***************************************************************** 04/26/07 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 15.98 ***************************************************************** 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 Reuters: Putin comments escalate U.S.-Russia missile shield row 2 AFP: US-Russia missile defence dispute overshadows NATO meetings - 3 Reuters: HIGHLIGHTS-Putin's annual address to parliament 4 Reuters: No climate consensus at U.S.-EU summit | 5 Hindustan Times: Blair endorses Indo-US nuke deal- NUCLEAR REACTORS 6 Marking 21 Years Since Chernobyl, Ban Ki-moon Says World Cannot Forg 7 WNN: Decommissioning at Chernobyl 8 Bangkok Post: IPPs to get 5,800 MW 9 US: Herald News: Officials: Morris okay for nuclear facility 10 US: Houston Chronicle: The fight's still on, but sides look differen 11 US: Houston Chronicle: Big nuclear refueling job is winding down | 12 RIA Novosti: The lessons of Chernobyl 13 RIA Novosti: Belarus opposition supporters meet to remember Chernoby 14 US: NRC: NRC to Discuss 2006 Performance at Columbia Generating Stat 15 US: PARADE: A NEW NUCLEAR PLANT? 16 US: POAC: State petitions federal court over Oyster Creek relicensin 17 US: Platts: GE tells NII it intends to pursue ESBWR design acceptanc 18 Platts: Putin calls for higher share of nuclear, coal, hydro generat 19 US: TheHill.com: Amid contractor's strike at nuclear plant, lawmaker 20 US: Rutland Herald: Politics at its worst 21 US: Times Argus: Taxing Yankee 22 US: APP.COM: State to NRC: See ya in court 23 US: APP.COM: America needs nuclear power like Oyster Creek's | 24 US: Courier Post: N.J. asks court's aid over Oyster Creek 25 US: JOURNAL NEWS: NRC, Indian Point officials to discuss performance 26 Bangkok Post: Thais hear call for nuclear energy 27 US: Salt Lake Tribune: No nukes 28 US: Salt Lake Tribune: Nuclear power proponent 29 US: Dallas Morning News: Bill would simply re-regulate the energy ma 30 US: Dallas Morning News: Power bill vote delayed | 31 US: Bloomberg News: Nuclear plant costs weigh down Xcel Energy profi 32 US: Reuters: Workers in short supply for U.S. nuclear power | 33 UPI: India to calm demands for U.S. nuke deal 34 CBS: Ukrainians Remember Chernobyl, President Joins Mourners In Memo 35 US: New London Day: Power Disrupted At Reactor That Is Closed For Re 36 US: New London Day: Millstone 3 Briefly Loses Power 37 US: Huffington Post: The Spin Over the "Joint Nuclear Energy Action 38 SNA: Bulgaria: Bulgarians,Romanians Protest against Belene NPP 39 US: sacbee.com: Water rate hike sought by firm - NUCLEAR SECURITY 40 BBC NEWS: Russia in defence warning to US NUCLEAR SAFETY 41 BBC NEWS: Row over Litvinenko's radioactive house 42 BBC NEWS: Organ removal inquiry widened 43 BBC NEWS: Flask train crash motorist blamed 44 Guardian Unlimited: Nuclear workers' body parts inquiry widened 45 The Herald: Organ removal probe shifts to Dounreay after Sellafield 46 AU ABC: Army admits to Brisbane radiation leak. 47 Sydney Morning Herald: No cover-up of army radiation leak - govt - NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE 48 Las Vegas SUN: Government renews focus on cross-Nevada rail line to 49 BBC NEWS: Dounreay link to tissue inquiry 50 ReviewJournal.com: Officials shift focus for rail route to Yucca 51 US: The Australian: Rann not certain of overturning uranium policy 52 US: West Australian: ALP's uranium decision 'tough but right' 53 US: West Australian: Protestors lobby Labor on uranium mining 54 US: LA Daily News: High court to rule on cleanup 55 US: Sydney Morning Herald: Uranium race hots up again - Xchange - 56 US: PE: Democrats press for federal limits on rocket-fuel chemical i 57 US: AU ABC: Ditching uranium policy 'critical' for SA. 58 US: KNDO/KNDU: GNEP Citing Period Closing Off 59 LasVegasNOW.com: Renewed Focus on Caliente Corridor for Nuke Dump Ra 60 US: AU ABC: Leave uranium mining policy alone, Snowdon says PEACE US DEPT. OF ENERGY 61 DOE: DOE Issues Two Draft National Interest Electric Transmission 62 DOE: U.S. Department of Energy Announces 8th Annual Small Business C 63 Tri-City Herald: Study says vit plant may be able to treat some wast 64 Tri-City Herald: Secretary Bodman: What's next for lab? 65 Inside Bay Area: Lab seeking to restore explosives testing 66 lamonitor.com: Study: In for another card ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** FULL NEWS STORIES ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** 1 Reuters: Putin comments escalate U.S.-Russia missile shield row Thu Apr 26, 2007 5:06PM EDT By Mark John and David Brunnstrom OSLO (Reuters) - President Vladimir Putin froze Moscow's commitments under a European arms control pact on Thursday, escalating a row between the United States and Russia over U.S. plans to build a missile shield in eastern Europe. Putin's announcement came hours before NATO and Russian officials discussed a project which U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice insisted was no threat to Moscow, brushing off such Russian concerns as "purely ludicrous". Asked to comment on Putin's move to suspend Russia's implementation of the Conventional Forces in Europe (CFE) pact negotiated in the months following the Cold War, Rice insisted Moscow should fulfill its commitments. "These are treaty obligations and everyone is expected to live up to treaty obligations," Rice told a news briefing in Oslo before foreign ministers met their Russian counterpart. NATO expressed dismay after Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov confirmed Putin's announcement to NATO ministers in a charged encounter which one U.S. official described as a "litany of complaints" by Lavrov. "That message was met by concern, grave concern, disappointment and regret," said alliance Secretary-General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer. "The allies are of the opinion that the CFE is one of the cornerstones of European security." The CFE Treaty was negotiated in the months after the Cold War among the then-22 member states of NATO and the Warsaw Pact countries with the goal of achieving verifiable reductions in conventional military equipment. Only Belarus, Kazakhstan, Russia and Ukraine have ratified an adapted 1999 version, with NATO states holding out until Russia withdraws its remaining troops from Georgia and Moldova. Continued... © Reuters 2007. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 2 AFP: US-Russia missile defence dispute overshadows NATO meetings - by David Millikin Thu Apr 26, 3:27 PM ET OSLO (AFP) - A dispute over US plans to station anti-missile bases in eastern Europe escalated Thursday as Moscow threatened to pull out of a key defence treaty, while Washington derided Russia's concerns as "ludicrous." The US plan to station 10 non-explosive interceptors in Poland and a tracking radar in the Czech Republic was set to dominate NATO-Russia talks here Thursday that will involve US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and her Russian counterpart, Sergei Lavrov. Rice and Lavrov were due to hold a private 20-minute meeting on the sidelines of the conference, US officials said. The burgeoning US-Russia dispute also overshadowed discussions among NATO ministers that focussed on the alliance's involvement in the war in Afghanistan. Hours before the talks, Russian President Vladimir Putin slammed the US missile plan and fired a shot across NATO's bow by calling for a freeze on his country's compliance with the Conventional Forces in Europe (CFE) treaty. "It is high time for our partners to deliver their contribution to arms reduction, not just in word but in deed," Putin said of the anti-missile plan, which he warned would mark an unprecedented deployment in Europe of US strategic weaponry. Rice responded at a later press conference by saying Russia's involvement in CFE was a treaty obligations "and eveeryone is expected to live up to treaty obligations." She said she would ask Lavrov for clarifications of Putin's stance. Earlier Thursday, Rice complained that Russia was applying Cold War logic to a defensive proposal aimed not at Moscow but at countering the emerging threat of ballistic missiles in the hands of "rogue states" like Iran. "Let's be real about this," Rice said. "The idea that somehow 10 interceptors and a few radars in eastern Europe are going to threaten the Soviet strategic return is purely ludicrous and everybody knows it," she said, making her own Cold War slip by referring to the ex-Soviet Union. "The Russians have thousands of warheads. The idea that somehow you can stop the Russian strategic nuclear deterrent with a few interceptors just doesn't make sense," she said. Rice said Washington was "perfectly willing to spend as much time as we need to to demystify for the Russians what we are doing." "But we have to continue it on the basis of a realistic assessment of what we are proposing, not one that is grounded in the eighties," she said. Washington announced in January its hope to extend the so-far unproven missile defence shield to cover European allies, with the network due to become operational by 2013. Russia fears the system could target its missile arsenal and start a new arms race, and it disagrees on the US assessment that Iran could obtain weapons within a decade that would have the range to strike at Europe. Opinion polls indicate most Poles and Czechs oppose the plan and some NATO allies also expressed reservations, although US officials say these have largely been addressed in a series of meetings with top US officials in recent weeks. NATO Secretary General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer confirmed the allies' strong support for the US missile plan. And he rejected Russia's assertion the US proposals represented a threat for the region, insisting they "cannot and will not and and do not upset the strategic balance in Europe." Washington has dispatched top officials to Moscow, including Defense Secretary Robert Gates, to explain the plan and propose an unprecedented level of cooperation with the Russians on missile defence programs. Russia responded cooly to the offer and Putin's pointed comments raised concerns that US-Russia relations, already under strain, could take a serious turn for the worse. "It's important to prevent a spiral of mistrust between Russia and the United States," German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier cautioned at the start of the NATO meeting. The CFE was signed between NATO and the Warsaw Pact of European communist states in 1990 and then adapted in 1999 after the 1991 breakup of the Soviet Union. It led to massive cuts in conventional weaponry and forces, but the 1999 version has not been ratified by most NATO members. Copyright © 2007 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The ***************************************************************** 3 Reuters: HIGHLIGHTS-Putin's annual address to parliament Thu Apr 26, 2007 5:01AM EDT MOSCOW, April 26 (Reuters) - Russian President Vladimir Putin gave his annual address to both houses of parliament on Thursday. Below are key points from Putin's speech so far: ** Putin said foreign money was being channelled into Russia to meddle in domestic politics, and called for tougher legislation to fight extremists. ** Putin said the introduction of a system of proportional representation would ensure a fair result in this December's lower house election. Russia's strategic direction will depend directly on the new parliament, he said. ** He announced a housing offensive. Some of the proceeds of the auction of assets in bankrupt oil firm YUKOS should be ploughed into homebuilding, he said. ** The state should spend some of its oil wealth to encourage voluntary pension saving. It should match each 1,000 roubles of individual saving top-up payments, Putin said. State pensions will rise by 65 percent through to 2009. ** Russia needs to boost its power generation capacity by two-thirds by 2020, Putin said, adding it should build 26 new atomic power plants and create a special nuclear corporation to run them. © Reuters 2007. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 4 Reuters: No climate consensus at U.S.-EU summit | Thu Apr 26, 2007 12:58PM EDT By Noah Barkin BERLIN (Reuters) - The European Union and United States will pledge at a summit next week to remove costly non-tariff business barriers, but steer clear of a strong message on climate change amid resistance from Washington. German Chancellor Angela Merkel, who has worked hard to improve transatlantic ties following a damaging split over the Iraq war, will meet President George W. Bush in Washington on Monday -- her fourth visit since taking office and first since assuming the rotating presidency of the EU. The centerpiece of the meeting will be a "Transatlantic Economic Partnership" agreement to harmonize regulatory standards and boost cooperation in areas from intellectual property and port security to investment and accounting. Merkel has championed the agreement for its economic benefits. She also hopes to send a message to rising powers like China about Europe and Washington's determination to promote their common values and rules in a globalized world. But the summit, which will touch on top international issues like Iran's nuclear program, Middle East peace and Kosovo independence, also risks exposing deep differences between the partners on the issue of global warming. German officials said on Thursday the two sides were still wrangling over the wording of a statement on climate change, which Merkel had hoped would be a springboard for a broader climate deal at a June G8 summit she will host in Heiligendamm. Instead, the watered-down statement is expected only to acknowledge the need for "heightened" or "strengthened" action to fight global warming without any specific pledges. "The willingness of the United States to discuss this issue at all is positive," one senior German official said, describing the EU-U.S. meeting as a "first step" on the road to the Heiligendamm summit, which is now only six weeks away. © Reuters 2007. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 5 Hindustan Times: Blair endorses Indo-US nuke deal- Manmohan-Bush meeting likely to unlock 123 pact April 26, 2007 Nabanita Sircar Welcoming the agreement on civil nuclear co-operation between India and the US, British Prime Minister Tony Blair called the deal a "significant contribution" to future energy security. The highly sensitive deal which was finally agreed upon by President Bush and Prim Minister Singh in New Delhi on Thursday, is being closely watched by world leaders. While President Bush called the deal "historic", Blair said, "I believe that the deal can make a significant contribution to energy security, development, economic and environmental objectives for India and the international community, as well as represent a net gain for the non-proliferation regime." Blair iterated that the UK "has strongly supported this initiative from its inception and has been actively involved throughout". He said that Britain now looked forward to "work closely with the US and India, and with partners in the Nuclear Suppliers Group and elsewhere on the detail of this important issue." ***************************************************************** 6 Marking 21 Years Since Chernobyl, Ban Ki-moon Says World Cannot Forget Loss And Pain Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2007 10:01:28 -0400 MARKING 21 YEARS SINCE CHERNOBYL, BAN KI-MOON SAYS WORLD CANNOT FORGET LOSS AND PAIN New York, Apr 26 2007 10:00AM On the 21st anniversary of the Chernobyl disaster, the worst nuclear power plant accident in history, United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon today <" http://www.un.org/apps/sg/sgstats.asp?nid=2536">said that although the world should never forget the loss and pain caused by the tragic incident, it is imperative to move Mr. Ban paid tribute to the hundreds of emergency workers who risked their lives to respond to the accident, the thousands who worked to build a shelter around the damaged reactor, the over 330,000 who were displaced from their homes, the 5,000 children stricken with cancer and the millions left traumatized and deeply worried about their health and livelihoods. In 1986, explosions destroyed Chernobyl’s Unit 4 reactor core, sending a cloud of radionuclides over parts of Ukraine, Belarus and Russia. “While paying respect to the past, we need to take stock of the present and look ahead to the future,” he said in a statement issued by his spokesperson. Given that science points to the possibility of a return to normal life for people living in regions affected by the disaster, Mr. Ban called for sustainable social and economic development, the creation of new jobs, an influx of investment and the reinstatement of a sense of self-sufficiency. “The communities affected by Chernobyl have shown great resilience in coping with a disaster of tremendous magnitude,” he noted, urging the “international community to do its part in helping them to bring a region so rich in history and potential fully back to life.” Mr. Ban also said that he was glad that Russian tennis player Maria Sharapova has agreed to take on the role of <" http://undp.bg/media_room.php?id=1973">Goodwill Ambassador for the UN Development Programme (UNDP) so that she can give a global voice to the recovery efforts underway at Chernobyl. 2007-04-26 00:00:00.000 ___________________ For more details go to UN News Centre at http://www.un.org/news To listen to news and in-depth programmes from UN Radio go to: http://radio.un.org/ _______________________________ To change your profile or unsubscribe go to: http://www.un.org/apps/news/email/ ***************************************************************** 7 WNN: Decommissioning at Chernobyl 26 April 2007 Ground preparation work is underway for the New Safe Confinement of Chernobyl 4, while dismantling progresses at unit 1, and defuelling at unit 3. A giant arch will isolate Chernobyl 4 from the environment for 100 years On 26 April, 21 years ago, Ukraine's Chernobyl plant suffered the worst nuclear accident in history when a power runaway event wrecked reactor 4, leading to a hydrogen explosion that destroyed the reactor building and exposed the core of the ruined reactor. Work on constructing two more RBMK 1000 units at the site came to an immediate halt, but the three remaining reactors continued to operate for some years, unit 2 was shut down in 1991, unit 1 in 1996 and unit 3 in 2000. Their contribution to Ukraine's electicity supply was only recently replaced by the start-up of Khmelnitsky 2 and Rovno 4 in late 2004. Several major projects are underway at the contaminated site. Most important is the work to isolate the dangerous remains of unit 4 from the environment. Toward that end, a $1 billion international project will see a New Safe Confinement constructed over the decaying Object Shelter erected in the disaster's immediate aftermath by Soviet authorities. Groundwork is underway to prepare for the construction of a massive arch structure which will cover unit 4's reactor building and its section of the shared turbine hall. At the other units, more conventional decommissioning activities are in progress. The first batch of dismantled equipment from the turbine hall of unit 1 was sent to the Kompleks waste handling facility at the start of April, over 30 months after work began. Only outdoor equipment has been dismantled so far, this providing a relatively simple introduction to the decommissioning of contaminated plant equipment. In addition, preliminary work has been done towards dismantling the insides of the turbine hall. Around 10 t of equipment from unit 1 is shipped off site each day, and at that rate, work could be complete by 2020-2. Meanwhile, defuelling - the first stage in the decommissioning of a nuclear power plant - is taking place at unit 3. After nuclear fuel assemblies have been left to cool in the reactor core for a few years, they can much more easily be removed for storage and eventual recycling or disposal. At unit 3, nine of the reactor's 1000 assemblies are removed by rail each day for interim storage at the nearby INF SF-1 dry storage facility. However, the facility does not have sufficient space to hold all the fuel, and some must be kept in buffer pools until a second store is constructed. Defuelling of units 1 and 3 began in December 2005. Unit 1 was defuelled by the end of November 2005 while unit three should be defuelled by late June this year. Further information WNA's Nuclear Power in Ukraine information paper WNA's Chernobyl Accident information paper ***************************************************************** 8 Bangkok Post: IPPs to get 5,800 MW Friday April 27, 2007 YUTHANA PRAIWAN The National Energy Policy Committee is expected to endorse a call for new independent power producer (IPP) bids next month to produce 5,800 megawatts of electricity between 2012 and 2014, the first portion of total capacity required by the new 15-year power development plan. Bids are expected to be called at the end of this year, Energy Minister Piyasvasti Amranand said yesterday. Of the total capacity, 2,800 MW of uncontested capacity will be awarded to Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand (Egat), while the remaining 3,000 MW would go to private investors. Out of Egat's total capacity, only 700 MW would be produced from coal. A fuel source has not been specified for the remaining capacity. Private investors are not prohibited from proposing bids to build coal-fired power plants. Electricity Generating Plc and Ratchaburi Electricity Generating holding Plc, Egat's SET-listed subsidiaries, are also allowed to bid for the projects. Dr Piyasvasti said that another 6,300 MW of electricity were slated for production from 2015-17. Of that total, 4,200 megawatts would be awarded to private investors and the remaining 2,100 MW would go to Egat, which would be required to build only coal-fired power plants. Bidding envelopes to build small power producer (SPP) plants with a total capacity of 1,000 MW will be sold to prospective bidders starting from next Monday.Each SPP plant is expected to have a capacity of between 10 and 100 MW. About 500 MW of total capacity will be produced from co-generation plants and 530 MW will be generated from renewable energy sources including wind, solar and hydro power, and rubbish and agricultural wastes. Dr Piyasvasti said the SPP bids would generate activity worth about one billion US dollars during the next two years. ====================================================================== Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next © 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 ***************************************************************** 9 Herald News: Officials: Morris okay for nuclear facility HeraldNewsOnline.com April 26, 2007 By CHRISTINA CHAPMAN Staff Writer MORRIS -- Officials have determined the General Electric Co.'s Morris-area site is environmentally suitable for a proposed nuclear-spent fuel rod recycling facility. GE held a public meeting Wednesday to share the results of the site study. Following the presentation, people were able to ask questions of the GE and research officials. GE's Morris-area site and 12 other sites were chosen by the Department of Energy to conduct a site characterization study to see if the site could house the facilities. The DOE gave GE $1.5 million for the study of its 889 acres. The proposal is part of President Bush's Global Nuclear Energy Partnership, which seeks to build three facilities: an advanced fuel cycle research facility, a nuclear fuel recycling center and an advanced recycling reactor, which would destroy long-lived radioactive elements in the new fuel, while generating electricity. The facilities would recover about 95 percent of the energy available in spent fuel and reduce radioactive half-lives. Of the 16 topics the study looked at, the site had no environmental obstacles and is a strong candidate for the proposed facilities, said Eric Loewen, manager of advanced plant new product introduction at GE. Some of the topics included transportation links to the site, affects on local plant and animal habitats, water resources, endangered species, demographics, geology, seismology, weather and costs. The presentation focused on several of the most concerning topics for the public. The first was water resources. For the recycling procedure, a cooling tower is needed and GE would like to take the water from the Kankakee or Illinois rivers, Loewen said. "They wouldn't use (ground water) if it impacted the rest of the community, would they?" asked Georgette Vota of Coal City, after the presentation. Vota was reassured that ground water use is not the intention, but if the DOE instructs otherwise, there is enough ground water to accommodate. But an exploration of the impact on residents water-use would be done. Another grave concern was the fault line under the site. Loewen explained that the fault line has been determined as "inactive and incapable." Fault lines are determined incapable after 5,000 years of no activity. The fault line is 10 