population Health and Public Health Practice

RSO: Mitchell, Abigail

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.


Committee Membership

Meetings
 Meeting 1 - 03/22/2007

Reports having no URL can be seen
at the Public Access Records Office

 Email: info@nas.edu
*****************************************************************
 39 Public Citizen: Groups Challenge Uranium Enrichment Plant's License
 
Date: Tue, 3 Apr 2007 17:35:10 -0500 (CDT)


April 3, 2007

Public Interest Groups File Brief To Challenge License for 
Proposed New Mexico Uranium Enrichment Plant

Louisiana Energy Services' Plant Would Violate Law and NRC Safety 
Regulations

WASHINGTON, D.C. - The Nuclear Information and Resource Service 
(NIRS) and Public Citizen today filed a brief in the District of 
Columbia Court of Appeals challenging the legality of the license 
for Louisiana Energy Services' (LES) proposed uranium enrichment 
plant near Eunice, N.M.

To read the entire press release, visit: 
http://www.citizen.org/pressroom/release.cfm?ID=2410.

### /*Your email ID. <diaEmailID='315438100' thread=5678/>--*/



*****************************************************************
 40 Tri-City Herald: DOE expands comment period by 2 more months

Published Tuesday, April 3rd, 2007

ANNETTE CARY HERALD STAFF WRITER

The Department of Energy will take comments for two additional
months to prepare an environmental study on the Global Nuclear
Energy Partnership.

The deadline to submit comments will be extended from April 11 until
June 4, DOE announced Monday.

"Continuing the environmental scoping process means we will continue
to better understand the environmental conditions under which we
will be operating," Dennis Spurgeon, the assistant secretary for
nuclear energy, said in a statement.

Hearings have been held in Pasco and Hood River as DOE considers
whether to use Hanford to reprocess spent commercial nuclear fuel.
It's considering 13 sites across the nation for at least one of
three proposed facilities.

Washington state has sent DOE a letter emphasizing that the
environmental study -- called an environmental impact statement --
needs to include adequate information and analysis.

"The scope of the GNEP proposal is enormous, and the potential
impacts are long lasting," wrote Jane Hedges, program manager for
the Nuclear Waste Program of the Washington State Department of
Ecology.

If GNEP facilities require permits from the state of Washington to
treat, store or dispose of waste from the project, the state will
need a full evaluation of impacts on human health and the
environment, Hedges wrote.

The state is asking that the study answer 28 questions, including:

w How mature or proven are the technologies being proposed for use?

w Would the vitrification plant be used to treat waste for disposal?

w How much used nuclear fuel might be brought into the state, where
would it be stored and how long would it be stored before processing?

w Would reprocessing waste be classified as high-level radioactive
waste?

w What emissions would facilities generate?

w Would any facilities be built near the Columbia River?

w What routes would be used to transport used fuel rods and waste to
and from Hanford?

w How will DOE reconcile the continued use of Hanford for GNEP with
budget shortfalls and schedule delays in Hanford cleanup?

The Hanford nuclear reservation is being considered for all three
facilities proposed under GNEP. A nuclear waste fuel recycling
center is proposed to separate used nuclear fuel into reusable and
waste components and then manufacture new fuel from the reusable
components.

An advanced recycling reactor would be built to use the recycled
fuel, producing electricity while destroying radioactive waste that
otherwise would have to be stored at an national repository such as
Yucca Mountain, Nev.

DOE also is proposing an advanced fuel cycle research facility to
develop recycling processes. Supporters of Hanford's Fast Flux Test
Facility would like the reactor restarted to help with the research.

Besides destroying waste, GNEP also has an international component.

It's proposed by the Bush administration to ensure reliable fuel
services while limiting the spread of nuclear weapons. The United
States would cooperate with countries that have advanced nuclear
programs to supply nuclear fuel to other countries that refrain from
pursuing enrichment or recycling of fuel.

&copy 2007 Tri-City Herald, Associated Press & Other Wire Services
*****************************************************************
 41 Eureka Reporter: Spent fuel facility to break ground

4/2/2007
 
The Pacific Gas & Electric Co. announced Monday that it is preparing
to break ground on its Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation
to be constructed on the site of the Humboldt Bay Power Plant.

According to a news release issued by PG&E, “The ISFSI will consist
of five dry casks, into which all spent fuel from the retired
nuclear power plant at the site will be stored safely.”

The facility should be ready for the storage of nuclear rods in
2008, the release stated.

“Construction of the ISFSI is significant because it will allow the
decommissioning and eventual dismantling of the nuclear unit to
continue, with dismantlement expected to start in 2010,” the release
stated.

PG&E officials and local dignitaries are expected to attend a
ground-breaking ceremony Wednesday.

