***************************************************************** 05/09/07 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 15.109 ***************************************************************** 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 Yonhap News: U.S. Treasury holds key to resolving N.K. banking dispu 2 US: Las Vegas SUN: Editorial: Enlightened energy effort 3 US: YubaNet.com: Legacy of Scientific Fraud Honed by Bush Administra 4 US: Business Week: McCain: U.S. must change energy policy 5 Reuters: U.S. says Russia can't alter missile shield plan 6 SSB: Russian Nuclear Forces 2007 7 Reuters: CIA did not focus enough on Khan network - researcher 8 Guardian Unlimited: U.N. Raises Doubts on Biofuels 9 UPI: Analysis: Pakistan's nukes may resurface 10 AFP: India tests nuclear-capable surface missile - NUCLEAR REACTORS 11 TheStar.com: Two sides crank up heat in nuclear power debate 12 Platts: Anti-nuclear parties dominant in Scotland after UK elections 13 US: Burlington Free Press: House offers up new twist on Vermont Yank 14 US: Oshkosh Northwestern: Point Beach nuclear unit back online 15 Energy Business Review: Cernavoda nuclear power plant achieves first 16 US: Rutland Herald: Vermont Yankee passes annual safety review 17 US: Rutland Herald: Vt. legislators pursue Yankee tax plan 18 US: Brattleboro Reformer: VY cries foul over new tax 19 US: Brattleboro Reformer: VY gets passing grade in annual safety rev 20 US: Daily Press: New nukes 21 Reuters: Finnish town votes against E.ON nuclear plant 22 UPI: India to U.S.: Free to pick energy allies 23 Prague Daily Monitor: Czech solar power plants post record output in 24 Business Report: Nuclear power 'part of the future' 25 US: Columbia Missourian: MU nuclear reactor security is already comp 26 US: Middletown Press: End is near for Connecticut Yankee 27 US: Petoskey News Review: Nuclear opponents call for Big Rock hearin 28 Times of India: Nuclear countdown NUCLEAR SECURITY 29 UPI: More nations join anti-nuclear terror plan NUCLEAR SAFETY 30 US: WNN: Military event revealed after over a year 31 BBC NEWS: Council u-turn on Litvinenko home 32 Guardian Unlimited: Charity criticises Gulf veterans' treatment NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE 33 Calgary Sun: Prof lauds storing nuclear waste on surface 34 US: DOE: DOE Offers $60 Million to Spur Industry Engagement in GNEP 35 US: Platts: Ux, TradeTech report uranium spot price rises to $120/po 36 THERECORD.COM | INSIDER: Reactor waste not safe 37 GSA: 20 years of Yucca Mountain research now available for scientifi 38 US: UPI: Nuke industry gets $60M for GNEP 39 US: Hemscott: Tritium in New York nuke plant sewage PEACE US DEPT. OF ENERGY 40 ScrippsNews: UC keeps hand in at Livermore 41 DOE: DOE Announces Additional Public Comment Meetings for Draft 42 KnoxNews: Uranium Center of Excellence: more than just a fancy name? 43 Hanford News: Hanford cleanup: Delay requested for tax decision - 44 Hanford News: University nuclear reactors tighten security 45 Hanford News: Audit doubts vit plant system 46 Tri-City Herald: Hanford budget discussion tonight 47 SF Chronicle: UC-led team to manage nuclear lab / University 48 Guardian Unlimited: UC Team Gets Livermore Contract 49 ContraCostaTimes.com: Livermore lab still in UC control 50 Guardian Unlimited: Atty: Former Lab Worker to Be Charged 51 # People's Defender: A Piketon update and clarification 52 lamonitor.com: Bechtel, UC chosen for Livermore contract 53 sacbee.com: UC will remain major player at lab - ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** FULL NEWS STORIES ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** 1 Yonhap News: U.S. Treasury holds key to resolving N.K. banking dispute The U.S. Treasury holds the key to resolving a North Korean banking dispute, an unexpected stumbling block to implementing a denuclearization deal that would remove nuclear weapons and programs from the communist nation, officials here said Tuesday. The Associated Press reported from Hong Kong that Pyongyang last week specifically asked an American bank to transfer US$25 million out of Macau to another country. The Treasury was expected to make a decision by as early as Thursday, it said. At the State Department, spokesman Sean McCormack said the North Koreans were still working with their bankers on finding a solution. "We have not been informed that they have found the solution. We will stay tuned," he told reporters. The spokesman added the final decision rests with the Treasury. "Any decisions with respect to how the solution intersects or does not intersect with the rules of the financial system are going to be made by the Department of