million years old. GE officials also pushed that it would not transport nuclear spent fuel rods into Morris. GE currently stores spent rods in on-site pools. If the GE site is chosen, the site's current rods and the ones at Exelon Nuclear's Dresden Station, would be put through the recycling process. The current rods alone would take about 10 years to recycle, said Tom Rumsey, manager of communications for GE. To minimize any transportation locally, GE is approaching the city council to rearrange a current road between the facilities. GE and Argonne's role GE would combine with research facilities at Argonne National Laboratory. The two facilities are among 13 sites in eight states under consideration for the project. The DOE is expected to choose one or more sites for the new technology by June 2008. If the GE site is selected, it will only participate using Argonne's technology. Argonne is one of two companies that has come up with technology to reprocess the spent fuel. Argonne proposes to electronically drive the reprocessing procedure with the waste ending as a solid. The other method DOE is considering recycles the fuel chemically and turns the waste into a liquid. The liquid process is what was used at the New York demonstration facility, which has had affects on the local environment, Rumsey said, which is why GE will not use that technology. The electronic procedure has been used to separate metals, applying it to spent fuel rods is new, Rumsey said. GE wants to construct the plant for two reasons: to recycle the current rods and to see if the technology is economical to sell for profit. If approved, the plant would take five years to construct and a couple years after that to see if it can make a profit. If it is successful, GE and Argonne would consider selling the technology and building the reactors to sell for revenue. What profits are made would also be used to decommission the plant after its estimated 40 years of operation. Copyright 2007 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. heraldnewsonline.com: Feedback | Contact Us | About Us | Advertise © Copyright 2007 Sun-Times News Group | Terms of Use and Privacy ***************************************************************** 10 Houston Chronicle: The fight's still on, but sides look different | Chron.com - April 25, 2007, 11:12PM By TOM FOWLER Copyright 2007 Houston Chronicle The nuclear power debate that gripped the country in the 1970s and 1980s is heating up again, but don't expect a replay of the same old arguments. The nuclear industry is donning a green hat this time around, using concerns over greenhouse gas emissions to position itself as a clean energy source. "Nuclear power is the largest carbon-free source of electricity in the country, far more than hydro, wind and solar combined," said Anthony Pietrangelo, vice president of regulatory affairs for the Nuclear Energy Institute, an industry trade group. Opponents, meanwhile, are making economic arguments: New plants get tax breaks that burden other taxpayers, and the plants pose economic risks to customers. "The financial investment needed in order for nuclear power to make a significant contribution to the remediation of global climate change is substantial," according to a statement released by Public Citizen and the Union of Concerned Scientists last week. Further complicating the debate, not all environmental groups are on the same page regarding nuclear power. Environmental Defense, one of the groups backing a private equity buyout of TXU in exchange for a cutback in the number of coal power plants the Dallas-based company will build, is taking "a more nuanced" position on nuclear power, said Jim Marston, the group's regional director. "Global warming is so serious a concern and the time for action is so short that we have to look closely at every low-carbon option, including nuclear," Marston said. But there are caveats, he said. The industry needs to prove it is making headway against the long-standing problems of waste disposal and the dangers of spent fuel falling into the hands of terrorists, Marston said. And before turning up the dial on nuclear power, he said, policymakers first should consider lower-cost and lower-risk options such as cutting demand through underutilized efficiency programs. "If we're making a trade-off, saying we want nuclear because we don't want the CO2 emissions, we still ought to recognize the risks and do the other things to meet our power needs first that are less risky," Marston said. U.S. nuclear power plants have had a good safety and business record in the 27 years since the Three Mile Island accident that brought new projects in this country to a halt, Pietrangelo argues. The companies behind the 30-plus reactors proposed for construction in coming years wouldn't be lining up to start the projects otherwise, he said. There are plenty of unknowns about how nuclear power plant construction projects will proceed, Pietrangelo said, given the changes in processes and technologies in the years since the last new plant was built. But Texas, Florida and other parts of the country need to develop large, reliable power generation projects in order to keep up with demand, he said. As companies begin to submit their joint operating/construction applications to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission later this year, they can expect environmental groups to be ready and waiting with challenges, said Tom "Smitty" Smith, director of the Texas office for consumer group Public Citizen. "The anti-nuclear movement is beginning to rebuild, just as the pro-nuclear industry is starting to deploy its plans for new plants," Smith said. tom.fowler@chron.com ***************************************************************** 11 Houston Chronicle: Big nuclear refueling job is winding down | Chron.com - April 26, 2007, 12:02AM A refueling project in South Texas is winding down, with a top- performing plant almost ready to go back on line after months of planning and effort by hundreds By TOM FOWLER Copyright 2007 Houston Chronicle The South Texas Project's nuclear generators are among the best performing in the world in terms of power output. Where they ranked in 2006: • Unit 1* 10.14 billion kilowatt-hours; 6th in U.S.; 17th worldwide • Unit 2 11.22 billion kwh, 1st in U.S.; 3rd worldwide. *Unit 1 was down 34 days for refueling during the year. Source: Nucleonics Week Big nuclear refueling job is winding down A small army of workers is wrapping up refueling work at the South Texas Project's No. 2 reactor near Bay City this week, preparing to bring back on line one of the nation's best- performing power units. One-third of the reactor's 193 uranium fuel rods were exchanged for new ones, three of the four steam turbines were replaced and hundreds of maintenance tasks were completed during the four-week-plus process. Refuelings are somewhat routine at the country's 103 operating nuclear reactors — the two South Texas reactors stop for refueling about every 18 months, and one of the two reactors operated at TXU's Comanche Peak plant near Waco completed refueling this week. But even the mundane may get closer scrutiny in the near future as the nation faces what may be a new wave of nuclear plant construction after more than a decade of inactivity. Up to 32 new reactors are under consideration around the country, according to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, including eight or more new units in Texas. NRG Energy, one of the owners of the South Texas Project, said last year it plans to add two units there in the coming years. TXU may add two units at Comanche Peak as well as build plants at undisclosed locations. An Amarillo businessman is planning two units there, and Illinois-based Exelon is considering two units somewhere in South or East Texas. Lots of planning But new construction is far from the minds of the operators of the South Texas Project. Planning for the Unit 2 refueling began more than a year ago, South Texas Project Vice President Ed Halpin said. The unit has about 500 full-time employees, but another 1,500 contractors have been involved in the refueling. In addition to replacing the three turbines, which will increase output by 70 megawatts to 1,300 megawatts, workers replaced the shaft on the fourth and largest turbine. '"This is one of the most challenging and robust outages we've had at the plant to date," Halpin said. "When it's done, we'll have accomplished about 500,000 man-hours of work." As work proceeded at the plant in rural Matagorda County, a parking lot marked for refueling workers was filled with cars and trucks. Temporary construction trailers dotted the area between the two units as dozens of workers streamed in and out of the buildings. The South Texas units are among the nation's newest nuclear reactors. Operations began at Unit 1 in 1988 and Unit 2 in 1989. NRG Energy, Austin Energy and CPS Energy own the project. Pressurized water The South Texas Project uses pressurized water reactors. The energy created by the uranium fuel rods in the reactors heats water to 600 degrees and circulates it through a sealed piping system. This sealed system passes through a vessel called a steam generator, which heats a separate water supply into steam. That steam is then used to turn the blades of the unit's power turbines to generate electricity. The Unit 2 refueling went well, Halpin said, but it wasn't without issues. Some of the workers temporarily lost communication with each other because of problems with a new wireless system. The problem was quickly fixed, but Halpin said operators had at least two other communication systems available had the problem persisted. Cost overruns and delays The South Texas Project had a history of cost overruns and delays before its startup in the late 1980s and was shut down several times afterward, but the headlines have been fewer in recent years. Last year the Union of Concerned Scientists, a Washington-based nonprofit advocacy group, issued a report citing security concerns raised by unnamed guards who work at the plant. The report included allegations that security guards failed to search a firetruck that left and re-entered the plant weekly as part of a drill, that a convicted felon was once allowed into the plant, that the plant's maintenance staff has easy access to firearms, and that some surveillance cameras and radio equipment did not work. Halpin said those concerns have been addressed. "We had some teamwork issues where people got frustrated and things were not getting resolved," Halpin said. "As a senior management team, there are things we should have done better." The security force at the plant recently held a successful "force on force" drill where a commando-like force staged a mock attack on the plant, Halpin said. Such drills are required every three years at nuclear plants. A Nuclear Regulatory Commission spokesman said the agency generally doesn't comment on security issues at plants unless problems are found. If a problem were found during a drill, however, NRC officials would stay on-site until the problem was fixed, he said. tom.fowler@chron.com ***************************************************************** 12 RIA Novosti: The lessons of Chernobyl Opinion & analysis - 13:01 | 26/ 04/ 2007 MOSCOW. (RIA Novosti commentator Tatyana Sinitsyna) - Ever since the explosion of Unit 4 on April 26, 1986, the word Chernobyl has come to symbolize the worst man-made disaster of the 20th century. It produced a tremendous radiation emission, human victims, broken lives, severe health problems, huge material losses, great stress, and radioactive contamination of enormous territories. On the day of the tragedy, the winds took the rising plume of radioactive dust from the banks of the Pripyat River and carried it all over the world. Abnormal radiation levels were registered on tea plantations in the Caucasus Mountains, in California and even in the ice of the Antarctic. Europe was the hardest hit - dust settled in Poland, Bulgaria, Germany, Sweden, Switzerland, Belgium, the Netherlands, Britain and other countries. Who was to blame for the disaster? It would seem that this question must have been exhausted by now, but it is being raised over and over again. "What is still unclear? The bodies in charge of nuclear and radiation safety and IAEA [International Atomic Energy Agency] experts have drawn their conclusions; the trial was held. There are no grounds to doubt the opinion of serious experts," said Professor Alexander Borovoy from the Kurchatov Institute Russian Research Center, who headed a group of scientists in Chernobyl for many years. "Journalists are still giving me a hard time, but I do not want to answer this question because it conceals the intention to condemn people who went through hell, those whose bodies and souls were burnt, who died an agonizing death. I have no right to be a judge of my late teachers who gave us nuclear energy and nuclear weapons that have protected us up to this day. Only one question matters for me: Has everything been done to avoid a repetition of Chernobyl? The answer is yes." In the 21 years since the accident, Chernobyl has been visited by thousands of experts from all over the world. They meticulously uncovered what had happened, conducted studies and drew conclusions together. Nevertheless, there are still people who call everything into doubt. They are engaged in heated debates and keep coming up with new, far-fetched hypotheses. For instance, they conjure up the image of the KGB, which ostensibly "got scared by perestroika," or they talk about a "nuclear explosion of plutonium," which the plant's personnel were allegedly producing in secret. Sometimes, the disaster has been blamed on an earthquake that for some reason was limited to Unit 4, or even presented as a terrorist attack. The conspiracy theorists discovered some yellow stains that they presented as evidence - traces of explosives. In reality, these stains were left by uranium acid. One version was truly fantastic. Its proponents claimed that a "nearby anti-ballistic-missile facility released large doses of radiation that affected the psyche of the night shift at the nuclear plant." But everything was much simpler than that. On the eve of the tragedy, at 2:25 p.m. on April 25, a young woman called from Kiev, and demanded in no uncertain terms that the station's personnel should turn Unit 4 back on and put off an experiment that was already under way. The angry girl merely relayed the orders of her bosses. The engineers objected but eventually carried out the instructions. The unit worked for nine hours under dangerous circumstances, and finally exploded in response to the personnel's inadmissible actions. After the disaster, the term "Chernobyl-type reactor" became a synonym for mortal danger and unreliability. It is referred to by its Russian initials, RBMK, which stand for high-power channel-type reactor. One of the leaders of the Russian Green movement, Alexei Yablokov, categorized as insane the government's decision to continue the mothballed construction of an RBMK-type reactor at the Kursk nuclear power station. But experts maintain that the risk of an accident involving RBMK reactors is truly negligible: 1 million reactor years. "This means that if a reactor worked for the incredibly long period of 1 million years, it might explode by accident. But its average service life is between 30 and 40 years, so in practical terms the probability of an accident is zero," explained Boris Gorbachev, a physicist from Chernobyl. But the RBMK design still had a weak point: it did not fully consider the human factor and allowed an operator to interfere in its program (the upgraded version rules this out). It was assumed that a nuclear specialist simply could not make a mistake. But, regrettably, neither the director of the station nor the chief operating officer understood the physics of a nuclear plant; they were ordinary specialists in power engineering. Two years before the tragedy, government officials decided to assign nuclear power stations to the Ministry of Electrification; previously they had been part of the nuclear complex. This was the first step on the road to the disaster. A protective sarcophagus (as high as a 25-storey building) was erected over the destroyed unit to contain the radioactive debris. It became a source of increasing concern because of a possible chain reaction - it contained 180 metric tons of radioactive fuel. The shelter was still spewing radiation and builders could not work in its vicinity. As a result, the sarcophagus developed cracks with a total area of about 1,000 square meters through which plutonium dust escaped. The structure of the old sarcophagus was unreliable because it rested on the unit's surviving walls. It was only 10 years after the disaster that the Chernobyl Shelter Fund (CSF) was set up to fund the Shelter Implementation Plan (SIP). Western countries agreed to cough up the required 1 billion dollars. The new shelter should reliably isolate the nuclear debris for about 100 years. It will be one of the saddest but also one of the most instructive monuments on Earth. The opinions expressed in this article are the author's and do not necessarily represent those of RIA Novosti. RIA Novosti ***************************************************************** 13 RIA Novosti: Belarus opposition supporters meet to remember Chernobyl victims 22:06 | 26/ 04/ 2007 MINSK, April 26 (RIA Novosti) - An annual opposition demonstration marking 21 years since the Chernobyl accident ended in Minsk without violence Thursday. Police said about 2,500 people gathered in central Minsk to protest against the government's insufficient efforts to reduce the consequences of the devastating disaster at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant in 1986, which killed and affected nine million people, according to UN estimates. The protesters are also opposed to the authorities' plans to build a nuclear power plant and to allocate polluted areas for farmland. Opposition supporters gathered near the building of the Academy of Sciences and moved toward a church built in memory of the Chernobyl victims, where they laid flowers and held a minute of silence. The opposition holds the demonstration every year. The most violent meeting took place in 1996, when protesters turned over cars and beat up journalists. Restricted zone around the Chernobyl NPP 21 years ago, on April 26, 1986, the worst nuclear disaster in history took place in the Chernobyl District, Ukraine. RIA Novosti ***************************************************************** 14 NRC: NRC to Discuss 2006 Performance at Columbia Generating Station News Release - Region IV - 2007-011 - U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs, Region IV 611 Ryan Plaza Drive, Suite 400, Arlington TX 76011 www.nrc.gov CONTACT: Victor Dricks Phone: 817-860-8128 E-mail: opa4@nrc.gov The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff will meet in Richland, Wash., on May 1, with representatives of Energy Northwest to discuss the agency’s assessment of safety performance last year at the Columbia Generating Station nuclear plant near Richland. The meeting, which will be open to the public, is scheduled to begin at 6 p.m. at the Energy Northwest’s Business Services Center, 3000 George Washington Way, Richland. In addition to the performance assessment, the NRC staff will be available to answer questions from the public on the safety performance of Columbia Generating Station, as well as the NRC’s role in ensuring safe plant operation. “The NRC continually reviews the performance of Columbia Generating Station and the nation’s other commercial nuclear power facilities,” NRC Region IV Administrator Bruce S. Mallett 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.” A letter sent from the NRC Region IV office to plant officials addresses the performance of the plant during 2006 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/wnp_2006q4.pdf. The NRC utilizes color-coded inspection findings and performance indicators to assess nuclear power plant performance. The colors start with "green" and then increase to "white," "yellow" or "red," commensurate with the safety significance of the issues involved. The NRC said Columbia Generating Station operated safely during 2006, but during the first quarter was in the NRC’s regulatory response column based on a “white” performance indicator due to a problem with a key safety system. A subsequent inspection indicated the licensee had successfully addressed the issue. The letter also notes that a performance improvement plan to address problem identification and resolution issues has been successfully implemented. NRC will continue to focus attention on this area to verify that performance improvements are sustained. Routine inspections are performed by two NRC Resident Inspectors assigned to the plant and by inspection specialists from the Region IV Office in Arlington, Texas. Among the areas of plant performance to be inspected this year by NRC specialists are activities associated with engineering, fire protection, emergency preparedness, maintenance and radiological controls. Current performance information for Columbia Generating Station is available on the NRC web site at: http://www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/WASH2/wash2_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. April 26, 2007 ***************************************************************** 15 PARADE: A NEW NUCLEAR PLANT? Not unthinkable Published: Thursday, April 26, 2007 It's unthinkable. No, not that Public Service Enterprise Group, the owner of the Salem I, the Salem II and the Hope Creek nuclear power plants, is ever so gingerly considering building a fourth nuclear power plant at the Salem County site. What's unthinkable is that we are about to tell you that building a fourth nuclear power plant there might not be a bad idea at all. The time has come to think the unthinkable. While nuclear power continues to generate scary images of Three Mile Island and Chernobyl in the minds of many, it is gaining some support among people who consider themselves environmentalists — including Patrick Moore, a co-founder of Greenpeace, and Stewart Brand, creator of the Whole Earth Catalog. The reason: Global warming. The rewards of nuclear power — a generating process that does not produce greenhouse gases — may now be worth the risks, which are real and considerable. Simply put, as concern over fossil-fuel plants and their greenhouse-gas emissions grows, nuclear power looks better and better. Even if PSEG decided today to build a fourth Salem County nuclear plant — which the company is nowhere near doing; it says it is merely evaluating its options — the new plant would not be operational for at least eight years, considering the long permitting and construction process. Taking some baby steps now toward posssibly building a new plant is simply smart. And Nuclear Regulatory Commission spokesman Neil Sheehan told Press science writer David Benson recently that it makes sense to look at adding a fourth plant to the existing complex in Salem County. “The infrastructure is there. The emergency planning is already there. The transmission lines are there,” Sheehan noted. Of course, staunch opponents of nuclear power will note that concentrating four nuclear-power plants at one site increases some risks. There will probably never be a national consensus about nuclear power. But it's a good time to remember that there are two legitimate sides to this issue and that one side — the opposition — has dominated the national debate for too long. No new nuclear power plant has been has been built in this country for decades. The time is right to at least start looking at the possibility of constructing more of them. Contact Us | Terms of Service / Privacy Policy | Advertising | Site ***************************************************************** 16 POAC: State petitions federal court over Oyster Creek relicensing By DAVID BENSON Staff Writer, (609) 272-7206 Published: Thursday, April 26, 2007 Oyster Creek Generating Station in Lacy Township is the nation's longest running reator. Staff file photo by Bill Gross The state Department of Environmental Protection has made it clear: What happens in California also must happen in New Jersey. And that could jeopardize the relicensing of the nation's longest-running nuclear reactor, located in Lacey Township. On Wednesday, the state Attorney General's Office filed a petition in federal court challenging the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's decision not to consider the environmental impact of a terrorist attack on the Oyster Creek nuclear power plant as part of that facility's relicensing review. A ruling by the 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia is expected before the NRC is scheduled to make its final licensing decision, due in January. If the court sides with the state, the NRC and AmerGen, owner of the nuclear plant, would be forced to do a new environmental impact statement before relicensing could proceed. The Oyster Creek nuclear station