 
Copyright (C) 2005, The Eureka Reporter. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 42 Croatia: Javno: HSS: We Do Not Need A Nuclear Waste Dump

NUCLEAR WASTE DUMP

Croatian Peasant Party's Marijana Petir and Leo Colan opposed the 
decision to create a nuclear waste dump on Trgovska gora 
mountain.

Daria Lešić

On behalf of the Croatian Peasant Party (HSS), Marijana Petir, as 
the Party's representative in the central Croatia region, said 
that she was shocked and embittered by the decision to turn the 
mountain Trgovinska gora in the Dvor municipality into a nuclear 
waste dump. 

"The area has a huge potential for tourism. Trgovinska gora, 
along with the river Una, should be declared the region's nature 
park," thinks Petir. 

She explained that there was no need for a nuclear waste dump in 
Croatia because estimates show that the nuclear power plant Krsko 
only produce 50 cubic metres of radioactive waste. 

"It is not normal to build a dump which would have a 18,000 cubic 
metres capacity for only 50 cubic metres of waste that go to 
Croatia from the Krsko plant," pointed out the HSS regional 
representative for central Croatia. 

She continued by saying that she was not dismissing the 
possibility that, by planning to build a dump, Croatia was taking 
on half of the waste from Slovenia. 

"The two countries must agree on the potential location of the 
radioactive waste dump, but it should not be in Croatia. We 
therefore suggest that it be in a third country," Petir thinks. 

She mentioned that she did not believe prime minister Sanader's 
statements rejecting Trgovinska gora as a potential nuclear waste 
dump because, as she says, "so far he has shown a lack of concern 
for the inhabitants of the County of Sisak – Moslavina."    

"Sanader promised a highway between Zagreb and Sisak and he did 
not fulfil his promise. Also, the prime minister did not prevent 
the pollution from the INA refinery in Sisak," said Petir, HSS 
president in the Sisak - Moslavina County.

She asked the prime minister to do what he had publicly announced 
before it was too late. 

HSS president in the Dvor municipality Teo Colan added that the 
municipality had not done anything to prevent the creation of a 
waste dump on Trgovinska gora. 

"Dvor's problem is that no one reacts while 'the holy cow' in 
politics in the area is bringing the Croatian Democratic Union 
(HDZ) and Independent Democratic Serb Party (SDSS) closer 
together," concluded Colak. 

Published: April 03, 2007 17:33h


Copyright © 2006-2007 Javno.com   All rights reserved. IMPRESSUM     
*****************************************************************
 43 Chillicothe Gazette: GNEP comment period extended

www.chillicothegazette.com - Chillicothe, OH

Tuesday, April 3, 2007   

By ASHLEY LYKINS Gazette Staff Writer

PIKETON -For a few months longer, residents will get to have 
their voices and opinions regarding the Global Nuclear Energy 
Partnership heard and put on the record.

The U.S. Department of Energy announced Monday that comments for 
GNEP's Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement will now be 
accepted until June 4 rather than the originally scheduled April 
4.

The statement will investigate impacts GNEP facilities could have on
the environment, such as those on land use, air quality, accidents
and terrorism. The proposed facilities, an advanced nuclear fuel
recycling center and an advanced recycling reactor, could be built
on the Energy Department reservation in Piketon.

The center would divide nuclear waste into its reusable and
non-reusable parts, and the reactor would demolish radioactive
aspects of the fuel and generate electricity. This process would
reduce the amount of nuclear waste to be stored permanently,
according to the Southern Ohio Nuclear Integration Cooperative, a
group that supports the possibility of GNEP's presence in the area.

GNEP also would let nuclear-capable countries, such as the U.S. and
France, provide nuclear fuel to other countries as long as they
didn't pursue their own nuclear programs.

The statement will also explore alternatives to GNEP.

"Continuing the environmental scoping process means we will continue
to better understand the environmental conditions under which we
will be operating," said Dennis Spurgeon, assistant secretary for
nuclear energy, in a press release. "We have seen strong support for
GNEP all across the country, and it's encouraging to hear that an
increasing number of Americans recognize the growing need for
nuclear energy: a safe, affordable and emissions-free power source."

Piketon is one of 13 sites that could possibly be home to GNEP.

"We are very pleased they are going to extend the comment period,"
said Greg Simonton, director of the Southern Ohio Diversification
Initiative. The group is one of two members of SONIC. "I believe
people having the chance to go to public meetings and understanding
more about it ... is a good move on the Department of Energy's part."

Extending the allotted comment period, however, has been a
possibility since the beginning, said Julie Rouggiero, a spokeswoman
for the Energy Department.

"I think this has always been an option," she said. "We want
everyone who wants to be heard to be heard."

Geoffrey Sea, co-founder of Southern Ohio Neighbors Group, and the
members of his group have maintained the Piketon site will simply be
a nuclear "waste dump" and nuclear waste will be shipped to the site
and stored.

