***************************************************************** 04/09/07 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 15.83 ***************************************************************** 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 US accused of using neutron bombs in Iraq 09 Apr 2007 2 BBC NEWS: Iran 'enters new nuclear phase' 3 IRIB PERSIAN NEWS: Iranians fete more nuclear advances 4 Reuters: Iran will review atomic NPT membership if pushed 5 Reuters: CHRONOLOGY: Iran's nuclear program | 6 Reuters: U.S. says Iran statements show Tehran's defiance | 7 UPI: U.S. professional groups cut Iran links 8 UPI: Iran has nuclear holiday 9 Sunday Herald: Iran has shares in French nuclear facility 10 Guardian Unlimited: Fears over Iran's nuclear programme 11 UPI: North Korea nuke talks likely delayed 12 US: Los Angeles Times: Party-issued laptops now a White House headac 13 RIA Novosti: Searching for alternative sources of energy 14 UPI: Russia launches new line of submarines 15 Japan Times: Russia's atomic chief wants to tie up with Japan on fue 16 UPI: India to test long-range missile this week NUCLEAR REACTORS 17 US: TMIA loses hearing; vows to fight on 18 The Hindu: 8 pressurised heavy water reactors to be set up 19 Times of India: NTPC eyes 6,000 MW N-power- 20 US: Times Leader: Anti-nuke group's hearing is denied 21 US: Star-News: Brunswick prepares nuclear-fuel site | 22 US: Reuters.com: PG&E Calif. Diablo Canyon 2 reactor back at full | 23 BusinessWeek: Russia, Rusal plans nuclear plant 24 US: FR NRC: Union of Concerned Scientists; Receipt of Petition for R 25 US: NRC: NRC to Discuss 2006 Performance Assessment for Palisades Nu 26 US: MSNBC.com: How NRC unit became gun-toting cops - U.S. News - 27 Hemscott: Rusal says planning nuclear plant in far-east Russia 28 US: CBS News: France: Vive Les Nukes, 29 US: 10NBC: Ginna is running out of room for its spent fuel rods 30 Chennai Online News: 8 heavy water reactors in 11th Plan 31 Chennai Online News: India, Russia civil nuke cooperation 32 US: NewsBlaze: NRC Schedules Conference With Areva to Discuss Wash. 33 UPI: Outside View: Helen Calidcott: Growing nuclear threat 34 Bangkok Post: Nuclear gets green light NUCLEAR SECURITY NUCLEAR SAFETY 35 US: Las Vegas SUN: Navy veteran in Las Vegas fighting for radiation 36 US: The Press Republican: Atomic fallout 37 US: FR DHHS: Irradiation in the Production, Processing and Handling 38 US: reviewjournal.com: RADIATION EXPOSURE NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE 39 RGJ.com: Transporting waste will put state at risk 40 US: Chillicothe Gazette: REMINDER: Piketon meetings set for tonight, 41 Manitowoc Herald Times Reporter: Nuke waste forum focus 42 US: Reuters: FACTBOX: Key facts about uranium enrichment 43 US: Star Phoenix: Mine cleanup to begin 44 US: StockInterview.com: New ISR Processing Technology Could Help Boo PEACE 45 US: Citizens Education Project: Will New UK Trident Lead to N-Tests US DEPT. OF ENERGY 46 Hanford News: State to discuss cleanup deadlines 47 Hanford News: Bill sets upstate office: Hanford workers, others coul 48 Hanford News: Nuclear agency to review leak at Richland plant 49 NAS: Project: Development and Implementation of a Cleanup Technology 50 KnoxNews: NRC gives thumbs up to nuclear plant ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** FULL NEWS STORIES ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** 1 US accused of using neutron bombs in Iraq 09 Apr 2007 Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2007 15:09:50 -0500 (CDT) Breaking News and Commentary from Citizens for Legitimate Government 09 April 2007 http://www.legitgov.org/ All links to articles as summarized below are available here: http://www.legitgov.org/index.html#breaking_news 'The enemy [US] used neutron and phosphorus weapons against Baghdad airport... there were bodies burnt to their bones.' US accused of using neutron bombs in Iraq 09 Apr 2007 The former commander of Iraq's Republican Guard has accused the US of using non-conventional weapons in its war against the Middle East country. Saifeddin Fulayh Hassan Taha al-Rawi told Al Jazeera that US forces used neutron and phosphorus bombs during their assault on Baghdad airport before the April 9 capture of the Iraqi capital... "The enemy used neutron and phosphorus weapons against Baghdad airport... there were bodies burnt to their bones," he said. Iraq most wanted footage aired 09 Apr 2007 The Al-Jazeera news channel broadcast a video recording overnight of what it said was one of the most wanted members of Saddam Hussein's regime still on the run. The Qatar-based network gave no date for the purported footage of elite Republican Guards chief Saifeddin Fulayh Hassan Taha al-Rawi, who was number 14 on the most wanted list drawn up by the US military for the 2003 invasion... In the footage shown, Rawi accuses US forces of using neutron and phosphorus bombs during their assault on Baghdad airport ahead of the capture of the Iraqi capital. [See: Aljazeera Arabic: U.S used neutron bombs in 2003 Baghdad Airport battle 08 Apr 2007] New regime bans vehicles in Baghdad on anniversary of fall of old regime --Four US soldiers killed by roadside bomb in Diyala as violent attacks leave 32 Iraqis dead. 09 Apr 2007 Baghdad on Sunday declared a 24-hour vehicle ban on the fourth anniversary of the fall of Saddam Hussein's regime in a bid to prevent car bomb attacks in the Iraqi capital. On Sunday, eve of the anniversary, the daily bloodshed showed no let-up with at least 23 people killed in attacks including car bombings. Iraqis burn US flags on Baghdad fall anniversary --Sadr calls on Iraqis to protest US occupation of Iraqi four years after fall of Saddam Hussein. 09 Apr 2007 Hundreds of thousands of Shiites burned and trampled on US flags on Monday as they gathered in the Iraqi holy city of Najaf for an anti-American rally called by firebrand cleric Moqtada al-Sadr on the fourth anniversary of the fall of Saddam Hussein. Iraqis Protest to Mark Baghdad's Fall 09 Apr 2007 Tens of thousands draped themselves in Iraqi flags and marched peacefully through the streets of two Shiite holy cities Monday to mark the fourth anniversary of Baghdad's fall. Demonstrators were flanked by two cordons of police as they called for U.S. forces to leave, shouting "Get out, get out occupier!" Officials: Attacks on Green Zone increasing 07 Apr 2007 Rocket and mortar attacks against Baghdads Green Zone have increased in the past three weeks after a period of relative quiet [?], two American military security personnel in the zone said recently. Air Force Senior Master Sgt. Paul Riffle, the senior enlisted member of the International Zone Police, said there had been six or seven separate attacks on the heavily fortified area of central Baghdad in the previous 10 days alone... 10 U.S. Troops Die in Iraq; 6 on Sunday 08 Apr 2007 The U.S. military announced the weekend deaths of 10 American soldiers, including six killed on Sunday. Security remained so tenuous in the capital on the eve of the fourth anniversary of the U.S. 'capture' of Baghdad that Iraq's military declared a 24-hour ban on all vehicles in the capital from 5 a.m. Monday. Explosion near Iraqi hospital kills at least 15 08 Apr 2007 A pickup truck loaded with artillery shells exploded on Sunday near a hospital south of Baghdad, killing at least 15 people. The blast left a crater 10 metres wide, the Iraqi military said. Australia pays $260,000 in Iraqi 'blood money' 08 Apr 2007 The federal government has paid over $260,000 to Iraqis as compensation for claims of personal harm or hardship caused by Australian soldiers. At least 45 payments of up to $90,000 have been made, usually in wads of US dollars, to Iraqi civilians in so-called act of grace payments by the Defence Department, according to newspaper reports. Churchgoers get a grisly message 07 Apr 2007 As parishioners were filing into Parnell's Holy Trinity Cathedral yesterday, Father Peter Murnane waited outside, showing images of deformed Iraqi children. Father Murnane has been protesting against depleted uranium weapons in Iraq and Afghanistan throughout the pre-Easter season of Lent outside the United States consulate in Auckland. Experts bash Bush: Pullout won't bring 'enemy' to U.S. 08 Apr 2007 It's become President [sic] Bush's mantra, his main explanation for why he won't withdraw U.S. forces from Iraq anytime soon. In speech after speech, in statement after statement, Bush insists that "this is a war in which, if we were to leave before the job is done, the enemy would follow us here." The line... suggests a chilling picture of warfare on America's streets. But is it true? Military and diplomatic analysts say it isn't. They accuse Bush of exaggerating the threat that enemy forces in Iraq pose to the U.S. mainland. Iraqi Details 'Shocking' U.S. Missteps 08 Apr 2007 In a rueful reflection on what might have been, an Iraqi government insider [Ali A. Allawi] details in 500 pages the U.S. occupation's "shocking" mismanagement of his country [Yeah, this one, too] - a performance so bad, he writes, that by 2007 Iraqis had "turned their backs on their would-be liberators." Pope: 'Nothing Positive' From Iraq 08 Apr 2007 In an Easter litany of the world's suffering, Pope Benedict XVI lamented that "nothing positive" is happening in Iraq and decried the unrest in Afghanistan and bloodshed in Africa and Asia. Army Is Cracking Down on Deserters 09 Apr 2007 Army prosecutions of desertion and other unauthorized absences have risen sharply in the last four years, resulting in thousands more negative discharges and prison time for both junior soldiers and combat-tested veterans of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, Army records show. Levin: Senate Won't Withhold Iraq Funds 08 Apr 2007 The Senate will not stop paying for the Iraq war nor relent from insisting that President [sic] Bush keep pressing the Baghdad government for a negotiated end to the violence, a Democratic leader said Sunday. Cost of Iraq War Filters Down to States And Cities 08 Apr 2007 The cost of the Iraq war is filtering down to state and local budgets, forcing cuts in transportation funding, Medicaid, education and other federally subsidized programs, according to analysts and lawmakers. 12 Guantanamo detainees on hunger strikes are being force-fed 08 Apr 2007 A long-term hunger strike has broken out at the American detention center at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, with more than a dozen detainees subjecting themselves to daily force-feeding to protest their treatment, military officials and lawyers for the detainees said. The 13 detainees now on hunger strikes is the highest number to endure the force-feeding regimen on an extended basis since early 2006, when the military broke a long-running strike with a new policy of strapping prisoners into "restraint chairs" while they are fed by plastic tubes inserted through their nostrils. Guantanamo Hunger Strikes At Yearlong High 09 Apr 2007 Thirteen inmates at the US military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba are current engaged in hunger strikes, which is believed to be the highest number of prisoners refusing nourishment in a year, The New York Times reported Sunday. Active CIA terror cells operate inside Iran 08 Apr 2007 The U.S. has long been believed to be secretly funding separatist and radical groups to create chaos inside Iran in an attempt to pile pressure on the government to give up its nuclear programme. Britain suspends Persian Gulf patrols 09 Apr 2007 Britain has talked of suspending all its patrolling operations in the northern Persian Gulf, following Iran's capture of 15 British sailors. During an interview with the BBC, Admiral Jonathon Band, head of the British Navy, said the navy has suspended its inspection operations of the suspect vessels, adding that the whole practice will be subject to a "complete review." Iran's uranium enrichment enters "industrial level" 09 Apr 2007 Iran has entered an "industrial stage" in its production of nuclear fuel, the head of the countrys atomic energy program announced on Monday. Iran Expands Uranium Enrichment 09 Apr 2007 Iran announced Monday that it has begun enriching uranium with 3,000 centrifuges, defiantly expanding a nuclear program that has drawn U.N. sanctions and condemnation from the West. President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said at a ceremony at the enrichment facility at Natanz that Iran was now capable of enriching nuclear fuel "on an industrial scale." Six Canadians killed in Afghan bomb blast 09 Apr 2007 Six Canadian soldiers were killed and two wounded in southern Afghanistan on Sunday when their vehicle was blown up by a roadside bomb. The Canadian defence ministry said the incident happened west of Kandahar. Afghanistan Blasts Kill 7 NATO Soldiers 08 Apr 2007 Roadside bombs in southern Afghanistan on Sunday left seven NATO soldiers dead, the alliance said, as its forces continued an anti-Taliban offensive in the world's most fertile opium-producing region. Hamas gives Israel soldier swap list 09 Apr 2007 Israel received a list of names of Palestinian detainees Hamas wants to be released in exchange for an Israeli soldier captured by Gaza resistance fighters last June, a spokesman for Palestinian Prime Minister Ismael Haniya said. Israel reviews names of hundreds of Palestinian prisoners --Efforts to free soldier progress 09 Apr 2007 Israel is reviewing the names of hundreds of Palestinian prisoners that Gaza militants want released in exchange for a captured Israeli soldier, security officials said yesterday, signaling a possible breakthrough in efforts to win the young man's freedom. US Navy builds Stingray-esque base in Indian Ocean --Frogmen, mini-subs to operate from nuke motherships 07 Apr 2007 Reports have emerged that the US Navy is upgrading its submarine base at the isolated tropical atoll Diego Garcia, which is formally British territory. The base improvements will allow its new class of SSGN nuclear submarines to operate from Diego Garcia, which is potentially noteworthy. Revolution, flashmobs, and brain chips. A grim vision of the future 09 Apr 2007 Information chips implanted in the brain. Electromagnetic pulse weapons. The middle classes becoming revolutionary, taking on the role of Marx's proletariat. [Hopefully!] The population of countries in the Middle East increasing by 132%, while Europe's drops as fertility falls. "Flashmobs" - groups rapidly mobilised by criminal gangs or terrorists groups. First Amendment Defense Is Pursued in Hezbollah TV Case 09 Apr 2007 Two men charged with attempting to broadcast Hezbollah television say the First Amendment protects them from being prosecuted for supporting terrorism. Whether the case against Javed Iqbal of Staten Island and Saleh Elahwal of New Jersey will grow into a major confrontation over the First Amendment is far from certain. 'Have you been in any peace marches? We ban a lot of people from flying because of that.' Another Enemy of the People? By Mark Graber 08 Apr 2007 I am posting the below with the permission of Professor Walter F. Murphy, emeritus of Princeton University. For those who do not know, Professor Murphy is easily the most distinguished scholar of public law in political science. His works on both constitutional theory and judicial behavior are classics in the field... "On 1 March 07, I was scheduled to fly on American Airlines to Newark, NJ, to attend an academic conference at Princeton University... I tried to use the curb-side check in at the Sunport, I was denied a boarding pass because I was on the Terrorist Watch list... I presented my credentials from the Marine Corps to a very polite clerk for American Airlines. One of the two people to whom I talked asked a question and offered a frightening comment: 'Have you been in any peace marches? We ban a lot of people from flying because of that.' I explained that I had not so marched but had, in September, 2006, given a lecture at Princeton, televised and put on the Web, highly critical of George Bush for his many violations of the Constitution. 'That'll do it,' the man said." 'Millions to rebel' over ID cards 08 Apr 2007 The government is predicting that some 15m people will revolt against Tony Blairs controversial ID card scheme by refusing to produce the new cards or provide personal data on demand. 'He's not ready.' Gonzales Crams for a Senate Grilling 16 Apr 2007 Attorney General Alberto Gonzales has virtually wiped his public schedule clean to bone up for his long-awaited April 17 testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committeea session widely seen as a crucial test as to whether he will survive the U.S. attorney mess... At a recent "prep" for a prospective Sunday talk-show interview, Gonzales's performance was so poor that top aides scrapped any live appearances. During the March 23 session in the A.G.'s conference room, Gonzales was grilled by a team of top aides and advisers... about what he knew about the plan to fire seven U.S. attorneys last fall. But Gonzales kept contradicting himself and "getting his timeline confused," said one participant who asked not to be identified talking about a private meeting. His advisers finally got "exasperated" with him, the source added. Gingrich: Gonzales should weigh quitting 09 Apr 2007 Joining a growing list of Republicans, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich said Sunday that Attorney General Alberto Gonzales should consider resigning. The possible presidential candidate said the botched firing of U.S. attorneys has destroyed Gonzales' credibility as the nation's top law enforcer. Another Layer of Scandal (The New York Times ) 09 Apr 2007 As Congress investigates the politicization of the United States attorney offices by the Bush administration, it should review the extraordinary events the other day in a federal courtroom in Wisconsin. The case involved Georgia Thompson, a state employee sent to prison on the flimsiest of corruption charges just as her boss, a Democrat, was fighting off a Republican challenger. It just might shed some light on a question that lurks behind the firing of eight top federal prosecutors: what did the surviving attorneys do to escape the axe? Bush hits new approval rating low 09 Apr 2007 U.S. President [sic] George W. Bush is setting a new record for low job approval rating with 62 percent of Americans giving him a failing grade. A USA TODAY/Gallup Poll telephone survey of 1,008 adults taken Monday through Thursday, shows Bush's approval rating standing at 38 percent which has not changed for seven consecutive months. Imus: 'Embarrassed' by racial comments 09 Apr 2007 Calling himself "a good person" who made a bad mistake, radio host Don Imus [the Ignoramus] said Monday he would check his acid tongue after being lambasted for making 'racially charged' comments about the Rutgers University women's basketball team. [No, not 'racially charged' --racist period. --LRP] Quick action! CNN Poll: Should Don Imus' apology be enough to end the controversy over his remarks about the Rutgers women's basketball team? [Left-hand side of page] Yes 55% 14026 votes No 45% 11325 votes Total: 25351 votes [CNN has phrased the wording so that people vote to 'end the controversy,' but Imus the Ignoramus needs to be *fired!*] Good eats at no cost for Pennsylvania state senators --Records reveal catered lunches, expensive dinners on taxpayers' tab; Democrats spent much more freely than Republicans 08 Apr 2007 Senate Democrats regularly feasted on salmon cakes, gourmet bread, grilled shrimp and pork tenderloin last session. On the day before 2005's infamous middle-of-the-night pay raise, Democratic Leader Robert Mellow treated his staff to a catered breakfast -- served on china for a $45 extra charge. Senators get a $146 per diem for lodging and meals in Harrisburg, but receipts filed with the Senate chief clerk indicate members also availed themselves of numerous additional options for dining at public expense. AP: 1.4M Pa. Warrants Pending 08 Apr 2007 Pennsylvania's new statewide computer system makes it possible for the first time to put a number on how many warrants remain unserved across the state - 1.4 million, including more than 100 for homicide, The Associated Press has found. Unprovoked Beatings of Homeless Soaring 08 Apr 2007 A 2006 report by the National Coalition for the Homeless found 142 attacks last year against homeless people, 20 of which resulted in death - a 65 percent increase from 2005, when 86 were violently assaulted, including 13 homicides. Occidental CEO got more than $400 million in 2006 08 Apr 2007 Occidental Petroleum Corp.'s chairman and chief executive took in more than $400 million in compensation last year, the company said in a filing, one of the biggest single-year payouts in U.S. corporate history. U.S. gas prices jump 18 cents in 2 weeks 08 Apr 2007 The average cost of self-serve regular gasoline rose about 18 cents per gallon nationwide over the past two weeks, according to a survey released Sunday. Stanford's deal with Exxon Mobil raised concerns By Jennifer Washburn 08 Apr 2007 The alliance between the oil giant BP and the University of California, Berkeley, stands out because of its $500 million price tag, its commercial scope and the potential for BP to exert excessive influence over the academic research. But it isn't an isolated case. The second largest such partnership is a 10-year, $225-million deal Stanford University signed with Exxon Mobil and other energy firms in 2002 to fund a Global Climate and Energy Project. Scientists Approve Global Warming Report --North America Can Expect More Hurricanes, Floods, Droughts, Heat Waves and Wildfires 08 Apr 2007 An international global warming conference approved a report Friday warning of dire threats to the Earth and to mankind -- from increased hunger to the extinction of species -- unless the world adapts to climate change and halts its progress. CLGers, we need your support. http://www.legitgov.org/#contribute Or, please mail a check or money order to the CLG: Citizens for Legitimate Government (CLG) P.O. Box 1142 Bristol, CT 06011-1142 Contributions to CLG are not tax deductible. [Previous lead stories:] Credit Ford Motor Co. CEO Alan Mulally with saving the leader of the free world from self-immolation. [*Credit* isn't the word that immediately springs to mind.] Plug it in, fire it up, Mr. President 07 Apr 2007 Mulally told journalists at the New York auto show that he intervened to prevent President [sic] Bush from plugging an electrical cord into the hydrogen tank of Ford's hydrogen-electric plug-in hybrid at the White House last week. Ford wanted to give the Commander-in-Thief an actual demonstration of the innovative vehicle, so the automaker arranged for an electrical outlet to be installed on the South Lawn and ran a charging cord to the hybrid. However, as Mulally followed Bush out to the car, he noticed someone had left the cord lying at the rear of the vehicle, near the fuel tank. "I just thought, 'Oh my goodness!' So, I started walking faster, and the President walked faster and he got to the cord before I did. I violated all the protocols. I touched the President. I grabbed his arm and I moved him up to the front," Mulally said. "I wanted the president to make sure he plugged into the electricity, not into the hydrogen." [See CLG site for animated GIFs that accompany this summary!] 'The situation today is a hundred times worse.' Iraqis Wish to Put up Saddam's Statue 07 Apr 2007 Iraqis who once celebrated and even participated in pulling down Saddam Hussein's statue four years ago when US tanks rolled into Baghdad in a heart-breaking scene for many Arabs and Muslims are now lamenting the good old days under the late president. Iranian diplomat claims he was tortured by CIA agents 07 Apr 2007 The Iranian diplomat released this week after being abducted in Iraq said that he had been tortured by CIA agents, the official IRNA news agency reported on Saturday. Jalal Sharafi "explained how he was kidnapped and tortured by American troops and agents of an Iraqi organization acting under the supervision of the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency (CIA)," IRNA said. Signs of torture were evident on Sharafi's body and he "is now undergoing medical treatment," IRNA said. Please forward this newsletter to anyone you think might be interested. Those who'd like to be added to the Newsletter list can sign up: http://www.legitgov.org/#subscribe_clg. Please write to: signup@legitgov.org for inquiries. CLG Newsletter editor: Lori Price, Manager. Copyright ) 2007, Citizens For Legitimate Government . All rights reserved. CLG Founder and Chair is Michael Rectenwald, Ph.D. ***************************************************************** 2 BBC NEWS: Iran 'enters new nuclear phase' Last Updated: Monday, 9 April 2007, 19:01 GMT 20:01 UK The Natanz plant is thought to have room for 50,000 centrifuges Iran can now produce nuclear fuel on an industrial scale, President Ahmadinejad has announced, in a move likely to further strain tensions with the West He gave no details of Iran's capacity, but some officials said 3,000 uranium gas enrichment centrifuges were running at the Natanz plant in central Iran. Mr Ahmadinejad's speech came as Iran celebrated nuclear technology day. The UN has passed two packages of sanctions against Iran for refusing to suspend its uranium enrichment programme. A US spokesman said the White House was "very concerned" about the Iranian announcement. "Iran continues to defy the international community and further isolate itself by expanding its nuclear programme, rather than suspending uranium enrichment," said Gordon Johndroe, spokesman for the White House National Security Council. UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon urged Iran to follow the Security Council resolution. "I sincerely hope that, even at this time, when the Iranian government is undergoing Security Council sanctions, that they should engage in dialogue.... It is very important for any member country to fully comply with the Security Council resolution," he told reporters. An EU spokesman renewed calls for Iran to suspend uranium enrichment, AFP news agency reported. "This does nothing to change our position - Iran must co-operate fully with the IAEA and follow the United Nations resolutions," said Ton Van Lierop, a spokesman for the European Commission. NPT warning "With great honour, I declare that as of today our dear country has joined the nuclear club of nations and can produce nuclear fuel on an industrial scale," Mr Ahmadinejad told the audience at Natanz. He did not say how many centrifuges - the machines that spin uranium gas in order to enrich it to levels needed for fuel - were now operational at Natanz. Ahmadinejad did not disclose any figures on Iran's progress Iran announced in February that it had set up two cascades of 164 centrifuges each at Natanz. It said it planned to have 3,000 centrifuges by the end of last month. Ali Larijani, Iran's chief nuclear negotiator with the West, said at Natanz on Monday that Iran had begun injecting gas into many of the centrifuges, without specifying the number. Some other officials said 3,000 centrifuges had been installed, the BBC's Frances Harrison at Natanz reports. The most sensitive areas at Natanz, deep underground, are thought to be halls that can hold up to 50,000 centrifuges. Mr Larijani also warned that Iran would have no choice but to review its membership of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty if further pressure was applied by the West over its nuclear programme. Journalists and diplomats were invited to the event at Natanz, but EU diplomats boycotted them in protest at Iran's refusal to comply with UN demands to end its uranium enrichment programme. A year ago, Iran announced that it had produced enriched uranium for the first time. It said it had enriched only to 3.5% - the level needed for nuclear fuel but way below that needed to make a nuclear bomb. * BBC Copyright Notice ***************************************************************** 3 IRIB PERSIAN NEWS: Iranians fete more nuclear advances 2007/04/09 President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad will lead great nuclear celebrations across the Islamic Republic Iran which usher the country into new fields of the super modern technology. With focus of the feat in Natanz, central Iran, several smaller ceremonies are underway across Iran. The President is set to address the larger celebrations in Natanz nuclear facility on Monday, on an annual day named after Nuclear Technology. President Ahmadinejad had promised earlier to give a good news about further advances of the nation in the field. 