hopes to lengthen its operating life by 20 years. If the NRC approves a license renewal for the plant, the Oyster Creek facility would become the first in the nation to operate beyond its initial 40-year license. If it's not approved, the Ocean County nuclear plant would begin the process of shutting down in April 2009. The NRC has said repeatedly that the risk of a terrorist attack at a nuclear facility cannot be adequately determined. But last year, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in California said the NRC must, under the National Environmental Policy Act, consider what would happen to the environment in the event of a terrorist attack against a spent fuel-storage facility on the Diablo Canyon reactor site in California. In 2006, the NRC appealed the 9th Circuit Court's decision to the U.S. Supreme Court. In January, the Supreme Court let the decision stand, but chose not hear the case. Two months ago, the NRC rejected New Jersey's contention that the commission must consider those environmental consequences as part of the Oyster Creek facility's quest for a license renewal, nearly paralleling the language used in the California case. “We thought the California ruling would work in our favor,” said Elaine Makatura, DEP director of public relations. But the NRC made it clear that while it would respect the 9th Court's decision on the West Coast, the ruling would not be applied anywhere else. In rejecting New Jersey's contention in February, the NRC alluded to expected challenges in other U.S. circuit appeals courts. “The NRC is not obliged to adhere, in all of its proceedings, to the first court of appeals decision to address a controversial question,” the NRC wrote in its opinion to the DEP. “Such an obligation would defeat any possibility of a conflict between the Circuits on important issues.” NRC spokesman Neil Sheehan said Wednesday that the commission still sees the 9th Court's decision as improper. “It applies only in California,” he said. Richard Webster, a staff attorney with the Rutgers Environmental Law Clinic, disagrees with the NRC. Webster represents a coalition of six environmental groups opposed to the re-licensing of the Oyster Creek plant. “There is a very good chance the 3rd Circuit Court will rule in favor of the state,” Webster said. “The Supreme Court denied to overturn the 9th Circuit Court ruling, because it's obvious terrorism is foreseeable.” Webster also said he believes it's possible the 3rd Circuit Court will move quickly, because a decision from the NRC on a license extension for the plant is due by January 2008. “I would think that the court would (look) upon those constraints when it decides upon the scheduling issues,” Webster said. This case is likely to draw attention from around the country, Webster said. “Massachusetts has a similar issue up there,” he said. “And there are other attorneys general who have expressed interest.” The coalition of environmental groups the attorney represents may join the state's lawsuit as a “friend of the court.” But Webster said it's still too soon to be sure. Lee Moore, a spokesman for the state Attorney General's Office, said the coalition would be welcome: “If there are people with a stake in this who want to come in, we welcome them.” Like Webster, Moore believes the case will be decided sooner rather than later. “As a practical matter,” he said, “the thinking here is that the case is likely to be decided before any final licensing decision is made.” The NRC has a self-imposed deadline of 30 months on any relicensing . For the Oyster Creek facility, that deadline comes in just nine months. Moore said he couldn't speculate on the state's chances of winning the lawsuit against the NRC. “I can say we think it's important that the 9th Circuit ruled as it did,” Moore said. “It suggests that the 9th Circuit found validity in the argument.” The NRC may have inadvertently given its own voice to the argument on Tuesday when it released a proposal that would require applicants for new reactors to assess how to design nuclear plants with protections that mitigate the effects of a large commercial aircraft impact. “This is the most recent step in a broad, proactive effort to improve the security of reactors initiated by the NRC after Sept. 11, 2001,” NRC Chairman Dale Klein said in a news release. “At the end of the road there may not be any changes necessary, but there also may be additional things that can be done.” The state Attorney General's Office found the proposal interesting. “We'll certainly be taking a close look at it,” Moore said. Sheehan said the NRC clearly views the lawsuit and the proposal as two different topics — existing reactors compared with new ones. But Webster said he sees it as irony: That new reactors might face such requirements, while existing plants could extend their nuclear lives by 20 years with no such added protections required. To e-mail Dave Benson at The Press: DBenson@pressofac.com Contact Us | Terms of Service / Privacy Policy | Advertising | Site ***************************************************************** 17 Platts: GE tells NII it intends to pursue ESBWR design acceptance London (Platts)--26Apr2007 GE told regulator NII it intends to pursue ESBWR design acceptance, should the UK government decide to support new nuclear construction, Nuclear Installations Inspectorate spokesman Mark Wheeler said April 25. A letter of intent dated April 16 was sent by GE Energy President/CEO of nuclear business Andrew White to NII Chief Inspector Mike Weightman. "We aren't assessing anyone's design at the moment," said Wheeler. He noted that NII's parent organization, the Health and Safety Executive, had said it would not accept any formal design assessment applications until the UK government had made a positive decision on nuclear. The government is expected to publish several energy policy decisions in a White Paper expected next month. Four reactor vendors -- GE, Areva, Westinghouse and Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd. -- have expressed interest over the past several months in introducing their designs to the UK market. Wheeler declined to comment on whether other letters of intent had also been received by NII. For more news, request a free trial to Platts Nucleonics Week at http://www.platts.com/Request%20More%20Information/index.xml?story or subscribe now at http://www.platts.com/infostore/product_info.php?cPath=22_41&products_id=67 ***************************************************************** 18 Platts: Putin calls for higher share of nuclear, coal, hydro generation Moscow (Platts)--26Apr2007 Russia's president Vladimir Putin Thursday said Russia needs to increase its power generation by two thirds by 2020 and raise the share of nuclear, coal and hydropower generation. In his annual state-of-the-nation address, Putin said state and private companies were to invest to Rb12 trillion ($467 billion) to reach the target. Putin prioritized the development of the electricity sector among the country's other large-scale projects, saying the program would involve the construction of new and upgrade of existing power plants and expansion of grids. He also called for a focus on non-gas generation. "Significant changes in the structure of electricity generation are needed through increasing the share of atomic, coal and hydropower generation," Putin told the Federal Assembly, Russia's dual-house Parliament. During the whole Soviet period, 30 nuclear power units were commissioned, Putin said, while over the next 12 years, 26 more of advanced technology would be launched. Putin called for the creation of a special corporation, which would unite atomic energy organizations and work on domestic and external markets, and secure the state defense interests. A special law will need to be passed, he added. He also said that with vast hydro resources, only 20% of Russia's hydrogeneration potential is being used. z "In other developed countries, it is 70-80%," he added. Putin called for the construction of new large hydropower plants, especially in Siberia and Russia's Far East. Russia, with its significant coal reserves, should also focus on coal power generation by advanced technology, he said. Copyright © 2007 - Platts, All Rights Reserved ***************************************************************** 19 TheHill.com: Amid contractor's strike at nuclear plant, lawmakers eye federalizing security guards Friday, April 27, 2007 - The Hill-About The Home The Executive Amid contractor's strike at nuclear plant, lawmakers eye federalizing security guards The Executive By Jessica Holzer April 26, 2007 Amid a strike by the contract security guards at the country’s only nuclear-weapons assembly plant, House staffers are drafting legislation to federalize the force protecting highest-security sites that make or store nuclear materials. Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.), the chairman of the investigations panel of the House energy committee, said he aims to attach the legislation to the defense authorization next month, setting up a clash with the Department of Energy (DoE), which is opposed to transforming the force into one of federal workers. Nearly 550 guards at the Pantex plant in Amarillo, Texas, walked off the job earlier this month, protesting a reduction in retirement security that came just as more stringent fitness standards were putting older guards out of work. By federalizing the heavily armed forces guarding such high-risk sites, DoE would be able to implement human-resources policies better suited to the heightened security levels since the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks, Stupak argued. “We ask them to protect our most dangerous, most secretive weapons and yet we treat them like they’re third-class citizens,” he said. The guards protecting “category 1” nuclear sites, such as the Los Alamos, Sandia and Lawrence Livermore national laboratories, long have been employed by a patchwork of private companies offering varying benefits and pay. The Pantex guards work for BWX Technologies. A 2004 report from a DoE task force recommended federalizing the guards as the best way of transforming them into an “elite protective force” capable of repelling the most aggressive attacks from armed terrorists. “In principle, the best long-term organizational foundation for achieving the secretary’s objective is the conversion of existing contractor protective forces to federal status,” the former administrator of the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA), Linton F. Brooks, wrote to a former deputy energy secretary, Kyle McSlarrow. NNSA is the DoE agency charged with overseeing category 1 nuclear sites. In January 2005, McSlarrow endorsed the report’s findings and ordered that its recommendations be implemented. The department later abandoned the idea, despite the conclusions of previous analyses, noted in the report, that federalizing the workers would not increase costs. In a recent meeting with House staffers, NNSA officials said they believed that federalizing the protective force would result in lower pay for the guards and therefore would be unpopular. Asked for the DoE’s view on the issue, a department spokesman Wednesday said: “We have taken a look at this issue in the past in a number of studies. The department’s protective force structure, coupled with our security policy initiatives, are providing heightened levels of protection for our facilities that hold our sensitive national assets in the current threat environment.” Critics of contracting the security at the facilities cite the potential for work stoppages due to labor disputes and argue that contractors’ drive to increase profits could lead them to cut corners on security. The guards themselves are trying to federalize, believing that they would gain better retirement security and greater freedom to move into less strenuous positions as they age. They have cited frustration over what they call a steep decline in security standards due to contractor mismanagement. “Once that’s exposed, the people that have allowed those security degradations to take place should be held accountable,” said Mike Stumbo, a Pantex guard and the head of the council of unions that represent the DoE protective forces. Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) asked the DoE inspector general to investigate the plant late last year after employees sent a letter complaining of lax security standards and poor working conditions. The senator also sent a request to the Government Accountability Office (GAO) last year asking analysts to review the cost of federalizing the protective forces. A spokesman from the lawmaker’s office said Grassley was not planning to introduce legislation. Meanwhile, the Senate Armed Services Committee staff has contacted the GAO on the issue in recent weeks, though it has made no formal request for information. And a staffer from the House Energy Committee said several lawmakers on the House Armed Services panel have expressed interest in Stupak’s legislation. Federalizing the protective force would be a complex task, both legally and administratively, but Stupak argued that it was a crucial step for shoring up the security of nuclear sites. “I just don’t think you get the dedicated employees when it’s privatized,” he said. “They see it as a dead-end job, not rewarded or appreciated.” The Hill 1625 K Street, NW Suite 900 Washington, DC 20006 202-628-8500 tel | 202-628-8503 fax The contents of this site are © 2007 Capitol Hill Publishing Corp., a subsidiary of News Communications, Inc. ***************************************************************** 20 Rutland Herald: Politics at its worst Rutland Vermont News & Information April 26, 2007 By JENNIFER CLANCY, PH.D. The ill-conceived, last-minute legislative proposal by Senate President Pro Tem Peter Shumlin to impose a special, confiscatory $37 million tax on Vermont Yankee shows state politics at its worst. This measure, which would pay for an energy-efficiency program, should be disturbing to all hard-working Vermonters, and those who are concerned with Vermont's business reputation. It is also very bad environmental policy because it discourages production from a clean energy source. The Shumlin proposal comes as the Legislature grapples for a way to fund a global warming bill designed to reduce carbon dioxide emissions via an expanded energy-efficiency program. Whether the senator likes to admit it or not, Vermont today has the lowest per capita carbon emissions rate of any state in the country and got there in good part because it gets one-third of its electricity from emission-free Vermont Yankee. Vermont Yankee mitigates the production of more than 4 million tons of carbon dioxide annually that would result otherwise from base-load, fossil-fuel sources. While wind, solar, and other sources of renewable power do have an important role to play in Vermont's energy future, they are intermittent sources and cannot be counted on 2-4/7. The message the senator is sending to other large businesses in the state, and those considering relocating and creating jobs here is this: "If we think we can take something from you, we will. And we will do it even if your company has given us good deals in the past." In 2002, when Entergy bought Vermont Yankee it entered into a power purchase agreement projected to save the state's ratepayers $250 million through 2012, based on estimates from the Vermont Department of Public Service. These estimates are in all likelihood too low, as energy prices have risen significantly beyond 2002 projections and Vermont Yankee still only charges 3.95 cents per kilowatt hour for its electricity. In his Monday press release, Shumlin all but said he is shaking down Vermont Yankee because they cannot do anything about it, stating, "… and it won't affect our energy rates: those are locked in until 2012." But it will impact those who decide to come to Vermont to do business and employ people. This includes IBM in Essex Junction, which employs thousands of Vermonters and which is already a statewide leader in energy-efficiency programs. It will also affect our children who want to stay here to work and raise families. It will affect the southeast Vermont regional economy which will see tens of millions of dollars taken from hard-working employees and businesses that do business with Vermont Yankee. And it will affect the amount of power and the price of that power that Vermont Yankee chooses to sell to Vermont in the future. The senator's audacity is even more disturbing considering that in 2005 Vermont Yankee agreed to finance a fund for renewable energy projects as a condition of obtaining dry-cask storage for spent nuclear fuel at the plant. Today, there is more than $25 million in the fund, yet the state has barely begun to identify or allocate this money for renewable projects. The Shumlin proposal formally claims to be taxing "the long-term storage of highly reactive nuclear waste created by Vermont Yankee." Many, including Dr. Patrick Moore, a co-founder of the environmental group Greenpeace, view used fuel as a resource because it can be recycled into additional fuel, which indeed already happens in most other countries around the world with nuclear facilities. The state-of-the-art dry-cask containers for Vermont Yankee's spent fuel are widely used in the industry and have an impeccable safety record. Vermonters have already paid significant energy taxes over the past 20 years to have this waste shipped to a federal waste repository. To this end, Sen. Shumlin should use his influence with Sens. Leahy and Sanders to encourage U.S. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid to stop obstructing the opening of the Yucca Mountain storage facility in his home state of Nevada. Whatever Sen. Shumlin's motivation for this measure, it is at best illogical and ill-conceived. The senator's proposal neither taxes sources of carbon emissions nor does it impose any type of "cap and trade" system in the state. Thus, it fails to address the carbon problem at its source or provide any direct disincentive for additional carbon production. Legislative hearings on such a large tax would certainly make this clear, while possibly leading to an adjustment of the size of the tax and more sensible funding measures. With arbitrary enactment of the Shumlin tax, Vermont would send a negative message out to all businesses considering expansion or relocation to the state, while jeopardizing the amount of no emission carbon power it receives, at attractive prices. This would be both unfortunate, unnecessary, and clearly not the Vermont way. Shumlin should end the shakedown of Vermont Yankee now. Jennifer Clancy, Ph.D., of St. Albans is an environmental scientist and a member of the Vermont Energy Partnership. (www.vtep.org). © 2007 Rutland Herald ***************************************************************** 21 Times Argus: Taxing Yankee Vermont News & Information April 26, 2007 An excellent idea for curbing the emission of greenhouse gases, saving Vermonters money and stimulating the state's economy has foundered so far this year because of difficulties in finding money to pay for the program. Now Sen. Peter Shumlin has announced a plan to impose new taxes on Entergy Vermont, which owns Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant, to pay for the program to improve energy efficiency for the state's buildings. Originally, the energy-efficiency program would have received funding from a 1-cent surcharge on heating fuels, following the pattern established by Efficiency Vermont, which improves electric power efficiency with money from a surcharge on our electric bills. But even a modest fee attached to fuel bills ran into opposition from consumers already whacked by the skyrocketing price of fuel oil and by Gov. James Douglas, who criticized the fee as an unacceptable new tax. It is unfortunate if Douglas' aversion to new taxes becomes a rationale for paralysis at a time when action to respond to climate change is urgent. His reflexive aversion to taxes could stand in the way of a program that would help Vermonters save far more money than they pay in a new tax. Advocates of the program say Vermonters could expect to save $400 a year in fuel costs if they take advantage of the proposed efficiency program. Taking action to slow climate change and to save money on fuels is going to cost money — that is something we have to face — and the money will have to come from somewhere. The question now is whether Shumlin's plan to tax Entergy Vermont makes sense. In answering that question, we have to ask whether Shumlin has turned to Entergy as a convenient cash cow, a big, profitable, out-of-state corporation that can be milked for additional revenues, or whether there is a legitimate justification for getting more money from the company. Shumlin has said his proposal amounts to a "windfall profits" tax on Entergy. He says that energy prices are 50 percent higher than projected two years ago and that, merely on the extra capacity added at Yankee after the planted boosted its output by 20 percent, Entergy is reaping $10 million to $20 million in extra profits yearly. In addition, he said, the company will be receiving $4 million to $9 million from ratepayers in forward capacity payments, initiated several years ago to ensure energy supplies. He said the company would also be receiving $4 million in annual payments from the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative. With all this extra money sloshing around, it is Shumlin's view that the state has a right to ask for some of it back to invest in energy efficiency for Vermont's homes and businesses. He would do this by imposing a tax on waste storage. Entergy has already agreed to provide money to a clean energy fund, payments that were part of its application for dry cask storage of its nuclear waste. With Shumlin's new proposed tax on storage, Vermont Yankee is crying foul, saying the state would be changing the terms of its deal. Shumlin counters that the failure of the federal government to find a long-term solution to the storage problem has forced Vermont to accept the role as guardian of the plant's waste and taxing the plants waste storage operation is justified. It is not in Vermont's interest to engage in practices that double-cross businesses or subject them to capricious new taxes. But neither is it in Vermont's interest to follow a policy of paralysis with regard to climate change. Shumlin's proposal for funding the fuel efficiency program ought to get a serious and responsible look. © 2007 Times Argus ***************************************************************** 22 APP.COM: State to NRC: See ya in court | Asbury Park Press Online Posted by the Asbury Park Press on 04/26/07 Post Comment The odds against the Nuclear Regulatory Commission rejecting a 20-year license extension for the Oyster Creek nuclear generating plant always were long. It's only a matter of time — perhaps as soon as next month — before it gives its blessing to the Lacey plant. That would keep intact the NRC's perfect record of never having said "no" to a license renewal request. Fortunately, that won't be the end of the story. The state Wednesday announced it will challenge in federal court the NRC's ruling that it doesn't have to consider the impact of a possible terrorist strike on the plant in the license renewal process. We hope the state will follow that up by ordering Oyster Creek to be retrofitted with a cooling tower, in keeping with the requirements of the federal Clean Water Act. Plant owner AmerGen has said that a cooling tower would be too expensive to allow it to continue operating the plant profitably. In February, the NRC rejected the state's contention that an analysis of the potential impact of a terrorist strike at the plant — whose dated design makes its spent fuel pool particularly vulnerable — should be part of the environmental review process. The state's decision to challenge the ruling in court isn't simply a legal maneuver to shut the plant. Concern about the possible impact of a terrorist strike on Oyster Creek's spent fuel pool was heightened by the recent disclosure of an internal memo from a safety specialist at Oyster Creek stating that the floor of the spent fuel pool was not constructed to design and was not adequately attached to the wall. ". . . (F)rom a nuclear safety perspective, the controlling structure with least margin is the floor of the fuel pool," the memo said. "The floor was supposed to be attached to the walls with a rebar configuration. . . . This is not the configuration we found and was why we had to limit the fuel pool temperature to 125 degrees Fahrenheit to ensure the floor did not detach and drop during a seismic event and rupture the fuel pool liner. If this rebar is really corroding as projected, I suspect our design analysis of the floor support is not valid today, let alone for a 20-year life extension." The NRC has done everything its self-serving rules allow to keep opponents from having their legitimate questions about the plant's impact on public health, safety and the environment addressed. As state Environmental Commissioner Lisa P. Jackson noted Wednesday, "If the NRC intends to block states from considering the environmental consequences of a terrorist attack, then they are obligated to assess that danger themselves." Copyright © 2007 Asbury Park Press. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 23 APP.COM: America needs nuclear power like Oyster Creek's | Asbury Park Press Online Thursday, April 26, 2007 BY EDWARD STROUP Post Comment Anyone who objectively read the recent commentary from Dennis Zannoni about the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station in Lacey will realize that he relies on hype and hysteria in his attempt to besmirch this good plant and its dedicated employees. ("Oyster Creek plant hasn't lived up to promises," April 1.) Let me set the record straight. For 40 years, Oyster Creek has lived up to its promises to the state and the public. Everyone who works at the plant takes their responsibilities to provide safe, reliable power very seriously. We live and work here, our children go to the same schools and play the same sports as local residents. We own homes, pay taxes and spend our salaries in the local community. We attend church and support local charities. We have not forgotten (and never will) our responsibility to the plant, the public and our families. Now more than ever, America and New Jersey need all the safe, clean, reliable nuclear power they can get. Our dependence on foreign oil puts us at great risk every day. Oil and gasoline prices are through the roof. The more we burn oil to produce electricity, the more we reduce the limited available supply and put pressure on already high prices. It is considerably cheaper to produce electricity with nuclear power than with oil or natural gas. That's why nuclear power plants are base-load plants and natural gas plants are peak-load plants. This means that nuclear power is available 24 hours a day, seven days a week. In contrast, natural gas plants run when the need for additional power is so great, like on consecutive 90-degree summer days, that the price becomes secondary to demand. Wind, hydro and solar power don't even come close to being able to provide the levels of electrical power and reliability that consumers require. While Zannoni implies that nuclear power is the reason for high electric prices, the truth is just the opposite. Every other form of generation, especially oil and gas, is much more expensive than nuclear power. What about the environment? Oyster Creek is a clean plant and does not pollute the environment like fossil fuels such as oil and gas. What about coal? A lot of our power comes from coal plants located in Ohio and Pennsylvania. These plants spew toxins and pollution into the air, which blow directly toward New Jersey. Any reduction in clean nuclear power would only increase and prolong the life of these dirty coal plants, further increasing our air quality problems. Closing Oyster Creek would have a huge impact on the local and state economy. The plant employs nearly 600 workers. During outages, the company hires thousands of craft workers, who pay taxes, use goods and services and support the local economy. The plant is an economic engine for the state. For anyone to say that closing the plant would not affect the economics of the entire state is wrong. The issues raised around spent fuel are not unique to Oyster Creek. This issue is being addressed by the construction at Yucca Mountain in Nevada and is the responsibility of the U.S. Department of Energy. Spent fuel is managed safely at hundreds of sites around the country. Whether Oyster Creek closes or not, the spent fuel will remain on site until a federal repository is opened. Until that takes place, it is better to have it guarded and overseen by a highly skilled and trained work force at a fully operating plant than left in the shell of a closed plant. The Oyster Creek security program uses a combination of a well-trained armed security force, physical barriers and electronic surveillance and detection systems to control access and protect plant systems. Since 9/11, Oyster Creek has invested more than $27 million to improve site security. It is preposterous to say the Nuclear Regulatory Commission is a weak body. The NRC has overseen the safe operation of nuclear plants since the first plant was built. The NRC bases it decisions on science and fact — not on supposition and hype. The agency's highly qualified experts independently watch over every aspect of the daily operation of the plants. The NRC has the ability to shut down the plant any time there is a problem. Zannoni claims to have 20 years of involvement with Oyster Creek. He states that while plant owners, managers, operators, NRC regulators and others have come and gone, he has remained. He says, "I have the best understanding of the overall picture of Oyster Creek." The average union worker has more than 20 years' experience at the plant. They are highly skilled and trained technicians who have seen, repaired and maintained everything there is. They are senior licensed operators with 20 and 30 years of experience. They are radiation protection experts responsible for the health and safety of the plant and public. They are chemical technicians, maintenance technicians, as well as instrument and control technicians. They are nuclear-certified welders, electricians and many others — all the best in the industry. Oyster Creek is a good, safe, reliable plant that provides clean electrical power in a cost-effective manner to a state that needs all the generation it can get. It should be relicensed. Edward Stroup is president and business manager of Local 1289, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Wall. I have two questions for Mr. Stroup... 1) How do we dispose of the nuclear waste generated by these facilities? 2) Would he and his family live within 5 miles of a nuclear waste repository while we try to figure out how to dispose of the waste? Until we, as a nation, can address these issues we, as a nation, should pursue any and all avenues to replace fossil fuels and nuclear power with renewable and/or "green" sources of power, such as solar, tidal, and wind generators. Posted by: NJCynic on Thu Apr 26, 2007 12:15 pm Copyright © 2007 Asbury Park Press. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 24 Courier Post: N.J. asks court's aid over Oyster Creek Thursday, April 26, 2007 By RICHARD PEARSALL Courier-Post Staff New Jersey has asked a federal court to intervene in the relicensing review of the Oyster Creek nuclear power plant. The state wants the court to require the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to make the potential effect of terrorism part of its review of whether Oyster Creek's operating license should be renewed for 20 years. The NRC ruled in February such an analysis is neither required under the law nor necessary. On Wednesday, New Jersey filed a petition with the Third Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia, challenging the NRC's ruling. State Attorney General Stuart Rabner said he finds the NRC's position contradictory. "On the one hand, the NRC has imposed extensive security requirements on nuclear power plants since 9/11 to guard against attacks," Rabner said. "On the other hand, it continues to insist that, from a legal perspective, the likelihood of such an attack is merely theoretical and not worthy of analysis as part of the relicensing process." Oyster Creek, in Lacey Township, Ocean County, is the country's oldest nuclear power plant, having opened in 1969. Its license expires in 2009. Critics of the nearly 40-year-old plant say it is not safe, citing concerns about its structural integrity and evacuation routes as well as security. In challenging the NRC's reluctance to do a terrorism study, New Jersey cited a decision handed down by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in California last June. In that case, which involved licensing of a fuel storage tank for the Diablo Canyon nuclear power plant in San Luis Obispo, the court ruled the NRC should consider the potential effect of terrorist attacks. Noting the Ninth Circuit's decision is binding only in that jurisdiction, the NRC has declined to adopt it elsewhere. Wednesday, a spokeswoman for the NRC defended the agency's position. "While it's obviously important in general, the terrorism issue lies outside the scope of the National Environmental Policy Act and of the license renewal process," said Diane Screnci. "Separately we do look at the security of the (Oyster Creek) plant. It has always been strong and has been strengthened since 9/11." Reach Richard Pearsall at (856) 486-2465 or rpearsall@courierpostonline.com Copyright 2007 CourierPostOnline.com. All rights reserved ***************************************************************** 25 JOURNAL NEWS: NRC, Indian Point officials to discuss performance Thursday, April 26, 2007 By GREG CLARY Residents who want to watch and listen while federal regulators discuss Indian Point's safety performance with the nuclear plants' top executives will get the chance to do that tonight at a special meeting in Cortlandt. "Each year we take a step back to size up plant performance during the previous calendar year, with the overarching goal of ensuring that facilities are achieving the levels of safety that are essential to protecting the public and the environment," said Samuel Collins, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's regional administrator responsible for Indian Point. The meeting comes a day after Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-New York, pressed the NRC's five commissioners unsuccessfully during a Senate hearing to conduct a detailed inspection of the plants' safety using some outside experts to "restore public confidence" in the nuclear plant. "I am disappointed that they do not share my level of concern about the numerous problems that have arisen at the facility over the last several years," Clinton said of the commissioners after yesterday's meeting. "I hope that the NRC officials have better answers for the people in the surrounding communities at (today's) public meeting." Clinton said the agency should call for the independent assessment to close "a significant trust gap" about what it is doing to ensure the plant is well-run. Dale Klein, the chairman of the NRC, agreed with an earlier Clinton phrase that the plants seem "snake-bit at some times," but said the agency is already rigorously overseeing the plants and is perhaps falling short in its ability to "articulate" what it does as a matter of course. Indian Point 2 and Indian Point 3 received green ratings for 2006, the top safety rating at the NRC, but Indian Point 3's rating was downgraded one notch to white after there were two unplanned shutdowns of the 1,000-megawatt plant earlier this month, bringing that facility's total to four since July. Among the key topics that will be discussed between the nuclear plants' officials and the NRC include the following: - Seven inspection findings at Indian Point 2 that involved "procedure inadequacy." NRC officials said the individual problems were not significant, but in total point to a need to improve procedures and training. - The agency also wants to check on the company's progress in addressing issues related to the site's safety conscious environment and the willingness of plant employees to raise safety concerns. - The recent change in rating from green to white at Indian Point 3 because of the unplanned shutdowns. In previous years, these meeting have drawn audiences of 200 people or more, many as eager to quiz the NRC during its question-and-answer period as to listen to the technical information presented. Members of the public are not allowed to participate during Indian Point-NRC discussions. This year, the agency will also set up experts on a variety of public-interest topics - including groundwater contamination, emergency planning and the problems with the emergency siren system - to give residents a chance to talk more informally with regulators. That informational open house will be at the same location - Colonial Terrace, 119 Oregon Road, Cortlandt, next to the Town Hall. The information session starts at 2:30 p.m., and the meeting between the regulators and Indian Point officials starts at 6:30 p.m. NRC officials said Indian Point representatives as well as state regulators and several citizen groups will also likely be available at the open house. Reach Greg Clary at 914-696-8566 or gclary@lohud.com. Copyright © 2006 The Journal News, a Gannett Co. Inc. newspaper serving Westchester, Rockland and Putnam Counties in New York. ***************************************************************** 26 Bangkok Post: Thais hear call for nuclear energy (TNA) - The Department of Alternative Energy Development and Efficiency urged energy-concerned agencies to urgently study possibilities and options to build a nuclear power plant, as neighbouring countries are beginning to use nuclear generated electricity, the agency deputy director general Amnuay Thongsathitya said Thursday. Speaking at a seminar on "Sustainable Energy Development in Southeast Asia" jointly organised by the Chulalongkorn University Social Research Institute and Greenpeace Southeast Asia, Mr Amnuay said Thailand must go ahead now to study the nuclear power option for electricity generation, even though there is no conclusive answer as to whether such an energy source would be appropriate for Thailand or not. Preparations to build a nuclear power plant would take at least 13-15 years, he said, and the most important thing was to educate the public nationwide about nuclear energy. As for the safety aspect, Mr Amnuay said he could not state clearly that nuclear energy is definitely safe. However, he said that now the use of nuclear power plants is on a rising trend every year, and that the Thailand's neighbours - including Vietnam, Malaysia, and China - already have their first nuclear power plants. (It was not clear why he said this. Vietnam and Malaysia have research nuclear reactors, as does Thailand.) He also played down worries related to radioactivity as the technology was advanced enough to ensure the safety of the nuclear energy. "Thailand could not avoid problems related to nuclear power plants, whether or not we have a plant in our country as our neighbouring countries have their own (already)," he said. Thailand is dependent on imported energy, of which nearly half - 48-to-49 per cent - is fuel oil and the rest is natural gas and other sources. It was expected that by 2011, Mr Amnuay said, Thailand will use alternative energy for at least 8 per cent of the total energy used - almost double the present usage in 2007. This year Thailand was expected to use alternative energy to meet 4.7 per cent of its energy requirement. ***************************************************************** 27 Salt Lake Tribune: No nukes Article Launched: 04/26/2007 12:00:00 AM MDT I do not in any way support Gary Sandquist's view that the future lies in nuclear energy (Forum, April 14). It was thought that nuclear energy would solve all of our problems over 60 years ago. It should be obvious now that nuclear energy hasn't delivered on its promise. It supplies only a small percentage of all the energy consumption in the United States and it is causing massive headaches regarding how to effectively deal with its byproducts. There are a couple of huge problems with nuclear energy. The reactors can only be operated for a maximum of 60 years. Unlike a conventional power plant they cannot just be torn down, as they are contaminated with radiation and must be entombed and left to sit for a period longer than modern human history. There is also the problem of dealing with the radioactive waste that every reactor creates. Burying all of it in a mountain isn't exactly what I would consider a plan. As history has shown us there is also the potential for an accident that might endanger the public. It seems obvious that Mr. Sandquist is forgetting some important facts when it comes to dealing with nuclear power. Greg Bushnell Bountiful © Copyright 2007, The Salt Lake Tribune. ***************************************************************** 28 Salt Lake Tribune: Nuclear power proponent Public Forum Letter Article Last Updated: 04/25/2007 07:31:21 PM MDT I support Gary Sandquist's opinion (Forum, April 14) wholeheartedly. We need to invest in the future, and that future is in safe, reliable nuclear power. The population expansion that will occur in the next few years will tax all resources beyond anything we have ever seen, and it will appear to be in a never-ending cycle. We need to be prepared, and nuclear power is the way to greet the future. We need to pour our resources, as a country, into developing more efficient and safer nuclear power plants, especially since nuclear power only provides us with 6 percent of our commercial energy, and we need to create a safer way to store the waste products, not just dump them in a concrete box in the middle of the desert. The future is nuclear power, and if we can't grasp that concept we will be left with the antique coal mines and the polluted air of the past. Sarah Hallen Bountiful © Copyright 2007, The Salt Lake Tribune. ***************************************************************** 29 Dallas Morning News: Bill would simply re-regulate the energy market | Ron Kirk: Opinion 06:51 AM CDT on Thursday, April 26, 2007 I know a thing or two about the importance of protecting and representing constituents when crafting good public policy. And the truth is, good intentions don't always make good policy. Such is the case with SB 896, a bill that would re-regulate the Texas electric market. When Kohlberg Kravis Roberts & Co. and Texas Pacific Group announced an agreement to invest in Texas and acquire TXU Corp., they fully expected the transaction to be heavily scrutinized by the public, lawmakers and by each of the many regulatory entities charged with reviewing such transactions. The investors came into this process confident that the transaction meets the standards set by the Public Utility Commission, namely that it does not harm ratepayers. In fact, it provides many benefits to customers. As part of their announcement, the investors outlined a new direction for the company that includes price cuts and price protection benefits for residential customers and strengthens environmental policies. This new direction also provides for significant investments in alternative energy and the institution of corporate policies tied to climate stewardship. This transaction offers great benefits for Texans, especially when it comes to residential electric rate cuts and the environment. For customers, this transaction means hundreds of millions of dollars in annual savings – and that's not just talk. The investors have committed to more than $300 million in savings for customers, which will mean an average of $220 in annual savings per customer. Every Texan will benefit as a result of this investment by enjoying a cleaner environment. The new owners will reduce planned coal units from 11 to three, avoiding 56 million tons of annual carbon dioxide emissions. The investors also plan to double purchases of wind energy, and they have committed to invest $400 million in energy conservation and efficiency initiatives. Unfortunately, legislation recently passed by the Texas Senate and under consideration by the Texas House, SB 896, jeopardizes these benefits. This legislation significantly changes the current regulatory system and targets one specific transaction without regard to the consequences for future investment in Texas. This legislation has only one purpose: to stop the TXU transaction. Not only does it retroactively impair a private contract agreed to in good faith, it creates an open-ended review process with no deadline and no clear guidelines as to what is in the public's interest. The fact is that the PUC already has the authority to review this transaction. Yesterday, the investors voluntarily initiated a full PUC review by submitting an expedited 14.101 filing. This filing is not legally required until 30 days after the transaction is closed. In an effort to demonstrate good faith and the transparency under which the new company will operate, the investors elected to file early. A voluntarily expedited filing is significant. It triggers a full review allowing the PUC to make an official determination on whether the transaction is consistent with the public interest and also provides a means for the PUC to codify and hold the new owners accountable for their commitments. This transaction will undergo additional regulatory review, as well. The buyers have filed with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, and prior to closing, they will make regulatory filings with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, the Federal Communications Commission and the Antitrust Division of the U.S. Department of Justice. Adding more regulatory oversight to this process will risk destroying the transaction. It will delay or halt delivery of the promised environmental gains and price reductions and change the perception of Texas as a state that encourages business investment. No matter how many times the proponents of SB 896 claim that it is not re-regulation, it emphatically is. This is Texas, where we don't change the rules in the middle of the game. That's not what people expect when they decide whether to invest here. This proposed legislation is bad for customers, bad for business and bad for Texas. Ron Kirk served as mayor of Dallas from 1995 to 2002. He is an adviser to Texas Energy Future Holdings LP, which is representing the TXU buyers, and is a partner with Vinson and Elkins. His e-mail address is board@texasenergyfuture.com. © 2007 The Dallas Morning News Co. ***************************************************************** 30 Dallas Morning News: Power bill vote delayed | TXU deal is still on, investors say, despite move to limit firms' generation capacity 12:00 AM CDT on Thursday, April 26, 2007 By ELIZABETH SOUDER / The Dallas Morning News esouder@dallasnews.com AUSTIN – As politics delayed a House vote on legislation meant to force the state's largest power generation companies to shrink, the investors that wish to buy TXU Corp. said they still expect their deal to close. HARRY CABLUCK/The Associated Press Rep. Phil King (right, with Rep. Todd Smith of Euless) says he told TXU lobbyists that his amendments are 'the best we can do' on the power generation issue. The House was scheduled to vote on a bill Wednesday that would limit the amount of power generation capacity each company may own. The bill's sponsor, Rep. Phil King, R-Weatherford, had worked out amendments that would limit power companies to serving 35 percent of the market in each region of the state, which would force TXU and NRG Energy to sell plants in some areas. His amendments also would include a new compromise to lift the limits once the Texas grid switches to a new market model in 2009. Mr. King said he thinks he has the votes lined up to pass the bill, and he thinks TXU is on board. The vote is probably delayed until Friday. Texas Pacific Group and Kohlberg Kravis Roberts & Co. have offered to buy TXU for $45 billion, but the buyers could walk away from the deal without penalty if new laws force TXU to shed a material amount of power generation capacity. A spokesman for the buyers said Wednesday that he still expects the deal to happen. "At this point we anticipate the transaction moving forward," said Jeff Eller, chief executive of Public Strategies Inc., which represents the buyers. The buyers on Wednesday filed merger documents for state regulators to review before the sale closes late this year. Technically, the buyers could have waited until 30 days after they finish the deal to make the filing. "What we want to do is take a look at what the Legislature does, ultimately what gets passed into law, and we'll evaluate that for the transaction," Mr. Eller said. "We're over there every day talking to legislators. We're going to continue doing that until there are bills for the governor to sign or the session is over." The amendments to the bill would allow a company to breach the 35 percent limit if it works out a mitigation plan with the Public Utility Commission. TXU serves more than 40 percent of the North and West zones, while NRG Energy serves about 86 percent of the Houston zone. Amendments that Mr. King helped write would also exclude new nuclear plants and coal gasification plants from the 35 percent cap. "I told them that's the best we can do," Mr. King said of his discussions about the amendments with TXU lobbyists. Early Wednesday, Mr. King said he expected the vote to go smoothly. But then Rep. Robert Talton, R-Pasadena, called a point of order on the legislation, complaining that some wording was left out of a document relating to the bill. Mr. Talton has stalled a number of bills on various topics this session. Mr. Talton's point of order sent the bill back to the Regulated Industries