"The DOE gave the extension precisely so they have time to get
Congress to approve interim waste storage at Piketon before the
public has a chance to comment on it," said Sea. "We urge people to
get their comments in as soon as possible."

Sea also urged those who comment to send copies of their submissions
to his group at shippsong@aol.com.

SONIC was one of 11 groups to receive a grant to perform its own
siting study to determine whether Piketon would be appropriate for
GNEP facilities. Its study is due May 31 and information in it may
be used in the Programmatic Environmental Statement.

It's application for funding is available at its Web site on
www.safesonic.net.

A draft of the statement is slated for this summer, and public
comment on it will follow in the fall. The final statement is
scheduled to be released in late spring of 2008. The Energy
Department's decision for GNEP's location will be released in summer
2008.

SONIC will be conducting two more public meetings for its siting
study. They will be:

6 to 9 p.m. April 9 at the Plumbers and Pipe Fitters Hall in
Portsmouth.

6 to 9 p.m. April 10 at Ohio University-Chillicothe's Shoemaker
Center.

Copyright ©2007 Chillicothe Gazette
*****************************************************************
 44 FR DOE: Notice GNEP extension of comments

Notice of Extension of Time to Submit Scoping Comments on the 
Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement for the Global Nuclear 
Energy Partnership

Doc E7-6175

[Federal Register: April 3, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 63)] 
[Notices] [Page 15871-15872] From the Federal Register Online via 
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr03ap07-46]                         

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

AGENCY: Office of Nuclear Energy, U.S. Department of Energy.

ACTION: Notice of extension of time to submit scoping comments.

SUMMARY: In response to public requests, the Department of Energy (DOE) 
announces an extension of time to submit comments on the proposed 
scope, alternatives, and environmental issues to be analyzed in the 
Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement for the Global Nuclear 
Energy Partnership (GNEP PEIS). This date has been extended to June 4, 
2007, thereby giving an additional 61 days to provide comments.

ADDRESSES: Please direct comments, suggestions, or relevant information 
on the GNEP PEIS to: Mr. Timothy A. Frazier, GNEP PEIS Document 
Manager, Office of Nuclear Energy, U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 
Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585-0119; Telephone: 866-
645-7803, Fax: 866-645-7807, e-mail to: GNEP-PEIS@nuclear.energy.gov. 
Please mark envelopes, faxes, and e-mails: ``GNEP PEIS Comments.'' 
Additional information on GNEP may be found at http://www.gnep.energy.gov
.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For general information on DOE's 
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process, please contact: Ms. 
Carol M. Borgstrom, Director, Office of NEPA Policy and Compliance, GC-
20, U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., 
Washington, DC 20585-0103, 202-586-4600, or by leaving a message at 1-
800-472-2756. Additional information regarding DOE's NEPA activities is 
available on the DOE NEPA Web site at http://www.eh.doe.gov/nepa This notice is available at http://www.eh.doe.gov/nepa. and http://

http://www.gnep.energy.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On January 4, 2007, DOE published a Notice 
of Intent (NOI) (72 FR 331) to prepare the GNEP PEIS pursuant to the 
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 4321 
et seq., and the Council on Environmental Quality's (CEQ's) and DOE's 
regulations implementing NEPA, 40 CFR parts 1500-1508 and 10 CFR part 
1021, respectively. With the publication of the NOI, DOE began the PEIS 
scoping period and invited Federal, state, and local governments, 
Native American Tribes, industry, other organizations, and the public 
to provide comments on the proposed scope, alternatives, and 
environmental issues to be analyzed in the GNEP PEIS. In response to 
public requests, DOE is now extending the time for submittal of scoping 
comments an additional 61 days from April 4, 2007, to June 4, 2007. DOE 
will consider all comments received during the scoping period in 
preparing the GNEP PEIS. Late comments will be considered to the extent 
practicable.

[[Page 15872]]

    Issued in Washington, DC, on March 29, 2007.
Dennis R. Spurgeon,
Assistant Secretary for Nuclear Energy.
 [FR Doc. E7-6175 Filed 4-2-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6450-01-P


*****************************************************************
 45 Reuters: U.N. urges checks against radioactive scrap metal 

Tue Apr 3, 2007 5:47PM BST

GENEVA (Reuters) - The United Nations on Tuesday issued guidelines
aimed at reducing the growing risk of radioactive scrap getting into
steel and other recycled metals.

The voluntary guidelines aim to help scrap yards and metal smelters
as well as customs, regulatory authorities and transport firms to
monitor radiation and combat the problem, the U.N. Economic
Commission for Europe said.

When buildings including hospitals and plants constructed in the
1950s have been demolished, sometimes radiation-emitting materials
are found, according to the ECE's Martin Magold.