Treasury," he said. But Molly Millerwise, Treasury's spokesperson, denied the report. "The U.S. Treasury Department is not aware of any such request from North Korea to use a U.S. bank to transfer funds," she said in an e-mail to Yonhap. Banco Delta Asia (BDA), a small bank in Macau, froze the $25 million after the U.S. accused it of laundering money North Korea pockets through illicit financial activities ranging from counterfeiting of American currency to smuggling of narcotics and contraband. In March, the Treasury issued a ruling to prohibit U.S. banks from doing business with BDA. The Macanese bank then unblocked the funds, allowing account holders to make withdrawals. The unfreezing of the accounts was intended to bring North Korea back to a six-nation forum and commit it to a denuclearization agreement that would eventually dismantle Pyongyang's atomic weapons and program. But North Korea now insists that it wants to transfer the money to other countries, possibly Russia and Italy, to verify that they still can do regular business in the international financial system without being blacklisted. Pyongyang's request is for an American bank to become in "intermediary," a delivery vehicle between BDA and a bank in another country. But Section 311 of the U.S. Patriot Act, the legal basis for prohibiting U.S. business with BDA, does not allow such a transaction. A source close to the negotiations, however, speaking only on condition of anonymity, would not rule out the possibility. "I think we need to wait and see," the source told Yonhap when asked if there were ways to work around Section 311. WASHINGTON, May 8 (Yonhap News) Posted on : May.9,2007 09:10 KST © 2006 The Hankyoreh Media Company. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 2 Las Vegas SUN: Editorial: Enlightened energy effort Today: May 09, 2007 at 7:21:1 PDT Racing to build a better bulb as Congress discusses setting a lighting-efficiency standard E nvironmentalists and light-bulb manufacturers are working on a bright idea that, if Congress adopts it, could create a national lighting standard that saves energy and phases out conventional incandescent bulbs in 10 years. According to a story in the weekend edition of The Wall Street Journal, the new rule probably would be a two-stage standard that would require bulbs that use 30 percent less electricity than current bulbs in five years and those that use 75 percent less electricity in 10 years. The proposal could be included in energy legislation that the Senate is to consider at the end of the month. The eventual requirement would mean using compact fluorescent bulbs, which last longer and use less electricity than the standard incandescent bulb. Despite this advantage, fluorescent bulbs cost more at the time of purchase - $2 to $3 each as compared with standard bulbs, some of which can be bought for less than 50 cents. The Senate Energy Committee has estimated that trading standard bulbs for fluorescent ones could save about $18 billion in electricity costs annually and could vastly reduce the demand on coal-fired power plants, which supply about half of the nation's electricity, the Journal reports. Still, there are significant hurdles to clear. Most consumers balk at the purchase price of fluorescent bulbs - even though they can recoup those costs in as little as six months - and many prefer the incandescent bulb's softer lighting quality. As a result, only about 6 percent of U.S. households have made the switch to fluorescents. The lighting industry will need to make improvements, such as developing a fluorescent bulb that costs less and works better in reading lamps. It also must create bulbs that will work with the existing decorative or track-lighting systems in many American homes. Such work is under way - as is research by manufacturers of standard light bulbs to create a more energy-efficient incandescent bulb. Regardless of who wins the race to build a better bulb, this is how more industries ought to work. Reducing our nation's dependence on fossil fuels and our overall energy consumption is going to take cooperation and commitment among industry competitors - and an acknowledgment that government sometimes should play a role in helping set these standards. All contents copyright 2005 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 3 YubaNet.com: Legacy of Scientific Fraud Honed by Bush Administration Julie MacDonald Scandal Symptomatic of Broad Pattern of Mendacity By: Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility Published: May 9, 2007 at 07:58 Email this article Since its inception, the Bush administration has manipulated and misrepresented the findings of