Committee, which Mr. King chairs. The committee quickly met, corrected the wording, and gave the bill to the Calendars Committee to reschedule the vote. The earliest the bill could return to the House floor is Friday. Without the amendments written during the past week, the bill would only tweak existing law that limits power generators to serve 20 percent of the entire Texas grid. With the 35 percent-per-region addition, the House bill is closer to the Senate version, which would limit power companies to serving 25 percent of the wholesale market in each zone of the state. Sen. Troy Fraser, R-Horseshoe Bay, who sponsored the Senate bill, is gearing up for a compromise in a conference committee once the House votes. "Twenty-five percent was a number to start discussion. There's no magic to 25, but there has to be some number," he said Tuesday. Mr. Fraser and others want to cut the amount of power capacity each company may own to reduce a market player's ability to unduly influence wholesale market prices. While power companies may serve only 20 percent of the entire Texas grid, the companies could manipulate prices if they concentrate operations in one zone of the state. Currently the Texas grid is a zonal market, meaning the market has several congestion zones. If transmission line congestion makes it difficult to import power from outside a zone, power plants within that zone can raise their price. Mr. King's idea to place limits on the market until the market structure changes could allay such concerns. The Electric Reliability Council of Texas will switch to a nodal market in January 2009. Rather than having four congestion zones, the market would have 4,000 nodes. One congested node might boost prices in that location but wouldn't affect prices or transmission elsewhere. "It's hard to manipulate, and it's totally transparent," Mr. King said of the new grid operating model. The House on Wednesday did approve a bill to reinstate the System Benefit Fund, a fee paid by utility customers that's supposed to go toward electricity discounts for low-income residents. The fees had been diverted to the general fund, but the new legislation would devote that money to helping the poor. Also Wednesday, the TXU buyout group and TXU's Oncor unit, which operates power lines, filed buyout documents with the PUC. In the 3-inch-thick binder of paper, TXU restates its commitments to create a separate board for the regulated power line business and a separate headquarters, not to pile any buyout debt onto the regulated company, yet to continue spending billions of dollars to upgrade power line equipment. Oncor and the buyers said the buyout won't cause an increase in the rate customers must pay for power line services. The filing includes a proposed timeline for the PUC to review the buyout. Company lawyers said the PUC doesn't have the right to block the deal, but regulators could block Oncor from passing along some costs to consumers in the next rate case, which is likely to begin this year. The lawyers for Oncor and the buyers would like the commission to hold the buyout review in August and make a final decision in September. The company asked commissioners to hear the case themselves, rather than passing it on to the State Office of Administrative Hearings, to keep the process speedy. TXU also filed buyout documents with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission last week and will file with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission in coming weeks. The deal requires approval from those agencies, a process that could take months. It also requires shareholder approval. © 2007 The Dallas Morning News Co. ***************************************************************** 31 Bloomberg News: Nuclear plant costs weigh down Xcel Energy profit Xcel Energy Inc., owner of utilities in Denver and Minneapolis, had lower-than-expected profit because of higher nuclear power-plant operating costs and reduced earnings from wholesale electricity sales. By Greg Chang, Last update: April 25, 2007 – 7:38 PM Xcel Energy Inc., owner of utilities in Denver and Minneapolis, had lower-than-expected profit because of higher nuclear power-plant operating costs and reduced earnings from wholesale electricity sales. Net income fell 21 percent to $119.7 million, or 28 cents a share, from $151.3 million, or 36 cents, in the year-ago period, the Minneapolis-based company said Wednesday in a statement. Sales dropped to $2.76 billion from $2.89 billion. Xcel during the quarter had $18 million in higher costs related to refueling of its nuclear plants. The company in recent quarters has also had less excess electricity to sell on wholesale markets because it is adding retail customers. "It's a slow start" to the year, said David Parker, an analyst with Robert W. Baird & Co. in Tampa, Fla., who rates the shares "neutral" and owns none. "Nuclear outages definitely pressured" the results. He had expected Xcel to earn 40 cents a share. The average of three analyst estimates compiled by Bloomberg was 36 cents. Some of the weakness in earnings was related to "timing" issues that won't be repeated in subsequent quarters this year, Parker said. "While we're slightly behind for the quarter, we're on track to deliver earnings within our 2007 guidance range," Chief Financial Officer Ben Fowke said in a conference call with analysts. The company's nuclear-related costs in the past three quarters of the year are expected to be $17 million lower than the same period last year, he said. Xcel repeated its forecast for annual profit this year in the range of $1.35 to $1.45 a share. It earned $1.36 in 2006. The company lowered its forecast for sales growth to a range of 1.4 to 2 percent, from an earlier forecast of 1.7 to 2.2 percent. Shares of Xcel rose 3 cents to close at $24.72. The shares have risen 7.2 percent this year. Copyright 2007 Star Tribune. All rights reserved. Feedback|Terms of ***************************************************************** 32 Reuters: Workers in short supply for U.S. nuclear power | Thu Apr 26, 2007 6:58PM EDT By Lisa Lambert WASHINGTON (Reuters) - When the top U.S. nuclear regulator addressed industry leaders in March, he spoke about a problem often neglected in public debates about nuclear energy: the threat of a labor shortage. "Where are we going to get the educated and skilled workers to safely run the current fleet (of reactors) over extended lifetimes and the potential nuclear plants of the future?" asked Dale Klein, chairman of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. "Where are they being educated? Where are they being trained?" The U.S. government, energy experts and even some environmentalists see a revival of nuclear power as a clean energy alternative, but that resurgence may be held up by a lack of qualified workers. As nuclear power went out of fashion in the wake of the Three Mile Island disaster in 1979, college nuclear engineering programs were shuttered and fewer workers have entered the field. Some 103 reactors currently generate about 20 percent of U.S. electricity, with the last one coming on line in 1996 in Tennessee. That number could increase. A new focus on global warming, which most scientist say is caused by gases emitted by burning fossil fuels, has brought coal-, oil- and gas-fired generation under scrutiny. While nuclear reactors produce radioactive waste, they do not emit greenhouse gases, and energy experts say a new nuclear plant could break ground as early as 2010. Financial incentives laced through a 2005 energy law have some excited about a "nuclear renaissance." But the nuclear engineers and technicians who landed their jobs in the 1970s are retiring and there are few trained to take their places. Continued... © Reuters 2007. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 33 UPI: India to calm demands for U.S. nuke deal United Press International - Energy - Briefing Published: April 26, 2007 at 3:36 PM NEW DELHI, April 26 (UPI) -- India may back off its demand to be allowed to test nuclear weapons, which threatens to stall a highly touted nuclear agreement with the United States. U.S. and Indian negotiators have been trying to come to terms with a bilateral nuclear deal for more than a year. The U.S. Congress tentatively gave the Bush administration authority to finalize the deal, which would give India access to U.S. nuclear materials and technology. Such a deal is banned by the United States since India is not a signatory to international nuclear compacts like the comprehensive-test-ban and non-proliferation treaties. The deal is a boon for both countries' nuclear economies. In exchange, India would refrain from testing nuclear weapons or reprocess uranium, as well as split its program into weapons and energy sections, allowing for international inspections of the latter. The Financial Times reported last week that India demanded to nix the testing and reprocessing sections, which U.S. officials said would end negotiations. The Daily Times in Pakistan reports India is going to offer the United States to withdraw its complaint on nuclear testing, in order to salvage negotiations. India hopes to retain some access to reprocessing, though. India wants to expand its nuclear power sector to feed its rising energy consumption and free up more oil and gas for export. It is asking for entry into the Nuclear Suppliers' Group, an international consortium of nuclear-energy countries that regulates international nuclear commerce. India, which is a nuclear-weapons state, refuses to sign the treaties citing sovereignty concerns, which has prevented NSG entry. Successfully signing the deal with the United States could be a key to getting in. © Copyright 2007 United Press International, Inc. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 34 CBS: Ukrainians Remember Chernobyl, President Joins Mourners In Memorial Service On 21st Anniversary Of Disaster - CBS News President Joins Mourners In Memorial Service On 21st Anniversary Of Disaster Chernobyl's Tiniest Victims Twenty Years Later, Heart-Breaking Effects Of Nuclear Accident KIEV, Ukraine, April 26, 2007 Quote "It is a day to remember my friends who gave their lives to save Europe from catastrophe." Oleksandr Naumenko, former policeman and rescuer (AP) Ukraine's President Viktor Yushchenko and dozens of mourners prayed and lit candles early Thursday to mark the precise time that the Chernobyl nuclear reactor exploded 21 years ago in what became the world's worst nuclear accident. Chernobyl's Reactor No. 4 exploded at 1:23 a.m. on April 26, 1986, spewing radiation over a large chunk of the former Soviet Union and much of northern Europe. "With grief we bow our heads before all the hero rescuers and victims of this nuclear disaster which hurt our land," Yushchenko said in the early morning ceremony as a bell tolled. An area roughly half the size of Italy was contaminated, forcing the resettlement of hundreds of thousands of people and ruining some of Europe's most fertile farmland. At first, Soviet leaders tried to cover up the accident. Only on April 28, after scientists in Sweden detected radioactivity, did the Kremlin acknowledged an accident had occurred. But even then, the traditional May Day parades went ahead and millions filled the streets unaware of the invisible fallout. "It is a day to remember my friends who gave their lives to save Europe from catastrophe," said Oleksandr Naumenko, a former policeman and one of the rescuers, as he lit a candle. Death tolls connected to the explosion, which released about 400 times more radiation than the U.S. atomic bomb dropped over Hiroshima, remain hotly debated, although at least 31 people died from illnesses caused by radioactivity. Thousands have been diagnosed with thyroid cancer, and the U.N. health agency said about 9,300 people were likely to die of cancers caused by radiation. Some groups, however, including Greenpeace, have put the numbers 10 times higher. Chernobyl was shut down in 2000. © MMVII The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. © MMVII, CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 35 New London Day: Power Disrupted At Reactor That Is Closed For Refueling [ Welcome to theday.com ] By Patricia Daddona Published on 4/26/2007 in Home »Region »Region News Waterford — The Unit 3 reactor, shut down for refueling at Millstone Power Station, briefly lost power from outside sources Wednesday morning when circuit breakers tripped open. A backup diesel generator immediately kicked in around the time of the incident at 10:47 a.m. and supplied electricity to vital systems until 2:34 p.m., when power was restored, said Karl Neddenien, a spokesman for Millstone owner Dominion. Workers for the Connecticut Valley Power Exchange Operators apparently opened two circuit breakers at the same time while doing maintenance work on Unit 3, Neddenien said. CONVEX links the generating and transmission facilities of electric utilities serving Connecticut and western Massachusetts. CONVEX representatives could not be reached to comment. When the incident occurred, Dominion notified the Nuclear Regulatory Commission that an “unusual event” had taken place, the lowest of four emergency classifications, said NRC spokesman Neil Sheehan. Unit 2's operation was not disrupted, and there were no injuries or equipment damage at Unit 3, Neddenien said. Since Unit 3 is shut down for refueling, “there were no safety implications and no release of radioactivity,” Sheehan said. The circuit breakers are like those in an average home, but much larger, with many specialized safety features. When a circuit breaker is closed, electricity courses into the plant from sources off- site; when it is open that flow is disrupted. Waterford Privacy Policy | Contact Us at 1 (860) 442-2200 | New London, CT | © 1998-2007 The Day Publishing Co. ***************************************************************** 36 New London Day: Millstone 3 Briefly Loses Power theday.com ] Published on 4/25/2007 in Home »Region »Region News The Unit 3 reactor shut down for refueling at Millstone Power Station briefly lost power from outside sources this morning when circuit breakers tripped open. A backup diesel generator immediately kicked in around the time of the incident, at 10:47 a.m., and supplied electricity to vital systems until 2:34 p.m., when power was restored, said Karl Neddenien, a spokesman for Millstone owner Dominion. The circuit breakers are like those in an average home, but much larger, with many specialized safety features. When closed, electricity courses into the plant from sources off site, but when opened that flow is disrupted. Workers for the Connecticut Valley Power Exchange Operators apparently opened two circuit breakers at the same time while doing maintenance work on Unit 3, Neddenien said. When the incident occurred, Dominion notified the Nuclear Regulatory Commission that an “unusual event” took place, the lowest of four emergency classifications, said NRC Spokesman Neil Sheehan. Unit 2’s operation was not disrupted, and there were no injuries or equipment damage at Unit 3, Neddenien said. Since Unit 3 is shut down for refueling, “there were no safety implications and no release of radioactivity,” Sheehan said. Privacy Policy | Contact Us at 1 (860) 442-2200 | New London, CT | © 1998-2007 The Day Publishing Co. ***************************************************************** 37 Huffington Post: The Spin Over the "Joint Nuclear Energy Action Plan" | Alex Raksin: 04.25.2007 READ MORE: George W. Bush, United States I suppose that those of us who troll this site regularly are used to having President Bush pull the wool over our eyes. But in my over 20 years in journalism -- including a stint as an editorial writer and book editor that blessed me with the trade's brassiest awards, from the Pulitzer Prize on down -- I have never encountered a slicker spin than the administration's announcement today, April 25, of a "joint nuclear energy action plan" between the United States and Japan. Though the plan won't bequeath you immortality, according to the official announcement here, it will "safely and securely, allow developing nations to deploy nuclear power to meet energy needs" and shower lavish financing on companies that agree to "construct... nuclear power plants in the United States for the first time in 30 years," including a promise that U.S. taxpayers will generously compensate any companies that lose money on the deals. The plan, the biggest deal that Bush's $405-million "Global Nuclear Energy Partnership" (GNEP) has scored to date, also makes a host of other promises, from "reducing the number of required ... waste depositories to one for the remainder of this century" to "enhancing energy security, while promoting non-proliferation." Nuclear experts, including those in federally funded agencies such as the National Academy of Sciences and the Government Accounting Office, have said it will be decades before their program can make good on any of those commitments. Both agencies are now studying Bush's latest plan, but neither will be published until early next year. This information gap, I fear, will lead most mainstream reporters to simply parrot the administration's portrayal of GNEP as some kind of talismanic cure-all, at least from now until President Bush seals the deal by shaking Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe's hand at the White House on Friday (April 27). Had reporters done their due diligence, they would have found that earlier this week, Robert Alvarez, President Clinton's top energy advisor from 1993-99, released a study documenting the many ways in which the Administration's nominally "environmentally friendly" GNEP program could become a deadly and costly fiasco. Published by the Institute for Policy Studies, Alvarez's report is available here. Alvarez's highly technical study may not be anywhere as juicy as the details elsewhere on this site about why Rosie O'Donnell was fired, but the study boils down to three points * GNEP would allow large quantities of cesium 135 -- a radionuclide with a half life of 2.3 million years -- to be disposed in the near surface and pose serious contamination problems for many thousands of years. As Alvarez puts it, "You can't just park some of the most highly radioactive wastes in the world at a landfill and assume that by so doing you have kept them safely removed from humans for the next 2.3 million years." * Despite the Energy Department's claims that recycling of reactor spent fuel will solve the nuclear waste disposal problem, a small fraction is likely to be recycled. Uranium constitutes more than 95% of the materials in spent nuclear fuel by weight. But, it will require costly treatment for reuse in reactors - estimated in the billions of dollars. As a result, DOE's plans include the landfill disposal of tens of thousands of tons of recovered uranium. You might assume -- as most of my good friends are wont to do -- that you are too small and powerless to stop the GNEP juggernaut, I have news for you: But you'd be wrong. The Bush administration had asked Department of Energy officials to bar citizens from commenting on GNEP after April 4. But nuclear safety proponents successfully pressed officials to extend the deadline to June 4, leaving all Americans free to submit their views either to their federal legislator or directly to the administration by contacting Timothy A. Frazier by phone (866-645-7803) or email (GNEP-PEIS@nuclear.energy.gov). So far, the nation's legislators and many reporters have been asleep at the nuclear reactor control panel. You can help wake them up by asking them to zero out the budget for the GNEP program that Alvarez's study shows to be ludicrously impractical. Or you could go further and suggest that the leftover funding be diverted into the scores of demonstrably cost-effective and environmentally safe energy-generating alternatives, such as geothermal and hydropower, that the president -- incredibly enough -- is now actually pressing legislators to de-fund in next year's budget. Copyright 2007 © HuffingtonPost.com, Inc. ***************************************************************** 38 SNA: Bulgaria: Bulgarians,Romanians Protest against Belene NPP Sofia News Agency 26 April 2007, Thursday The citizens from Bulgaria's town of Svishtov and Romania's Zimnich are to stage a Thursday protest against the construction of the nuclear plant at Belene on the Danube. The chairman of Svishov's local parliament will present an administrative certificate against the construction of Bulgaria's second NPP and the radioactive waste storehouse, which is also planned to be built in the region. "All we want is our children to grow up in a clear environment," the protestors said. The protest is organized in the day when many people all over the world commemorate the twenty-first anniversary since Chernobyl's explosion, which spewed radiation across much of northern Europe over a 10-day period. novinite.com Forum Google Tourism Business MobileBulgaria All Rights Reserved © Novinite Ltd., 2001-2007 - Copyright & Bulgaria news Novinite.com (Sofia News Agency - www.sofianewsagency.com) is unique with being a real time news provider in English that informs its readers about the latest Bulgarian news. The editorial staff also publishes a daily online newspaper "Sofia Morning News." Novinite.com (Sofia News Agency - www.sofianewsagency.com) and Sofia Morning News publish the latest economic, political and cultural news that take place in Bulgaria. Foreign media analysis on Bulgaria and World News in Brief are also part of the web site and the online newspaper. News Bulgaria ***************************************************************** 39 sacbee.com: Water rate hike sought by firm - California-American says it needs $73.7 million for groundwater cleanup, new storage facilities. By Bobby Caina Calvan - Bee Staff Writer Published 12:00 am PDT Thursday, April 26, 2007 California-American Water, which serves thousands of customers in the capital region, is petitioning the state Public Utilities Commission for a rate increase that would increase residential water bills by about a third and business bills by almost half. The company is seeking to raise $73.7 million for a host of capital improvement projects -- including $15 million to deal with groundwater contamination in Rancho Cordova linked to perchlorate, a toxic chemical used in rocket fuel that damages thyroid glands. "No one likes a rate increase; however, there are standards we have to adhere to, as far as public safety," said Debra Vernon, the company's spokeswoman in Sacramento. Its last approved hike -- in 2004 -- raised rates by 17 percent over three years. An increase of nearly 3 percent went into effect this year. The company supplies water to about 57,000 customers in Isleton, south Sacramento, North Highlands, Arden Arcade, Elverta, Citrus Heights, Antelope, Walnut Grove and Rancho Cordova. The application for the rate increase was submitted to the PUC in January and its approval is pending. If approved by the PUC -- a decision is expected in the fall -- the new rates would go into effect in January. The hike, which would be spread over three years, translates to an increase of about 33 cents a day for metered homes or 39 cents for flat-rate customers or 32.9 percent, the company said. Business customers can expect an increase of about $1.50 a day, or 48 percent. The proposed rate increases don't sit well with some residents. "There's a whole lot of folks that just cannot afford that kind of increase," said Val Martin, 74, a retired salesman who lives in Antelope. "I live on Social Security like most elderly people do," said Martin, who expects to pay an additional $15 on his usual bill of about $50 a month. "I really can't afford it." As part of its rate-increase application, the company is planning to launch a low-income assistance program that would provide monthly discounts. The company is proposing to launch a conservation program intended to lower bills for customers who reduce water usage. It has plans to continue upgrading its services, including new fire hydrants, expanding metered service and upgrades to water-treatment plants. In Isleton, the company plans to spend $1 million for a 350,000-gallon storage tank -- which is expected to help the area's fire district -- and $2.6 million treatment system to reduce arsenic contamination. To address growth in the Rosemont area, the company is planning to spend $3.9 million, part of which will be for replacing contaminated wells and a bigger storage tank. About the writer: * The Bee's Bobby Caina Calvan can be reached at (916) 321-1067 or bcalvan@sacbee.com. Copyright © The Sacramento Bee, (916) 321-1000 ***************************************************************** 40 BBC NEWS: Russia in defence warning to US Last Updated: Thursday, 26 April 2007, 12:23 GMT 13:23 UK Mr Putin confirmed that the address was his last before stepping down Russia may stop implementing a key defence treaty because of concerns over US plans for a missile shield in Europe, President Vladimir Putin said. Mr Putin made the threat during his annual address to parliament - which he said would be his last as president. He also hit out at an influx of foreign money which he said was being used to meddle in Russia's internal affairs. BBC diplomatic correspondent Jonathan Marcus says Mr Putin's speech marks a significant raising of diplomatic stakes. The Russian president suggested that his country should freeze its compliance with the 1990 Conventional Forces in Europe (CFE) treaty - which limits military deployments across the continent - until all Nato countries had ratified it. Our partners... are using the present situation to boost the presence of military bases and systems close to our borders Vladimir Putin The treaty was adapted in 1999 after the collapse of the Warsaw Pact, but Nato states have not yet ratified the new version, linking it to the withdrawal of Russian forces from Georgia and Moldova. Mr Putin accused Nato states of exploiting the situation to increase their military presence near Russia. He said that the Russian moratorium would continue "until all countries of the world have ratified and started to strictly implement it". If there was no progress at upcoming talks between Nato and Russia, Russia would "look at the possibility of ceasing our commitments under the CFE treaty", he said. The US wants to station 10 interceptor missiles in Poland, with radar operations in the Czech Republic - which Russia strongly opposes. "The Russians have thousands of warheads. The idea that you can somehow stop the Russian strategic nuclear deterrent with a few interceptors just doesn't make sense," said the US secretary of state in Oslo, ahead of the Nato-Russia meeting. Nato Secretary-General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer said that he would seek a further explanation of Russia's position at the talks. 