"It is a general problem, not just in eastern Europe and former
countries of the Soviet Union. There have been incidents in the
United States and China," he told Reuters.

The ECE said sellers of scrap metal should carry out radiation
monitoring of industrial premises being dismantled and issue
certificate with results.

Customs also needed to monitor shipments. while national regulatory
bodies should lay down regulations on the safe storage, transport
and disposal of radioactive scrap.

Some 184 million tonnes of recycled scrap metal was traded
internationally in 2004, but no unified guidelines to check
radioactivity in recycled scrap metal had existed previously, the
agency said in a statement.

With 50 percent of steel being produced form recycled sources,
"monitors are increasingly detecting radiation in scrap metal", it
said.  

Some of the radiation results from natural sources and represents 
low levels, but some cases may be serious and require costly 
decontamination.

Experts agreed on the recommendations after analysing responses 
to a questionnaire sent to more than 60 countries. Fewer than 
half of scrap yards were reported as checking imports and exports 
of scrap metal for radiation, the ECE said.


© Reuters 2007. All rights reserved. | Learn more about Reuters
*****************************************************************
 46 AU ABC: Garrett, Rudd still at odds over uranium. 

03/04/2007. ABC News Online

Labor's environment spokesman Peter Garrett says he is not changing
his position on extending uranium mining in Australia.

The ALP's policy on no new uranium mines is due to be debated at the
party's annual conference later this month.

Opposition Leader Kevin Rudd wants to dump the policy but Mr Garrett
is standing firm.

"My position on uranium is clear and I'll take that position to the
national conference," he said.

"I think there needs to be an open and healthy debate, and I do not
believe that Australia should be any further into nuclear activities
than we are already."




*****************************************************************
 47 Oregon: Daily Vanguard: Tight-lipped toxic truckin? - 

Arts and Culture

Nuclear waste transport in Oregon

Joanna Hofer

Issue date: 4/3/07 Section: Arts and Culture

Did you know that plans were under consideration to truck nuclear
waste through Oregon, through the Gorge, up to the ailing Hanford
Nuclear Reservation? Not much has been said about it in the local
media until last week when a local television station mentioned it
briefly--so briefly, in fact, that when I decided to search for more
information, I found nothing. After several Google and site-specific
searches yielding nothing, I was beginning to think I had
hallucinated the whole thing. Maybe it was some kind of spring break
delirium?

After I heard the report, or hallucinated the report, whichever the
case might be, I began to imagine the scenario of transporting spent
nuclear fuel through the Columbia River Gorge. If you've ever been
down I-84, there is no question that this is a remarkable stretch of
road. It runs from Portland down nearly the entire length of the
Columbia River, nestled next to the rocky crags of the Gorge until
it opens out onto the brown rolling hills of the Palouse. Here
"stunning" is an understatement. I began to imagine a handsomely
paid truck driver winding his way down this highway. Then I imagined
strong gusts of wind, the kind that nearly blew my car off the road
last year, the kind that big rigs pull over and stop to wait out.
Then I began to imagine a wild-eyed meth addict or a droopy lidded
drunk driving recklessly fast in the wrong lane. I began to wonder
if it was really a good idea to transport spent nuclear fuel through
the Gorge to be "recycled" at Hanford. Nuclear energy is "clean"
energy, unless its byproducts are spilled all over the place.

So why no news? Why no media coverage to answer my questions? If
spent nuclear fuel could be transported through the Gorge eastward
to Hanford, where would it be coming from? Would it be transported
through Portland? Is the Oregon Department of Energy for or against
this proposal? How much waste would be transported? How often? Where
from? How long would it be stored at Hanford? I Googled and Googled
and got nothing.

Finally, the Department of Energy (DOE) came to my aid with its
Global Nuclear Energy Partnership (GNEP) website located at
gnep.gov. The GNEP is President Bush's "Advanced Energy Initiative"
which is charged with the mission of reducing "U.S. reliance on
imported oil by changing the way we power our cars, homes and
businesses."

Historical background

November 2006, the Hanford Nuclear Reservation was one of 11 sites
chosen for review by the DOE for the potential to become an advanced
nuclear fuel recycling center.

January 2007, the DOE allocated $10 million for 11 commercial and
public consortia to conduct detailed studies for integrated spent
fuel recycling facilities under President Bush's GNEP.

March 26, 2007, a public hearing was held in Hood River to discuss a
DOE environmental study conducted by the GNEP. April 4 is the
deadline for submitting comments entitled "GNEP PEIS Comments" to
GNEPPEIS@nuclear.energy.gov

On, May 30, the site characterization report is due to the
Department of Energy.

What is a nuclear fuel recycling center?