600 civil and military officials, 50 foreign ambassadors and several cabinet ministers including the Foreign Minister and Intelligence Minister will attend the ceremony. According to Atomic Energy Organization's official Hossein Simorgh Gholam-Reza Aqazadeh, Head of the Atomic Energy Organization will also address the ceremony. Over 180 Iranian and foreign reporters will cover the fete. sam Copyright 2004, All Rights Reserved By Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting News Network Sponsored By IRIB News Computer Center. E-Mail: Info@IRIBNEWS.ir ***************************************************************** 4 Reuters: Iran will review atomic NPT membership if pushed Mon Apr 9, 2007 10:22AM EDT NATANZ, Iran (Reuters) - Iran will be forced to review its membership of the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) if it faces further pressure over its atomic program, Iran's chief nuclear negotiator told reporters. "If they continue to pressure Iran over its peaceful nuclear activities, we have no other choice but to follow parliament's order and review our membership of the NPT," Ali Larijani said. He was explaining a comment by President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in a speech at the Natanz enrichment facility, where the West fears Iran is mastering the ability to make atomic bombs. Tehran insists it has purely peaceful aims. The president had said: "Iran has so far moved in a completely peaceful path and wants to continue following this path. They should avoid doing something which forces this nation to review its behaviour." The president had also said Iran was working within the NPT, which he said gave Iran the right to make nuclear fuel, and said it activities were monitored by the U.N. International Atomic Energy Agency. Larijani was also asked if Iran had started injecting gas into 3,000 centrifuges to enrich uranium being set up at the Natanz atomic site and he said: "Yes we have injected gas." But he did not say how many of the 3,000 machines had been installed. Diplomats who follow Iran's nuclear file say almost 1,000 of the machines have been set up. The centrifuges can make fuel for power plants or, if Iran wanted, material for warheads. © Reuters 2007. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 5 Reuters: CHRONOLOGY: Iran's nuclear program | Mon Apr 9, 2007 11:19AM EDT (Reuters) - Iran said on Monday it had begun the "industrial stage" of nuclear fuel production, in a fresh snub to the U.N. Security Council which has demanded Tehran halt such work. Following are events since Iran's nuclear program first came to light. August 2002 - Exiled opposition National Council of Resistance of Iran reports uranium enrichment facility at Natanz and heavy water plant at Arak. June 2003 - International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) report says Iran failed to comply with nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty by keeping its atomic program secret for 18 years. December 2003 - Iran signs protocol allowing snap inspections of nuclear facilities. February 2005 - President Mohammad Khatami says no Iranian government will give up nuclear technology program. September 2 - IAEA report confirms Iran has resumed uranium conversion at Isfahan. January 10, 2006 - Iran removes U.N. seals at Natanz enrichment plant and resumes nuclear fuel research. Continued... © Reuters 2007. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 6 Reuters: U.S. says Iran statements show Tehran's defiance | Mon Apr 9, 2007 7:47PM EDT WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Iran's latest statements on its nuclear program were "another signal" that Tehran was defying the international community's call to give up enrichment activities, the United States said on Monday. "It's a missed opportunity," State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said when asked about Iran's announcement that it had begun industrial scale nuclear fuel production. "This is another signal that Iran is defying the international community." Western nations, led by the United States, suspect Iran's nuclear program is aimed at producing atomic weapons. Iran says the nuclear fuel will only be used to generate electricity. McCormack said he hoped "reasonable" Iranian leaders would do the cost-benefit calculations and see that the current approach did not benefit Iran's people. "There is a way out. There is a negotiation alternative should the Iranian leadership choose to take it. To date they have not and today is another indication that they have chosen not to," said McCormack. He said Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's speech showed that U.N. actions against Tehran were legitimate and justified. The United Nations has imposed two rounds of sanctions against Tehran for its refusal to give up sensitive enrichment work. "The overall trend line is Iran continuing to defy the international system and once again only raising questions about the intentions of their nuclear program," McCormack said. © Reuters 2007. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 7 UPI: U.S. professional groups cut Iran links United Press International - Security & Terrorism - Briefing Published: April 9, 2007 at 10:16 AM WASHINGTON, April 9 (UPI) -- U.S. professional associations are putting the screws to Iran by suspending collaborative and other ties with their Iranian counterparts. Iran Daily, quoting a report by the Iran Students' News Agency, said last week the American Chemical Society has rescinded the membership of 36 Iranian scientists. It said the ACS cited the U.S. embargo again Iran for its decision. The U.S.-based International Society for Optical Engineering has stopped delivery to Iranian researchers of requested books and publications, it added. Other U.S. organizations restricting collaboration with Iran include the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, the U.S. Journal of Petroleum Geologists and the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers. The United States has imposed an economic embargo on Iran since the 1979 takeover of the U.S. Embassy in Tehran and the holding hostage of U.S. diplomats for more than 400 days. The United Nations Security Council has now mandated sanctions on Iran over Iran's suspected program to develop nuclear weapons. © Copyright 2007 United Press International, Inc. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 8 UPI: Iran has nuclear holiday United Press International - NewsTrack - Top News - Published: April 9, 2007 at 6:37 AM MASHAD, April 9 (UPI) -- An Iranian official said in Mashad Monday the country is ready to negotiate with the West over its nuclear program. Ali Larijani, the secretary of Iran's Supreme National Security Council, told a gathering of religious scholars that Iran's goal in negotiations was to assure other countries that Iran's nuclear program is peaceful, Iranian Press TV reported. Western nations suspect Iran's nuclear program is aimed at creating nuclear weapons, while Iranian officials have said it is to produce energy. Iran has defied a U.N. Security Council order that it cease enriching uranium. "The agreement is aimed to give assurances to the negotiating parties that Iran's nuclear program is peaceful. However, we will never give up our rights in the negotiations," Larijani said Monday. Larijani said Iran would not consider itself independent if it had to rely on other countries for nuclear fuel for its power plants, Press TV reported. Larijani's remarks came as Iran celebrated a National Day of Nuclear Technology, which began with a national ringing of school bells. President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and other officials were to attend an event at the Natanz nuclear site and people were expected to form human chains around nuclear facilities across the country. © Copyright 2007 United Press International, Inc. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 9 Sunday Herald: Iran has shares in French nuclear facility April 09, 2007 Est 1999 Scotland's award-winning independent By Rob Edwards, Environment Editor Eurodif holding shows ‘hypocrisy’ of non-proliferation treaty WESTERN GOVERNMENTS have been accused of "stunning hypocrisy" after it was revealed that Iran has a 10% stake in the world's largest uranium enrichment plant in France. All the time that Britain, France and the US have been pressing the Iranian government to cease enriching uranium, the Islamic republic has been reaping multimillion pound dividends from its shareholding in Eurodif, an international enrichment plant at Pierrelatte in southern France. Because of its involvement, Iran has also been learning more about the latest enrichment technology. It claims that it only wants to enrich uranium to improve its performance as a fuel in nuclear power stations, but Western nations are worried that it will be used to make nuclear bombs. Iran's stake in Eurodif has been exposed in a report written by a French nuclear expert for the Greens and the European Free Alliance in the European parliament. Documents confirming the connection have also been seen by the Sunday Herald. They show that in 2006, Reza Aghazadeh, Iran's vice-president and the president of the Iranian Atomic Energy Organisation, was replacing the Iranian representatives on the board of Sofidif, a joint French-Iranian company with a major stake in Eurodif. According to a meeting of Sofidif in June 2006, the purpose of the company was "to participate in the study, the realisation and the operation of uranium enrichment plants based on the French gaseous diffusion technique". Other papers show that in 2005 Sofidif's investment in Eurodif yielded £12 million in dividends. Eurodif, formed by France, Belgium and Spain in the 1970s and run by French nuclear company Cogema, enriches uranium for 100 reactors in France and worldwide. At the same time, Iran has been accused of breaching its obligations under the nuclear non-proliferation treaty by enriching uranium at a plant at Natanz in central Iran. Last week, the United Nations discussed moves to toughen sanctions against the country in an attempt to force it to shut the plant. Mycle Schneider, the Paris-based nuclear consultant who wrote the report for the MEPs, was shocked by what he discovered. "The continuous deep involvement of Iran in the world's largest multinational uranium enrichment plant in France is the perfect illustration of the stunning level of hypocrisy that has governed the non-proliferation treaty," he said. The point was reinforced by Dr David Lowry, a nuclear proliferation specialist based in Surrey. "The hypocrisy of France, as a nuclear technology supplier to Iran, ganging up on its customer client with the other self-appointed permanent bully-boy' members of the UN Security Council would be funny if it wasn't so serious," he said. Rebecca Harms, vice-president of the Green group in the European parliament, said: "It's time to stop pretending that there is a fundamental difference between the peaceful atom and nuclear weapons. It is not only operating uranium enrichment facilities that provide the basis for a nuclear weapons programme, it is nuclear technology and know-how that paves the way to the bomb." Schneider's report also exposes details of an extraordinary nuclear experiment run by the US in the 1960s. Two PhD students without any nuclear expertise were asked by a leading nuclear weapons laboratory in Berkeley, California, to design a nuclear bomb using publicly available sources. "The goal of the participants should be to design an explosive with a militarily significant yield," said a declassified US report from 1964. The project was known as the "Nth Country Experiment", as it was attempting to assess the risk of new countries developing nuclear weapons. It took the students concerned, Dave Dobson and Bob Selden, two and a half years to come up with a design. It was judged by scientists from the US nuclear weapons laboratories to be a credible and workable bomb. It would be too big to be fired on a missile, they concluded, though it could be delivered by plane or truck. The bibliography, compiled by the students from open sources, remains classified. ©2007 newsquest (sunday herald) limited. all rights reserved Terms & Conditions | Privacy Policy ***************************************************************** 10 Guardian Unlimited: Fears over Iran's nuclear programme From Press Association Monday April 9, 2007 6:48 PM The Foreign Office has expressed concern over Iran's announcement that it has dramatically expanded its nuclear programme. Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's declaration that his country is now capable of enriching nuclear fuel "on an industrial scale" caused alarm in the West. He insists the technology is for solely civilian purposes but the US and other western nations fear it is the first step towards developing nuclear weapons. The tenfold escalation to the use of 3,000 centrifuges comes despite the imposition of United Nations sanctions and fears of possible US military action. A Foreign Office spokesman said Iran should suspend enrichment immediately. He said: "We are concerned that Iran appears to have confirmed more nuclear enrichment activity. This is a further breach of IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) and UNSC (UN Security Council) resolutions. "Iran knows exactly what it must do: comply with UNSC resolutions 1737 and 1747 by suspending all enrichment-related and reprocessing activities before discussions can begin on assistance with a modern civil nuclear power programme." He added: "We have always made it clear that we are happy for Iran to have a civil nuclear power programme but they have to satisfy the international community that that is what it is seeking to develop. "The international community stands together in ensuring that Iran does not develop the means to acquire nuclear weapons." Liberal Democrat foreign affairs spokesman Michael Moore said Iran's continued drive represented "a serious threat to the world", insisting: "While some may doubt the president's claims, there should be no question about Iran's intentions. "The international community must be firm in its response and ensure that the sanctions against the regime are as tight and as tough as possible." © Copyright Press Association Ltd 2007, All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 11 UPI: North Korea nuke talks likely delayed United Press International - NewsTrack - Top News - Published: April 9, 2007 at 12:51 PM WASHINGTON, April 9 (UPI) -- A dispute over frozen North Korean funds makes it unlikely that a mid-April deadline will be met to shut down North Korea's nuclear reactor. Top U.S. nuclear envoy Christopher Hill plans to travel to South Korea and China this week for more negotiations. The dispute centers on North Korea's refusal to shut down its Yongbyon reactor until it receives $25 million of its funds that have been frozen in a Macau bank, the Voice of America reported Monday. The accounts were frozen after U.S. authorities accused North Korea of counterfeiting and other illegal activity. Federal authorities then agreed the accounts could be unfrozen to help speed the nuclear negotiations, but the Bank of China reportedly refused to transfer the money for fear of damaging its reputation, the VOA reported. In exchange for closing its reactor, North Korea is to receive emergency aid equal to 50-thousand tons of fuel oil. © Copyright 2007 United Press International, Inc. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 12 Los Angeles Times: Party-issued laptops now a White House headache - 9:27 PM PDT, April 9, 2007 Democrats say a private e-mail system was used in violation of federal rules. By Tom Hamburger, Times Staff Writer WASHINGTON — When Karl Rove and his top deputies arrived at the White House in 2001, the Republican National Committee provided them with laptop computers and other communication devices to be used alongside their government-issued equipment. The back-channel e-mail and paging system, paid for and maintained by the RNC, was designed to avoid charges that had vexed the Clinton White House — that federal resources were being used inappropriately for political campaign purposes. Now, that dual computer system is creating new embarrassment and legal headaches for the White House, the Republican Party and Rove's once-vaunted White House operation. Democrats say evidence suggests the RNC e-mail system was used for political and government policy matters in violation of federal record preservation and disclosure rules. In addition, Democrats point to a handful of e-mails obtained through ongoing inquiries suggesting the system may have been used to conceal such activities as contacts with lobbyist Jack Abramoff, who was convicted on bribery charges and is now in prison for fraud. Democratic congressional investigators are beginning to demand access to this RNC-White House communications system, which was used not only by Rove's office but by several top officials elsewhere in the White House. The prospect that such communication might become public has further jangled the nerves of an already rattled Bush White House. Some Republicans believe that the huge number of e-mails — many written hastily, with no thought that they might become public — may contain more detailed and unguarded inside information about the administration's far-flung political activities than has previously been available. "There is concern about what may be in these e-mails," said one GOP activist who asked not to be identified because of the sensitivity of the subject. "The system was created with the best intentions," said former Assistant White House Press Secretary Adam Levine, who was assigned an RNC laptop and BlackBerry when he worked at the White House in 2002. But, he added, "the road to hell is paved with good intentions." Rep. Henry A. Waxman (D-Los Angeles), chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, last week formally requested access to broad categories of RNC-White House e-mails. Waxman told the Los Angeles Times in a statement that a separate "e-mail system for high-ranking White House officials would raise serious questions about violations of the Presidential Records Act," which requires the preservation and ultimate disclosure of e-mails about official government business. Waxman's initial request to the RNC seeks e-mails relating to the presentation of campaign polling and strategy information to Cabinet agency appointees. He is also expected to ask for e-mails relating to Abramoff's activities, which Waxman is also investigating. The Senate and House Judiciary Committees are also expected to formally request e-mail records from the RNC that relate to last year's firing of eight U.S. attorneys. The private e-mail system came to light in the U.S. attorney controversy because one of Rove's deputies used an RNC-maintained e-mail domain — gwb43.com — to communicate with the Justice Department about replacing one of those prosecutors. White House officials said the system had been used appropriately and was modeled after one used by the Clinton White House political office in the late 1990s. "The regular staffers who interface with political organizations have a separate e-mail account, and that's entirely appropriate," said White House spokesman Scott M. Stanzel. "The practice is followed to avoid inadvertent violations of the law." Stanzel said he did not know how many officials used the separate system. Another White House official called it "a handful." Some Republican activists say the e-mail request will not create great difficulty for the White House because nothing nefarious happened and because the RNC automatically purges some e-mails after 30 days. RNC officials are expected to meet with House Government Reform and Judiciary Committee lawyers as early as this week to discuss the first document request. "We'd like to cooperate to whatever level is appropriate," Republican Party spokeswoman Lisa Camooso Miller said Friday. Waxman focused on the e-mails after a hearing last month examining a presentation of campaign forecasts and polling data made by a Rove deputy to top appointed officials of the Government Services Administration, some of whom believed they were being instructed to help GOP candidates. White House staff arranging for the GSA briefing by a Rove deputy, Scott Jennings, used the gwb43.com e-mail domain name. That caught the attention of Waxman's investigators, who had previously examined e-mails from Abramoff to Rove's executive assistant, Susan B. Ralston, to object to an impending Interior Department decision. The decision, he wrote, was "anathema to all our supporters it's important if possible to get some quiet message from the WH [White House] that this is absurd." Ralston used outside accounts - including at rnchq.org - to communicate with Abramoff and his partners. One e-mail from an Abramoff associate said that White House personnel had warned "it is better to not put this stuff in writing in [the White House] . e-mail system because it might actually limit what they can do to help us, especially since there could be lawsuits, etc." Abramoff's response, according to a copy of his e-mail released by Waxman's committee, was: "Dammit. It was sent to Susan on her rnc pager and was not supposed to go into the WH system." Ralston later resigned in connection with the lobbying scandal. Waxman told RNC Chairman Mike Duncan in a letter that such exchanges "indicated that in some instances White House officials were using nongovernment accounts specifically to avoid creating a record of communications" that could be reviewed by congressional committees or released under the Presidential Records Act. Lawyers for the committees say that use of campaign-connected e-mail addresses may make it easier to gather information because it would be harder for the White House to make a broad claim of executive privilege. Lawyers for congressional Democrats have anticipated that the White House will invoke executive privilege in an effort to block requests for information about its role in the firing of U.S. attorneys, Abramoff and other matters. In the U.S. attorney case, Rove deputy Jennings used the RNC e-mail system to write to D. Kyle Sampson, then Atty. Gen. Alberto Gonzales' chief of staff, in August 2006 about replacing Arkansas U.S. Atty. H.E. "Bud" Cummins III with former Rove protege Tim Griffin. "We're a go for the U.S. atty plan. WH leg, political and communications have signed off and acknowledged that we have to be committed to following through once the pressure comes," Jennings wrote in an e-mail from the gwb43.com domain name. Sampson noted in a related e-mail that "getting him appointed was important to" Rove, then-White House Counsel Harriet E. Miers and other officials. The gwb43.com account, and others like it, have been traced to the Republican National Committee computer servers, Waxman's staff said. Doug Sosnik, White House political director under Clinton, says that his office had a small number of separate computers and cellphones for campaign-related matters but that the scope of the political operation was smaller than that in the Bush White House. For both administrations, the separate system was an acknowledgment that certain White House jobs necessarily mixed policy and politics. Though campaign-related activity is prohibited for federal workers on the job, White House appointees typically work extraordinarily long hours and are required to be available around the clock. Sosnik said only a handful of people used the political computers in the Clinton White House, which were purchased with campaign funds. However, he said, the political messaging from the Bush team appears to have been broader than that of Clinton's. He could recall no instance, for example, in which campaign computers or cellphones were used to communicate with the Justice Department. Levine, the former Bush press aide, said he saw senior White House colleagues, including Rove and his top staff, moving fluidly between the two computer systems, which often sat on officials' desks along with their government computers. But Levine said he found the two computers with their separate purposes and log-in procedures confusing and inefficient. So he quietly slid his RNC laptop into a desk drawer, deciding to use the telephone rather than e-mail to communicate anything that was not considered official government business. "In retrospect," he said last week, "I was lucky." * tom.hamburger@latimes.com ***************************************************************** 13 RIA Novosti: Searching for alternative sources of energy Opinion & analysis - 17:58 | 09/ 04/ 2007 MOSCOW. (Yury Zaitsev for RIA Novosti) - The development of unconventional and renewable energy sources is a major challenge facing humankind in the twenty-first century. Technologies such as nuclear fusion and biofuels will prove vital if humankind is to find an alternative to hydrocarbons. Under a bill that was recently signed by U.S. President George W. Bush, so-called "corn fuel" will account for 7.5 billion gallons of total national fuel consumption by 2015. President Bush probably decided to follow the Brazilian example because that country has been obtaining ethanol from sugar cane and using it as a motor fuel for a long time. The European Union, which initially planned to increase the share of alternative power-generation sources in its energy mix to 10% by 2012, will probably achieve this goal by as soon as 2010. French nuclear power plants now generate 80% of all domestic power. Russian scientists are also working hard to develop unconventional and renewable energy sources, which may soon be included in the national power-generation network. For example, small gas-turbine thermal power plants burning wood splinters and coal have an impressive potential and are expected to generate 5% of all electricity nationwide by 2020. They will mostly be used in Arctic regions, which now utilize small diesel generators and low-capacity furnaces burning huge amounts of expensive hydrocarbons. It costs, for example, $1,000 to deliver one metric ton of diesel fuel and $150 for one ton of heating oil to the Russian Arctic. Environmentally friendly alternative sources of energy are an attractive power-generation option. "Dirty" organic fuels, such as coal, heating oil and firewood, now account for 70% of the energy balance in northern Russia. Russia can also harness solar and wind energy from along its 12,000 km Arctic coast. Windmills are considered cost-effective when average annual wind speeds exceed 4-5 meters per second. Arctic winds blowing at over 5-7 meters per second can generate 45 billion kWh. Likewise, solar panels can be located in the south of the Sakha (Yakutia) Republic, in north-east Russia. The weekly amount of solar energy falling on the Earth exceeds the total energy potential of global oil, coal and gas deposits. Alexander Asseyev, director of the Semiconductor Physics Institute at the Siberian department of the Russian Academy of Sciences, estimated the country's total solar-energy potential as equivalent to over two trillion tons of fuel. By placing solar batteries with an average efficiency of 12% over 4,000 square kilometers, it would be possible to completely meet the national electric power demand. The Earth's crust contains tremendous amounts of silica, exceeding deposits of uranium ore 100,000 times over. Obtaining this highly expensive element cost-effectively is the key to mass-producing solar batteries. Moreover, Russian scientists have mastered the production of multi-crystalline silicon for solar power engineering. Work is also proceeding apace to produce highly efficient gallium arsenide solar cells. The first Russian tidal power plant, which was built on the Kola Peninsula, made it possible to design similar power plants capable of generating tens of millions of kilowatt-hours (kWh) of electricity. In the mid-20th century, Russian scientists suggested using hot volcanic vapors to generate cheap geothermal electric power. In 1966, the 11,000 kWh Pauzhetskaya geothermal power plant was built on the Kamchatka Peninsula. The recently commissioned Verkhne-Mutnovskaya geothermal power plant generates 25% of all electricity in the Kamchatka Region. There are plans to expand its capacity by 20 kWh by installing additional power units running on recycled hot thermal water. Though geothermal plants are quite expensive, future operating costs are reduced because they harness "free" natural energy. Russian coal deposits contain an estimated 260 trillion cubic meters of methane, which can be used as a separate fuel. Gennady Gritsko, director of the Coal and Coal Chemistry Institute at the Siberian department of the Russian Academy of Sciences, said methane can be extracted from small deposits, domes and traps. This cost-effective method does not require any expensive mining operations. Gritsko said ventilation flows contain an unlimited amount of methane and can trap more gas than coal mines. Coal can also be used to obtain synthetic gasolene and hydrogen for fuel. Hydrogen, the ideal environmentally friendly fuel of the future, produces nothing but water when it is burned. The hydrogen power industry would therefore help reduce toxic emissions and solve the global warming problem. Another promising technology is thermonuclear reactors. Unlike conventional nuclear power plants that use heavy-element fission, they fuse the nuclei of two light atoms into heavy elements. Scientists set the task to simulate the fusion that takes place in the Sun in laboratory conditions and to harness it for commercial power-generation purposes. Deuterium and tritium isotopes, which fuse together inside the Sun, create chemically inert helium and emit tremendous amounts of energy, hundreds of times more than is emitted during uranium fission at conventional NPPs. Research by Soviet and Russian scientists made it possible to solve the problem of thermonuclear fusion. Russia is now a full participant in the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER) project. Vladimir Fortov, member of the Russian Academy of Sciences, said thermonuclear power plants may start generating household electricity by 2040. However, Nobel Prize winner Zhores Alfyorov, also a member of the Russian Academy of Sciences, said this would take much longer to happen. Yury Zaitsev is an academic adviser at the Russian Academy of Engineering Sciences. The opinions expressed in this article are the author's and do not necessarily represent those of RIA Novosti. RIA Novosti ***************************************************************** 14 UPI: Russia launches new line of submarines United Press International - NewsTrack - Top News - Published: April 9, 2007 at 1:33 PM MOSCOW, April 9 (UPI) -- A shipbuilding yard in northern Russia was the site for the launch of the country's fourth-generation strategic nuclear submarine. The 580-foot-long Borey-class sub, called the Yury Dolgoruky, will be equipped with the Bulava ballistic missile in 2008 after undergoing sea trials this year, the Russian news service RIA Novosti reported. The submarine is capable of carrying up to 16 ballistic missiles. Two other Borey-class nuclear subs, the Alexander Nevsky and the Vladimir Monomakh, are under construction at the same shipyard in northern Russia. Russian President Vladimir Putin said in March that fourth-generation submarines armed with Bulava missiles would form the core of a fleet of modern submarines, a major component of Russia's defense policy. © Copyright 2007 United Press International, Inc. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 15 Japan Times: Russia's atomic chief wants to tie up with Japan on fuel japantimes.co.jp Web Monday, April 9, 2007 MOSCOW (Kyodo) The head of Russia's Federal Atomic Energy Agency has expressed strong interest in expanding nuclear cooperation with Japan, including providing low-enriched uranium for fuel and enriching uranium for Japan. In a written response to questions ahead of his planned visit to Japan starting Monday, Sergei Kiriyenko, director of the agency known as Rosatom, also proposed that the two countries set up a joint venture in Russia dealing with the entire nuclear fuel cycle. Kiriyenko's visit comes after Prime Ministers Shinzo Abe and Mikhail Fradkov agreed in February to start talks on a nuclear cooperation accord. The lack of such an agreement has limited bilateral cooperation in the private sector. Kiriyenko said he will talk about the envisioned agreement during his visit, indicating the negotiations could conclude by the end of this year. Japan has been reluctant to pursue uranium enrichment on its own because it can lead to the development of nuclear arms. Kiriyenko said "two obstacles" have hindered nuclear cooperation between Japan and Russia -- the lack of a nuclear cooperation agreement and the fact that in Russia there has been little separation between military and civilian use of nuclear power. The Japan Times ***************************************************************** 16 UPI: India to test long-range missile this week United Press International - Security & Terrorism - 4/9/2007 8:15:00 AM -0400 NEW DELHI, April 9 (UPI) -- India is expected to conduct a test launch of its largest nuclear-capable missile sometime this week. Sources told Press Trust of India over the weekend that the Agni-III missile would be launched from the Wheeler Island range between Tuesday and Friday. The test will be the latest in a series of recent missile tests by India and its rival, Pakistan, and is in keeping with a pattern of tit-for-tat launches by the two nuclear-capable neighbors. Pakistan sent up a Hatf-II surface-to-surface vehicle at the end of March. The launch was announced a day after Pakistan and India ended their latest round of talks over the disputed Siachen Glacier in the Himalayas with no progress reported in efforts to arrange a troop withdrawal from the remote area. The Harf-III is capable of carrying nuclear weapons; however it is considered a short-range missile with a range of about 125 miles. The Agni-III is a long-range asset that has a stated range of 3,000 kilometer (1,864 miles) that could be extended to 5,000 kilometers (3,106 miles), defense experts told PTI. PTI said the Agni-III is the longest-range missile in southern Asia, although China has some missiles with a greater reach. The Agni-III underwent a failed test launch last summer, but has been successfully tested once since that time. © Copyright 2007 United Press International, Inc. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 17 TMIA loses hearing; vows to fight on Date: Mon, 09 Apr 2007 15:04:59 -0700 *Date: *April 9, 2007 8:00:14 AM EDT *Anti-nuke group’s hearing is denied* *PPL wants to add 20 years to existing licenses for area nuke plant.* TOM VENESKY tvenesky@timesleader.com A hearing request in opposition to PPL’s application to renew the operating licenses for its Susquehanna nuclear power plant in Salem Township has been denied by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. In January, Eric Epstein, chairman of TMI Alert, filed a hearing request with the NRC regarding PPL’s application to add 20 years to the existing 40-year operating licenses for both of its reactors. Epstein listed five contentions on his request that alleged: • Inability of applicant to maintain financial obligations. • Failure to address water-use issues. • Flawed demographic profile. • Flawed tax analysis. • Non-compliance with emergency preparedness requirements. The license for the Unit 1 reactor will expire in 2022, and the Unit 2 reactor license expires in 2024. On March 22, a three-judge Atomic Safety and Licensing Board, which was established by the NRC to decide on the hearing request, ruled that none of Epstein’s five contentions merits a hearing. According to NRC spokesman Neil Sheehan, there are 103 reactors in the United States and 47 have been approved for license extensions while only seven have faced a hearing request. “I knew getting a contention admitted was a long shot, and my intention going in was to develop a public record,” Epstein said, adding he will not appeal the decision. NRC spokeswoman Diane Screnci said the window to request a hearing on the application has passed. It will take the NRC approximately 22 months to complete a review of the application, Screnci said, and the agency will focus on the plant’s plan to address aging and an environmental impact statement. The NRC will issue a draft environmental impact statement this December and a public hearing will be held in January 2008. “We still have a lot of work to do,” Screnci said. Epstein said the license renewal application was submitted too early considering the current licenses don’t expire for another 15 and 17 years. The lengthy time frame will make it difficult to determine how much aging will occur between now and then, he said. Epstein said he intends to file an appeal with the Susquehanna River Basin Commission regarding the plant’s application for increased water usage from the Susquehanna River. He will also challenge PPL’s request to the NRC to increase capacity, or uprate, each of its reactors at the Salem Township plant. The appeal must be filed before May 13, Epstein said. “The plant is going to be operating for 20 more years with increased capacity, so there should be an increased benefit to the community,” he said. “The community should receive a commensurate reward for incurring an increased risk. The greater risk comes from storing more waste at the site while receiving less tax revenues.” Screnci said PPL has made a request to increase the power of each reactor by 13 percent. The request was made on Oct. 11, 2006, and the NRC review will be completed on Jan. 30, 2008. ***************************************************************** 18 The Hindu: 8 pressurised heavy water reactors to be set up Tuesday, April 10, 2007 : 0345 Hrs Chennai, April 10. (PTI): The Department of Atomic Energy proposes to set up eight 700 Mw Pressurised Heavy Water Reactors (PHWRs) in the 11th plan, S K Jain, Chairman and Managing Director of the Nuclear Power Corporation of India (NPCIL) and BHAVINI, said on Monday. The Bhartiya Nabhikiya Vidyut Nigam Limited (BHAVINI) is an undertaking of the department of atomic energy, entrusted with the construction and operation of fast breeder reactors. Three more 500 Mw Fast Breeder Reactors (FBRs) and one Advanced Heavy Water Reactor (AHWR) would also be set up, he said, addressing a press conference here after inaugurating an international symposium on 'Advances in Stainless Steel' here. The site had been identified and clearance has been received from the Ministry of Environment and Forests for four PHWRs. "Construction drawings are being prepared. We are waiting for approval from the Government. The groundwork will start soon after that," he said. He also said that the eight reactors would be launched in the next five years. Two of three FBR's will be located at Kalpakkam at the existing plant site. A site finding committee was in the process of identifying the location for future reactors, land for which could then be frozen for the purpose, he said. It was also desirable to have 10 more 1,000 Mw PHWR's to support and meet the additional needs of the DAE, he said. He ruled out India being short on Uranium. "We have sufficient uranium to support 10,000 Mw. In fact, this year itself, uranium production will be doubled," he said. Dr S Banerjee, Director, BARC said the design for the AHWR has been completed and they were now preparing the engineering design. Copyright © 2006, The Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the ***************************************************************** 19 Times of India: NTPC eyes 6,000 MW N-power- 10 Apr, 2007| Updated at 0011hrs IST [ 9 Apr, 2007 2243hrs ISTTIMES NEWS NETWORK ] NEW DELHI: Power major National Thermal Power Corporation (NTPC) plans to set up 6,000 MW of nuclear generation capacity over the next few years and is talking to equipment and fuel suppliers for the purpose. We will have 2,000 MW of nuclear power generation by the middle of 12th Plan (2012-17). Simultaneously, we will start work on two power plants of 2,000 MW each, NTPC Chairman and Managing Director T Sankaralingam said. He said the company was talking to equipment and fuel suppliers for the proposed plants. NTPC has been in talks with international players such as GE Energy for setting up the new nuclear facilities and was also engaged in discussions with Thorium Power, a US-based manufacturer of nuclear fuel technology, to establish joint ventures in the country. NTPC also plans to change its business model to one that would be pegged to market requirements. "NTPC will explore opportunities for direct supply to bulk customers and trading through open access. NTPC would invest in energy technologies. These will be our futuristic platform for fundamental and applied research and help the company work with specific targets in several areas, including those which would enhance our operational efficiency and competitiveness. NTPC provides the cheapest power with an average rate of 164 paise per unit. We will strive to retain the cost advantage," Sankaralingam said. On the PSUs future vision, Sankaralingam said, "We are a 26,194 MW company the largest power in India today. Our vision is to become a world class integrated power major, powering India's growth, with increasing global presence". Copyright ©2007Times Internet Limited. All rights reserved. For ***************************************************************** 20 Times Leader: Anti-nuke group's hearing is denied Timesleader.com PPL wants to add 20 years to existing licenses for area nuke plant. TOM VENESKY tvenesky@timesleader.com A hearing request in opposition to PPL’s application to renew the operating licenses for its Susquehanna nuclear power plant in Salem Township has been denied by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. In January, Eric Epstein, chairman of TMI Alert, filed a hearing request with the NRC regarding PPL’s application to add 20 years to the existing 40-year operating licenses for both of its reactors. Epstein listed five contentions on his request that alleged: Inability of applicant to maintain financial obligations. Failure to address water-use issues. Flawed demographic profile. Flawed tax analysis. Non-compliance with emergency preparedness requirements. The license for the Unit 1 reactor will expire in 2022, and the Unit 2 reactor license expires in 2024. On March 22, a three-judge Atomic Safety and Licensing Board, which was established by the NRC to decide on the hearing request, ruled that none of Epstein’s five contentions merits a hearing. According to NRC spokesman Neil Sheehan, there are 103 reactors in the United States and 47 have been approved for license extensions while only seven have faced a hearing request. “I knew getting a contention admitted was a long shot, and my intention going in was to develop a public record,” Epstein said, adding he will not appeal the decision. NRC spokeswoman Diane Screnci said the window to request a hearing on the application has passed. It will take the NRC approximately 22 months to complete a review of the application, Screnci said, and the agency will focus on the plant’s plan to address aging and an environmental impact statement. The NRC will issue a draft environmental impact statement this December and a public hearing will be held in January 2008. “We still have a lot of work to do,” Screnci said. Epstein said the license renewal application was submitted too early considering the current licenses don’t expire for another 15 and 17 years. The lengthy time frame will make it difficult to determine how much aging will occur between now and then, he said. Epstein said he intends to file an appeal with the Susquehanna River Basin Commission regarding the plant’s application for increased water usage from the Susquehanna River. He will also challenge PPL’s request to the NRC to increase capacity, or uprate, each of its reactors at the Salem Township plant. The appeal must be filed before May 13, Epstein said. “The plant is going to be operating for 20 more years with increased capacity, so there should be an increased benefit to the community,” he said. “The community should receive a commensurate reward for incurring an increased risk. The greater risk comes from storing more waste at the site while receiving less tax revenues.” Screnci said PPL has made a request to increase the power of each reactor by 13 percent. The request was made on Oct. 11, 2006, and the NRC review will be completed on Jan. 30, 2008. © Copyright 2007 The Times Leader. All Rights Reserved. Times Leader 15 N. Main Street Wilkes-Barre, PA 18711 (570) 829-7101 or (800) 427-8649 ***************************************************************** 21 Star-News: Brunswick prepares nuclear-fuel site | StarNewsOnline.com | | Wilmington, NC Published April 09. 2007 3:30AM Print Outdoor storage of spent material begins in 2010 By Ken Little Staff Writer ken.little@starnewsonline.com Site preparation at the Brunswick Nuclear Plant near Southport has started for the outdoor storage of spent nuclear fuel. Actual storage of the spent fuel in garage-sized "dry cask" bunkers made of steel and concrete will not begin until 2010. "We have begun some on-site work and we are on track. We have started to clear the area and we are starting to do some soil remediation studies to determine what we have to do to the area," said Francis McComas, spokesman for plant operator Progress Energy. Fuel assemblies containing rods filled with radioactive uranium-enriched pellets will be stored in cylindrical metal canisters, which slide into concrete bunkers. Industry critics say outside storage of the fuel assemblies opens up the possibility of attack by terrorists. McComas said security measures will be taken, including the use of guards. "We are confident that the storage facility will be a viable option," McComas said. "It will be a safe way to store the fuel." Nuclear Regulatory Commission spokesman Roger Hannah said dry cask storage was re-examined after the Sept. 11 attacks. "We did consider it post 9/11. There were a number of efforts to look at issues that were not considered before with dry cask storage. There were a number of enhancements made and there were some number of things done with equipment and personnel," Hannah said. He would not elaborate. The storage canisters to be used at the Brunswick property are of a horizontal, rather than vertical, design. Twenty of the modules, each with a storage capacity of four to five years, are scheduled to be on site by 2010. The canisters will be located about 200 yards north of the plant, near an access road running parallel to the plant's intake canal, utility officials said. The storage site won't be visible from the road or from the Cape Fear River. The commercial nuclear industry does not expect to be able to use the proposed federal repository at Yucca Mountain, Nev., anytime soon. Resistance to the project remains strong in Nevada. Industry observers have said the earliest the underground disposal site would begin accepting spent nuclear fuel is 2010, with more realistic projections of 2016 or 2017. "The expectation is that at some point there will be a permanent disposal facility, but we are obviously cognizant of the fact it will be some time," Hannah said. McComas said an electricity transmission line must be moved to make way for the Brunswick outdoor storage site, along with some towers that the line runs across. Underground fiber-optic cables, along with telephone and electricity lines, must also be rerouted, McComas said. About 20 metric tons per year of used nuclear fuel is generated by a typical plant; about 2,000 metric tons of spent fuel is generated each year by the nuclear industry, according to the Nuclear Energy Institute. Used fuel is already stored at the Brunswick site in "spent fuel pools" in buildings housing the plant's two reactors. "There are a number of plants that have been doing this for a while and a number of plants that are going to dry storage," Hannah said. The pools inside the Brunswick reactor buildings are about 40 feet deep. The 14-foot assemblies housing the rods containing spent fuel emit radiation and must be cooled in water for five years until they lose some of their radioactivity and can be placed in dry cask storage. Progress Energy must meet all NRC requirements before outside storage begins at Brunswick, Hannah added. Progress Energy uses the same dry-cask technology at its Robinson Nuclear Plant in Hartsville, S.C., where outside storage of spent nuclear fuel began in 2005. The utility also continues to transport fuel assemblies by train from the Brunswick plant in sealed canisters to Shearon Harris, a Progress Energy-operated nuclear plant in southwestern Wake County. The material is stored there in spent fuel pools. The NRC license to ship the canisters by rail to the Shearon Harris plant will expire in 2008. There is enough capacity in the two spent fuel pools at the Brunswick plant to store the radioactive material until on-site dry storage is available, Progress Energy officials have said. Ken Little: 343-2389 ken.little@starnewsonline.com ***************************************************************** 22 Reuters.com: PG&E Calif. Diablo Canyon 2 reactor back at full | Mon Apr 9, 2007 8:23am ET NEW YORK, April 9 (Reuters) - PG&E Corp.'s (PCG.N: Quote, Profile , Research) 1,087-megawatt Unit 2 at the Diablo Canyon nuclear power station in California returned to full power by early Monday, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission said in a report. Last week, the company kept the unit at about half power to work on the intake tunnels. The 2,174 MW Diablo Canyon station is located in Avila Beach in San Luis Obispo County, about 195 miles northwest of Los Angeles. There are two 1,087 MW units numbered 1 and 2 at the station, which entered service in 1985 and 1986, respectively. Unit 1 continued to operate at full power. One MW powers about 700 homes in California. PG&E owns and operates more than 6,000 MW of generating capacity, markets energy commodities and supplies electricity (5 million) and natural gas (4.1 million) to customers in California. © Reuters 2007. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 23 BusinessWeek: Russia, Rusal plans nuclear plant The Associated Press April 9, 2007, 7:49AM EST MOSCOW Russia's atomic energy agency and aluminum giant Rusal announced plans Monday to build a nuclear power plant and an aluminum smelter in the country's Far East. Rosatom and OAO United Company Rusal will conduct a feasibility study by the end of the year and then set a timetable for construction of the plant and smelter, foreseen under a joint agreement on long-term investment projects, they said in a statement. The project would help meet a target set by President Vladimir Putin of raising the proportion of nuclear generated power to at least 25 percent by 2030, as well as helping meet the enormous electricity needs of Rusal, the world's biggest producer of aluminum. The statement said that the project will be configured as a so-called public-private partnership, enabling Rusal and Rosatom to seek government funds specially earmarked for infrastructure development. "The program will provide a platform for an economic upturn across large areas of the country," Rosatom head Sergei Kiriyenko said in the statement. It did not say where the plants would be located; the Far East is a large area encompassing much of Russia's eastern coastline and nearby inland regions. Russia has 31 reactors at 10 nuclear power plants, accounting for 16-17 percent of the country's electricity generation. First Deputy Prime Minister Sergei Ivanov reiterated on Monday that the first floating nuclear power plant, to provide power for the Arctic port of Severodvinsk, should go on-line in 2010, and said there are plans for seven such plants along Russia's northern and eastern coasts, the Interfax news agency reported. Rusal, its rival Sual and Swiss-based commodities trader Glencore International AG completed the combination of their assets at the end of March, creating United Company Rusal and surpassing U.S.-based Alcoa Inc. as the world's largest aluminum producer. UC Rusal has annual pro forma sales of approximately $12 billion and a production capacity of nearly 4 million tons of aluminum per year, or about 12 percent of global output. The company operates in 17 countries across five continents. Copyright 2000-2007 by The McGraw-Hill Companies Inc. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 24 FR NRC: Union of Concerned Scientists; Receipt of Petition for Rulemaking Doc E7-6644 [Federal Register: April 9, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 67)] [Proposed Rules] [Page 17440-17441] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr09ap07-19] Proposed Rules Federal Register ________________________________________________________________________ This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules. [[Page 17440]] NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 10 CFR Part 73 [Docket No. PRM-73-13] AGENCY: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. ACTION: Petition for rulemaking; notice of receipt. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is publishing for public comment a notice of receipt of a petition for rulemaking, dated February 21, 2007, which was filed with the Commission by David Lochbaum, Director, Nuclear Safety Project, on behalf of the Union of Concerned Scientists. The petition was docketed by the NRC on February 23, 2007, and has been assigned Docket No. PRM-73-13. The petitioner requests that the NRC amend its regulations to close a loophole in current regulations that would enable persons who do not meet trustworthiness and reliability standards for unescorted access to protected areas of nuclear power plants the permission to enter protected areas with an unarmed escort. The petitioner believes that current regulations create a security vulnerability that could potentially compromise public health and safety. DATES: Submit comments by June 25, 2007. Comments received after this date will be considered if it is practical to do so, but the Commission is able to assure consideration only for comments received on or before this date. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by any one of the following methods. Please include PRM-73-13 in the subject line of your comments. Comments on petitions submitted in writing or in electronic form will be made available for public inspection. Because your comments will not be edited to remove any identifying or contact information, the NRC cautions you against including any information in your submission that you do not want to be publicly disclosed. Mail comments to: Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, ATTN: Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff. E-mail comments to: SECY@nrc.gov. If you do not receive a reply e- mail confirming that we have received your comments, contact us directly at (301) 415-1966. You may also submit comments via the NRC's rulemaking Web site at http://ruleforum.llnl.gov. Address questions about our rulemaking Web site to Carol Gallagher (301) 415-5905; e-mail cag@nrc.gov. Comments can also be submitted via the Federal eRulemaking Portal http://www.regulations.gov. Hand deliver comments to: 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852, between 7:30 a.m. and 4:15 p.m. Federal workdays. (Telephone (301) 415-1966). Fax comments to: Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission at (301) 415-1101. Publicly available documents related to this petition may be viewed electronically on the public computers located at the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR), Room O1 F21, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland. The PDR reproduction contractor will copy documents for a fee. Selected documents, including comments, may be viewed and downloaded electronically via the NRC rulemaking Web site at http://ruleforum.llnl.gov. Publicly available documents created or received at the NRC after November 1, 1999, are available electronically at the NRC's Electronic Reading Room at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. From this site, the public can gain entry into the NRC's Agencywide Document Access and Management System (ADAMS), which provides text and image files of NRC's public documents. If you do not have access to ADAMS or if there are problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS, contact the PDR Reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737 or by e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael T. Lesar, Chief, Rulemaking, Directives and Editing Branch, Division of Administrative Services, Office of Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, Telephone: 301-415-7163 or Toll Free: 800- 368-5642. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Petitioner The petitioner is the Union of Concerned Scientists. The petitioner states that it is a nonprofit partnership of scientists and citizens that combines scientific analysis, policy development, and citizen advocacy to achieve practical environmental solutions. In 2002, the Union of Concerned Scientists had 61,300 members. The petitioner states that the Union of Concerned Scientists has been an active participant in the past in public meetings conducted by NRC regarding security regulations, and that the petitioner continues to articulate potential problems and recommended solutions in various public arenas. Background Current regulations at 10 CFR part 73 contain requirements for the physical protection of nuclear power plants and materials. Specifically, Sec. Sec. 73.55(d), 73.56(b), and 73.57(b) outline procedures for granting access to protected areas of nuclear power plants. Section 73.55 (d)(6) states that a person who has not been granted unescorted access to protected areas may be granted access with an escort. Section 73.56(b) requires that licensees establish and maintain an access authorization program granting individuals unescorted access to protected and vital areas with the objective of providing high assurance that individuals granted unescorted access are trustworthy and reliable. Section 73.57 requires the fingerprinting of persons who have been granted unescorted access. The petitioner states that while current regulations require access control to protected areas, including fingerprinting and background clearances, Sec. 73.55(d)(6) would allow access to protected areas by persons who do not meet trustworthiness and reliability standards for unescorted access to the protected area. The petitioner further states that current regulations enable persons who do not meet trustworthiness and reliability standards for unescorted access to the protected area to be escorted through protected areas by unarmed persons that may not be members of the security force. The petitioner believes that this is [[Page 17441]] a loophole that creates a security vulnerability that could potentially compromise public health and safety. The Proposed Amendments The petitioner requests that 10 CFR part 73 be amended to require that licensees implement procedures to ensure that: (1) When information becomes known to a licensee about an individual that would prevent that individual from gaining unescorted access to the protected area of a nuclear power plant, the licensee will implement measures to ensure the individual does not enter the protected area, whether escorted or not; and (2) when sufficient information is not available to a licensee about an individual to determine whether the criteria for unescorted access are satisfied, the licensee will implement measures to allow that individual to enter the protected area only when escorted at all times by an armed member of the security force who remains in periodic communication with security supervision. In the case of the first proposal, the petitioner believes that when it is known that a person's trustworthiness and reliability do not meet the prescribed standards identified in Sec. 73.56(b), access to protected areas, either escorted or unescorted, should be denied. In the case of the second proposal, the petitioner recognizes that it is impractical and burdensome to conduct background investigations of every person requiring access to a protected area, noting persons may need one-time access. With that in mind, the petitioner proposes granting these persons access to protected areas, but only when escorted by an armed member of the security force and only when this armed member is in periodic communication with security supervision. Conclusion The petitioner believes that current regulations create a security vulnerability that could potentially compromise public health and safety. The petitioner believes that its proposed amendments to 10 CFR part 73 will address this vulnerability in current regulations that enables persons who do not meet trustworthiness and reliability standards for unescorted access to protected areas of nuclear power plants permission to enter protected areas with an unarmed escort. Accordingly, the petitioner requests that the NRC amend its regulations related to the physical protection of nuclear power plants and materials as described previously in the section titled, ``The Proposed Amendments.'' Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 3rd day of April 2007. Kenneth R. Hart, Acting Secretary of the Commission. [FR Doc. E7-6644 Filed 4-6-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P ***************************************************************** 25 NRC: NRC to Discuss 2006 Performance Assessment for Palisades Nuclear Power Plant News Release - Region III - 2007-014 - U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs, Region III 2443 Warrenville Road, Lisle, IL 60532 www.nrc.gov CONTACT: E-mail: opa3@nrc.gov The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff will meet with representatives of Nuclear Management Co., on Wednesday, April 11, to discuss the agency’s assessment of safety performance for last year at the Palisades Nuclear Power Plant. The plant is located near Covert, Mich. The meeting, which will be open to the public, is scheduled to begin at 6 p.m. at Lake Michigan College, 125 Veteran Blvd, South Haven, Mich. The NRC staff will present the results of the assessment and be available to respond to questions or comments from the public before the close of the meeting. “The NRC continually reviews the performance of the Palisades plant and the nation’s other commercial nuclear power facilities,” NRC Region III Administrator James Caldwell said. “This meeting will provide an opportunity for a discussion of our annual assessment of safety performance with the company and with local officials and residents who live near the plant. Our goal is to explain the NRC oversight process and make as much information as possible available to the public regarding our regulation of these facilities.” A letter sent from the NRC Region III Office to plant officials addresses the performance of the plant during the period and will serve as the basis for the meeting discussion. It is available on the NRC web site at: http://www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/LETTERS/pali_2006q4.pdf. The NRC’s assessment concluded that the Palisades plant operated safely during the period. The NRC uses color-coded inspection findings and performance indicators to assess nuclear plant performance. The colors start with “green” and then increase to “white,” “yellow” or “red,” commensurate with the safety significance of the issues involved. All of the inspection findings and performance indicators for Palisades during 2006 were determined to be “green.” As a result of this performance, the NRC will conduct the normal, baseline level of inspections during the upcoming year. In the second quarter of 2006, there was one “white” performance indicator in the area of availability and reliability of systems required to mitigate the effects of an accident. The performance indicator returned to “green” after the second quarter. The NRC conducted a supplemental inspection to make sure the issues associated with the “white” performance indicator had been addressed. Routine inspections are performed by two NRC Resident Inspectors assigned to the plant and by inspection specialists from the Region III Office in Lisle, Ill., and the agency’s headquarters in Rockville, Md. Among the areas of plant operations to be inspected this year by NRC specialists are the replacement of reactor vessel head, alert and notification system testing, fire protection, and access control to radiologically significant areas. Current performance information for Palisades is available on the NRC’s web site at: http://www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/PALI/pali_chart.html ====================================================================== NRC news releases are available through a free list server subscription at the following Web address: http://www.nrc.gov/public-involve/listserver.html. The NRC Home Page at www.nrc.gov also offers a Subscribe to News link in the News & Information menu. E-mail notifications are sent to subscribers when news releases are posted to NRC's Web Site. Monday, April 09, 2007 ***************************************************************** 26 MSNBC.com: How NRC unit became gun-toting cops - U.S. News - Typical cases involve falsified records, lost equipment, sleeping on the job NRC From its Rockville, Md., headquarters, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission oversees the U.S. nuclear industry. The NRC's Office of Investigations looks into regulatory violations by NRC licensees and contractors. Mike Stuckey Senior news editor With no public discussion or input from Congress, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission has quietly obtained armed federal police status for a small office of investigators whose big cases typically involve people sleeping on the job, falsifying documents or misplacing equipment. “I didn’t realize you needed guns and handcuffs to protect yourself against paper cuts,†said Dave Lochbaum of the Union of Concerned Scientists, a longtime critic of the NRC’s Office of Investigations. The police status was granted after the office claimed it needed powers it never or rarely uses, and raised the specter of clandestine and dangerous missions in letters and memos to other federal agencies. While police powers may be of questionable value in performing NRC investigations, they support a job classification that pays non-managerial agents an average of $130,000 a year and as much as $145,000. The Office of Investigations was formed in 1982 to investigate violations by licensees and contractors of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the five-member panel appointed by the president to oversee non-military applications of nuclear technology. When agents suspect criminal violations, they’re supposed to notify the Justice Department, which then decides if a criminal investigation will be opened. No 'statutory authority' That’s because the NRC has no “statutory authority†to investigate crimes, a power that Congress has specifically granted to other agencies. The agency has recognized it does not have that power and rejected advice in a 2005 “peer review†that it consider seeking it from Congress. But in 2005 and again last year, all 30 agents in the NRC's Office of Investigations were deputized as U.S. marshals. Known as “blanket deputation†and valid until Nov. 30, 2009, the act gives the NRC agents the power to make arrests, serve search warrants, protect confidential informants, conduct electronic eavesdropping and carry firearms. Guy Caputo Office of Investigations Director Guy Caputo said his agents need police powers to do their NRC jobs and that their classification as criminal investigators has undergone “a long litany of scrutiny."  That scrutiny has largely been applied by James Foster, a retired NRC employee who has argued for years that OI agents are improperly classified as criminal investigators. He maintains that “99.99 percent of Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Investigations special agents’ duties consist of non-custodial interviews with cooperative witnesses and document reviews." Because the OI was not granted law enforcement authority by Congress, Foster maintains it was improper to place OI agents in the criminal investigator job category to begin with. That classification, obtained shortly after the office was formed, carries a 25 percent salary premium for being available to work long hours and full retirement benefits after 20 years of service for agents 50 or older. Instead, he says, OI agents should be classified as general investigators whose work sometimes touches on criminal cases but who are ineligible for the extra salary and early retirement.  His own “very conservative analysis†indicates that the government has needlessly spent more than $15 million on extra salary and benefits over the years. Foster said the NRC got and preserved the criminal investigator status by providing “vague, erroneous or misleading and false information†to other agencies. He points to NRC statements that all of OI’s cases are criminal investigations and that agents have “frequent and direct contact with suspected or convicted criminals.†He believes deputy status could help pre-empt future questions about whether OI agents should be paid as criminal investigators. But Caputo, the OI director, said the agents' status was supported by a 1999 review by the NRC’s inspector general. Performed in response to Foster’s allegations, the probe concluded there was “no indication of wrongdoing by NRC staff concerning the classification of OI investigators.†`Criminal aspect' to every case And Caputo's chief deputy, James Fitzgerald, said that because any of the office's cases could eventually result in criminal charges if picked up by the Justice Department, "Every investigation we conduct has a civil and criminal aspect to it." Caputo said he sought deputy status for his agents because it was recommended in a "peer review" done by another law enforcement agency. He would not name the agency nor provide the report. The recommendation that the NRC seek blanket deputation for its agents, and Caputo's intent to do so, were mentioned on the sixth page of a nine-page document sent to the five-member NRC on June 1, 2005. The NRC provided a copy to MSNBC.com, but redacted most of it. The only other recommendation from the peer review that was not blacked out was that the NRC consider congressional action to "help establish the law enforcement identity of the NRC OI." NRC officials rejected that. Because NRC commissioners did not question the recommendation, the agency's staff considered it approved. "In this case, there being no response, that's an affirmative," said NRC Public Affairs Director Eliot Brenner. Nor was there any public discussion. On Oct. 14, 2005, the U.S. Marshals Service informed Caputo that his request for blanket deputation had been granted for a year. In November 2006, a three-year renewal was granted. Before the blanket deputation, the Marshals Service had been fielding an increasing number of requests from Caputo for deputation of individual OI agents since 2001. Prior to that, OI had requested that only a single agent be deputized in the thousands of cases it had handled since 1982. NRC spokesman Dave McIntyre said the change was due to "operational experience ... the general climate following 9/11 ... and increased requests from the Justice Department for NRC OI assistance in investigating cases we referred for potential criminal prosecution." In letters and forms submitted to the marshals in pursuit of deputy status, Caputo listed a variety of tasks: "to make arrests or execute search warrants," "render witness protection," and "conduct electronic and/or normal surveillance related activities" and participate in "various joint terrorism task forces." In an interview with MSNBC.com, Caputo acknowledged that OI had not made any arrests since its formation. He said his agents served two search warrants in 2006, when the office handled 266 cases. He declined to say whether OI agents had conducted electronic surveillance or provided witness protection. Nor would he discuss their work on "joint terrorism task forces." 'Nickel and dime questions' "You have a lot of ... nickel and dime questions that we're not going to touch," said Brenner, who joined Caputo, Fitzgerald and two other NRC staff members in a conference call with MSNBC.com. Caputo also would not say what kind of weapons his agents carry, although "they've got the latitude to carry them whenever they need to." He said agents are generally hired with many years of experience in other federal law enforcement agencies and they "use very, very good common sense and judgment in terms of when they need to carry their weapons." In his 2005 bid for blanket deputation, Caputo said his agents "routinely interview witnesses and suspects in potentially dangerous circumstances . late night/early morning, in remote locations and in hostile environments." That characterization was dismissed as "just ridiculous" by Billie Garde, a lawyer who has worked extensively on cases involving the NRC. "Nuclear power plants are in remote locations but I have been interviewing witnesses there for my entire career and I'm a grandmother," she said. "I don't need a gun." Garde said she can't think of any instance in which OI agents would need to be deputized. "OI doesn't have anybody in the field unless they're doing an investigation. The fact is the OI guys are sitting at desks in regional offices. They're investigating complaints from whistleblowers about paperwork fraud." 'At most ... white collar crimes' Lochbaum of the Union of Concerned Scientists, an engineer who worked at nuclear plants for 17 years before joining the watchdog group, has such a low opinion of OI that he sought unsuccessfully in 1998 to get it disbanded. He also can't think of any reasons the office would need deputy status. "At most, they're looking at white collar crimes," he said. He finds it particularly galling that OI has used witness protection as a reason to seek deputy status. When he tried to get protection for a Tennessee whistleblower who was receiving threats, Lochbaum said, the NRC "said if they kill him or blow him up, something like that, then we can investigate that and see if that violated any of our regulations. But it's not our job to protect these guys." The tasks listed in Caputo's letters to the Marshals Service also seem at odds with many of the "Significant Cases" listed in the office's recent annual reports: a guard failing to report his arrest for habitual traffic offenses; the operator of a research reactor modifying equipment without authorization; a doctor lying about a licensing matter; a power plant operator sleeping on the job. In recent years, the office did participate in criminal investigations of a major problem at a nuclear power plant and massive fraud at a valve manufacturing company, both in Ohio. But the defendants, who were accused of lying to the government or conspiracy to commit fraud, were engineers and executives, not felons with violent backgrounds. Overall, criminal prosecutions stemming from OI investigations are exceedingly rare. While the office notes that it refers dozens of cases every year to the Justice Department for "prosecutive determination," from 2000 to 2005 criminal probes were launched in just seven of 244 referrals. Caputo acknowledged that his office does not follow a 1988 agreement with the Justice Department, particularly a provision that says NRC agents are only to "assist" law enforcement agencies in criminal investigations when asked to do so in a written request signed by "a United States attorney or deputy assistant attorney general, as appropriate." Old document, but still cited Caputo dismissed the memorandum of understanding as something that has been superseded by "customs and usage," yet the agreement is often cited in current NRC documents. The Marshals Service would not disclose how often blanket deputation is approved for federal offices that don't have law enforcement authority nor name any other offices that have obtained it. After reviewing a list of questions about the deputations for two weeks, the service referred many of them back to the NRC and to the Deputy Attorney General's Office at the Justice Department. A Justice Department spokesman promised on two occasions to seek answers but did not follow up. Jeffrey Merrifield Jeffrey Merrifield, the only one of the five NRC commissioners to respond to requests for comment on the deputation, said commissioners knew that OI was seeking blanket deputation and agreed it was necessary "if for no other reason than to defend themselves." But Merrifield was under the mistaken impression that OI agents had some law enforcement authority without being deputized. Story continues below advertisement His comments echoed Caputo, who said, "You just never know what you're going to run up against . the kinds of people you're going to be talking to." Neither offered specific examples of dangerous situations that NRC agents have encountered. Asked why the NRC didn't seek input from Congress, Merrifield, the only attorney currently serving on the panel, replied, "We felt this was in the ministerial authority of the commission." James Foster Foster, a onetime gun-carrying federal air marshal, admits he has an ax to grind because he was forced out of his job as unqualified to be a criminal investigator when OI was created to replace the office where he worked. But he notes that he went on to work in other NRC jobs for 20 years and retired proud of his career with the agency, which he still believes accomplishes its overall mission well. Now, he says, he continues to raise the issue "because it's the right thing to do. I firmly believe in it. I believe the agency's misspending money and this is causing the wrong focus for NRC investigations." c 2007 MSNBC Interactive MSN Privacy | Legal Feedback | Help ***************************************************************** 27 Hemscott: Rusal says planning nuclear plant in far-east Russia MOSCOW (Thomson Financial) - Russian aluminium producer Rusal and Russian nuclear energy agency Rosatom said they are to begin to work on plans to build a vast nuclear energy and metal processing plant in far-eastern Russia. An agreement signed by both parties stated they had agreed to carry out 'a detailed exploration of the opportunities to create an energy and metals complex in the Far East, notably a nuclear power station and an aluminium blast furnace.' A feasability study for the project is to be carried out before the end of the year, with a construction calendar to be defined thereafter. The statement did not give details of where the complex might be located. tf.TFN-Europe_newsdesk@thomson.com afp/vlb COPYRIGHT Copyright AFX News Limited 2007. All rights reserved. The copying, republication or redistribution of AFX News Content, including by framing or similar means, is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of AFX News. Copyright 2007 Hemscott Group Limited. ***************************************************************** 28 CBS News: France: Vive Les Nukes, Steve Kroft On How France Is Becoming The Model For Nuclear Energy Generation - Eye On Energy Explore the production and consumption of energy in the United States. Find out more about energy costs, and the use of fossil fuels, nuclear power and renewable energy sources. Interactive Alternative Energy Learn about the types of renewable energy that are used in the U.S. and the regions of the country considered to be most suitable for each kind. April 8, 2007 Quote "Wind and solar are you know, temporary sources of energy. It works when you have wind, it works when you have sun. No sun, no wind, no energy. You don't want watch TV only when you have wind." Anne Lauvergeon WHAT DO YOU THINK? (CBS) With power demands rising and concerns over global warming increasing, what the world needs now is an efficient means of producing large amounts of carbon free energy. One of the few available options is nuclear, a technology whose time seemed to come and go and may now be coming again. For the first time in decades, new nuclear plants are being built, and not just in Iran and North Korea. With zero green house gas emissions, the U.S. government, public utilities and even some environmental groups are taking a second look at nuclear power. And as correspondent Steve Kroft reports, one of the first the places they are looking is to France, where it has been a resounding success and the attitude is "Vive Les Nukes." When much of the world spurned nuclear power, 30 years ago, the French, being French, decided to go their own way and embrace it. Paris, the "City of Light," is lit by nuclear energy, which powers just about everything else in France: its homes, its factories, even its high speed railroads. Nearly 80 percent of the country's electricity comes from 58 nuclear power plants, crammed into a country the size of Texas. Pierre Gadonniex, the head "Electricite de France," the country’s national utility says it all began with a French obsession for energy independence. "In France, we have nearly no coal. We have no oil. So clearly, nuclear appeared to be the best way," Gadonniex explains. "And 30 years later, it appears to be a very smart decision." Because nuclear plants emit no greenhouse gases, France has the cleanest air in the industrialized world, and because the price of oil is now around $60 a barrel, it has the lowest electric bills in Europe. In fact, France has so much cheap electricity, it exports it to its European neighbors. French nuclear plants supply power to parts of Germany, Italy and help light the city of London. "It is a very competitive way of producing electricity when oil prices are beyond, I would say, around $40 a barrel," Gadonniex tells Kroft. And the