'Meddlers' Mr Putin also hit out at those who he said were using democracy as a pretext to interfere in politics. "There is a growing influx of foreign cash used to directly meddle in our domestic affairs," Mr Putin said. "Not everyone likes the stable, gradual rise of our country," he said. "There are some who are using the democratic ideology to interfere in our internal affairs." He did not specify those responsible, but in the past Russian authorities have accused the West of funding groups that oppose the government. He also called for a moment of silence in memory of former President Boris Yeltsin, whom he said had laid the foundations for a changed Russia. He called for a library to be established in Mr Yeltsin's name. Other highlights included: * praise for Russia's economy, which he said was now one of the 10 largest in the world * a funding boost for state housing, using some of the proceeds from the auction of bankrupt oil giant Yukos Mr Putin's speech was delayed by a day because of Mr Yeltsin's state funeral. He reiterated his pledge to step down in March 2008, after serving two terms as president. * BBC Copyright Notice ***************************************************************** 41 BBC NEWS: Row over Litvinenko's radioactive house Last Updated: Thursday, 26 April 2007, 12:01 GMT 13:01 UK By Steven Shukor BBC News, London Mr Litvinenko's house has been sealed off "For sale: a stylishly-presented, three-bedroom townhouse, with landscaped garden and off-street parking. Has undergone remediation work due to radioactive contamination." You might forgive an estate agent for withholding some of that information when the home of murdered former Russian spy Alexander Litvinenko eventually goes on the market. The Ł500,000 house located in a quiet development built seven years ago in Muswell Hill, north London, has been vacant since Mr Litvinenko's death in November 2006. His wife Marina, who saw his condition deteriorate dramatically at their home, and their son Anatole have moved out and are unlikely to return. 'No blank cheque' The property, 140 Osier Crescent, has been sealed off by Haringey Council, which has issued a prohibition order preventing access until the decontamination work is carried out. But that may take a while. A row has broken out between the council and Russian billionaire Boris Berezovsky, who owns number 140 and other houses in Osier Crescent. The statement from the council is ridiculous Boris Berezovsky After several vain attempts to contact Mr Berezovsky and his lawyers, Haringey Council has resorted to issuing a press release in an attempt to prompt some sort of action. "We have been trying to contact the owners of the property who are responsible for paying for the remediation work," said the release. "So far we have been unable to resolve this issue." Councillor Nilgun Canver said: "We cannot write a blank cheque promising to pay whatever it costs to remediate the property, that is the responsibility of the owner." Traces of polonium-210, the substance used to poison Mr Litvinenko, have been detected in 14 premises across London, which have had to close for decontamination work. The Itsu sushi bar in Piccadilly, where he met academic Mario Scaramella on 1 November, was closed for several weeks during the clean-up by contractor Nukem, which cost Ł16,000. The cost of remediation work at 140 Osier Crescent has not been disclosed, but would include a Ł15,000 survey to determine the extent of the contamination. Remediation can involve painting over contaminated surfaces, removing affected items such as furniture and leaving low-level contamination in place to decay naturally. 'Ridiculous' The BBC News website had more luck than Haringey Council in contacting Mr Berezovsky, who said in no uncertain terms he had no intention of paying for the clean-up. He used the opportunity to have yet another dig at Russian President Vladimir Putin who he blames for his friend's death, suggesting he should pick up the bill. The Kremlin has always denied any involvement in the killing. Mr Litvinenko was poisoned with Polonium-210 in his green tea "The statement from the council is ridiculous," Mr Berezovsky said. "Marina is now homeless with her son. "It's not that I don't want to help. I am helping them but I disagree that we are responsible for this. Those responsible for the murder should pay for any damage, as well as compensate all those affected by this terror attack in London." In the meantime, the council has written to reassure residents in Osier Crescent that the contamination does not pose a danger to nearby homes. The letter said: "The home of Mr Litvinenko is contaminated with polonium-210 and... a hazard exists to anyone residing in or entering the premises. "We must stress that the contamination is not a hazard to any neighbouring property." Radioactivity decays away over time, the Health Protection Agency (HPA) said, and without remediation any contamination will have decayed after a "few years". The HPA said polonium-210 contamination reduced to half the amount over a period of 138 days, and to half that level over the next 138 days, and so on. Property prices That appears to be of little reassurance to Mr Litvinenko's former neighbours who feel the council have kept information to a "bare minimum". If the council is really concerned about the public's health they should clean it Jane Lord "It's quite worrying to know there is a radioactive house in your street," said resident Jane Lord. "Children play in the road opposite Alexander's house. I have two small children. Who knows what risks there are?" She added: "This whole argument about who is responsible for the clean-up is laughable. If the council is really concerned about the public's health they should clean it." Muswell Hill estate agents said the radioactive house was having little bearing on the property market. "Some potential buyers have been slightly concerned about Mr Litvinenko's property," said Andrew Hunt, of Kinleigh Folkard and Hayward. E-mail this to a friend Printable version LITVINENKO POISONING ***************************************************************** 42 BBC NEWS: Organ removal inquiry widened Last Updated: Thursday, 26 April 2007, 11:32 GMT 12:32 UK The case of 65 former workers at Sellafield sparked initial concerns An inquiry into the removal of body tissue from nuclear workers at Sellafield in Cumbria has been expanded to cover a number of other sites. Trade and Industry Secretary Alistair Darling says samples may also have been taken from non-nuclear workers. The inquiry has widened to include Atomic Weapons Establishment (AWE) in Berkshire and UK Atomic Energy Agency (UKAEA) at Harwell in Oxfordshire. Mr Darling told the Commons he had asked Michael Redfern QC, who is heading the inquiry, to consider the fresh information he had received since establishing the investigation last week. "The UKAEA tell me they believe such work was carried out at Harwell at least until the early 1980s and possibly at other UKAEA sites, potentially involving work related to individuals who had not been employed at nuclear sites," he told MPs. The AWE believes there could have been additional testing on their employees Trade and Industry Secretary Alistair Darling "The AWE believes there could have been additional testing on their employees." British Nuclear Group, which owns the Sellafield site where the practice first came to light, says tissue was taken for "legally correct" purposes. The UKAEA said it had launched an internal review of its own records after the Sellafield cases came to light. 'Information sketchy' The checks showed similar work had been carried out at the Oxfordshire site until at least the 1980s, including on "deceased persons who were not employees of the nuclear industry". UKAEA director of assurance Dr John Crofts said: "Our preliminary checks of records dating back 45 years have identified evidence Harwell was involved in such work but the information we have at this stage is incomplete and sketchy." He promised the authority was now hoping to complete its review "as speedily as possible". QUESTIONS FOR INQUIRY Who authorised the taking of samples and when? Were families of the deceased told? What was the purpose of keeping samples? Mr Redfern QC - who also led the investigation into the removal of children's organs at Alder Hey hospital, Liverpool - was asked to investigate trade union claims that permission was not sought to remove tissue, which included bones and body parts. Originally it was thought to affect the families of 65 workers - most of them at the Cumbrian site, but also some at Springfields in Lancashire. Of the samples, 23 were taken following a coroner's request, 33 after a post-mortem examination, three were associated with legal proceedings and one was a biopsy from a living person. 'Disturbing development' In four cases there is no information about how the request came about. Shadow energy minister Charles Hendry described Thursday's announcement as a "disturbing development". "It is now clear the removal of tissue samples was on a much larger scale than was first thought," he added. "Serious questions will need to be answered as to whether tissue samples were taken without proper consent or authorisation and why families were not informed." * BBC Copyright Notice ***************************************************************** 43 BBC NEWS: Flask train crash motorist blamed Last Updated: Thursday, 26 April 2007, 12:48 GMT 13:48 UK The train was carrying a discharged nuclear fuel flask to Sizewell A driver has been blamed for a crash in Suffolk involving his vehicle and a train carrying a nuclear fuel flask. The accident happened on 22 May 2006 when the 19mph train was transporting an empty nuclear flask to Sizewell on a freight-only branch line. The Rail Accident Investigation Branch (RAIB) report said a motorist did not halt at a sign and drove directly into the path of the train without looking. Warning device "The gates at the level crossing had been left open for some time and could not be closed," the report said. "The driver failed to look for approaching trains because he had never encountered a train at the crossing before." The RAIB has made recommendations to reduce the chance of a future accident on the line. Among the measures will be educating road users to close the barrier gates behind them after passing over the railway. A spokesman for the RAIB said: "Safety information is to be communicated to users of the type of crossing where the accident happened and more inspection and maintenance is to be done. "The crossing signs, where the accident happened, are to be improved and a warning device installed." * BBC Copyright Notice ***************************************************************** 44 Guardian Unlimited: Nuclear workers' body parts inquiry widened Mark Tran Thursday April 26, 2007 Sellafield nuclear processing plant. Photograph: Christopher Furlong/Getty An investigation into the removal of body parts from nuclear workers after their deaths will examine other sites in addition to Sellafield, the government said today. The trade and industry secretary, Alistair Darling, said he had asked Michael Redfern QC, who is leading the inquiry, to look at records of other sites to find out whether similar tests on autopsy tissues were carried out without the knowledge of the families of the dead workers. In a written ministerial statement, Mr Darling said he had been informed by the UK atomic energy authority (UKAEA) that such tests may have taken place at Harwell, the birthplace of Britain's nuclear industry, until at least the early 1980s, and possibly at other sites. "In light of this information, and in line with what I told the House last week, I have therefore asked Michael Redfern QC to make this additional information part of his considerations," Mr Darling said. The inquiry will examine the circumstances in which organs and tissue were removed from 65 workers between 1961 and 1992. In particular, it will seek to establish who requested the testing and whether families gave their consent. "Our preliminary checks of records dating back 45 years have identified evidence that Harwell was involved in such work, but the information we have at this stage is incomplete and sketchy," Dr John Crofts, the UKAEA director of assurance, said. "Our priority now is to complete a thorough search and review of our records and to ensure that all relevant information is made available to Michael Redfern QC." Mr Darling launched an investigation earlier this month after unions alleged that organs were removed from bodies of workers at Sellafield and secretly tested for radiation. Experts said it appeared that tissue samples were checked to see whether contamination had occurred, particularly from plutonium, whenever someone died at Sellafield. Useful links UK Atomic Energy Authority Department of Trade and Industry Guardian Unlimited © Guardian News and Media Limited 2007 ***************************************************************** 45 The Herald: Organ removal probe shifts to Dounreay after Sellafield find Web Issue 2819 April 27 2007 MICHAEL SETTLE, Chief UK Political Correspondent April 27 2007 Comment Officials are to trawl the medical records of staff at the Dounreay nuclear site as the government inquiry into the removal of organs and tissue from dead workers in the atomic industry is expanded. Last week, a row broke out when it was claimed 65 people, most of whom worked at Sellafield in Cumbria, had organs and tissue removed for analysis but without the knowledge or consent of their families. Yesterday, Alistair Darling, the Trade and Industry Secretary, told MPs industry chiefs believed similar medical work was carried out at the nuclear site in Harwell near Oxford and "possibly at other sites", potentially involving non-nuclear workers. A spokesman for the UK Atomic Energy Authority (UKAEA) told The Herald that it had "no information" to date to say that such work took place at Dounreay in Caithness but revealed it had set up a special team of workers to go through records from several sites, including the Scottish one, going as far back as the 1960s. "We will be looking for information from any of the sites," said the spokesman. He added that all relevant details would be passed on to Michael Redfern, the QC who is leading the government inquiry. As well as the UKAEA, which oversees five sites including Sellafield, Harwell and Dounreay, the Atomic Weapons Establishment (AWE) in Berkshire, which maintains the warheads of Britain's nuclear deterrent, is also checking its records. In his statement, Mr Darling said: "The UKAEA tell me that they believe such work was carried out at Harwell at least until the early 1980s and possibly at other UKAEA sites, potentially involving work related to individuals who had not been employed at nuclear sites. The AWE believes that there could have been additional testing on their employees." The Secretary of State set out the terms of reference for the inquiry, which will look into the circumstances in which organs and tissue were removed from 65 workers between 1961 and 1992. He said the aim was to find out in particular who requested the testing and whether or not families gave their consent. Mr Darling said the inquiry would also establish whether the families or surviving relatives were informed of the results of the testing as well as who authorised the analysis. Charles Hendry for the Conservatives said expansion of the inquiry to look at other nuclear sites was "very disturbing". He noted: "It is now clear the removal of tissue samples was on a much larger scale than was first thought. Our sympathies are with the families involved at Harwell. Serious questions will need to be answered as to whether tissue samples were taken without proper consent or authorisation and why families were not informed." Paul Noon of Prospect, the union which represents 12,000 scientists, engineers, technicians and managers in the nuclear industry, added: "Nuclear workers and their families at Harwell and other nuclear sites will be concerned at the news that the removal of organs and tissue was more widespread than originally revealed. We will be pressing for Michael Redfern to move with all possible speed to complete the inquiry." In a statement, the UKAEA said it had told the DTI of its initial findings but was now "undertaking a more detailed search and review" and that it would look to complete this "as sensitively and speedily as possible". © All rights reserved. Reproduction in whole or in part without permission is prohibited. Copyright © 2007 Newsquest (Herald & Times) Limited. All Rights Reserved ***************************************************************** 46 AU ABC: Army admits to Brisbane radiation leak. 27/04/2007. ABC News Online Last Update: Friday, April 27, 2007. 7:32am (AEST) The Department of Defence has confirmed there was a radiation leak at a Brisbane army workshop four years ago. A spokesman says the leak was discovered when the substance tritium was detected on the clothes of civilian contractors who had worked at the Bulimba logistics unit in 2003. Tritium is used in gun sights and compasses and is highly radioactive. It can cause cancer and genetic mutations. An Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency inspector found radioactive contamination in two building on the site. The Defence Department spokesman stressed that there was no threat to nearby residents or the staff who came into contact with the substance. He says the site has been decontaminated. Parliamentary Secretary for Defence Peter Lindsay denied there had been a cover-up and said residents did not need to be informed. "Defence every day has 50,000 people out there, 90,000 people out there," he said. "There are always things happening but they are dealt with internally. Otherwise you'd spend your time doing other things that weren't defence." ***************************************************************** 47 Sydney Morning Herald: No cover-up of army radiation leak - govt - www.smh.com.au April 27, 2007 - 6:24AM The federal government has denied it covered up a radioactive leak at a Brisbane army barracks four years ago. A leak of a substance called tritium was detected in a workshop at the inner-city Bulimba barracks in February 2003, forcing the closure of the facility for six months. Tritium is a cancer-causing substance used to make gunsights and compasses. The Australian Defence Force (ADF) on Friday said that after an examination by an independent authority the facility was decontaminated and refurbished. Several Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency (ARPANSA) recommendations to the ADF about its handling of tritium made after the leak had been implemented, an ADF spokeswoman said. Parliamentary Secretary for Defence Peter Lindsay said no adverse health affects were detected as a result of the leak. "As soon as we detected there had been a small release of tritium, and I mean small release of tritium ... all of the building was immediately closed, the workers were checked, all of their clothing was checked, all of their homes were checked," Mr Lindsay said. "(It was) a very, very thorough process, and this resulted in the determination that there was no adverse health effect at all." Mr Lindsay rejected claims from opposition defence spokesman Joel Fitzgibbon that there had been a cover-up of the potential health risk. "There's nothing to hide, there's nothing to cover up, there's been no cover-up," Mr Lindsay said. The Queensland government and health department were fully informed of the leak, he said. Queensland Health's senior director for population health, Dr Linda Selvey, confirmed that the department was contracted by the Department of Defence in February 2003, to help in scientific testing and decontamination of the barracks. Dr Selvey said Queensland Health then reported its findings to ARPANSA in a preliminary report in February 2003, and presented its final report three months later. "The assessment showed that the level of radiation exposure for the workers and the community was likely to have been much lower than is considered acceptable and safe for people," Dr Selvey said. Dr Selvey said Queensland Health was regularly involved with radiation safety and waste disposal activities under contract to the Department of Defence. © 2007 AAP When news happens: send photos, videos & tip-offs to 0424 SMS SMH (+61 424 767 764), or us. ***************************************************************** 48 Las Vegas SUN: Government renews focus on cross-Nevada rail line to nuclear dump April 26, 2007 LAS VEGAS (AP) - The Energy Department is refocusing plans for a cross-Nevada railroad to a national nuclear waste repository, after an Indian tribe said it won't let radioactive waste cross its reservation, a top Yucca Mountain official said. A north-to-south railroad corridor that would have crossed the Walker River Paiute reservation in Mineral County no longer will be considered, Ward Sproat, director of the Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management, said Wednesday. The department will instead focus on completing studies of the so-called Caliente rail corridor, a 319-mile route that would be built from eastern Nevada across the state to the Yucca Mountain repository at a projected cost of more than $2 billion. Sproat made his comments during a presentation in Washington, D.C., to a conference organized by the U.S. Transport Council, whose members are tied to the shipping of nuclear materials. Sproat, the Energy Department's Yucca project chief, said it was too late to remove the 280-mile Mina corridor from an environmental impact study the department expects to make public in October. He said the Mina route could have been cheaper and faster to build, but said planners now expect the decision will favor the Caliente route. The Walker River Paiute tribe announced April 17 that it was withdrawing from environmental studies of the Mina route, named after a site south of Hawthorne. The tribe's participation was key to Energy Department plans to use existing railroad rights-of-way through old mining districts to Yucca Mountain, 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas. Bob Halstead, a transportation consultant to the state of Nevada, said the Energy Department might face difficulties trying to develop the east-west Caliente route. Halstead said planners face several engineering challenges along the route, plus resistance from some ranchers and from the sponsors of a monumental desert art exhibit in Garden Valley. The Energy Department plans to use the rail line to ship materials to Yucca Mountain, where it plans to entomb at least 77,000 tons of the nation's most radioactive waste in tunnels. Congress picked the Yucca site in 2002, with plans to open it in 2010. But budget cuts and questions about quality control have stalled the Energy Department schedule for seeking an operating license from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. --- Information from: Las Vegas Review-Journal, http://www.lvrj.com All contents copyright 2005 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 49 BBC NEWS: Dounreay link to tissue inquiry Last Updated: Thursday, 26 April 2007, 19:46 GMT 20:46 UK Dounreay was an experimental reactor facility Dounreay has revealed that