According to the DOE, an advanced nuclear fuel recycling center
would separate usable uranium and transuranics from spent light
water reactor fuel and convert them into a new fuel called
transmutation fuel. The new fuel could then be used in an advanced
recycling reactor. The GNEP explains, "This advanced recycling
reactor is a fast reactor that would demonstrate the ability to
reuse and consume materials recovered from spent nuclear fuel,
including long-lived elements that would otherwise be disposed of in
a geologic repository." What do they mean when they say,
"demonstrate the ability?" Is this an experiment?

Possible advantages

Reprocessing or recycling used nuclear fuel has the advantages of
being an additional source of electricity and is a way to use waste
that would otherwise be stored at a national high level nuclear
waste repository. If Hanford were chosen as the site of recycling,
8,000 new jobs would be created in the region.

The team consortia in charge of the Hanford study are Tri-City
Industrial Development Council and Columbia Basin Consulting Group.
According to the GNEP website, the award amount specifically
allocated to the consortia for the Hanford study was $1,020,000.
This money will be used to study the "site and nearby land uses,
demographics, ecological and habitat assessment, threatened or
endangered species, historical, archaeological and cultural
resources, geology and seismology, weather and climate, and
regulatory and permitting requirements. A programmatic environmental
impact statement (PEIS) will be made evaluating potential
environmental impacts from each proposed GNEP facility."

Possible disadvantages

Senator Ron Wyden, Democrat of Oregon, was reported by the Tri-City
Herald to be against using Hanford as a repository for more nuclear
waste since the DOE has not yet decontaminated the site from its
past production of plutonium for nuclear weapons.

According to the local environmental organization, Columbia
Riverkeeper, utilizing Hanford as a nuclear recycling center would
mean: "trucking dangerous nuclear waste through Portland, I-84 and
Hood River, starting up a risky environmental nuclear reactor at
Hanford, generating stockpiles of weapons-usable plutonium, posing
new terrorist threats to the region, spending tens of billions of
taxpayers dollars to subsidize the U.S. commercial nuclear
industry's storage problems."

What was the reason the Portland mainstream media did not utter more
than a sentence about the potential for transport of nuclear waste
through our state? Why doesn't a site-specific search of local media
websites including The Oregonian yield any results? Is their
perception that this topic is dull? Granted once one gets into catch
phrases like "public hearing," "environmental study," "GNEP," "DOE,"
and "consortia," I have to reach for the toothpicks to prop my eyes
open. However, once propped, the topics of lights, power, human
strife, energy and potentials for extreme environmental devastation
get my attention. It seems that keeping the public informed on this
issue is important. After all, the deadline to comment is April 4,
tomorrow. Why no news?

Our Poison Planet

For more information on the nuclear discussion, Our Poison Planet: A
Conference on the Nuclear Poisoning of Our Planet During War and
Peace will be held at PSU in Lincoln Hall on April 14 from 9:30 a.m.
-- 3 p.m. Speakers will include Thomas Fasy, MD, Ph.D., Doug Rokke,
Ph.D., Greg deBruler and Dennis Kyne. Topics of discussion will
include depleted uranium, Hanford Nuclear Reservation, Gulf War
Syndrome, cancer, birth defects, deceptions and sustainability of
life on the planet. For more information e-mail: 911@poisonplanet.org

Related websites:

Tri-City Herald, www.tri-cityherald.com

Global Energy Nuclear Partnership, www.gnep.gov

Oregon Department of Energy, www.oregon.gov/ENERGY/

Columbia Riverkeeper, www.columbiariverkeeper.org

Heart of America Northwest, www.hoanw.org

International Panel on Fissile Materials, www.fissilematerials.org

Alliance for Nuclear Accountability, www.ananuclear.org

© Daily Vanguard
*****************************************************************
 48 CBC News: Governments spending $25M to clean up uranium mines

CANADA | SASKATCHEWAN

Last Updated: Tuesday, April 3, 2007 | 2:01 PM CT

A multimillion dollar cleanup of abandoned uranium mines is expected
to start this summer in northern Saskatchewan.

The federal and provincial governments are sharing the $24.6 million
cost of cleaning up some 40 mines near Uranium City that were
abandoned in the 1950s and 1960s.

Signs outside an abandoned mine near Uranium City warn about
radioactivity.

(Karoline Benoit/Radio-Canada)

The old Gunnar mine, south of the community in the extreme northwest
corner of the province, gets the worst marks from Saskatchewan
Environment.

The mine buildings are in ruin, four million tonnes of tailings are
not properly confined and the waste leaks into nearby lakes, like
Lake Athabasca, according to the department.
 
Most of the money will go to clean up Gunnar, while the rest will be
used to clean up 36 smaller abandoned mines.

Different approaches for the cleanup will be taken, depending on the
mine, according to Bill Olsen, project manager at Saskatchewan
Research Council.

"There are a number of different ways it can be done based on
geography, and cement caps is certainly one of them, putting waste
rocks in the hole is another one, and for the more remote sites,
there is even some foam-type application that can be used," he said.