its own scientists to frustrate the intent of the Endangered Species Act, according to testimony released today by Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER). The testimony is part of an oversight hearing today conducted by the House Natural Resources Committee. The hearing addresses the abrupt resignation of Interior Deputy Assistant Secretary Julie MacDonald in the wake of an Inspector General report finding that she falsified agency scientific findings and improperly supplied internal drafts of agency documents to the Farm Bureau and property rights groups. According to the PEER testimony: * Manipulation of scientific Endangered Species Act (ESA) documents has become pervasive with hundreds of agency biologists reporting their work being revised for political reasons; * Former Interior Secretary Gale Norton fostered a "lie to succeed" culture in which managers who commit scientific fraud get promoted while scientists who persist in disclosing inconvenient facts are marginalized or fired; and * The pattern of mendacity extends beyond the Interior Department, as fishery biologists working on ESA issues within the National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) relate routine political interference with scientific assessments. "Julie MacDonald was not a lone rogue; she was merely following orders to keep the Administration's friends comfortable," stated PEER Executive Director Jeff Ruch, who appears on a panel with Deputy Interior Secretary Lynn Scarlett. "If the Bush administration will not provide enforceable pledges to faithfully reflect the environmental science produced by the public agency specialists, then Congress should step in." PEER is proposing that Congress require written justification of all changes made by political appointees and commission an independent review to identify and correct past acts of scientific fraud. In addition, PEER is urging Congress to strengthen whistleblower laws so as to provide scientists with sorely lacking legal protection and review cases of scientists whose careers have been destroyed for political reasons. "Interior has yet to correct any of the scientific errors that its own Inspector General found," added Ruch, noting that unless Interior cures the defective ESA findings, the courts will be required to address them one-by-one in citizen suits brought by conservation groups. "Starting with Julie MacDonald, this revival of congressional oversight will hopefully mean that serial political manipulators will be held to account." Copyright © 2007 YubaNet.com, all rights reserved. Email your ***************************************************************** 4 Business Week: McCain: U.S. must change energy policy The Associated Press May 9, 2007, 1:38PM EST By COREY WILLIAMS PLYMOUTH, Mich. Republican presidential candidate John McCain said Wednesday that America's current energy policy needs revamping with more focus placed on alternative forms of energy. "We need to increase our technology of hybrid cars," McCain told reporters after a campaign stop at a restaurant in the Detroit suburb of Plymouth. "We need to increase our use of ethanol and all kinds of alternative fuels, and we need to go back to nuclear power." McCain's comments came a day after the U.S. Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee approved a plan that would raise the nationwide fleet fuel economy average by about 40 percent from current levels of 25 miles per gallon for cars and trucks. McCain was asked about the committee's action, but said he was not aware of it. On Monday, Democratic presidential hopeful Barack Obama also made a stop in Michigan, using a speech to the Detroit Economic Club to chastise U.S. auto industry leaders for being slow to react to hybrid cars and alternative fuel technology. Obama proposed a plan that would give health care assistance to domestic automakers in return for development of fuel-efficient hybrid vehicles. McCain was making his second campaign stop in Michigan in less than a month. The Arizona senator wrapped up a two-day swing through the state on April 13. On that trip he spoke at a Kalamazoo County Republican Party fundraiser after campaigning in Oakland County's West Bloomfield Township and in the southwestern Michigan community of Holland. Copyright 2000-2007 by The McGraw-Hill Companies Inc. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 5 Reuters: U.S. says Russia can't alter missile shield plan Wed May 9, 2007 9:57AM EDT PARIS (Reuters) - Russia cannot alter a U.S. plan to set up a missile defense system in nearby Poland, a senior U.S. official said in an interview published on Wednesday that is likely to stoke Russia's anger over the project. Washington has enraged Russia and unsettled some European allies with a plan to deploy 10 missile interceptors in Poland and radar in the Czech Republic which it says would help shield Europe from possible missile attack by nations such as Iran. In an interview with French newspaper Le Monde, U.S. Undersecretary of State Nicholas Burns said Russian fears were unjustified as the project was purely defensive and could not be modified to launch attack missiles. "The Russians need to review their information. And understand that they are not part of NATO, so they are not in a position to modify this project," Burns was quoted as saying. "We have listened to them but they have been so intransigent in their position that most NATO allies now support our proposal," he added. While European concerns about the missile shield appear to be easing, Russia has yet to be persuaded by U.S. arguments that the system is no threat to its nuclear deterrent and has so far rebuffed U.S. invitations to cooperate on the system. Burns was speaking days before a planned visit to Moscow by U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice on May 14 and 15 where she is expected to seek to ease tension with Russia over the missile shield, Kosovo and other issues. © Reuters 2007. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 6 SSB: Russian Nuclear Forces 2007 Strategic Security Blog A project of the Federation of American Scientists (Updated May 9, 2007) At the beginning of 2007, Russia maintained approximately 5,600 operational nuclear warheads for delivery by ballistic missiles, aircraft, cruise missiles and torpedoes, according to the latest Nuclear Notebook published in the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists. The Russian Notebook, which is written by Hans M. Kristensen of FAS and Robert S. Norris of NRDC, breaks down the Russian arsenal into roughly 3,300 warheads for delivery by strategic weapon systems and 2,300 warheads for delivery by tactical systems. In addition to operational warheads, the Notebook estimates that Russia has a stock of roughly 9,400 warheads intended as a reserve or awaiting dismantlement, for a total stockpile of approximately 15,000 warheads. The Importance of Arms Control (Section below updated May 9, 2007) Russia and the United States apparently have decided not to extend the START agreement when it expires in 2009. The demise of the treaty will effect the number of warheads deployed on Russia's ICBMs. Russia has already announced its intention to change the warhead loading on its Topol-M ICBMs. Had START been extended, Russia's arsenal of deployed strategic nuclear warheads would likely have declined to approximately 2,040 warheads by 2015 and roughly 1,590 warheads by 2030. Once the treaty expires, however, and the Topol-M is equipped with three warheads (MIRVs, Multiple Independently Targeted Reentry Vehicles), the arsenal will reach roughly 2,210 warheads in 2015. Deployment of the silo-based Topol-M apparently will finish in 2020, in which case the warhead level will fall to approximately 1,810 warheads by 2030, depending on missile production rates for the mobile version of the Topol-M (see figure below). Russian Strategic Nuclear Warheads 2006-2030 The expiration of START in 2009 will have a significant impact on the future warhead level on Russia's ICBMs. Beyond 2015, plans for the Russian force structure are uncertain. This projection a total of 84 Topol ICBMs on duty in 2015, and deployment of up to eight Borei-class SSBNs with 6 MIRVs per missile. The lower chart assumes up to 3 MIRVs on both silo and mobile Topol-M. Col. Gen. Nikolai Solovtsov, the commander of the Russian Strategic Rocket Forces (SRF), declared in December 2006 and again in May 2007 that Russia will begin to substitute the single warheads on Topol-M ICBMs with multiple warheads after START expires in 2009. He did not specify if that includes both the silo-based and mobile Topol-Ms. If only the silo-based Topol M is MIRVed, then Russia would have some 2,140 strategic warheads in 2015 and approximately 1,690 warheads deployed by 2030. Current plans will leave Russia with roughly 146 ICBMs by 2015, a significant reduction from the 489 it had at the beginning of 2007, less than half of what the United States plans to have at that time. Russian planning also takes into consideration the Chinese posture, and the U.S. Air Force reported in March 2006 that work may be underway on a new strategic missile that can be deployed in both land-based and sea-based versions. Russia apparently no longer believes it is necessary to maintain the same number of nuclear warheads as its