post mortem samples of two deceased employees were sent to its Oxfordshire headquarters. Analysis for radioactivity was permitted at the Harwell plant. The cases will now be included in a major government inquiry into whether proper consent was sought from relatives. The UK Atomic Energy Authority (UKAEA) has confirmed that the Harwell cases include samples from two Dounreay employees who worked at the Caithness Plant between 1962 and 1991. For the benefit of everyone involved, especially any affected families, we will complete this review as sensitively and speedily as possible Dr John Crofts UKAEA The records of former Dounreay workers are being checked as part of the inquiry into the removal of tissue from nuclear staff without consent. UKAEA is working with Michael Redfern, QC, who is leading the investigation. The inquiry was sparked by claims that samples were taken from former Sellafield employees who died in the 1960s. Trade and Industry Secretary Alistair Darling announced that the inquiry would be extended to other sites. Thorough search UKAEA said there were indications that Harwell also participated in work related to deceased persons who were not employees of the nuclear industry. Dr John Crofts, UKAEA director of assurance, said: "Our priority now is to complete a thorough search and review of our records and to ensure that all relevant information is made available to Michael Redfern QC. "For the benefit of everyone involved, especially any affected families, we will complete this review as sensitively and speedily as possible." British Energy said the inquiry did not involve its sites at Torness in East Lothian, or Hunterston B in Ayrshire. * BBC Copyright Notice ***************************************************************** 50 ReviewJournal.com: Officials shift focus for rail route to Yucca Apr. 26, 2007 Paiute decision shuts off western option By STEVE TETREAULT STEPHENS WASHINGTON BUREAU WASHINGTON -- The Department of Energy is refocusing its plans for a Nevada railroad to Yucca Mountain after the Walker River Paiute Indians announced that they no longer were interested in having nuclear waste shipped across their reservation, a DOE official said Wednesday. A Northern Nevada railroad corridor that would have crossed tribal territory in Mineral County no longer will be considered, according to Ward Sproat, director of the Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management. DOE now will dedicate itself to completing studies of a rail corridor to the waste repository site that originates in eastern Nevada near Caliente, he said. "I wish they would have told us sooner, but they told us now," Sproat said of the Walker River Paiutes. Following a vote by its governing council, the tribe announced on April 17 that it was withdrawing from environmental studies of the Mina rail corridor, named after a site south of Hawthorne. Sproat said the Mina corridor studies essentially were done and still will be included in an environmental impact statement that DOE expects to make public in October, along with its assessment of the Caliente corridor. But, Sproat said, the Mina route "essentially wouldn't be considered as a viable alternative. So Caliente most probably we will end up sticking with and providing in our formal record of decision." The DOE official gave a presentation to a conference organized by the U.S. Transport Council, whose members are organizations tied to the shipping of nuclear materials. The tribe's participation was the key element of a strategy to route nuclear waste cargo on rail through Northern Nevada, then south to the repository through old mining districts once served by rail. Nuclear waste bound for Yucca Mountain, 100 miles northwest of Las Vegas, would have utilized tracks that run through the middle of the Paiute community of Schurz. As a possible condition of the tribe's participation, the relocating of the rail line away from the town was being studied. "I don't view this as a setback," Sproat said. "It is one less option that could have been cheaper and faster to build, but it is not something that is a major difficulty to us." Gary Lanthrum, transportation director for the Yucca program, said the tribe's decision effectively closes the door on any rail route through western Nevada. In the early days of the Yucca program, DOE identified a branch that essentially would go around the Walker River reservation. But Lanthrum said in an interview that such a path was "longer and more problematic. It is very rough terrain, rougher than Caliente, and it makes (the route) as long or longer than Caliente." Lanthrum also said he doubted there was time to develop other railroad options. DOE officials and some nuclear shipping industry officials said the 280-mile Mina corridor could have proved a less expensive and more easily built alternative to the 319-mile Caliente corridor, where price projections have eclipsed $2 billion. Critics of the route said the Mina corridor could expose more communities to waste shipments. Opposition began to build in cities such as Reno and Sparks. Bob Halstead, a transportation consultant to the state of Nevada, said the Energy Department will have its hands full trying to develop the Caliente route. "The assurances that we are hearing that this is not a big deal that Mina has dropped off, maybe that is good damage control, maybe that is wishful thinking," he said. Halstead said the DOE faces engineering challenges at several locations along the Caliente corridor along with resistance from disgruntled ranchers and the sponsors of "City," a monumental desert art exhibit in Garden Valley. Leave Your Comment 1 Reader Comments Terms & Conditions The following comments are provided by readers and are the sole responsiblity of the authors. The reviewjournal.com does not review comments before publication nor guarantee their accuracy. By publishing a comment here you agree to abide by the comment policy. If you see a comment that violates the policy, please notify the web editor. Some comments may not display immediately due to an automatic filter. These comments will be reviewed within 48 hours. Please do not submit a comment more than once. Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal, 1997 - 2007 ***************************************************************** 51 The Australian: Rann not certain of overturning uranium policy NEWS.com.au | * April 26, 2007 The Australian — The Nation SOUTH Australian Premier Mike Rann has spent the past five days feverishly lobbying undecided delegates to overturn Labor's no new mines policy at the party's national conference, but is still not convinced he will have the numbers to win the debate. Before flying to Sydney this morning in a last ditch effort to lobby delegates before the conference starts tomorrow, the South Australian Premier said the result would be close and would not go according to factional lines. "There are people from various factions and different states who have different positions on this issue," Mr Rann said. "It's really a very contentious issue. It's going to be a very close vote. "It's overturning a policy that's been in place for 25 years and one that generates a great deal of emotion," he said. Opposition leader Kevin Rudd will move the motion - which rules out uranium enrichment - at the national conference, and Mr Rann will second the motion with key support from deputy leader Julia Gillard and Martin Ferguson. © The Australian ***************************************************************** 52 West Australian: ALP's uranium decision 'tough but right' thewest.com.au 26th April 2007, 9:13 WST South Australian Premier Mike Rann says changing Labor's no new uranium mines policy is about the party preparing to take government at a federal level. Mr Rann said being in office involved taking tough decisions necessary in the national interest. "Being in government involves taking difficult decisions and being in government means taking hard decisions based on facts and science, not emotions," Mr Rann said on the eve of the ALP national conference in Sydney. "The current policy has been in place for 25 years while Labor has been in and out of office and during that time uranium exports from Australia have tripled. "So the policy isn't working, so why keep a policy that doesn't work, that's out of date and that is stopping the creation of thousands of jobs? "It's very important as we prepare for government nationally that we take the hard decisions. "Because that's what government is all about." Mr Rann said Opposition Leader Kevin Rudd would move the convention motion to end the uranium mines policy and he would second the move. He said the result would be close and would not necessarily go according to factional lines. "There are people from various factions and different states who have different positions on this issue," he said. "It's really a very contentious issue. It's going to be a very close vote. "It's overturning a policy that's been in place for 25 years and one that generates a great deal of emotion." Mr Rann, who will also be sworn in as one of Labor's senior vice presidents at the convention, said he had spent the past four or five days lobbying for the change and had also written to every delegate. AAP West Australian Newspapers Limited 2007. All Rights Reserved ***************************************************************** 53 West Australian: Protestors lobby Labor on uranium mining : thewest.com.au 26th April 2007, 10:40 WST Anti-nuclear lobbyists are using the anniversary of the Chernobyl nuclear disaster to convince Labor not to change its uranium mining policy. At the ALP's national conference this weekend, federal Labor leader Kevin Rudd will ask his party to overturn its 25-year ban on new uranium mines. Members of the Queensland Nuclear Free Alliance (QNFA) visited the Brisbane offices of Mr Rudd and Queensland Premier Peter Beattie to highlight the dangers of uranium mining and nuclear power. Thursday is the 20th anniversary of an accidental explosion at the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant in the Ukraine which resulted in radioactive contamination of much of Europe. The official death toll of the April 26, 1986, disaster was given as 56, but it was estimated that thousands more exposed to the fallout might die from cancer. Hundreds of thousands of people also had to be resettled. One of the QNFA members dressed as the Grim Reaper, while others carried mock coffins for children who died in the wake of the Chernobyl disaster. The group presented more than 600 letters from the public urging no change in Labor's uranium policy to a member of Mr Beattie's staff. An increase in uranium mining would put lives at risk, QNFA spokeswoman Robin Taubenfeld said. "Australia and the Labor Party has a real chance to decide what direction we're going to take," Ms Taubenfeld said. "Are we going to head down a dangerous, toxic nuclear path or are we going to head down a sustainable and healthy future for our children?" Uranium mining is environmentally damaging, Ms Taubenfeld said, and governments should consider alternative energy options before expanding the nuclear industry. AAP West Australian Newspapers Limited 2007. All Rights Reserved ***************************************************************** 54 LA Daily News: High court to rule on cleanup Case could affect valley's Whittaker-Bermite site BY JUDY O'ROURKE, Staff Writer Article Last Updated: 04/25/2007 09:43:57 PM PDT SANTA CLARITA - The U.S. Supreme Court will rule in June on a lawsuit involving voluntary cleanup of contamination, and that ruling could affect Santa Clarita as work continues to clear chemicals from a former munitions plant. The Castaic Lake Water Agency, the wholesaler serving the Santa Clarita Valley, has filed a friend of the court brief, supporting the plaintiffs' arguments in the case. At issue is whether a federal law that provides a means for recovering cleanup costs will be upheld in those types of cases. "A favorable result will help promote cleanups all across the country," said Fred Fudacz, a partner with California-based Nossaman Guthner Knox & Elliott LLP, which represented the water agency and others in the friend of the court brief. The case was argued Tuesday before the Supreme Court. Atlantic Research Corp., a subsidiary of Sequa Corp., had sought to recover cleanup costs from the federal government. The 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals supported the company's right to do so; the government appealed. A decision is expected in June. Earlier, Nossaman Guthner filed the amicus brief backing the lower court ruling on behalf of the CLWA and several state and national water agencies. Groundwater contaminated by perchlorate and other chemicals - at the Whittaker-Bermite site in the heart of Santa Clarita and other locales - is costly and time-consuming to clean up. "The relevance to us is, if there's additional contamination from the Whittaker-Bermite site, it enhances our ability to pursue action and obtain financial remuneration, much in the same way we did on the perchlorate litigation," said Dan Masnada, general manager of the CLWA. Contaminants in the soil and groundwater remain from five decades of weapons manufacturing and testing on the 996-acre Whittaker-Bermite site in the middle of town. Bermite, its insurer and others are paying for the cleanup. Perchlorate, a chemical residue from rocket fuel that has been implicated in thyroid problems, is the major contaminant left from the Bermite business. In March, the state Department of Toxic Substances Control began overseeing cleanup of soil at the site where explosives were manufactured and tested from 1934 to 1987. The Bermite property, now eyed for development, is bounded by Soledad Canyon Road, Golden Valley Road and San Fernando Road. The Circle J development is to the south. Off-site cleanup of tainted groundwater will begin in 2008 after pipelines and a treatment plant are built during the next year, Masnada said. The plant will join the agency's other facility near Bouquet Canyon Road and Valencia Boulevard. A nearby plant that treats water from Valencia Water Company's Q-2 well will be decommissioned after the new plant is built, its treatments integrated into the newer facility. The CLWA augments the local groundwater supply with water purchased from the State Water Project in Northern California. The agency supplies local retailers, among them Valencia Water. The new plant, which will also treat water from Saugus 1 and 2 wells, should stop the Saugus Formation's migrating perchlorate contamination plume, Masnada said, adding that customers need not worry. "All drinking water is tested to ensure it is 100percent potable and safe," he said. "Customers are not receiving any water with perchlorate in it and never will. Copyright © 2007 Los Angeles Newspaper Group ***************************************************************** 55 Sydney Morning Herald: Uranium race hots up again - Xchange - Comment & Analysis - Business www.smh.com.au April 27, 2007 Areva blocks Paladin's chance at conquering Summit, in bid to win marketing rights. FRENCH nuclear group Areva has gone on the offensive in its bid to obtain lucrative marketing rights over Summit Resources' portion of the Valhalla/Skal uranium joint venture in Queensland. Areva paid $126 million to snap up a 10.46 per cent stake in Summit from institutional investors, just one day before Paladin's final $1.2 billion scrip bid will close. Areva is upset that Summit reneged on a deal for it to take an 18 per cent stake in the company - and obtain two-thirds of Summit's marketing rights over Valhalla - after Paladin raised its offer last week. "Areva decided it needed to take action to protect its position after this unexpected development," Areva Australia's managing director, Philippe Portella, told Xchange. Paladin had indicated it was not keen to give away the marketing rights or to have Areva on its register, although it was open to an alternative alliance with the French company. Portella said Areva didn't plan to buy any more Summit shares for the time being. But it has effectively blocked Paladin from achieving compulsory acquisition of Summit, since Areva indicated it didn't plan to accept the offer for its stake. Paladin couldn't be reached for comment yesterday. It had received acceptances representing 34.3 per cent of Summit shares yesterday, but it is expected more will arrive at the last minute today. xchange@smh.com.au ***************************************************************** 56 PE: Democrats press for federal limits on rocket-fuel chemical in water supplies 10:00 PM PDT on Wednesday, April 25, 2007 By BEN GOAD and DAVID DANELSKI The Press-Enterprise WASHINGTON - Without a legal standard limiting the amount of rocket fuel in the nation's drinking water, pregnant women, infants and other people face significant health risks, Rep. Hilda Solis said Wednesday during a hearing on Capitol Hill. Solis, D-El Monte, and other members of the House Subcommittee on Environment and Hazardous Materials grilled officials from the Defense Department, the Environmental Protection Agency and others about the hazards of the rocket-fuel chemical perchlorate in drinking water and foods. Last month, Solis introduced a bill that would force the federal government to set a drinking-water limit for the chemical. In sufficient doses, perchlorate can impair thyroid function, which regulates metabolism and guides brain and nerve development in fetuses and babies, studies show. Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., has introduced similar legislation in the Senate. Together, the bills show that Democrats, who took control of Congress in January, are flexing their muscle on the perchlorate issue. "That's what our new majority brought to this -- a sense of urgency," said Democratic Rep. Albert Wynn, of Maryland, the subcommittee's chairman. Perchlorate is a component of rocket fuel and is used in munitions, flares, fireworks and other explosives. A U.S. Government Accountability Office study made public at Wednesday's hearing found 395 sites nationwide where perchlorate has contaminated drinking water, groundwater, sediment or soil. About half were in California and Texas. In cases where the source could be determined, 65 percent were attributed to the Defense Department and NASA. The chemical has tainted water supplies in Rialto, Colton, Glen Avon, Riverside, Redlands, San Bernardino and other Inland communities, prompting water agencies to clean up, dilute or stop using those sources. "Despite the widespread contamination of perchlorate and its impact on both public health and our water supply, the Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of Defense have engaged in a game of finger-pointing and delay," said Solis, who referred specifically to problems in Riverside and San Bernardino counties. She and other panel members suggested that the EPA wouldn't force Defense Department and NASA officials to conduct significant cleanups until an enforceable limit is set. The amount of perchlorate that causes harm still is debated. California health officials last year proposed a limit of 6 parts per billion of perchlorate in drinking water -- about one-fourth the amount EPA says is safe. However, the state has not acted on the proposal, California Department of Health Services spokeswoman Lea Brooks said. A U.S. Centers for Disease Control study published last fall found that women with lower iodide levels -- roughly a third of the U.S. female population -- can be affected by small amounts of perchlorate consumed in food and water. In Washington, Benjamin Grumbles, EPA assistant water administrator, said more research is needed before a decision can be made about enforcing standards. "The agency has placed a high priority on making a regulatory determination for perchlorate as soon as possible," Grumbles testified. "However, we want to ensure that any regulation presents a meaningful opportunity for health risk reduction." Alex Beehler, a Defense Department assistant undersecretary, rejected the suggestion that the military is not addressing perchlorate. The department has invested $114 million and initiated cleanup at several sites, he said. Reach Ben Goad at 202-661-8422 or bgoad@PE.com © 2007 Press-Enterprise Company ***************************************************************** 57 AU ABC: Ditching uranium policy 'critical' for SA. 26/04/2007. ABC News Online South Australian premier Mike Rann is on his way to Sydney to continue lobbying delegates ahead of tomorrow's Labor Party national conference. Mr Rann will be backing a move by federal Labor leader Kevin Rudd to scrap the party's 'no new uranium mines' policy. Mr Rann says he is hopeful he will have the numbers to overturn the policy. "I've been spending the last four or five days on the phone, I've also written to all of the delegates, arguing the case about why a change in the policy is good for Australia, it's critically important for South Australia," he said. But Greens MP Mark Parnell has warned that exporting more uranium from South Australia will create greater pressure for it to be returned as nuclear waste. "It is a cynical policy which seems to think that we can cherry-pick the most profitable parts of the industry but take no responsibility for dangerous waste and take no responsibility for weapons proliferation," he said. "It is certain that the rest of the world will increasingly look to Australia to become its nuclear waste dump and everyone in the Labor Party who votes for the proposal to relax the party's uranium rules is in effect voting for future radioactive waste dumps in this country." ***************************************************************** 58 KNDO/KNDU: GNEP Citing Period Closing Off Tri-Cities, Yakima, WA | KENNEWICK, Wash.- TRIDEC has just days to submit their final citing study on the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership at Hanford. The organization has until the end of the month to submit their citing study on the controversial plan. The proposal would bring a new reactor to the site, along with a fuel reprocessing station and laboratory. Supporters say Hanford is a prime site because of preexisting facilities like the FFTF. They hail it as the area's economic future after cleanup. Two public meetings on the issue brought out hundreds last month. DOE is expected to weigh those public comments and the TRIDEC feasibility report to make a decision. All content © Copyright 2000 - 2007 WorldNow and KNDO/KNDU. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 59 LasVegasNOW.com: Renewed Focus on Caliente Corridor for Nuke Dump Rail Line A top Yucca Mountain official says the Energy Department is refocusing plans for a cross-Nevada railroad to a national nuclear waste repository. That's after an Indian tribe decided not to let radioactive waste cross its reservation on the northern Nevada route dubbed the Mina corridor. Ward Sproat is the director of the Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management. He told a conference Wednesday in Washington that the department is back to focusing on the Caliente corridor. That's a 319-mile route that would be built from eastern Nevada across the state to the Yucca Mountain repository. It's got a projected cost of more than $2 billion. Sproat says the 280-mile Mina route might've been cheaper and faster to build -- since it would have used existing rail rights-of-way through old mining districts. (Copyright 2007 by The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.) ***************************************************************** 60 AU ABC: Leave uranium mining policy alone, Snowdon says ABC Northern Territory | Local News Thursday, 26 April 2007. 09:49 (AEST)Thursday, 26 April 2007. 