While there were thousands of people living in Uranium City when
surrounding mines were in production, today there's only about 80.

One resident, Adam German, says the work should have been done a
long time ago.

"When you leave open mines like that, it's just a danger to
everybody, so I'm all for this cleanup thing," he said.

The research council says the smaller mines should be fixed in the
next six years. The cleanup of Gunnar should be done by 2015.


About CBC · About CBC News · About CBC.ca · Jobs · Shop · Business
Copyright &copy; CBC 2007
*****************************************************************
 49 RIA Novosti: Uzbekistan ratifies treaty on nuclear-free Central Asia

11:26 | 03/ 04/ 2007
 
TASHKENT, April 3 (RIA Novosti) - Uzbek President Islam Karimov has
completed the ratification of a treaty declaring Central Asia a
nuclear-weapon-free zone, the presidential press office said Tuesday.

The accord, signed by the five post-Soviet countries of the volatile
region September 8, 2006, passed through the lower house of
Uzbekistan's parliament in January of this year, and was approved by
the upper house in March. The treaty took nine years to negotiate.

Officials from Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and
Turkmenistan signed the pact at a ceremony in the northern Kazakh
town of Semipalatinsk, home to now-defunct Soviet-era ranges for
testing nuclear bombs.

However, the three Western nuclear powers refused to sign an
accompanying protocol to support the new treaty.

The United States, Britain and France said they would not put their
weight behind the pact unless provisions were scrapped that
hypothetically allowed Russia to deploy nuclear weapons in Central
Asia in a crisis.

Those provisions were carried over from an older post-Soviet
security pact, the 1992 Tashkent Treaty.

For more information in Russian&nbsp;

RIA Novosti
*****************************************************************
 50 SF New Mexican: LANL: Bingaman aims to boost lab, science funding

Sen. Jeff Bingaman, D-N.M.

Andy Lenderman | The New Mexican April 3, 2007

LOS ALAMOS -- Los Alamos National Laboratory can help solve major
problems facing the country, from tracking the flow of nuclear
materials to developing better energy sources to rely upon, U.S.
Sen. Jeff Bingaman said Monday.

Bingaman addressed scientists at the lab and small-business owners
at Los Alamos Chamber of Commerce, and sent the message that he's
working to increase federal funding for science work nationally and
at the lab.

"My message was very simple," Bingaman said to a crowd of
small-business owners and other community members. "We need ... in
Washington to get back to a focus on the major long-term challenges
that we face in this country. I think we've been diverted from those
challenges in recent years, both with the war in Iraq and to some
extent with the war on terror."

Bingaman said the lab has "a great deal to contribute" in
determining the future of the nuclear weapons stockpile, ensuring
that nuclear weapons are not used in the coming decades and
"transitioning our economy both in the way that we produce and
transmit and use energy, so as to deal not only with our economic
security but to deal with the very real problem of greenhouse gas
emissions."

Bingaman chairs the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee,
which has great influence over national energy policy.

He said the committee will address large-scale demonstrations of
carbon capture and storage technologies;

more promotion of biofuels like ethanol; and tax incentives for
producing energy from renewable sources like the sun.

Bingaman also covered a worrisome subject in Northern New Mexico
today -- the possibility of layoffs to permanent workers at the lab.
Bingaman said it was somewhat surprising when he was asked about
that, and he then asked Lab Director Michael Anastasio about it.

"He said that he has repeated numerous times that there are no
layoffs planned and there is no plan to plan for layoffs," Bingaman
said.

Last year, the company that manages the lab announced 350 to 550
layoffs to contract workers. The lab's permanent work force of about
8,920 workers was not affected. Instead, lab managers have been
saving money by not filling some vacancies when workers leave.

The lab's overall budget is about $2.2 billion. President Bush's
proposed budget for the 2008 fiscal year would cut Los Alamos' money
from the Department of Energy by about 1 percent, or $18 million,
compared to the 2006 fiscal year.

Contact Andy Lenderman at 995-3827 or alenderman@sfnewmexican.com.


Copyright 2007 The New Mexican, Inc.
*****************************************************************
 51 Tri-City Herald: Risky Hanford tank emptied (w/ video)

Salt mantis cleans up Tank S-112

Published Tuesday, April 3rd, 2007

By Annette Cary, Herald staff writer

Hanford workers have finished emptying radioactive waste from an
underground tank that posed one of the highest risks to the Columbia
River, according to CH2M Hill Hanford Group.

Tank S-112 contained mostly radioactive salts that could dissolve
and move through the ground water to the river if the aging tank
were to leak.

The tank held 614,000 gallons of radioactive waste when work started
in 2003. That's more than double the waste that's been removed from
all six of the other tanks that have emptied to date.