rest of the world has taken notice. Nearly a dozen countries, including the United States, are either building or planning to build new nuclear plants, and some of that business will go to AREVA, the French government monopoly that controls every step of its nuclear industry from uranium mining to plant design construction to radioactive waste disposal. Deep in the wine country of Burgundy, in a massive factory, AREVA is building the first European reactors since the 1986 Chernobyl disaster. Bertrande Durrande, the Executive Vice President for Manufacturing, tells Kroft the business is "definitely growing." Besides the new reactors it is building for France and Finland, Durrande says, AREVA is bidding on a project to build four new nuclear reactors in China. Asked how many plants he thinks might be built in the next 20 years, Durrande says, "A minimum of 20. Which is quite a change when you compare it to the past." And some of them will almost certainly be in the United States, which hasn't built a new nuclear plant since the 1970's. With energy prices and global temperatures near their reported highs, and the possibility that greenhouse gases will be regulated, the Bush administration is pushing a nuclear revival. In many respects, the nuclear industry in the United States has disappeared. Over 100 plants were cancelled in the 1970's. Kroft talked to Clay Sell, the Deputy Secretary of Energy and the administration's point man on nuclear power. With world energy demand expected to rise 50 percent over the next 25 years, he says it is the only practical option for producing huge amounts of electricity with no carbon emissions. "No serious person can look at the challenge of greenhouse gases and climate change and not come to the conclusion that nuclear power has to play a significant and growing role in meeting that challenge worldwide," Sell says. Asked how much interest there is right now in building new plants, Sell says, "There is a tremendous amount of interest. Two years ago there was exactly zero plants on the drawing boards here in the United States. Today, there are about 15 companies talking about building over 30 commercial nuclear power reactors. Now, all of those won't get built. But we think there's a significant chance that many of them will be built." But so far, no one has signed up to actually build one, an undertaking that requires a huge investment of capital and a certain amount of faith. In the 1980's and 90's political opposition, regulatory delays, cost overruns, and a drop in electricity demand forced utilities to pull the plug on dozens of projects, and the industry has a long memory. "I recall one story, a man who is a CEO today of one of our leading companies," Sell says, "And he described the pain associated with beginning what he thought would be a billion-dollar plant in the 1970's, and bringing it online as a $9 billion plant 20 years later. And he made the point to me that that is not a lesson that'll quickly be forgotten in the industry." (CBS) To try and assuage those concerns the government is offering utilities financial incentives, risk insurance and a streamlined regulatory system, which has borrowed a page from the French by pre-approving four basic reactor designs from which the utilities can choose, knocking years off the process. And some of those new plants could be built on existing sites where reactors are already licensed and operating. But apart from economics, there is the issue of public acceptance. The Chernobyl disaster, and one barely averted at Three Mile Island nearly 30 years ago when a reactor core suffered a partial meltdown, severely damaged the industry's reputation. "Forget technology for the moment," Kroft says. "Forget energy. Forget greenhouse gases. A lot of the problems of this industry have been political. I mean, people are afraid of them. Fair statement?" "It is a fair statement," Sell acknowledges. "There is some level of concern. But what we found out and what we have seen is the more educated the public is, the more they understand the technology, the more comfortable and the more accepting they are." Americans, he says, tend to forget that there are 103 nuclear plants operating in the United States, that have produced 20 percent of the nation's electricity without major incident in the 28 years since Three Mile Island. "And in fact, they have an outstanding record. There has never been a radiation-related death in the commercial nuclear sector in the United States, ever," Sell points out. David Jhirad, the head of science and research for The World Resources Institute, an environmental think tank in Washington, acknowledges that the industry's safety record has been pretty good. Why are so many people afraid of it? "When there's a small probability of a catastrophe people think about the catastrophe and not the small probability," Jhirad says. "Then why have the French accepted it? And what is there about the two cultures that may influence that?" Kroft asks. "The French love high technology. Whether it be nuclear power. Or supersonic airplanes. Or high-speed trains. They love that," Jhirad explains. "And they love, they accord huge respect and credibility to scientists and engineers. And scientists and engineers actually run these programs." One of them is Anne Lauvergeon. She is an engineer, a onetime political aide to former French President Mitterrand and chairman of the nuclear giant AREVA, which dominates an industry that employs 150,000 people, and is a key exporter in the French economy. She may be the most powerful businesswoman in France, where everyone knows her as "Atomic Anne." Asked what the safety record in France is, Lauvergeon tells Kroft, "The safety record in France is excellent. We have not known very important accidents. We are very, very careful." "But one accident could change everything, right?" Kroft asks. "Of course," Lauvergeon agrees. "One accident, one very serious accident could affect the nuclear industry as a whole." "You must either be very good or very lucky," remarks. "Maybe mix of both," she says. "You cannot bet on the luck. No luck in nuclear. Only work." And right now she is working hard to convince the world that nuclear power can help solve some of the world's environmental problems. "One of the things the French tell us is that they consider nuclear power to be a green energy source. Accurate?" Kroft asks David Jhirad from The World Resources Institute. "Accurate, except for one thing. Which is perhaps the Achilles' heel of nuclear power. It's certainly accurate that the plants emit no carbon dioxide," Jhirad says. "The one thing that needs to be solved is the issue of long term radioactive waste storage and management." (CBS) For decades, Americans have stored their radioactive waste on-site at power plants, awaiting a permanent solution, the Yucca Mountain Repository in Nevada. It's years behind schedule, will cost $30 billion to open, and is already too small to hold all the waste. The French have taken another approach to the problem. While the United States decided to store its nuclear waste, the French embraced the idea of reprocessing it. Instead of burying the spent fuel rods underground or underwater, they decided to build a massive plant on the coast of Normandy and recycle the used fuel and reuse it. The high security facility stretches for two miles along the coast. All of France's spent nuclear fuel eventually ends up at the plant in pools of water. After the fuel rods have cooled five years, the French recycle them to make new fuel. The process drastically reduces the amount of nuclear waste, but one of the by-products of this is high-grade plutonium that can be used for nuclear weapons. "In our judgment, we have to recycle waste eventually. And recycling makes a lotta sense," Sell says. "The big argument against reprocessing has been the fact that some high-grade plutonium that could be used in making a bomb could be stolen from the plant," Kroft remarks. "And we're quite concerned about that as well. And that's why the president has pursued a policy that says we shall develop advanced recycling technologies that do not result in separated plutonium," Sell replies. The United States is leading an international effort to develop the process, but large-scale, plutonium-free reprocessing is still decades off, and just one of a number of research projects the industry hopes will improve a still young technology. "Five years ago, nuclear was dead. Now people are really buzzing about it," says MIT Professor Andrew Kadak, who is working on a new generation of nuclear technology, called the Pebble Bed reactor. Instead of conventional fuel rods, the uranium is contained in hundreds of thousands of graphite balls, which would make it safer than than conventional reactors. "This type of reactor is very unique in the sense that there's no way to melt this down," Kadak explains. "The power inside each little pebble is so low that the temperatures here don't get high enough to reach the melting temperature of uranium, these reactors are exactly what people really wanna see, and that is no meltdowns." For now the French are pushing an interim generation of nuclear reactors that are safer, simpler and more efficient than the ones that were built in the United States in the 1960's and 70's and they have partnered up with the American nuclear plant operator Constellation. "It's difficult to fight against climate change. And at the same time to be against nuclear power because you have not a lot of ways to produce energy without CO2 emissions," says AREVA chief Anne Lauvergeon. "You have hydro, you have nuclear, you have wind and you have solar. But wind and solar are you know, temporary sources of energy. It works when you have wind, it works when you have sun. No sun, no wind, no energy. You don't want watch TV only when you have wind." © MMVII, CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 29 10NBC: Ginna is running out of room for its spent fuel rods / WHEC TV-10 4/9/07 By Ray Levato The Ginna Nuclear Power Plant has been producing electricity for our area for nearly 40 years. But, what happens to all that left over fuel? Plant operators say they're running out of space, but have a safe plan to address the problem. We're talking about enriched uranium. Think of a fuel rod as a little thinner and longer than a broomstick handle. And Ginna has used tens of thousands of them since it opened in 1969. In fact, the Ginna Nuclear Power Plant is storing every spent fuel rod it has ever used and they are highly radioactive. Until the Yucca Mountain storage site in Nevada is open, by law, nuclear power plants are required to store their spent fuel. But Ginna will run out of room in its spent fuel pool in 2009. So Ginna will use what are called dry storage canisters made of steel and lead. The spent fuel will be put in those radioactively safe containers and stored in above ground concrete bunkers. Other nuclear power plants have been using this technology for almost 20 years. "Our number one priority at Constellation Energy, owner of Ginna, is safety. We've taken a hard look at this design and we've benchmarked the industry. We think we have a very sound design. And I feel very confident that these dry storage canister will operate safely," said Maria Korsnick, Vice President at Ginna. "I know it is new to this area, but in terms of the industry as a whole, this is to some extent a `been there, done that' kind of situation" said Steve Kerekes, a spokesman for the Nuclear Energy Institute. "Of the roughly 120 operating and closed nuclear power plant sites in the United States, over the past 20 years, half of those facilities have gone to dry storage." These same dry storage canisters are the ones that would be used to ship the fuel to Yucca Mountain. The Yucca Mountain storage site is not expected to be open until 2017 at the earliest. The Ginna Nuclear Power Plant generates 585 mega watts of electricity, enough to supply about 350,000 homes. ***************************************************************** 30 Chennai Online News: 8 heavy water reactors in 11th Plan Chennai, April 9: The Department of Atomic Energy proposes to set up eight 700 MW Pressurised Heavy Water Reactors (PHWRs) in the 11th Plan, S K Jain, Chairman and Managing Director of the Nuclear Power Corporation of India (NPCIL) and BHAVINI, said today. The Bhartiya Nabhikiya Vidyut Nigam Limited (BHAVINI) is an undertaking of the Department of Atomic Energy, entrusted with the construction and operation of fast breeder reactors. Three more 500 MW Fast Breeder Reactors (FBRs) and one Advanced Heavy Water Reactor (AHWR) would also be set up, he said, addressing a press conference here after inaugurating an international symposium on 'Advances in Stainless Steel' here. The site had been identified and clearance has been received from the Ministry of Environment and Forests for four PHWRs. "Construction drawings are being prepared. We are waiting for approval from the government. The groundwork will start soon after that," he said. He also said that the eight reactors would be launched in the next five years. Two of three FBR's will be located at Kalpakkam at the existing plant site. A site finding committee was in the process of identifying the location for future reactors, land for which could then be frozen for the purpose, he said. It was also desirable to have 10 more 1,000 MW PHWRs to support and meet the additional needs of the DAE, he said. He ruled out India being short on uranium. "We have sufficient uranium to support 10,000 MW. In fact, this year itself, uranium production will be doubled," he said. Dr S Banerjee, Director, BARC, said the design for the AHWR has been completed and they were now preparing the engineering design. (Our Correspondent) Published: Monday, April 09, 2007 Copyright © 2007, Chennai Interactive Business Services (P) Ltd. All rights reserved. cibs@chennaionline.com - Copyright and Disclaimer - Privacy Policy 2, North Crescent Road, T.Nagar, Chennai-600017. Click here for more ***************************************************************** 31 Chennai Online News: India, Russia civil nuke cooperation New Delhi, April 9: India and Russia today discussed ways to enhance civil nuclear cooperation, including modalities for building of more atomic reactors here with the help of Moscow. The talks between Foreign Secretary Shivshankar Menon and Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Andrei Denisov also covered cooperation on other issues, including terrorism, sources said. At the Foreign Office consultations, the two sides discussed follow-up action to the decisions taken during the visit of Russian President Vladimir Putin in January when Moscow agreed to build four new atomic reactors in Tamil Nadu and more at other sites that would be identified later. Two atomic plants at Kudankulam are already being built with Russian help. Moscow is keen to enhance cooperation in the civil nuclear field with India but is waiting for the 45-nation Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) to change its guidelines to allow it. Ahead of the talks, Denisov said both the countries are seeking to enhance cooperation in building of more nuclear power plants, and in implementing other joint projects in the area of peaceful use of atomic energy. He, however, underscored that it would be done taking into account international commitments of both the nations. "Bilateral talks usually focus on a broad range of issues: from the crucial international problems, such as Iraq, Afghanistan, and response to international terrorism, to the coordination of the working issues of bilateral cooperation in specific areas," Denisov said in an interview to ITAR-TASS ahead of his meeting with Menon. (Agencies) Published: Monday, April 09, 2007 Copyright © 2007, Chennai Interactive Business Services (P) Ltd. All rights reserved. cibs@chennaionline.com - Copyright and Disclaimer - Privacy Policy 2, North Crescent Road, T.Nagar, Chennai-600017. Click here for more ***************************************************************** 32 NewsBlaze: NRC Schedules Conference With Areva to Discuss Wash. Fuel Facility The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff is scheduled to meet with representatives of AREVA NP, Inc. on Thursday, April 12, to discuss apparent violations of agency requirements involving a small hydrogen fluoride release at the company's Richland, Wash., facility in late October 2006. The NRC-licensed plant processes uranium and produces nuclear fuel for commercial nuclear power plants. The apparent violations were identified during an NRC special inspection beginning shortly after the event and subsequent reviews and teleconferences. The predecisional enforcement conference with AREVA is scheduled to begin at 8:00 a.m. (EDT) in the NRC Region II Office, at 61 Forsyth Street SW, Suite 23T85, in Atlanta, Ga., and will be open to the public. The meeting is between AREVA and the NRC, but those people attending will have an opportunity to ask questions of NRC staff prior to the end of the meeting. On the morning of Oct. 23, 2006, a technician at the AREVA Richland plant noticed an unusual odor which was determined to be hydrogen fluoride gas, a non-radioactive chemical used in processing uranium hexafluoride into nuclear fuel. No elevated radiation readings were recorded, personnel were warned that entering the area required respiratory protection equipment, and operations in that area were stopped. The technician was later admitted to the hospital for observation, but there was no exposure to other workers and no release offsite. The NRC staff is satisfied that the company completed a thorough investigation and analysis of the event and has taken appropriate corrective actions, but NRC inspectors identified apparent violations involving event reporting, inappropriate respiratory protection equipment and inadequate engineering and administrative controls for small hydrogen fluoride releases. The purpose of the April 12th meeting is to obtain information that will allow the NRC to determine what, if any, enforcement action is warranted. No decision will be made by the NRC staff at the meeting, but NRC management will make a decision sometime in the near future. Source: NRC judythpiazza@gmail.com Copyright © 2007, NewsBlaze, Daily News ***************************************************************** 33 UPI: Outside View: Helen Calidcott: Growing nuclear threat United Press International - Security & Terrorism - 4/9/2007 9:01:00 AM -0400 By HELEN CALDICOTT UPI Outside View Commentator WASHINGTON, April 9 (UPI) -- According to the British counter-intelligence group MI-5, over 360 private companies, university departments, and government organizations in eight countries, including Israel, Syria, Pakistan, Iran, India, Egypt, the Pakistani High Commission in London, and the United Arab Emirates, have been procuring nuclear technology and equipment for use in nuclear weapons construction. At the same time that the International Atomic Energy Authority and the U.S. government profess extreme concern about the proliferation of nuclear weapons, they are actively promoting and encouraging the dissemination of technology, expertise, and materials that make proliferation likely. With sophisticated technology the minimum amount of plutonium required to make a bomb is 1 to 3 kilograms (2.2 to 6.6 pounds), however the generally accepted amount is 5 kg (11 pounds) of weapons-grade plutonium and 8 kg (17.6 pounds) for reactor-grade plutonium. The design is available on the Internet; the essential materials can be bought at any hardware store. A homemade plutonium bomb would be difficult to make but a bomb using highly-enriched uranium would be less so. And the world is awash in plutonium In light of terrorist attacks using conventional weapons, it is only a matter of time before someone steals enough plutonium to make an adequate nuclear weapon. Then we proceed into the age of nuclear terrorism. Even as there is much hand-wringing at the United Nations about the possibility that Iran and North Korea may be developing nuclear weapons, eight nations -- Russia, the United States, France, China, Britain, India, Israel, and Pakistan -- possess their own nuclear arsenals, and others are free to develop weapons without the admonitions that the United States and the United Nations are imposing upon Iran and North Korea. On the strategic front, the Bush administration has drafted a revised plan allowing military commanders to request presidential approval to use nuclear weapons to preempt an attack by a nation or terrorist group deemed to be planning to use weapons of mass destruction. These military commanders will also be permitted to use nuclear weapons to destroy known enemy stockpiles of chemical, biological, or nuclear weapons. The United States has always had a "first-use" policy against nuclear-armed nations, but now this strategy is also being applied to non-nuclear nations for the first time. Had this strategy been in place before the invasion of Iraq, a nuclear attack could have been justified to "take out" Iraq's imaginary weapons of mass destruction. Many countries are angry about the paternalism and arrogance displayed over the years by the nuclear-haves. As President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran, which is now actively developing uranium enrichment facilities, said recently, "Every day they (the Americans) are threatening other nations with nuclear weapons, and they are never inspected." He said that Western countries were "relying on their power and wealth to try to impose a climate of intimidation and injustice over the world." Hugo Chavez of Venezuela displayed similar feelings when he said recently, "It cannot be that some countries that have developed nuclear energy prohibit those of the Third World from developing it. We are not the ones developing atomic bombs, it's others who do that." The United States is directly responsible for the breakdown of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Review conference at the United Nations in May 2005, which collapsed when U.S. Under Secretary for Disarmament John Bolton refused to participate in meaningful discussions, thereby sabotaging the meeting, to the despair and disgust of the rest of the world. By the time of the United Nations summit in September 2005, John Bolton had been promoted to the position of U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, and he intervened, vehemently objecting to the United Nations' focus on disarmament of the major powers, rather than on the spread of nuclear weapons among rogue states and terrorists. Because the United States wields enormous power at the United Nations, the proposed new rules on disarmament and nuclear weapons proliferation were completely disregarded. Then-U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan concluded the summit by ruing its outcome. He made a final speech in which he said, "It's a real disgrace," lamenting the omission, blaming "posturing" for a failure to find a common approach to the spread of weapons of mass destruction. He said that nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament is "our biggest challenge" and our "biggest failing," as he recalled the collapse of the NPT review conference earlier in 2005. (This piece originally appeared in Dr. Helen Caldicott's "Nuclear Power Is Not the Answer," The New Press, 2006. Ths piece is published here with the permission of The New Press. Helen Caldicott is president of the Washington-based Nuclear Policy Research Institute. She was a founder of the International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War, the organization that won the 1985 Nobel Peace Prize.) (United Press International's "Outside View" commentaries are written by outside contributors who specialize in a variety of important issues. The views expressed do not necessarily reflect those of United Press International. In the interests of creating an open forum, original submissions are invited.) © Copyright 2007 United Press International, Inc. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 34 Bangkok Post: Nuclear gets green light Tuesday April 10, 2007 Nuclear power will be one of the key fuels used in electricity production over the next 15 years under the national power development plan (PDP) approved yesterday. The National Energy Policy Council yesterday approved one of the nine options proposed for the period from 2007 to 2021, focusing on diversifying the fuels used for electricity production from coal and natural gas to nuclear power. Implementation will be split into three stages. The first, from 2007-10, will focus on output from four new plants of the Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand (Egat). The second stage, from 2011-15, will acquire electricity from independent power producer (IPP) plants, of which 5,600 megawatts will be generated from natural gas, 2,100 MW from coal and 800 MW from small power producer (SPP) plants. © Copyright The Post Publishing Public Co., Ltd. 2007 Privacy Policy Comments to: Webmaster Advertising enquiries to: Internet Marketing Printed display ad enquiries to: Display Ads Full contact details: Contact us ***************************************************************** 35 Las Vegas SUN: Navy veteran in Las Vegas fighting for radiation compensation Today: April 09, 2007 at 9:0:12 PDT LAS VEGAS (AP) - Atomic veteran Michael Hirschhorn didn't give up his fight for compensation when the Department of Veterans Affairs denied his claim for skin cancer. He refused to quit after a Pentagon agency denied that he'd been exposed to radiation from nuclear blasts set off over the Pacific Ocean in 1962. And when a veterans law judge finally ruled in his favor only to have the government, in his view, low-ball his compensation award, Hirschhorn battled on. The 64-year-old former sailor from Las Vegas is still on his quest for compensation and is one of the relatively few atomic veterans who have successfully navigated the maze of disability paperwork to win an appeal. Most veterans become discouraged, give up or don't want to endure the back-and-forth created when their cases are shuttled between different government agencies, Hirschhorn said last week. Some die before their cases reach the appeals process, he said. Hirschhorn said he hopes his case will set a precedent for other atomic veterans. "There's 500,000 vets out there who are in a lot worse shape because they were exposed to ionizing radiation," Hirschhorn said. "Our government is lying to them." He echoed assertions made last month in Las Vegas by R.J. Ritter, national commander of the National Association of Atomic Veterans Inc. Ritter was addressing an advisory board that makes recommendations on atomic veterans issues to the Department of Veterans Affairs and the Defense Threat Reduction Agency. In Ritter's estimation, up to 500,000 U.S. military and support personnel were exposed to radiation during atmospheric nuclear weapons tests, including sailors aboard military vessels and pilots who flew through radioactive clouds. It also includes the soldiers and Marines who huddled in trenches at the Nevada Test Site, marched through fallout or landed in contaminated areas during parachute jumps. Some 25,000 claims have been filed by atomic veterans seeking medical care or compensation since the early 1950s. Ritter said that fewer than 100 claimants have received total compensation and that only 300 to 400 claimants have been given 50 percent of the compensation they sought. In 2006, Hirschhorn convinced a judge for the Board of Veterans' Appeals in Washington that the Defense Threat Reduction Agency botched its assessment of how much radiation he was exposed to during a series of 1962 atmospheric nuclear weapons tests over the Pacific Ocean in the vicinity of Christmas Island. He has since launched another appeal, saying a doctor attributes the development of his skin cancer to his Navy service aboard the USS Merrick, which passed through Pacific atomic test sites while returning to the United States from Japan. Instead of receiving a 10 percent disability payment of $115 per month, Hirschhorn is seeking $900 a month, which represents a 60 percent disability rating. "They do everything they can to stall these cases. ... Every time you get one of these (denial) letters, you get kicked in the teeth and you want to give up," Hirschhorn said. "They set it all up to make sure they can issue a denial." Defense Threat Reduction Agency spokeswoman Cheri Abdelnour said the agency erred when it said the nuclear tests in Hirschhorn's case were "high altitude" blasts. If that had been the case, personnel aboard ships passing through the area would have experienced minimal exposure to radiation. In reality, the tests were conducted as much lower "air bursts" that created strong updrafts. The updrafts, according to Hirschhorn's citations of government documents, caused widespread distribution of highly radioactive fallout particles. Nevertheless, Abdelnour said the agency stands by its assessment in Hirschhorn's case because none of the detonations that occurred while the USS Merrick passed through the region "produced fallout that impacted Christmas Island, Johnston Island, or any of the ships supporting the operation." "We believe the veteran did not receive an appreciable radiation dose," Abdelnour wrote. --- Information from: Las Vegas Review-Journal, http://www.lvrj.com Las Vegas SUN main page All contents copyright 2005 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 36 The Press Republican: Atomic fallout The Press Republican - Plattsburgh, NY Mon, Apr. 9 Plattsburgh Korean War veteran Frank Bushey of Plattsburgh talks about the medals and patches he received during the war. Bushey witnessed an atomic test on April 18, 1953 Staff Photo/Rob Fountain Atomic fallout War vet shares experiences during his service time By: Robin Caudell Staff Writer April 09, 2007 PLATTSBURGH — Frank Bushey has a military wall in his Plattsburgh residence. On it hangs a black-and-white image of his father, Frank A. Bushey, circa 1920 and just back from France. The senior Bushey was attached to the 26th Infantry Division at the Plattsburgh Barracks. With the New York National Guard, he fought against Pancho Villa during the Mexican Insurgency and later in both world wars and the Korean War. Nearby are photographs of the younger Frank's sons: Craig Bushey, a former U.S. Air Force captain (KC-135 navigator), and Lt. Col. David Bushey, who is deployed with the 25th Artillery Battalion "Wolfpack" in Afghanistan. Between his father and sons are photographs of a fresh-faced Frank at Camp Lejeune in North Carolina. There is also an image of the mushroom cloud of "Shot Badger," taken on April 18, 1953. It was the sixth of 11 atmospheric nuclear-weapons tests at the Nevada Proving Ground, the Atomic Energy Commission's continental nuclear test site. Badger was fired on a 300-foot steel tower in Area 2 of Yucca Flat. According to a Defense Nuclear Agency Report: "The primary objective of the event was to investigate the possibility of increasing the yield of a standard fission-type weapon by varying the composition of the device. Other important objectives included evaluating the blast, thermal and radiation phenomena produced by this nuclear detonation and conducting a simulated air and amphibious assault under nuclear battlefield conditions." The report says Badger yielded only 23 kilotons of the expected 40 kilotons of energy. The blast "illuminated Las Vegas like daylight and was evident 500 kilometers to the southwest in Los Angeles." Frank Bushey knows what happened within his bones. He was one of 2,167 that comprised the 2nd Marine Corps Provisional Atomic Exercise Brigade, there for tactical troop maneuvers. 'THE GROUND SHOOK' With rifles, helmets and packs, the Marines entered 4-foot-deep, narrow trenches parallel to the bomb tower, about 3,600 meters away. Like the others, Frank assumed a right-knee kneeling position with his right shoulder pressed against the trench's forward wall during the quiet before countdown: About Badger's detonation, he writes. "The ground shook so bad, it threw us back and forth in the trenches. The sound of the blast was very, very loud. The 23-kiloton bomb had a lot of kick. I smelled something very acrid, and there was a crack that sounded somewhat like thunder, but much higher pitched. "The whole valley went from total darkness to brighter than 100 suns ... come to life all at once. I was looking down and saw the rocks on the ground in the trenches right through my eyelids. I glanced over to my left and saw the (Marine) that was there, whole skeleton — one huge X-ray." ALL THE COLORS The blast's winds were hurricane force. Brush and mesquite burned. Birds fell from the sky. "We got the word to stand and look at the fireball. There were all the colors of the rainbow. It was beautiful and yet ugly in some ways (like angry). Our plan was to attack an imaginary enemy at Ground Zero. We were ordered out of the trenches and into a skirmish-line attack to Ground Zero. A battalion size operation with about 800 Marines. Shortly into the attack the wind starting coming up and into our faces as we advanced." Frank's nose and throat were embedded with dust. Afterward, he was "hot" and "swept down" for radioactivity three times before deemed OK. "The First Battalion 8th Marines were exposed to an unexpected and unanticipated amount of radiation dose caused by a wind shift," according to a Defense Nuclear Agency document. HEALTH CONCERNS Flash forward. Sitting at the dining table, Frank recalled Badger as his wife, Martha Rose, mills about. "It was a scary moment for me," he said. "I didn't know if I was going to take my last breath on Earth or not. I knew it wasn't going to be a piece of cake when that thing went off." Almost 54 years later, he says he is living with the fallout: radiation cataracts removed from both eyes, two triple bypasses, prostate and colon cancer, osteoarthritis and post-traumatic-stress syndrome. Frank is a member of the Radiated Veterans of America and the National Association of Atomic Veterans. The latter group is "dedicated to assisting an estimated 1 million U. S. veterans, from all service branches, who were first-hand participants in atomic weapons test detonations, from July 16, 1945, to Nov. 23, 1992." In March, the Veterans Advisory Board for Dose Reconstruction concluded: "Congress should consider passing a bill that would recognize America's Atomic Veterans as a 'special group' for VA claims and purposes, and that such bill also offer America's Atomic Veterans 'special relief' that would not require radiation-dose reconstructions when filing a claim for ionizing radiation-induced illnesses." Frank was a tender 19 when he witnessed atomic energy unleashed. "This would destroy the planet in a very short time if we start to exchange nukes," he says now. "It follows with nuclear winter, and everyone dies." Did this article satisfy your expectations? Tell us! TO LEARN MORE • Shot Badger: www.dtra.mil/rd/programs/nuclear_personnel/docs%5CT24281.PDF • Radiated Veterans of America: www.radvets.org • National Association of Atomic Veterans: www.naav.com The PressRepublican.com is published by the Plattsburgh Publishing Company. Copyright 2007. ***************************************************************** 37 FR DHHS: Irradiation in the Production, Processing and Handling of Food Doc E7-6646 [Federal Register: April 9, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 67)] [Rules and Regulations] [Page 17394-17397] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr09ap07-9] DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration 21 CFR Part 179 [Docket No. 2003F-0088 (formerly 03F-0088)] AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Final rule; response to objections and denial of requests for a hearing. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is responding to objections and is denying requests that it has received for a hearing on the final rule that amended the food additive regulations by establishing a new maximum permitted energy level of x-rays for treating food of 7.5 million electron volts (MeV) provided that the x- rays are generated from machine sources that use tantalum or gold as the target material, with no change in the maximum permitted dose levels or uses currently permitted by FDA's food additive regulations. After reviewing the objections to the final rule and the requests for a hearing, the agency has concluded that the objections do not raise issues of material fact that justify a hearing or otherwise provide a basis for removing the amendment to the regulation. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Andrew J. Zajac, Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition (HFS-265), Food and Drug Administration, 5100 Paint Branch Pkwy., College Park, MD 20740-3835, 301-436-1267. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Introduction FDA published a notice in the Federal Register of March 13, 2003 (68 FR 12087), announcing the filing of food additive petition, FAP 3M4745, by Ion Beam Applications to amend the food additive regulations in Sec. 179.26 Ionizing radiation for the treatment of food (21 CFR 179.26) by increasing the maximum permitted energy level of x-rays for treating food from 5 to 7.5 MeV. The rights to this petition were subsequently transferred to Sterigenics International, Inc. In response to this petition, FDA issued a final rule in the Federal Register of December 23, 2004 (69 FR 76844) permitting the safe use of 7.5 MeV x- rays for treating food provided that the x-rays are generated from machine sources that use tantalum or gold as the target material, with no change in the maximum permitted dose levels or uses currently permitted by FDA's food additive regulations (the 7.5 MeV x-ray final rule). The preamble to the final rule advised that objections to the final rule and requests for a hearing were due within 30 days of the publication date (i.e., by January 24, 2005). II. Objections and Requests for a Hearing Section 409(f) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the act) (21 U.S.C. 348(f)) provides that, within 30 days after publication of an order relating to a food additive regulation, any person adversely affected by such order may file objections, specifying with particularity the provisions of the order ``deemed objectionable, stating reasonable grounds therefore, and requesting a public hearing upon such objections.'' FDA may deny a hearing request if the objections to the regulation do not raise genuine and substantial issues of fact that can be resolved at a hearing (Community Nutrition Institute v. Young, 773 F.2d 1356, 1364 (D.C. Cir. 1985), cert. denied, 475 U.S. 1123 (1986)). Under the food additive regulations at 21 CFR 171.110, objections and requests for a hearing are governed by part 12 (21 CFR part 12) of FDA's regulations. Under Sec. 12.22(a), each objection must meet the following conditions: (1) Must be submitted on or before the 30th day after the date of publication of the final rule; (2) must be separately numbered; (3) must specify with particularity the provision of the regulation or proposed order objected to; (4) must specifically state each objection on which a hearing is requested; failure to request a hearing on an objection constitutes a waiver of the right to a hearing on that objection; and (5) must include a detailed description and analysis of the factual information to be presented in support of the objection if a hearing is requested; failure to include a description and analysis for an objection constitutes a waiver of the right to a hearing on that objection. Following publication of the 7.5 MeV x-ray final rule, FDA received about 100 objections within the 30-day objection period. All but one of these submissions expressed general opposition to increasing the maximum permitted energy level of x-rays used to irradiate food and to food irradiation. Most of these objections were form letters, identically worded, urging FDA to conduct additional studies on the effects of 7.5 MeV x-rays on food and objecting ``to the agency's decision knowing that some amount of radioactivity could be created in food treated with 7.5 MeV.'' While most of these objections requested a hearing, no evidence was submitted in support of these objections that could be considered in an evidentiary hearing. These submissions expressing general opposition raise no factual issue for resolution and, therefore, do not justify a hearing.\1\ The one submission raising specific objections was a letter from Public Citizen with six objections to the 7.5 MeV x-ray final rule. The letter requested a hearing on issues raised by each objection. These objections are addressed in section IV of this document. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\A large number of these form letters were submitted after the close of the objection period. Tardy objections fail to satisfy the requirements of 21 U.S.C. 348(f)(1) and need not be considered by the agency (ICMAD v. HEW, 574 F.2d 553, 558 n.8 (D.C. Cir), cert. denied, 439 U.S. 893 (1978)). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- III. Standards for Granting a Hearing Specific criteria for deciding whether to grant or deny a request for a hearing are set out in Sec. 12.24(b). Under that regulation, a hearing will be granted if the material submitted by the requester shows, among other things, the following: (1) There is a genuine and substantial factual issue for resolution at a hearing; a hearing will not be granted on issues of policy or law; (2) the factual issue can be resolved by available and specifically identified reliable evidence; a hearing will not be granted on the basis of mere allegations or denials or general descriptions of positions and [[Page 17395]] contentions; (3) the data and information submitted, if established at a hearing, would be adequate to justify resolution of the factual issue in the way sought by the requestor; a hearing will be denied if the data and information submitted are insufficient to justify the factual determination urged, even if accurate; (4) resolution of the factual issue in the way sought by the person is adequate to justify the action requested; a hearing will not be granted on factual issues that are not determinative with respect to the action requested (e.g., if the action would be the same even if the factual issue were resolved in the way sought); (5) the action requested is not inconsistent with any provision in the act or any FDA regulation; and (6) the requirements in other applicable regulations, e.g., 21 CFR 10.20, Sec. Sec. 12.21, and 12.22, and in the notice issuing the final regulation or the notice of opportunity for hearing are met. A party seeking a hearing is required to meet a ``threshold burden of tendering evidence suggesting the need for a hearing'' (Costle v. Pacific Legal Foundation, 445 U.S. 198, 214-215 (1980), reh. denied, 446 U.S. 947 (1980), citing Weinberger v. Hynson, Westcott & Dunning, Inc., 412 U.S. 609, 620-621 (1973)). An allegation that a hearing is necessary to ``sharpen the issues'' or to ``fully develop the facts'' does not meet this test (Georgia Pacific Corp. v. EPA, 671 F.2d 1235, 1241 (9th Cir. 1982)). If a hearing request fails to identify any factual evidence that would be the subject of a hearing, there is no point in holding one. In judicial proceedings, a court is authorized to issue summary judgment without an evidentiary hearing whenever it finds that there are no genuine issues of material fact in dispute and a party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law (see Rule 56, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure). The same principle applies in administrative proceedings (see Sec. 12.28). A hearing request must not only contain evidence, but that evidence should raise a material issue of fact concerning which a meaningful hearing might be held (Pineapple Growers Ass'n v. FDA, 673 F.2d 1083, 1085 (9th Cir.1982)). Where the issues raised in the objection are, even if true, legally insufficient to alter the decision, the agency need not grant a hearing (see Dyestuffs and Chemicals, Inc. v. Flemming, 271 F.2d 281 (8th Cir. 1959), cert. denied, 362 U.S. 911 (1960)). FDA need not grant a hearing in each case where an objector submits additional information or posits a novel interpretation of existing information (see United States v. Consolidated Mines & Smelting Co., 455 F.2d 432 (9th Cir. 1971)). In other words, a hearing is justified only if the objections are made in good faith and if they ``draw in question in a material way the underpinnings of the regulation at issue'' (Pactra Industries v. CPSC, 555 F.2d 677 (9th Cir. 1977)). Finally, courts have uniformly recognized that a hearing need not be held to resolve questions of law or policy (see Citizens for Allegan County, Inc. v. FPC, 414 F.2d 1125 (D.C. Cir. 1969); Sun Oil Co. v. FPC, 256 F.2d 233, 240 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 358 U.S. 872 (1958)). Even if the objections raise material issues of fact, FDA need not grant a hearing if those same issues were adequately raised and considered in an earlier proceeding. Once an issue has been so raised and considered, a party is estopped from raising that same issue in a later proceeding without new evidence. The various judicial doctrines dealing with finality can be validly applied to the administrative process. In explaining why these principles ``self evidently'' ought to apply to an agency proceeding, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit wrote: ``The underlying concept is as simple as this: Justice requires that a party have a fair chance to present his position. But overall interests of administration do not require or generally contemplate that he will be given more than a fair opportunity.'' Retail Clerks Union, Local 1401 v. NLRB, 463 F.2d 316, 322 (D.C. Cir. 1972). (See Costle v. Pacific Legal Foundation, supra at 215-220. See also Pacific Seafarers, Inc. v. Pacific Far East Line, Inc., 404 F.2d 804 (D.C. Cir. 1968), cert. denied, 393 U.S. 1093 (1969).)) In summary, a hearing request must present sufficient credible evidence to raise a material issue of fact and the evidence must be adequate to resolve the issue as requested and to justify the action requested. IV. Analysis of Objections and Response to Hearing Requests The letter from Public Citizen raises six issues that they believe to be factual and requests a hearing based on these objections. FDA addresses each of the objections in the following paragraphs, as well as the evidence and information filed in support of each, comparing each objection and the information submitted in support of it to the standards for granting a hearing in Sec. 12.24. (1) Public Citizen contends that FDA did not adequately account for the fact that an electron beam on an x-ray target is not monoenergetic, and that a significant portion of the beam may be higher than the nominal energy, resulting in higher neutron production in the food and more activity. Public Citizen cites a published paper in the petition in which the authors note that measurements and calculations of a 7.5 MeV setting actually correspond to 8.1 MeV 0.8 MeV. The objection does not raise a genuine and substantial issue of fact for resolution at a hearing. Contrary to the objection, the final rule does not set a ``nominal energy'' limit. The final rule sets out 7.5 MeV as the maximum energy permitted. X-rays from machine sources at energies exceeding 7.5 MeV are not permitted by the final rule. Further, the objection provides no evidence to support the contention that safety concerns regarding inherent limitations on the precision of setting and measuring voltage were not considered. The paper referred to in the objection, Gregoire, O., Cleland, M.L., Wakeford, Mittendorfer, et al., ``Radiological Safety of Food Irradiation With High Energy X-Rays: Theoretical Expectations and Experimental Evidence,'' 2002, was included as a reference in the final rule and counters the objection. The paper discusses the radiological implications of irradiating meat with 7.5 MeV x-rays to an x-ray dose of 15 kGy, which is more than twice the maximum dose allowed for meat irradiation (4.5 kGy maximum for refrigerated meat and 7.0 kGy maximum for frozen meat) (see Sec. 179.26(b)). Experiments were performed with x-ray machines that use two different types of electron accelerators, one delivering electrons with a narrow electron energy spread, the other delivering a broad energy spread. The Gregoire paper concluded that risk to individuals from intake of food irradiated with x-rays from 7.5 MeV electrons, even with a broad energy spread, would be trivial. In the experiments discussed in the Gregoire paper, the equipment was set to achieve a voltage of 7.5 MeV. Measurements (including calculations) to verify the precision of the settings estimated that the machine produced electrons at an energy of approximately 8.1 MeV, with an uncertainty margin of 0.8 MeV. In other words, within the limits of precision of the measurements, the energy of the electrons used to produce the x-rays was shown to be greater than 7.3 MeV but less than 8.9 MeV. FDA notes that even though the equipment in this experiment produced a higher energy level than permitted by the regulation, the results show that any radioactivity that might be induced at that higher energy level is trivially small. Public Citizen has not raised a genuine and substantial issue of fact and [[Page 17396]] has not provided any information that contradicts the agency's safety determination. Thus, a hearing is not justified based on this objection (Sec. 12.24(b)(1) and (2)). (2) Public Citizen claims that FDA has concluded that any induced activity in food from treating it with 7.5 MeV x-rays is safe without a standard for a ``safe'' level of induced activity in food and further objects to any additional radiation level in treated food. The objection does not cite any support for its contention that FDA must establish a general standard for a safe level of induced activity in food beyond the act's requirements for food additive approvals. The use of x-rays to treat food is a food additive under the act's definition of ``food additive,'' which includes any source of radiation intended for use in producing, manufacturing, packing, processing, preparing, treating, packaging, transporting, or holding food (section 201(s) of the act) (21 U.S.C. 321(s)). Section 409 of the act requires that a regulation approving a food additive must prescribe, with respect to the proposed uses of the additive, the conditions under which the additive may be safely used. Further, section 409 of the act sets out that no such regulation can issue if a fair evaluation of the data fails to establish that the proposed use of the food additive, under the conditions of use to be specified in the regulation, will be safe. FDA has defined ``safe'' and ``safety'' by regulation to mean that ``there is a reasonable certainty in the minds of competent scientists that the substance is not harmful under the intended conditions of use.'' (21 CFR 170.3(i)). In accordance with the requirements of section 409 of the act and the food additive regulations, FDA determined that food treated with 7.5 MeV x-rays is safe by comparing the total annual dose from eating irradiated foods with the annual dose from naturally occurring radionuclides in the food. FDA's determination was based on its review of the data in the record, including the reports referenced in the final rule from the International Atomic Energy Agency, Gregoire et al., and the independent evaluation of the data by Oak Ridge National Laboratory. FDA concluded based on these analyses that any radioactivity that may be induced in any food treated with 7.5 MeV x- rays will be trivially low and that any potential human exposure due to consumption of irradiated food will be inconsequential compared to that from radionuclides that are present naturally in food. Public Citizen's objection presents no factual evidence that FDA has overlooked in reaching the decision that 7.5 MeV x-rays are safe for treating food under the conditions of use specified in the regulation. Thus, Public Citizen has failed to justify a hearing on this issue (Sec. 12.24(b)(2)). (3) Public Citizen objects to the agency's approval of 7.5 MeV x- rays for treating food without assessing the risk of getting cancer from eating food with added radioactivity. The objection points to a paper by Ari Brynjolfsson, cited by the petitioner, which estimates the lifetime cancer risk from eating foods irradiated with 7.5 MeV x-rays to be 0.8 per million.\2\ FDA disagrees with Public Citizen's assertion that it did not consider the risk of getting cancer from eating food treated with 7.5 MeV x-rays during its review of FAP 3M4745. As stated in the preamble of the rule, FDA contracted with Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) to perform an independent evaluation of the data in the administrative record, including an evaluation of cancer risk. The ORNL evaluation was placed in the docket when the rule published. ORNL concluded that because the factors used in the data in the administrative record to estimate cancer risk are based on much higher doses than permitted in the rule, the data in the administrative record, including the data in the Brynjolfsson paper, cannot be applied with any credibility to extrapolate cancer risk to the extremely low potential doses that a person might receive from consuming food treated with 7.5 MeV x-rays. The extrapolations that would be required would yield estimated risks far too small to reliably measure or verify. FDA agrees with this conclusion. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \2\ Public Citizen incorrectly states in their objection that the cancer risk estimated by the author is 0.08 per million. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The only evidence referenced by Public Citizen in support of its assertion is the Brynjolfsson paper, which was part of the administrative record and was considered in ORNL's evaluation of the data and FDA's safety determination. Therefore, Public Citizen has not identified any evidence to support its assertion that was not already considered by FDA in its safety determination. A hearing will not be granted on the basis of mere allegations or denials or general descriptions of positions and contentions (21 CFR 12.24(b)(2)). (4) Public Citizen asserts that FDA did not comply with Sec. 170.22 (21 CFR 170.22), which states that a food additive will not be granted a tolerance that will exceed 1/100th of the maximum amount demonstrated to be without harm to experimental animals unless evidence is submitted which justifies use of a different safety factor. Public Citizen expresses the view that this non-compliance includes not only the failure to conduct any animal experiments using foods irradiated with 7.5 MeV x-rays, but also the failure to calculate a 100-to-1 safety factor or submit evidence that justifies the use of a different safety factor. The objection does not include any evidence or support for the contention that animal experiments are required to be conducted to determine whether a proposed use of a food additive is safe. The safety criteria that must be considered by the agency before a food additive regulation is issued are listed in 21 U.S.C. 348(c)(5). The act does not prescribe what safety tests should be performed to determine whether an additive is safe. Public Citizen's objection references the regulation in Sec. 170.22 which sets out a safety factor of 100-to-1 in applying animal experimentation data to man (that is, the additive will not be approved for use in an amount greater than 1/100th of the maximum amount demonstrated to be without harm to experimental animals), unless evidence is submitted which justifies use of a difference safety factor. That regulation concerns how to apply animal experimentation data when it exists. It does not, however, require that animal testing be done in all food additive safety determinations. Because of the extremely low levels of induced radioactivity in food from the use of 7.5 MeV x-rays, it would not be possible to measure any toxicological effects from this induced activity in food fed to animals even with the most sensitive toxicological testing. Consequently, animal testing is neither necessary nor helpful to demonstrate the safety of food treated with 7.5 MeV x-rays. Rather, safety was demonstrated by showing that calculated estimates of radiation exposure from induced activity in food from the use of 7.5 MeV x-rays is far below the exposure from activity resulting from radionuclides that are present naturally in food. FDA concluded that such an analysis provides information that is far more sensitive to potential effects than can be obtained from the use of animal studies. Public Citizen has submitted no information to establish that the animal and other testing it recommended is required to demonstrate safety, or even that such testing would be valid to assess safety. Because Public Citizen provided no evidence to consider in [[Page 17397]] support of its assertion, FDA is denying the request for a hearing on this point because a hearing will not be granted on the basis of mere allegations or denials or general descriptions of positions and contentions (21 CFR 12.24(b)(2)). (5) Public Citizen asserts that by FDA failing to comply with Sec. 170.22, FDA did not comply with Sec. 170.20 (21 CFR 170.20), which states that ``the Commissioner will be guided by the principles and procedures for establishing the safety of food additives stated in current publications of the National Academy of Sciences National Research Council.'' Section 170.22 pertains to safety factors to be applied to animal experimentation data in determining whether a proposed use of a food additive is safe. As discussed previously in item 4, no animal studies were necessary nor were any conducted to demonstrate that the use of 7.5 MeV x-rays is safe for treating food. Because the provisions of Sec. 170.22 do not apply to the agency's review of FAP 3M4745, Public Citizen's assertion that FDA did not comply with Sec. 170.20 because it did not comply with Sec. 170.22 is without merit. Therefore, this objection is not a basis for a hearing because there is no genuine and substantial issue of fact for resolution (Sec. 12.24(b)(1)). (6) Public Citizen asserts that FDA did not comply with 21 U.S.C. 348(c)(3)(A), which states that ``No such regulation shall issue if a fair evaluation of the data before the Secretary--(A) fails to establish that the proposed use of the food additive, under the conditions of use to be specified in the regulation, will be safe: Provided, That no additive shall be deemed to be safe if it is found to induce cancer when ingested by man.'' Nor has FDA complied with Sec. 170.3(i), which defines ``safe'' as ``there is a reasonable certainty in the minds of competent scientists that the substance is not harmful under the intended conditions of use.'' Public Citizen has not provided any evidence to support these allegations or that contradicts or challenges the agency's safety determination. The agency finds that this objection is merely a general description of Public Citizen's position, and that it does not raise a factual issue for resolution at a hearing. Therefore, FDA is denying the requests for a hearing on this point because there is no genuine and substantial issue of fact for resolution at a hearing, and a hearing will not be granted on the basis of mere allegations or denials or general descriptions of positions and contentions (Sec. 12.24(b)(1) and (b)(2)). V. Summary and Conclusions Section 409 of the act requires that a food additive be shown to be safe prior to marketing. Under Sec. 170.3(i), a food additive is ``safe'' if there is a reasonable certainty in the minds of competent scientists that the substance is not harmful under the intended conditions of use. In the final rule approving the use of 7.5 MeV x- rays for treating food, FDA concluded, based on its evaluation of the data submitted in the petition and other relevant material, that the use of 7.5 MeV x-rays proposed in the petition for treating food is safe under the conditions set forth in the regulation codified at Sec. 179.26. The petitioner has the burden to demonstrate the safety of the additive in order to gain FDA approval. Once FDA makes a finding of safety, the burden shifts to an objector, who must come forward with evidence that calls into question FDA's conclusion (American Cyanamid Co. v. FDA, 606 F.2d 1307, 1314-1315 (D.C. Cir. 1979)). None of the objections received contained evidence to support a genuine and substantial issue of fact. Nor has any objector established that the agency overlooked significant information in reaching its conclusion. Therefore, the agency has determined that the objections that requested a hearing do not raise any substantial issue of fact that would justify an evidentiary hearing (Sec. 12.24(b)). Accordingly, FDA is not making any changes in response to the objections and is denying the requests for a hearing. Dated: March 27, 2007. Jeffrey Shuren, Assistant Commissioner for Policy. [FR Doc. E7-6646 Filed 4-6-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4160-01-S ***************************************************************** 38 reviewjournal.com: RADIATION EXPOSURE Apr. 09, 2007 Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal Veteran with skin cancer refuses to give up battle for compensation REVIEW-JOURNAL Michael Hirschhorn holds a document that illustrates how a radioactive cloud is formed from the strong updrafts that follow a nuclear explosion.||Photo by Samantha Clemens. Atomic veteran Michael Hirschhorn didn't give up his fight for compensation when the Department of Veterans Affairs denied his claim for skin cancer. And when a veterans law judge finally ruled in his favor only to have the government, in his view, low-ball his compensation award, Hirschhorn battled on. The 64-year-old former sailor from Las Vegas is still on his quest for just compensation and is one of the relatively few atomic veterans who have successfully navigated the maze of disability paperwork to win an appeal. Most veterans become discouraged, give up or don't want to endure the back-and-forth created when their cases are shuttled between different government agencies, Hirschhorn said last week. Some die before their cases reach the appeals process, he said. Hirschhorn said he hopes his case will set a precedent for other atomic veterans to follow. "There's 500,000 vets out there who are in a lot worse shape because they were exposed to ionizing radiation," Hirschhorn said. "Our government is lying to them." He echoed the point made last month in Las Vegas by R.J. Ritter, national commander of the National Association of Atomic Veterans Inc. Ritter was in Southern Nevada to address an advisory board that makes recommendations on atomic veterans issues to the Department of Veterans Affairs and the Defense Threat Reduction Agency. In Ritter's estimation, between 450,000 and 500,000 U.S. military and support personnel were exposed to radiation during atmospheric nuclear weapons tests. That group includes sailors aboard military vessels and pilots who flew through radioactive clouds. It also includes the soldiers and Marines who huddled in trenches at the Nevada Test Site, marched through fallout or landed in contaminated areas during parachute jumps. Some 25,000 claims have been filed by atomic veterans seeking medical care or compensation since the early 1950s. Ritter said that fewer than 100 claimants have received total compensation and that only 300 to 400 claimants have been given 50 percent of the compensation they sought. In 2006, Hirschhorn convinced a judge for the Board of Veterans' Appeals in Washington that the Defense Threat Reduction Agency botched its assessment of how much radiation he was exposed to during a series of 1962 atmospheric nuclear weapons tests over the Pacific Ocean in the vicinity of Christmas Island. He has since launched another appeal, saying a doctor attributes the development of his skin cancer to his Navy service aboard the USS Merrick, which passed through Pacific atomic test sites while returning to the United States from Japan. Instead of receiving a 10 percent disability payment of $115 per month, Hirschhorn is seeking $900 a month, which represents a 60 percent disability rating. Hirschhorn also said that payment should be retroactive to cover the five years he has spent proving his case to the Department of Veterans Affairs and the Defense Threat Reduction Agency. "They do everything they can to stall these cases. ... Every time you get one of these (denial) letters, you get kicked in the teeth and you want to give up," Hirschhorn said. "They set it all up to make sure they can issue a denial." In a Friday e-mail, a Defense Threat Reduction Agency spokeswoman said the agency erred when it said the nuclear tests in Hirschhorn's case were "high altitude" blasts. If that had been the case, personnel aboard ships passing through the area would have experienced minimal exposure to radiation. In reality, the tests were conducted as much lower "air bursts" that created strong updrafts. The updrafts, according to Hirschhorn's citations of government documents, caused widespread distribution of highly radioactive fallout particles. Nevertheless, Defense Threat Reduction Agency spokeswoman Cheri Abdelnour said the agency stands by its assessment in Hirschhorn's case because none of the detonations that occurred while the USS Merrick passed through the region "produced fallout that impacted Christmas Island, Johnston Island, or any of the ships supporting the operation." The Defense Threat Reduction Agency "radiation dose assessment incorrectly used the term 'high altitude burst' to describe an air burst that occurred, in fact, below 100,000 feet," Abdelnour said in the e-mail. "However, the radiation dose assessment was not based on this terminology, but rather the actual height of the bursts and extensive, empirical mapping and measurements of radioactive fallout." Abdelnour said the USS Merrick, to which the veteran was attached, did not experience any significant radioactive fallout. "We believe the veteran did not receive an appreciable radiation dose," Abdelnour wrote. But Veterans Law Judge Warren Rice Jr., who in May issued an eight-page decision on the former sailor's appeal, found room for doubt after reviewing Hirschhorn's research disputing the government's position. On Thursday, Hirschhorn described how he and the crew of the USS Merrick experienced at least four powerful atmospheric nuclear tests during the summer of 1962, the peak year for U.S. atomic tests. One, he said, was seen clearly by the crew before dawn. "When it went off, we saw like it was daylight, bright white light, then it was orange," Hirschhorn said. "We felt a slight heat wave. Then we were ordered to shower and go above deck and scrub down." That nuclear blast, dubbed Bighorn, was set off on June 27, 1962, and produced an energetic yield equivalent to detonating 7.65 million tons of dynamite. The other 1962 atomic tests Hirschhorn mentioned were Bluestone, conducted on June 30; Sunset, set off on July 10; and Pamlico, detonated on July 11. The Bluestone detonation produced a fireball 4,980 feet above the Pacific Ocean in the area of Christmas Island. The explosion was low enough to cause a strong updraft and considerable fallout, according to government documents. In his appeal, Hirschhorn contended the USS Merrick was closer to the nuclear bomb detonations than the government had stated when officials initially concluded that he received no exposure to radiation from fallout. In her e-mail, Abdelnour said the agency's radiation dose estimates are performed by contract scientists under the guidance of agency scientists. Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal, 1997 - Stephens Media Privacy Statement ***************************************************************** 39 RGJ.com: Transporting waste will put state at risk April 9, 2007 by Robert R. Loux David Sweetman's article ["Transport to Yucca Mountain no real threat," Hot Topic, April 4] is flat out wrong on a number of points. First, Yucca Mountain is far from "the most geographically sensible site in the USA" for isolating deadly spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste. The site is located in a geologically active region; the U.S. Geological Survey places it in an areas of major earthquake risks; there is the potential for renewed volcanic activity at and near the site during the time period when the nuclear waste will be dangerous; groundwater within the mountain is highly corrosive, creating circumstances where the containers the waste would be buried in will corrode fairly rapidly and allow the waste to escape and move to the aquifer beneath; and the site is highly fractured and water moves very rapidly through it, creating fast pathways for moving radiation out of the repository, into the aquifer below and eventually into the environment. In fact, even the U.S. Department of Energy has acknowledged that the geology at Yucca contributes almost nothing to waste isolation and protection. Instead, DOE plans to rely almost exclusively on "manmade barriers," such as waste disposal containers that must remain intact for between 10,000 and 1 million years, a premise that almost no one in the scientific community believes is remotely possible, never mind that the material DOE proposes to use for the containers has been shown to corrode very rapidly in water with the chemical composition of that found at Yucca Mountain. Second, the risks of transporting spent fuel and high-level waste are not trivial and are being exacerbated by the way in which DOE and the federal government are approaching the matter. For starters, there is no requirement for the transport containers or casks to be physically tested to withstand accidents and terrorist attacks. The feds allow manufacturers to use computer modeling of anticipated cask performance to demonstrate the casks' ability to withstand credible accidents and attacks. And while the commercial nuclear industry does have an acceptable safety record with respect to past shipments of spent fuel, the amount of waste that would be shipped in the first year or two of a future Yucca Mountain shipping campaign would exceed the entire number of such shipments in the U.S. over the past 38 years or more. This unprecedented shipping effort would be conducted by the federal DOE, an agency that has an atrocious track record when it comes to nuclear safety and contamination. Extensive research done by Nevada and Clark County suggests that risks of transport have been greatly underestimated by DOE, especially the risks of terrorism and sabotage. An accident involving the release of even a small fraction of the radionuclide inventory of a shipping cask in an urban setting like Reno-Sparks could contaminate a large area, cause hundreds of latent cancer fatalities and cost hundreds of millions in clean up costs, according to DOE's own estimates -- in addition to the damage that would be done to the area's economy. There is a very good saying among emergency preparedness people: Hope for the best but plan for the worst. Seeking to trivialize the risks posed by DOE proposed transport of deadly radioactive waste through Reno-Sparks and Washoe County represents and promoting complacency is the absolute wrong approach. Robert R. Loux is executive director of the Nevada Agency for Nuclear Projects. © Copyright Reno Gazette-Journal, a Gannett Co. Inc. Newspaper. ***************************************************************** 40 Chillicothe Gazette: REMINDER: Piketon meetings set for tonight, Tuesday www.chillicothegazette.com - Chillicothe, OH Monday, April 9, 2007 The Gazette Staff Two public meetings will take place tonight and Tuesday for residents to both learn about the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership and ask questions of the group working to bring it here. The Southern Ohio Nuclear Integration Cooperative, which is doing a detailed siting study to determine whether Piketon would be appropriate for the nuclear facilities, will be at the Plumbers and Pipefitters Hall in Portsmouth from 6 to 9 tonight. The facility is on Gallia Street. The next day at the same time, a similar meeting will take place at Ohio University-Chillicothe’s Shoemaker Center. SONIC was one of 11 sites awarded a grant to do the study. If Piketon is chosen to host GNEP facilities, nuclear waste from all over the nation, and perhaps the world, would come to the site to be recycled and reprocessed. The material would be separated into its reusable and waste components, which would generate electricity while minimizing permanent nuclear waste. Additionally, GNEP aims to prevent proliferation by allowing nuclear-capable countries, such as the U.S. and France, to provide reprocessing services to other countries that agree not to pursue their own programs. More material concerning GNEP and SONIC’s study is available on its Web site at www.safesonic.net. Copyright ©2007 Chillicothe Gazette All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 41 Manitowoc Herald Times Reporter: Nuke waste forum focus Posted April 9, 2007 TOWN OF CARLTON - Dominion, the owner and operator of the Kewaunee Power Station, will host an open house at 7:30 p.m on Thursday, April 12 to present its plans to build a dry storage facility for used nuclear fuel. The meeting will be held at the Carlton Town Hall, at the intersection of County Highway G and Town Hall Road in south Kewaunee county. A Dominion news release states the power company currently stores used nuclear fuel in a large, protected pool of water. "Dominion needs to add to this storage system by constructing an equally safe 'dry' storage facility so that it can continue to operate and provide reliable electricity to the state and region," the release states. The Virginia-based company indicates it is planning to use a system similar to other dry storage systems it operates at its nuclear stations in Virginia and Connecticut. Dominion purchased the Kewaunee Power Station in June 2005. Online: www.dom.com Contact us at 920-684-4433. htrnews.com is a Gannett Company website. Use of this site signifies your agreement to the Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, updated June 7, 2005. ***************************************************************** 42 Reuters: FACTBOX: Key facts about uranium enrichment 11:32PM EDT, Mon 9 Apr 2007 (Reuters) - Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said he would announce fresh achievements in Iran's nuclear program on Monday when he visits the Natanz uranium enrichment facility in central Iran. The United Nations demands Iran halt enrichment, a process which can be used to make fuel for power plants, or material for warheads if enriched to a high enough level. Iran has refused and has been punished by two rounds of U.N. sanctions so far. Here are some key facts about enriching uranium: * WHAT IT MEANS -- Enrichment is a process of increasing the proportion of fissile isotope found in uranium ore (represented by the symbol 'U') to make it usable as nuclear fuel or the compressed, explosive core of nuclear weapons. * WHY URANIUM MUST BE ENRICHED -- Uranium is found naturally in a variety of forms but only a particular adapted form of the mineral can be used to create electricity or explosives. -- This type, called U-235 to represent its mass, is present in only about 0.7 percent of mined ore while most of the rest is U-238, which has a slightly heavier mass. Continued... © Reuters 2007. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 43 Star Phoenix: Mine cleanup to begin canada.com Governments to spend millions on reclamation of abandoned uranium sites Lana Haight, The StarPhoenix Published: Monday, April 09, 2007 The cleanup of abandoned uranium mines in northern Saskatchewan is set to begin almost two years after the initial government announcement. In June 2005, the provincial NDP and the then-Liberal federal government announced they would each spend $12 million to decommission and reclaim legacy uranium mines and mill sites near Uranium City in Saskatchewan's north. Last week, the announcement was repeated, this time by the Conservative federal government along with the province. The difference is each level of government has committed to spend $12.3 million during the next several years. "It wasn't our announcement in 2005," said Tom Lukiwski, Conservative MP for Regina-Lumsden-Lake Centre, who made the most recent announcement on behalf of the federal minister of natural resources. "The money was never delivered back in 2005. That was the previous government. They were fond of making announcements, but never any follow-through." Six months after the Liberal announcement, Paul Martin's government was defeated by the Conservatives. Lukiwski said his government was not obligated to fulfi l the Liberal promise. "We've only been in government for a little over 14 months. Clearly, when we formed government, there were a number of priorities that we had that we announced during the election campaign that we wanted to work on," Lukiwski said in a telephone interview. The federal government's fi rst instalment of $1.1 million is "in the mail," he said. Another $9.3 million will be advanced in yearly payments over six years, starting in 2008. The remaining money will be spent between 2014 and 2023. Thirty-seven different sites, abandoned since the mid-1960s, have been identifi ed as potentially hazardous. All but two near Lac La Ronge are within a few kilometres of Uranium City. A trench needs to be fi lled in to the Gunnar mine, where abandoned buildings will be torn down and tonnes of radioactive tailings will be covered with soil and planted with vegetation, says Jay Fredericks, director of mineral policy with Saskatchewan Industry and Resources. "(The companies) operated in a time period when environmental standards and controls were much less than they are today. When the economics dictated that they could no longer be profi table as operations, a number of these companies walked away from the sites," he said. The Saskatchewan Research Council is overseeing the reclamation of the abandoned sites. Samples of soil, water, air, fi sh and animals are being analyzed to determine the level of radioactive contamination at the various sites, says Bill Olsen, project manager with the council. "As soon as the snow goes and the ground is dry enough to get to these sites, we'll be there reviewing what needs to be done and developing our plans, in collaboration with the community," he said. Because of the enormity of the Gunnar site reclamation, the council will require a licence from the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission before proceeding. Olsen expects to submit the project proposal to the commission within a couple of weeks. The reclamation of all the sites will take several years. Each location will then be monitored for a number of years. lhaight@sp.canwest.com © The StarPhoenix (Saskatoon) 2007 © 2007 CanWest Interactive, a division of CanWest MediaWorks ***************************************************************** 44 StockInterview.com: New ISR Processing Technology Could Help Boost U.S. Uranium Mining April 9, 2007 By James Finch Water: The Key to ISR Uranium Mining ISR Valuations Require Water Factor When Appraising ‘Pounds in the Ground’ The Advanced ISR Series – Part FOUR of a Six-Part Series COPYRIGHT © 2007 by StockInterview, Inc. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. No part of this article may be redistributed or published without permission from the editor of StockInterview.com. As part of our efforts to better educate not only uranium stock analysts and investors, but also the media and environmental groups, we have expanded upon last year’s introduction to In Situ Recovery uranium mining with our Advanced ISR Series. Water plays an integral role for In Situ Recovery (ISR) uranium mining. If the water is not in the right place, ISR mining can not take place. A company’s ‘pounds in the ground’ are nearly worthless or may have to be extracted through other means. One of the purposes of the Advanced ISR series is to finally bury the misleading ‘Pounds in the Ground’ mantra. Some uranium companies have given the wrong impression about their resource estimates by championing the number of their historical pounds. Some of those pounds might never be mined or even permitted for mining. Having NI 43-101 compliant resources does not necessarily confirm whether companies have economic deposits in which the extraction process can take place. Water could be the issue. Our interview with Glenn Catchpole of Uranerz Energy explains what investors should know about water’s role in ISR uranium mining. Companies with an ISR project may disappoint shareholders because of the water location, or lack of water, in relation to the ore body. Many analysts have assigned values to an ore body without taking water into consideration. We hope this interview will help shed new light on these valuations. Uranerz Energy chief executive Glenn Catchpole and his technical team have a long history of bringing ISR uranium operations into production. StockInterview: Let’s start with the basics. What is the first requirement for an In Situ Recovery uranium mine? Glenn Catchpole: The uranium ore body itself must or should be in a confined aquifer. What you are looking for is that the uranium-mineralized sandstone is in this aquifer. If there’s no water in the formation and it’s dry, then you can’t solution mine (also known as ISR). StockInterview: What do you mean by a confined aquifer? Glenn Catchpole: A confined aquifer is one that is confined between two impermeable geologic strata. In Wyoming, typically they would be either mud, stone, shale or some type of clay which forms an impermeable barrier above and below the sandstone hosting the uranium. Over time, water has moved down the sandstone strata. As it moves, the water comes under pressure and becomes confined. StockInterview: Why is this important? Glenn Catchpole: If you complete a water well in a sandstone strata that is under pressure and encase it in cement, the water will actually rise in that casing to some level based on the pressure in the aquifer. In some cases, there could be enough pressure or ‘head,’ where the well will actually flow onto the surface on its own. You want the water under pressure because the more pressure in the formation, or in the sandstone unit, then the more oxygen you can put in the solution. In the United States, you either add CO2 or sodium bicarbonate plus an oxidant, such as oxygen, to the groundwater. Then you re-inject the solution into the sandstone host formation to dissolve the uranium off the sandstone. The more oxygen you can put into the solution, the more effectively you can dissolve or oxidize the uranium. StockInterview: How do you find out how much pressure you have in the aquifer? Glenn Catchpole: Let’s assume you’ve got good uranium values from the results of your exploration program, and that you may have an economic ore body using the ISR method. You then need to confirm that the ore body is in an aquifer or that the sandstone is saturated with water. To do that, you would install hydrologic testing wells. Assuming there is water in those wells, you would then do a pump test to determine the hydrologic properties of this aquifer. Sufficient water pressure is required to recover uranium mineralization from the water-saturated ore body to make an ISR project economic. Courtesy of Uranerz Energy StockInterview: How do you know if your properties have mineralized sandstone formations which are saturated with water? Glenn Catchpole: There are deposits in Wyoming that are good in terms of grade, but they are completely above the water table. They are not saturated. In our case, we focused our acquisition activities in the Powder River Basin, which we know from our previous work. Most of those sands that are hosting uranium are indeed saturated with water. There are some that are not. From our experience we pretty much know those deposits that may be sitting above the water table. In other words, they are not saturated with water. If uranium went to $500/pound, maybe some day you could put a conventional mine on them. StockInterview: What about those in the exploration stage? Glenn Catchpole: If you were working in a new area doing raw exploration, and you did come across good mineralization that looked like you had an ore body there, you might not know for sure about the hydrology and what the water levels are like. You could get into a situation where either the sandstone is dry, or it is only partially filled with water. Or it’s filled with water, but it doesn’t have much head or pressure on it. You’ve got to do some test work and nail that down. StockInterview: Is there any way of detecting the problem in advance, before you discover you’ve got an inadequately saturated formation? Glenn Catchpole: When you are drilling an exploration hole, the driller knows when he encounters any water at all. If he doesn’t get any water, you know right away, you’ve got a problem very early on. When the driller starts out, he can start drilling with air. If he encounters water in his drilling, then he’s going to switch over to drilling mud to carry the cuttings. As he’s drilling a hole, he is creating cuttings. He has to have a mud slurry in order to carry those cuttings out of the hole. An experienced driller will have a good feel for how much water he’s encountered. These drillers have worked all over Wyoming; they’ve got some feel for the local geology and what the water situation might be. StockInterview: Once you’ve established the saturation and pressure, what’s next on your checklist? Glenn Catchpole: Assuming the mineralization is not tied up in clay streaks in the sandstone unit, then you want to know the permeability of the aquifer. How readily can you move water through the formation? To do that, you have to do a pump test, or aquifer test to calculate the value of the permeability of that aquifer. The higher the permeability, the more helpful it’s going to be in your mining process. You have to be able to move the solution through the formation in order to leach uranium off the sandstone grains. The more permeable the formation, the more fluid you can move through it; the more effective you can be in extracting uranium. StockInterview: How do you determine your rate of production? Glenn Catchpole: Two things determine your ISR mining production rate. That’s the concentration of the uranium in the fluid coming out of your recovery wells and the flow rate. There’s an equation you can use to determine the rate of production in pounds. You multiply your flow rate by your concentration, also known as head grade. StockInterview: Is this how companies conclude how many pounds they will annually produce on their ISR project? Glenn Catchpole: Generally, you have a production rate you are trying to achieve. For example, if I want to produce one million pounds per year, and my head grade is 80 milligrams per liter (a typical number used for U.S. projects) and my hydrologist tells me I’ve going to recover 10 gallons per minute, I will need 400 recovery wells. Based upon these hypothetical calculations, I will need 4,000 gallons per minute, or 400 recovery wells each recovering 10 gallons/minute, to produce one million pounds. As a side comment, when people say ‘I’m going to have a solution mine that produces three million pounds per year,’ it turns out to be a lot of wells. Your major cost in a solution mining operation, once you’ve got the plant built, is putting in your wells. (Editor’s Note: Discussing costs to put in wells with others in the uranium mining sector, we found a range of $20 to $30/foot for each well.) Conclusion In a separate information sheet, Glenn Catchpole provided us with a hypothetical approximation of an ISR wellfield in Wyoming. He wrote, “Production at an ISR uranium mine is directly related to the flow rate (FR) coming from the recovery wells and the concentration of the uranium or head grade (HG) in the recovery solution.” In this theoretical calculation, Mr. Catchpole assumed a head grade of 65 milligrams per liter, a flow rate of 10 gallons per minute for each recovery well, and an ore body’s average depth below surface of 500 feet. In order to produce one million pounds U3O8, this would require 350 production wells, 420 injection wells and 20 monitor wells. Using these assumptions, the theoretical well field would cost approximately $12 million to construct. Amortized over two years for the life of the well field, the cost for the well field construction – using annual production figures of one million pounds – would be about $6/pound U3O8. By lowering cost/foot for each well, a company could reduce their construction cost to about $4/pound U3O8. Mr. Catchpole cautioned these are simplistic and very rough approximations of an ISR wellfield cost in Wyoming. He also wrote, “These are presented for illustrative purposes only and the numbers generated should not be used in financial calculations or project evaluations.” (Editor’s Note: We continue to provide investors and analysts with realistic ranges of Capex and operating costs for the ISR mining method in the United States. In a previous interview, we discussed the cost per pound U3O8 for environmental permitting in the United States.) Uranerz Energy AMEX: URZ www.uranerz.com The 304-page trade softcover edition of “Investing in the Great Uranium Bull Market,” is available online by visiting: http://bookstore.stockinterview.com and is now offered on Amazon.com by visiting http://www.amazon.com Finally, the new update to StockInterview’s “Investing in the Great Uranium Bull Market.” The completely updated CD-ROM version offers uranium price guidance for 2007-2008 and a special ‘How to Choose Uranium Stocks in 2007.’ Also included are outlooks for production and potential future problems at several major uranium mines; the outlook for Australia, Russia, Kazakhstan, the United States, Africa and elsewhere. We also included a safe haven basket of uranium companies. How high do we expect spot uranium to reach and when will the spot uranium price likely peak? It’s all in the new CD-ROM book. Pre-orders will be accepted via mail and fax to (941) 870-3096 but credit cards will not be charged until shipment. Order form Please email your feedback on this article: jfinch@stockinterview.com ***************************************************************** 45 Citizens Education Project: Will New UK Trident Lead to N-Tests in Nevada? Article Published April 9, 2007 On March 14 the British Parliament voted to replace its Trident submarine nuclear weapons platform with new submarines and upgraded missiles and warheads. Why should this be a concern to Utahns? The Mutual Defense Agreement (MDA) between the United Kingdom and the United States was renewed with little debate in Parliament and less in the U.S. Congress. Under the MDA Treaty, Britain tests its new nuclear weapons designs in conjunction with the United States - at the Nevada Test Site. There have been 29 joint U.S./U.K. tests in Nevada between 1962 and 1991, at least 9 of which were for the Trident warhead. Several weeks ago Utahns celebrated the cancellation of the Divine Strake Test in Nevada. While everyone should be pleased with the decision to ditch this ill-advised explosion, designed to simulate a bunker busting nuclear explosion, a larger threat is that actual nuclear testing, albeit underground, may be soon resumed at the Nevada Test Site. Citizens Education Project first alerted the public here of the Bush Administration's moves to resume testing in the spring of 2001. The U.S. recently awarded the Lawrence Livermore Laboratory the contract to design the Reliable Replacement Warhead (RRW), with the stated purpose of making the "Naval Trident replacement as its top priority." Tribune reporter Robert Gherke filed a story last week headlined "White House Reaffirms Pledge of no Nuke Tests." But the article cast grave doubts on the sincerity of the promise. Both Rep. Matheson and Dr. Robert Nelson, a Scientist with the Union of Concerned Scientists, strongly rebutted the administration’s claim that to develop new nuclear weapons was different from actually testing them. The Bush Administration's budgets have requested funding for the preparation of the Nevada Test Site for renewed testing for several years. U.S. Deputy Secretary of Energy, Clay Sell said last week that "The United States reserves the right to conduct nuclear tests in the future, but hopes it will not be necessary." Secretary Snell made this saber rattling statement at the Carnegie Center in Moscow, Russia during a meeting of the U.S.-Russia Energy working Group. The Russian response is a major increase in their nuclear defense research and development budget, and they are deploying new nuclear weapons systems to counteract U.S. moves. The U.S. has signed the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) that prohibits any nuclear test explosion in any environment, but Congess has not ratified it. A voluntary moratorium has been in place since since 1991. To date, 177 nations have signed the CTBT and 138 have ratified it. The nations that have not ratified the treaty are Israel, Egypt, India, Indonesia, Pakistan, China, Colombia, North Korea, the Islamic Republic of Iran, and the United States of America. Some company we keep. Since the nuclear testing moratorium, India, Pakistan and possiblly North Korea have conducted their first nuclear tests. Proliferation of nuclear weapons capablility may be the world's most dangerous development. U.S. policy is not deterring proliferation, but encouraging it. Salt Lake City Mayor Rocky Anderson has gone on record as opposing U.S. Nuclear policy and renewed testing. A letter from Rocky opposing nuclear proliferation was read on the floor of British Parliament during the Trident debate, along with a letter from the Mayor of Nagasaki, Japan. Other local politicians have distanced themselves from the issue claiming that "nuclear testing was a national issue and that local politicians should not be involved." This belies the fact that Salt Lake City and County were hit repeatedly by fall-out from open air nuclear testing in the 1950’s and from unplanned releases from underground tests conducted into the 1990’s. We can not afford to just stick out heads in the sand and hope that the local nuclear threat will go away. The world is too small and the issues are too big that we can ever hope to hide from them. Gerald McDonough Steve Erickson Gerald McDonough is a local writer, researcher and consultant. Steve Erickson is the Director of the Citizens Education Project ***************************************************************** 46 Hanford News: State to discuss cleanup deadlines This story was published Friday, April 6th, 2007 Annette Cary, Herald staff writer Washington has agreed to enter high-level negotiations with the Department of Energy over missed legal deadlines for cleanup at the Hanford nuclear reservation rather than moving toward legal action. "It doesn't mean we've ruled out going to court but before we do that we will see if we can negotiate an agreement," said Andy Fitz, a Washington state assistant attorney general. Among the state's concerns is the delay in constructing the $12.2 billion vitrification plant to treat some of Hanford's worst wastes. The plant may not open until 2019, eight years past a legal deadline. On May 29 top officials with decision-making authority from DOE, the state and the Environmental Protection Agency will meet in the Tri-Cities to start negotiations. James Rispoli, DOE assistant secretary for environmental management; Jay Manning, director of the Washington state Department of Ecology, and Rob McKenna, Washington state attorney general, are expected to be at the table, among others. The state has seen three options for resolving the issue of missed deadlines, McKenna said. They range from "throwing up our hands and accepting the delay" to taking DOE to court to get deadlines enforced, he said. But it has settled on a middle option of attempting to negotiate a solution that recognizes DOE's budgetary and technical limitations, McKenna said. Gov. Chris Gregoire has warned in the past that she does not intend to extend legally binding Tri-Party Agreement deadlines without a good reason. Instead, the state will "try to find an equitable path forward," said Jane Hedges, the program manager for the Department of Ecology's Nuclear Waste Program. In exchange for extended deadlines, DOE may have to agreed to new requirements or to do some additional work to offset cleanup delays, according to the state and EPA, both Hanford regulators that would have to sign off on changes to the Tri-Party Agreement. "We've really pushed DOE hard to protect the ground water from contamination in the soil and (clean up) the ground water itself," said Dennis Faulk, EPA environmental scientist. However, neither the state nor EPA is ready to discuss specific proposals being prepared for the negotiations. Tri-Party Agreement deadlines are often adjusted, but usually for technical reasons or, in the recent the case of ground water protection and cleanup, to gather more information about contamination so better cleanup decisions can be made. Usually the deadline adjustments are for fairly short periods, such as a year or two. But now the state is concerned that DOE is falling far behind schedule on the projects it considers key to protecting the Columbia River. The vitrification plant is intended to turn much of 53 million gallons of radioactive and hazardous chemical waste now held in underground tanks into a stable glass form for permanent disposal. Technical problems that need to be resolved and funding shortfalls have caused it to fall eight years behind schedule. In the meantime, the waste it would treat, left from the past production of plutonium for the nation's nuclear weapons program, is being held in underground tanks that have leaked 1 million gallons of waste into the soil in central Hanford. DOE has been working to remove waste from 149 leak-prone tanks into newer double-shell tanks, but the project has fallen behind schedule. The first 16 tanks, all in an area called C Tank Farm, were supposed to be emptied by Oct. 1, 2006. So far, six tanks in the C Tank Farm and one elsewhere have been emptied. To supplement treatment at the main vitrification plant, DOE also has been looking at turning low-activity radioactive waste into large glass blocks for disposal in a bulk vitrification project. But financial and technical issues have delayed that work. Although delays in meeting deadlines for the main vitrification plant, retrieving waste from leak-prone tanks and testing bulk vitrification are the major drivers for the planned negotiations of the Tri-Party Agreement, the discussions may not be limited to those, Hedges said. Also among the state's concerns is whether DOE is on track to begin working with remote-handled transuranic waste, she said. That waste, which is typically contaminated with plutonium, is too radioactively hot to be handled except with remotely operated equipment. In recent years, the Hanford budget has been fairly flat, hovering around $2 billion or a little below, raising questions about paying for additional work if that's the outcome of negotiations. "I know the (cleanup) project will not be completed if the budget process does not keep up with inflation," McKenna said. DOE believes it is important to continue discussions on the Tri-Party Agreement deadlines and seeks "to put in place commitments that reflect validated and achievable cleanup schedules that result in measurable risk reduction," it said in a statement in response to the state's decision to proceed with high-level negotiations. © 2007 Tri-City Herald. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 47 Hanford News: Bill sets upstate office: Hanford workers, others could get help processing claims This story was published Saturday, April 7th, 2007 Chris Mulick, Herald Olympia bureau OLYMPIA - State lawmakers are poised to approve a bill setting up a small state office that could help workers for Hanford and hundreds of other self-insured employers process their workers' compensation claims. The measure hasn't been studied in detail in the Tri-Cities but it's drawn strong opposition from Richland Republican Reps. Shirley Hankins and Larry Haler, largely because Hanford watchdog Heart of America Northwest supports it. "Why does Heart of America want to be in this?" Hankins asked Friday afternoon. Different versions of the labor-backed Senate Bill 5053 have passed in both chambers on near party-line votes and differences still must be resolved before the bill is sent to Gov. Chris Gregoire. The bill would create an office of the ombudsman for employees of self-insured companies to serve as their advocate in processing workers' compensation claims. There are hundreds of large companies in Washington that are self-insured, meaning they have the financial wherewithal to provide benefits for workers who are injured or who become ill from job-related activities. Smaller companies are insured through the state. Origins of the bill date back to a 1998 study by the Joint Legislative Audit and Review Committee that recommended the office be created before self-insuring companies are given broader authority to manage their claims. The ombudsman, under a contract with the governor, would provide information to injured workers, act as their advocate, investigate complaints and refer complaints to the Department of Labor and Industries. Self-insured employers would cover costs of the office through annual assessments. "This will give workers an office that can help work them through problems and delays in the system," said Bob Cooper, a lobbyist for Heart of America. Labor interests testified for the bill in the Senate and it didn't gain much notice. Heart of America joined a labor lobbyist in testifying for the bill in the House two weeks ago. That was relayed in a Republican caucus meeting Wednesday evening, shortly before a floor vote, and Hankins and Haler went on the offensive in floor speeches, asking that Hanford activity be carved out of the bill. In separate interviews Friday, they outlined a litany of potential concerns. Haler said the bill raises more questions about the state meddling in federal affairs, that it adds bureaucracy to the workers' compensation system and he raised concerns about who Gov. Chris Gregoire would choose to serve as ombudsman. "It will more than likely be one of her friends at Heart of America," Haler said. Hankins is worried the bill would somehow put the state on the hook for paying for workers' compensation benefits. But mostly, Hankins and Haler appear alarmed by Heart of America's support. Both are suspicious the watchdog group will reap a financial benefit. "Heart of America is slowly creeping into different sections of Hanford employment," Hankins said. Cooper said the bill is nothing more than a self-insurance measure that happens to affect Hanford workers, among others, that Heart of America chose to testify on. "We didn't instigate this bill," Cooper said. "We just chimed in." Carl Adrian, president of the Tri-City Development Council, said he was just alerted to the bill Friday and hadn't had a chance to read it. © 2007 Tri-City Herald. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 48 Hanford News: Nuclear agency to review leak at Richland plant This story was published Saturday, April 7th, 2007 Mary Hopkin, Herald staff writer By Mary Hopkin, Herald staff writer Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff will meet with Areva NP staff Thursday to discuss violations discovered in October when there was a small hydrogen fluoride release at Areva's Richland facility. Roger Hannah, a spokesman for the Georgia-based commission, said the meeting is a routine part of an investigation and the incident was not major. "There has already been an investigation but this is an opportunity for them to tell their side of the story and for us to get information about the actions they have taken to remedy the situation," said Hannah. The incident occurred Oct. 23 at the plant, which produces fuel for nuclear power reactors. Two workers entered a process area inside the plant's dry conversion building, where uranium hexafluoride is heated in an autoclave to produce a gas that is then moved to a pressurized vessel. Steam and nitrogen are added to convert the gas to uranium oxide. The process produces a byproduct called hydrogen fluoride, a nonradioactive chemical that is collected and sold to the electronics industry, which uses it to etch computer chips. When the workers entered the building they detected an unusual odor and immediately left the process area, according to NRC reports. They reported to the first aid station and that evening one of the workers was admitted to the hospital. Although hydrogen fluoride is caustic, workers would have had to have been exposed to it for at least 30 minutes for there to be long-term health concerns. Air sample tests found elevated levels of hydrogen fluoride vapor near a line for the off-gas system but there was no indication of the release spreading beyond the immediate process area or to the environment, an NRC incident report said. Hannah said NRC staff is satisfied the company completed a thorough investigation and analysis of the event and has taken appropriate corrective actions, but inspectors identified apparent violations involved event reporting, inappropriate respiratory protection equipment and inadequate engineering and administrative controls for small hydrogen fluoride releases. Bob Link, manager of environmental health, safety and licensing for the plant, said the Richland office did three root cause analysis of the incident to prevent similar incidents and evaluated the response to the event. Link said the company has improved its protocols and procedures and added employee training and enhanced detection systems inside the plant. "We've also improved maintenance and inspection procedures," he said. The meeting between Areva and the NRC will begin at 8 a.m. in the NRC's Region 2 Office in Atlanta, Ga. and will be open to the public. Although the meeting is between Areva and the NRC, people attending the meeting will have an opportunity to ask questions of NRC staff at the end of the meeting. © 2007 Tri-City Herald. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 49 NAS: Project: Development and Implementation of a Cleanup Technology Roadmap for DOE's Office of Environmental Management PIN: NRSB-O-06-03-A Major Unit: Division on Earth and Life Studies Sub Unit: Nuclear and Radiation Studies Board RSO: Crowley, Kevin Subject/Focus Area: Environmental Issue Project Scope A National Academies committee will provide technical and strategic advice to the DOE-EM's Office of Engineering and Technology to support the development and implementation of its cleanup technology roadmap. Specifically, the study will identify: o Principal science and technology gaps and their priorities for the cleanup program based on previous National Academies reports, updated and extended to reflect current site conditions and EM priorities and input form key external groups, such as the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board, Environmental Protection Agency, and state regulatory agencies. o Strategic opportunities to leverage research and development from other DOE programs (e.g., in the Office of Science, Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management, and the National Nuclear Security Administration), other federal agencies (e.g., Department of Defense, Environmental Protection Agency), universities, and the private sector. o Core capabilities at the national laboratories that will be needed to address EM's long-term, high-risk cleanup challenges, especially at the four laboratories located at the large DOE sites (Idaho National Laboratory, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, and Savannah River National Laboratory). o The infrastructure at these national laboratories and at EM sites that should be maintained to support research, development, and bench and pilot scale demonstrations of technologies for the EM cleanup program, especially in radiochemistry. The committee will provide findings and recommendations, as appropriate, to EM on maintenance of core capabilities and infrastructure at national laboratories and EM sites to address its long-term, high-risk cleanup challenges. The project is sponsored by the U.S. Department of Energy. The approximate start date for the project is February 1, 2007. A report is expected to be released at the end of the project in approximately 16 months. Project Duration: 16 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 - 03/12/2007 Meeting 2 - 06/13/2007 Reports Reports having no URL can be seen at the Public Access Records Office Email: info@nas.edu ***************************************************************** 50 KnoxNews: NRC gives thumbs up to nuclear plant By ANDREW EDER, edera@knews.com April 9, 2007 SWEETWATER, Tenn. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission gave its stamp of approval for TVA?s operation of Watts Bar Nuclear Plant today at a public meeting here. The plant's performance for 2006 was classified as green, meaning that any safety problems found during the NRC?s inspections were of low significance. Jonathan Bartley, senior resident inspector at Watts Bar, said the NRC conducted 4,087 hours of inspection-related activities at Watts Bar in 2006. Based on the plant?s performance last year, NRC officials will conduct the normal level of inspections during 2007. Watts Bar has one operating pressurized-water reactor. TVA is considering whether to complete Watts Bar?s Unit 2 reactor, on which construction was halted in 1985. The utility is conducting a study to determine the project?s cost and scheduling, and a draft environmental impact statement is available for public review and comments. More details as they develop online and in Tuesday?s News Sentinel. Business writer Andrew Eder may be reached at 865-342-6318. Copyright 2007, Knoxville News Sentinel Co. ***************************************************************** NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 this material is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. For more information go to: *****************************************************************