09:49 The Northern Territory's Federal Member for Lingiari says he will be voting not to change Labor's three-mine policy at the party's national conference in Sydney tomorrow. Warren Snowdon says despite his efforts he expects the policy to be dumped. A number of Labor leaders are pushing for change, including Northern Territory Chief Minister Clare Martin. But Mr Snowdon says he represents the majority opinion in the Territory's Labor Party with his vote not to expand uranium mining. "As party president I saw it as important that I actually consult with the rank and file of the party to actually get a view from members to what they believe should happen," he said. "I ran five or six forums across the Northern Territory and at each one of those forums people expressed a very strong view that they didn't want the policy to change. "So that's the view I'll be expressing at the conference." ***************************************************************** 61 DOE: DOE Issues Two Draft National Interest Electric Transmission Corridor Designations April 26, 2007 WASHINGTON, DC – U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Secretary Samuel W. Bodman today announced the issuance of two draft National Interest Electric Transmission Corridor (National Corridor) designations. The Energy Policy Act of 2005 authorizes the Secretary, based on the findings of DOE’s National Electric Transmission Congestion Study (Congestion Study), to designate National Corridors. “These draft designations set us on the path to modernize our constrained and congested electric power infrastructure. They are a crucial step toward realizing President Bush’s goal of a modern, more efficient electric power delivery system,” Secretary Bodman said. “I am confident the Department’s actions will help facilitate the infrastructure growth necessary to meet the demands of our growing economy.” These draft National Corridors are comprised of two geographic areas where consumers are currently adversely affected by transmission capacity constraints or congestion. The proposed Mid-Atlantic Area National Corridor includes counties in Ohio, West Virginia, Pennsylvania, New York, Maryland, Virginia, and all of New Jersey, Delaware, and the District of Columbia. The proposed Southwest Area National Corridor includes counties in California, Arizona, and Nevada. These draft designations are being issued after months of careful study by DOE, which included close consideration of public comments on the Congestion Study, released by the Department last August. The Department recognizes the broad public interest in this process and, therefore, though not required by statute, is issuing draft designations in order to allow additional opportunities for review and comment by affected States, regional entities, and the general public. Within a National Corridor, transmission proposals could potentially be reviewed by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), which would have siting authority supplementing existing state authority. This would mean if an applicant does not receive approval from a State to site a proposed new transmission project within a National Corridor, the FERC may consider whether to issue a permit and to authorize construction. In the event of a FERC siting proceeding, the FERC must conduct a review under the National Environmental Policy Act, which would include analysis of alternative routes for that project, including route realignments necessary to avoid adverse effects on the environment, landowners, and local communities. A federal permit could empower the permit holder to exercise the right of eminent domain to acquire necessary property rights to build a transmission project. That authority could only be exercised if the developer could not acquire the property by negotiation, and even then, the authority would not apply to property owned by the United States or a State, such as national or state parks. The Department of Energy is issuing draft National Corridors in order to encourage a full consideration of all options available to meet local, regional and national demand, which includes more local generation, transmission capacity, demand response, and energy efficiency measures. DOE is not directing the construction of new transmission in a certain area, nor is it determining the route for any proposed transmission project. DOE is not asserting that additional transmission capacity is the only solution to resolve electricity problems in these regions. These draft National Corridors cover a sufficiently broad geographic area. They are designed to be large enough to help facilitate access to a range of possible generation sources that could serve the congested area and they preserve the options of State authorities and private companies to determine which generation sources are of principal interest. The draft National Corridors are broad enough to allow consideration of a range of potential transmission projects and routes by the appropriate transmission planning entities, siting authorities (e.g., State agencies and, under certain conditions, the FERC), and prospective transmission developers. A 60-day comment period will begin the day draft National Corridor designations are published in the Federal Register. During the comment period, DOE will confer with affected States and will hold the following three public meetings: DC metro area on May 15, 2007; San Diego, CA, on May 17, 2007; and New York, NY, on May 23, 2007. Additional information and a copy of the Federal Register notice are available at the National Interest Electric Transmission Corridors and Congestion Study. Media contact(s): Megan Barnett, (202) 586-4940 U.S. Department of Energy | 1000 Independence Ave., SW | Washington, DC 20585 1-800-dial-DOE | f/202-586-4403 ***************************************************************** 62 DOE: U.S. Department of Energy Announces 8th Annual Small Business Conference April 26, 2007 WASHINGTON, DC – The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) today announced that its Office of Small and Disadvantage Business Utilization will host its 8th Annual Small Business Conference, Exposition & Matchmaking Forum, June 26-28, 2007, at the Washington Hilton Hotel in Washington, DC. The Matchmaking Forum will provide over $1 billion in potential subcontracting opportunities in Fiscal Year 2007 through scheduled one-on-one meetings with procurement representatives from DOE’s prime contractors. “Because small businesses are the driving force of this economy, the Department of Energy and this Administration are committed to putting in place pro-growth policies that encourage enterprise and enhance economic growth,” Secretary Bodman said. “We want America to continue to be the best place in the world to conduct business. Small businesses play a key role in helping DOE to advance its mission and DOE’s Small Business Conference provides a forum to compete in DOE’s contracting market.” DOE is the second largest civilian purchaser, procuring over $23 billion in goods and services annually. DOE’s Office of Small & Disadvantaged Business Utilization will lead the Departments national outreach effort as outlined in President Bush’s Small Business Agenda. The Conference will provide insight and programs available to assist small businesses, small and disadvantaged businesses, women-owned, 8(A), HUBZone, veteran-owned and service-disabled veteran-owned businesses, to engage in DOE contracting opportunities. This year’s conference is co-sponsored by The Veterans Corporation, charged with creating and enhancing entrepreneurial business opportunities for Veterans, including those who are service-disabled. The Veterans Corporation is a 501(c) (3) organization. To register for the conference, visit: http://www.smallbusiness-outreach.doe.gov or call (888) 246-2460. President Bush has proclaimed April 22-28, 2007, as “Small Business Week,” signifying an ongoing commitment to honor small business owners and workers for their important role in ensuring that America remains the economic leader of the world. Additonal information on Small Business Week. Media contact(s): Julie Ruggiero, (202) 586-4940 U.S. Department of Energy | 1000 Independence Ave., SW | Washington, DC 20585 1-800-dial-DOE | f/202-586-4403 ***************************************************************** 63 Tri-City Herald: Study says vit plant may be able to treat some waste earlier Published Thursday, April 26th, 2007 ANNETTE CARY, HERALD STAFF WRITER The Department of Energy might be able to start treating some radioactive waste at Hanford's massive vitrification plant five years before it's in full operation, according to a new study. The Low Activity Waste Facility could begin operating as early as June 2014, even though the vitrification plant would not be ready to treat the most highly radioactive waste until February 2019. DOE has been considering an earlier start to the Low Activity Waste Facility at the $12.3 billion vitrification plant since 2005 as construction fell behind schedule. The legally binding Tri-Party Agreement requires the plant to be operating in 2011. The report released Wednesday will help DOE make the decision on whether to move forward with planning for the start of low-activity waste treatment before the completion of the rest of the plant, said Erik Olds, DOE spokesman. DOE commissioned the report done by CH2M Hill Hanford Group. It concluded that about 8 percent of the 42 million gallons of low activity tank waste can be treated between the early start of the Low Activity Waste Facility and the startup of the rest of the plant in 2019. That's out of a total of about 53 million gallons of radioactive and chemical waste being held in underground tanks, the oldest of them prone to leaking. The waste, which will be turned into a stable glass form at the vitrification plant, is left from the past production of plutonium for the nation's nuclear weapons program. An early start could have several advantages, the report said. "It reduces the risk to the environment from storing waste in the (single-shell tank) system," the report said. An earlier start to low activity waste treatment would free up about 4.7 million gallons of space in Hanford's newer double shell tanks. Hanford's old leak-prone single shell tanks are being emptied into the newer tanks, but they are nearing capacity and are expected to be full before the vitrification plant is in full operation. It also would ease the transition from construction to operations, the report said. "Because not all of the (vitrification plant) facilities would be commissioned at the same time, the size of the startup and operating crews would be smaller," the report said. That should make hiring and training specialized workers easier. It would provide early experience in operating the Low Activity Waste Facility, which might help DOE determine additional capacity it might need. The vitrification plant was not planned to be large enough to treat all the tank waste by legal deadlines and treating the larger volume of low activity waste will take longer than treating the high level radioactive waste. However, several challenges would have to be overcome for a split start to operations. Plans had called for waste to be sent first to the vitrification plant's Pretreatment Plant to separate waste into low activity and high level streams. Because the Pretreatment Plant will not be operating until 2019, a pretreatment system would have to be developed in the tank farms. DOE is considering a filtering system in the tanks followed by an ion exchange system outside the tanks. Setting up the system would cost $160 million to $220 million by rough estimates. Then the interim operations to separate and treat the waste would cost about $760 million, with none of the money in present budget projections. DOE plans to use mostly liquid waste for the potential earlier operations, simplifying the pretreatment process. Sludge in the tanks still would need to be separated in the Pretreatment Plant after it opens at the vitrification complex. An earlier start to low-activity waste treatment also would complicate construction and testing at the rest of the vitrification plant. "Radioactive waste processing operations within an active construction site will result in complex logistical and security issues which could affect the productivity of the construction work forces," the report said. The Pretreatment Plant and the High Level Waste Facility are expected to be under construction until 2015. Work at the Low Activity Waste Facility, the Analytical Laboratory and an array of support buildings is expected to be finished in 2012. However, they could not be used for treatment of glass until pretreatment facilities in the tank farm are ready under the current proposal. Some issues concerning environmental studies and treatment and disposal of secondary waste created by the Low Activity Waste Facility also would need to be worked out. In addition, changes to piping would be needed to get waste directly to the Low Activity Waste Facility and deal with secondary waste. The state of Washington, which regulates Hanford tank waste, is interested in looking at any options that get the waste treated earlier, said Laura Cusack, section manager of tank waste treatment for the state Department of Ecology, in a statement. However, it must have no detrimental impact to starting operations at the rest of the plant or on possible supplemental treatment, such as bulk vitrification, for some of the low activity waste, she said. She described the concept of an early start as "pre-conceptual." "There are many technical issues that have to be evaluated before the state can take a position," she said. Evaluating those issues should not come out of the current Hanford cleanup budget, she said. © 2007 Tri-City Herald, Associated Press & Other Wire Services ***************************************************************** 64 Tri-City Herald: Secretary Bodman: What's next for lab? Opinions Published Thursday, April 26th, 2007 Dear Mr. Secretary of Energy: We last wrote on Feb. 12, 2006, urging you to renew Battelle's contract to operate the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory in Richland. A week later, you announced plans to open the contract to competition instead. We hate to say we told you so, but our original recommendation is looking better all the time. In announcing the bidding process, James Decker, principal deputy director for the DOE's Office of Science, said a request for proposals should be released before summer. Summer 2006. Fourteen months later and still no RFP. Things aren't going so well. It didn't help that the three top federal officials at Hanford all announced their departures in recent months. The apparent difficulty in finding suitable replacements only increases the uncertainty. We're suffering a crisis in confidence, and a feeling of general malaise hangs over programs critical to the Northwest's environmental health and the nation's security. True, the outlook for some Hanford work has improved -- most notably the prospects for getting the vitrification plant back on track. But that's not enough to erase an oppressive uncertainty that's constantly wearing down morale at the site. We realize the troubles aren't all DOE's fault. Congressional bungling of the budget process has left many scientists with no idea whether their research will still be funded. But you can't blame Congress for the precariousness of PNNL's fate. Rumors are flying around the Tri-Cities that DOE is dragging its feet to give an edge to Battelle's would-be competitors. That kind of talk is to be expected under the circumstances. It's a bureaucratic bromide that speculation will fill any gap in information, and 14 months of waiting leaves an awfully big void. It's not a good sign that so many people believe your department is willing to play politics with something as important as a national laboratory's operations. It would be even more troubling to find out it's true. At this point, we're hoping that Sens. Patty Murray and Maria Cantwell, Rep. Doc Hastings and others in the Northwest's congressional delegation want the same answers we're looking for. A little political pressure could help clear the air. And, frankly, it's warranted. The decision to put the national laboratory's contract out for bid, coupled with the lengthy delay in issuing an RFP, affects every politician's constituents across the Northwest. It's a costly waiting game for Battelle, which is spending millions of dollars and assigning some of its best brain power to a competition that never comes. More importantly, those are resources that would otherwise be used to help solve problems in energy independence, environmental cleanup, national security and other critical concerns. Battelle's abilities aren't in question. The not-for-profit research firm has operated the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory for 40 years, winning hundreds of prestigious awards and garnering more than 1,200 patents in the process. The way this contract decision has been handled isn't fair to Battelle or PNNL's 4,100 employees. It's not fair to the community or the region. It's not much good for the nation, either. The points we raised when we wrote last year remain valid. Battelle's track record still makes it the logical choice for completing the task of replacing the 300 Area facilities with new lab space. And it's best positioned to ensure that the national lab's joint venture in biotechnology with Washington State University gets off to a solid start. We understand that competition can be an effective strategy for getting cheaper costs or improved performance for the taxpayer. But, as we argued 14 months ago, continuity, stability, rewarding excellence, building morale, retaining talent and maintaining focus are better strategies for PNNL. That's even more true today. If the RFP were released this week, DOE wouldn't reach a decision on PNNL's future before Battelle's contract expires in September. Since some sort of extension is inevitable, there's no good reason to wait to start negotiations with Battelle. But what's really needed is some long-term stability. We'd prefer another five-year contract extension, to be honest. We're confident the nation would be well served as a result. But if you're going ahead with this bidding process, get on with it. The longer the lab's fate is left in limbo, the greater the waste of this valuable national resource. Fourteen months and still no RFP? Battelle, its employees at PNNL and this community shouldn't have to wait any longer. We look forward to your reply. © 2007 Tri-City Herald, Associated Press & Other Wire Services ***************************************************************** 65 Inside Bay Area: Lab seeking to restore explosives testing By Mike Martinez, STAFF WRITER Article Launched: 04/26/2007 02:41:51 AM PDT TRACY ? A month after having its explosives permit rescinded, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory's Site 300 has resubmitted paperwork to the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District to raise the amount of outdoor explosives to 350 pounds per test day. The permit application, filed on April 6, said the lab anticipates using up to 350 pounds per day and up to 8,000 pounds per year of explosives for testing. "There is currently a need to perform open detonation (research and development) in amounts greater than the exemption threshold, in support of homeland security and national defense activities," according to the application. Among the dangerous materials expected to be found in the explosions are thallium and depleted uranium. Susan Houghton, a spokeswoman for the lab, said the amounts used in testing are "well below" standards set by the Environmental Protection Agency. She said they are continuing to work under their old permit which allows for a maximum test of 100 pounds a day and up to 1,000 pounds a year. "The ball is in their court," Houghton said. "We provided them with all the information. We hope they do a full public process. We think there has been a lot of misinformation out there; we think it's important for the public to hear the facts from the agency." Last November, Lawrence Livermore Laboratory was originally granted permission to expand its explosives testing from 1,000 pounds per year to 8,000 pounds per year. Following an appeals hearing in February, the air district rescinded the permits. Jamie Holt, a spokeswoman for the district, said they discovered there was additional information that was needed to fully understand the application before any final decision was made. She said the process has already begun for re-permitting and the air district has been receiving input "fromthroughout the nation," with most of the input opposing the expansion. "There will definitely be a robust public process," Holt said. "We definitely understand the public interest in this issue and will be certain to make sure the public has the opportunity to weigh in." Meanwhile, Site 300 was visited last week by federal officials in search of a home for a proposed National Bio and Agro-defense Facility to be built at Site 300. The facility, funded by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, would research and develop cures for life-threatening diseases affecting both humans and animals. Houghton said lab officials believe the visit "went extremely well." Gov. Arnold Schwarzeneggar, in an April 12 letter to the Secretary of Homeland Security Michael Chertoff, expressed his support for the facility being located in Northern California. "Housing the facility in Tracy will allow the NBAF to draw upon an almost unparalleled breadth and depth of academic expertise at the surrounding UC campuses and laboratories," Schwarzeneggar said. Mike Martinez can be reached at (209) 832-3947 or at mmartinez@trivalleyherald.com. © 2000-2006 ANG Newspapers | Privacy Policy ***************************************************************** 66 lamonitor.com: Study: In for another card The Online News Source for Los Alamos Panel calls new generation of warheads a prudent hedge The first of this two-part series examines a newly released independent evaluation of the Reliable Replacement Warhead Program. The second part will summarize the panel's concerns about the larger proposal, known as Complex 2030, of which the RRW is considered "the enabler." ROGER SNODGRASS Monitor Assistant Editor As the debate over the future of nuclear weapons enters the rapids of the new Congress, a report by the American Association for the Advancement of Science has provided competing viewpoints with plenty of fodder. "Panel says case not made for new warhead," read the headline for a story earlier this week by Associated Press writer H. Josef Hebert, the pre-eminent Washington national security reporter. When the study was released Tuesday, the nation's nuclear weapons chief Thomas D'Agostino "commended" the work and found it consistent with the National Nuclear Security Administration's plans to move forward with RRW. "Listeners hear what they want to hear," said Robert Selden, the first director of National Security at Los Alamos National Laboratory, now retired, who was a member of the AAAS study panel. "Reporters looking for something negative are surely going to find it." Selden was one of 13 members of a panel that drew largely upon veterans of the defense and nuclear weapons complex, but also included university professors and science policy experts. Selden said the report was complex but that his take on it was that it is very positive. "At the bottom line, it is positive about the prospects for RRW, as long as really good programs can be put in place to accomplish the goals that the RRW people have laid out," he said. The program's goals include reducing some of the perceived risks of the current stockpile stewardship program, increasing performance margins and maintenance and manufacturing efficiencies. In a teleconference just before the report was released on Capitol Hill, C. Bruce Tarter, director emeritus of Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory and chairman of the panel, summed up its conclusions as cautiously positive on the RRW going another step forward. "The view is that if we were in charge of the program or Congress, to use another metaphor, we would see another card." He said the panel thinks the project is "doable," but they would like to see what the numbers are that come out a proposed next phase of the engineering studies and costs estimates. On March 2, NNSA completed an earlier phase when it announced that Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory had been named the lead designer for the first RRW warhead in a competition with Los Alamos National Laboratory. Greg Mello, executive director of the watchdog Los Alamos Study Group, said the most important parts of the report are the ones that flag elements of the RRW that the panel found doubtful. "They were not impressed by the safety, security or cost benefits of the RRW, which have been some of the strongest selling points of the concept," Mello said. He called it a "both-and" type of program, because the report would require supporting both the new experimental warheads and the existing stockpile made up of legacy and refurbished warheads. "Substantial caution is appropriate," the report stated as an introduction to the panel's first finding, that the RRW concept "could lead to a final selected design that is certifiable without a nuclear test." These are two primary objectives for the weapon's concept, although the question of testing has also divided the ranks of supporters. Some have argued that an untested weapon, compared to the current stockpile of weapons that are based on tests, would not be dependable enough for military use. At the same time, the panel recommended that the first product of the program should undergo as rigorous a certification and demonstration process as any weapon in the current stockpile and "should incorporate other features that explicitly deal with the "untested" nature of the proposed warhead. They also call for an evaluation more independent and intensive than the traditional inter-laboratory peer review. © 2003 Los Alamos Monitor All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 this material is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. For more information go to: *****************************************************************