CH2M Hill is still waiting for confirmation from the Washington
State Department of Ecology that the tank has been emptied to the
standards of the legally binding Tri-Party Agreement.

For more on this story, read Wednesday's Herald.
======================================================================
Get the latest breaking news from the Tri-City Herald delivered to
your RSS reader or RSS-enabled browser. To find out more, go to our
RSS information page.


&copy 2007 Tri-City Herald, Associated Press & Other Wire Services
*****************************************************************
 52 Tri-City Herald: DOE relents in dispute with tribes, states

Published Tuesday, April 3rd, 2007

By Annette Cary, Herald staff writer

The federal government has reversed its policy in a long-running
disagreement with the tribes and states of Oregon and Washington and
agreed to do a natural resource damage assessment at the Hanford
nuclear reservation.

The assessment will look at damage caused by unintentional releases
of radioactive and hazardous chemicals from the nuclear reservation
to plants, animals and the Columbia River.

The states and the Yakama, Nez Perce and Umatilla tribes had filed a
lawsuit in federal court regarding natural resource damage issues,
including a demand that an assessment be done.

The Department of Energy had argued in legal documents that it's too
early to do a natural resource damage assessment. Once cleanup is
completed, federal Superfund law allows other governments -- such as
tribes and states -- to file claims against DOE if damages remain.

However, DOE announced Tuesday that it and other federal agencies
now plan to conduct a phased assessment of damages. The assessment
may be used to guide cleanup decisions.

For more information, read Wednesday's Herald.

&copy 2007 Tri-City Herald, Associated Press & Other Wire Services
*****************************************************************
 53 KnoxNews: ORNL readies reactor for restart

DOE to conduct review; new equipment passing tests so far, official
says

By FRANK MUNGER, munger@knews.com

April 3, 2007

OAK RIDGE - After being idle for more than a year, the world's 
most powerful research reactor could be back in operation this 
spring.

Kelly Beierschmitt, director of nuclear operations at Oak Ridge 
National Laboratory, said restart of the High Flux Isotope 
Reactor is tentatively scheduled for May 8-9.

That schedule depends on the outcome of a readiness review by the
U.S. Department of Energy.

The DOE safety review is supposed to start Monday and will probably
last a couple of weeks, Beierschmitt said. If the inspection team
identifies any issues that require fixing, that could take another
couple of weeks, he said.

"Things are going well," the ORNL official said. "Our reactor is
fueled, and we've been running pressure tests and flow tests. We're
essentially preparing the reactor for restart."

The 85-megawatt reactor was shut down in January 2006 for
maintenance and a series of upgrades, including installation of a
new cold source to improve the reactor's research capabilities.

The cold source will slow the movement of neutrons emanating from
the reactor core and allow scientists to do neutron-scattering
experiments in ways that heretofore were unachievable. The cold
source will use liquid helium and hydrogen to cool chambers to about
minus 425 degrees Fahrenheit.

The reactor upgrades took longer than anticipated. What was
initially described as a five-month project has turned into a
15-month project.

Beierschmitt said the most recent delay involved an issue with the
pressure controls in a hydrogen loop of the cold source. The system
would have gotten a passing grade, but it wasn't up to the desired
standard, he said.

"We were able to change two actuators and get rock-solid pressure
control," he said.

The reactor's new equipment has been performing well during a
sequence of demanding tests in recent months, Beierschmitt said.
Some of those tests used a special heat assembly to mimic the heat
coming from an operating reactor, he said.

Once the ORNL reactor is restarted, it will be slowly brought back
to power and undergo additional testing before full-scale research
activities resume.

Senior writer Frank Munger may be reached at 865-342-6329.

 Copyright 2007, Knoxville News Sentinel Co.
*****************************************************************
 54 OregonLive.com: DOE will begin Hanford damage review

Posted by The Associated Press April 03, 2007 13:36PM

YAKIMA -- In an abrupt reversal, the federal government has agreed
to begin assessing the damage to natural resources caused by
plutonium production at the Hanford nuclear reservation, the
nation's most contaminated nuclear site, The Associated Press has
learned.

Such injury assessments typically cost millions of dollars and often
serve as a precursor to paying monetary damages.

In 2002, the Yakama Nation sued the U.S. Department of Energy, which
manages Hanford cleanup, seeking restoration of soil, water, plant
and animal life that may have been damaged by radioactive waste and
other hazardous substances. The Nez Perce Tribe later joined the
lawsuit, as did Washington and Oregon.

The Energy Department fought back, arguing it was too soon to
determine if there were injuries to the environment or whether
reparations should be paid.

But the agency said Tuesday it would begin assessing those damages
in collaboration with two other federal agencies, the states and the
Indian tribes.

"The only change was how much we're willing to do when," Keith
Klein, manager of the Energy Department's Richland Operations
office, told the AP. "We're willing to do more, sooner, now, because
we believe we've found ways to do it that won't impact our cleanup
obligations and schedules or add unduly to the taxpayer cost."

The federal government created Hanford in the 1940s as part of the
top-secret Manhattan Project to build the atomic bomb. Today, it is
the nation's most contaminated nuclear site, with cleanup costs
expected to top $50 billion.


The Oregonian - The Oregonian Business Center | Hillsboro Argus

© 2007 Oregon Live LLC. All Rights Reserved. Use of this site
*****************************************************************
 55 KNDO/KNDU: CH2M Hill Cleans Out Seventh Single-Shelled Tank

Tri-Cities, Yakima, WA | 

 Another Tank Emptied Out At Hanford

RICHLAND, Wash.- Cleanup work is complete on another of the 
Hanford site's 149 single-shelled tanks.

It's the seventh that's been completed, and more waste was 
removed from tank S-112 than all others combined.

More than 600 thousand gallons of radioactive waste was removed 
since the project began in 2003.

The waste is being treated and transferred to less leak prone 
double-shelled tanks.

***


DOE Will Conduct Study on Environmental Impact of Hanford Cleanup
The Department of Energy is working with the Commerce and Interior
Departments to study damage to natural resources caused by Hanford
cleanup.

 All content © Copyright 2000 - 2007 WorldNow and KNDO/KNDU. All
Rights Reserved.
*****************************************************************
 56 DOE: DOE Signing Paves the Way for Funding, Construction of 
Innovative Clean Coal Plant in Florida

April 3, 2007

Advanced Technology System Deemed One of the Cleanest, Most
Efficient in the World

WASHINGTON, DC — The U.S. Secretary of Energy Samuel W. Bodman today
announced the signing of a Record of Decision that clears the path
for construction of a $569-million, 285-megawatt coal-fired power
plant that will be one of the cleanest, most efficient plants of its
kind in the world.  The plant will be co-owned by Southern Power
Company, the Orlando Utilities Commission (OUC), and Kellogg, Brown
and Root and will be located at OUC’s existing Stanton Energy Center
near Orlando, FL.  DOE will provide 41% of the funding, or $235
million, through a cooperative agreement with Southern Power.

“The innovative technologies we are funding through the President
Bush’s Clean Coal Power Initiative hold the promise of generating
clean, reliable, and affordable electricity in the United States,
utilizing our most abundant natural resource, coal”, Secretary
Bodman said.  “Southern Company’s proven combined-cycle approach
increases the amount of electricity that can be generated from a
given amount of fuel and takes us to the next step in implementing
this technology on a wide scale, commercial basis.”

This is one of three projects moving forward under the second round
of the President’s Clean Coal Power Initiative (CCPI), a 10-year,
$2-billion demonstration program that seeks to deliver innovative
technologies to improve the environmental performance of new and
existing coal-fired power plants in the United States.  The
technologies developed under the CCPI program will help maintain the
Nation’s abundant coal resources as a cornerstone of our future
domestic energy portfolio, particularly for power generation.

The other projects are Excelsior Energy Inc. and ConocoPhillips’
531-megawatt Mesaba Energy Project at Hoyt Lakes, MN and the Pegasus
Technology Project, which combines Pegasus Technologies Inc. with
Texas Genco in a joint effort to demonstrate technology advancements
supporting the President’s Clean Skies Initiative calling for
dramatic reductions in power plant emissions, particularly mercury,
by 2018.

The Florida plant will demonstrate an advanced power generation
system that uses a form of integrated gasification-combined cycle
technology and state-of-the-art emission controls.  The transport
gasifier technology to be demonstrated at the plant is unique among
coal gasification technologies in that it cost-effectively uses
low-rank coals, as well as coals with a high moisture or high ash
content.  These coals comprise half of the proven U.S. and world
reserves.

Integrated gasification combined-cycle technology will be at the
heart of FutureGen, a $1 billion prototype power plant that will
integrate a suite of technologies to slash emissions while producing
both electricity and hydrogen from coal.  Emissions from the plant
will be reduced almost to zero, solid wastes will be converted to
useful commercial products, and as much as 90 percent of the CO2
produced by the plant is expected to be captured initially.  The
FutureGen plant will also serve as the proving ground for even more
advanced technologies, including devices that may eventually capture
up to 100 percent of CO2 emissions.

For more information, please visit http://www.fossil.energy.gov/.

Media contact(s): Craig Stevens, (202) 586-4940 

 U.S. Department of Energy | 1000 Independence Ave., SW | 
Washington, DC 20585 1-800-dial-DOE | f/202-586-4403

    
*****************************************************************

NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 this 
material is distributed without profit or payment to those who 
have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for 
non-profit research and educational purposes only. For more 
information go to: 
<http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml> 
    
*****************************************************************