potential adversaries, but still sees a significant strategic force as necessary. “For us,” President Vladimir Putin said in May 2006, “this idea of maintaining the strategic balance will mean that our strategic deterrence forces must be capable of destroying any potential aggressor, no matter what modern weapons systems this aggressor possesses.” A Need For Additional Arms Control Russia is currently, like the United States, making the decisions that will shape the long-term size and composition of its nuclear forces. Seventeen years after the Cold War ended, those decisions are still closely tied to the size and composition of the U.S. nuclear posture. Putin proposed in June 2006 that START be replaced with a new treaty, and warned that “the stagnation we see today in the area of disarmament is of particular concern.” Although talks are underway with Washington on how to administer the strategic relationship after 2009, START apparently will not be extended. The governments of both countries urgently need to articulate and decide on a new phase of arms control that will replace the open-ended, ad hoc nuclear planning of today with a framework for how to get to very low numbers with the medium-term goal of concluding the nuclear era. Background: Russian Nuclear Forces 2007 | Status of World Nuclear Forces | Posted by Hans Kristensen on April 13, 2007 12:00 PM | Permalink TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.fas.org/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/692 ***************************************************************** 7 Reuters: CIA did not focus enough on Khan network - researcher Tue May 8, 2007 7:26PM EDT WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The CIA had some knowledge of Pakistani nuclear scientist A.Q. Khan's proliferation activities while they were in progress but did not pay enough attention to them, a London-based researcher said on Tuesday. "There's no doubt that the CIA knew about some of Khan's activities at various stages of his proliferation" operation, said Mark Fitzpatrick, a former top U.S. non-proliferation official now with the International Institute of Strategic Studies think tank. "There's also no doubt that the CIA didn't give enough attention to this area of private sector proliferation in looking at Iran's nuclear development program over the years" because like other western intelligence agencies, it was more focused on state to state activities, he said. Fitzpatrick, briefing journalists on a new IISS report on Khan and nuclear black markets, added, however, that the report did not thoroughly examine or draw firm conclusions on the extent of the CIA's knowledge. In response, CIA spokesman Paul Gimigliano said: "The disruption of A.Q. Khan's proliferation network was a major success, one in which the CIA played a crucial role. To suggest otherwise is to ignore the facts. "As with so many other intelligence triumphs, this was the result of hard, careful, essential work over time," he added. BLACK MARKET BUSINESS Khan, an admired figure in Pakistan, was arrested in January 2004 for his central role in the black market that sold Pakistani nuclear weapons technology to Iran, North Korea and Libya and offered technology to Iraq and perhaps other countries. Although officially pardoned by President Pervez Musharraf, Khan remains under house arrest. Continued... © Reuters 2007. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 8 Guardian Unlimited: U.N. Raises Doubts on Biofuels From the Associated Press Wednesday May 9, 2007 3:16 AM By NICOLE WINFIELD Associated Press Writer ROME (AP) - Biofuels like ethanol can help reduce global warming and create jobs for the rural poor, but the benefits may be offset by serious environmental problems and increased food prices for the hungry, the United Nations concluded Tuesday in its first major report on bioenergy. In an agency-wide assessment, the United Nations raised alarms about the potential negative impact of biofuels, just days after a climate conference in Bangkok said the world had both the money and technology to prevent the sharp rise in global temperatures blamed in part on greenhouse gas emissions. Biofuels, which are made from corn, palm oil, sugar cane and other agricultural products, have been seen by many as a cleaner and cheaper way to meet the world's soaring energy needs than with greenhouse-gas emitting fossil fuels. European leaders have decided that at least 10 percent of fuels will come from biofuels like ethanol by 2020, and the U.S. Congress is working on a proposal that would increase production of biofuels sevenfold by 2022. With oil prices at record highs, biofuels have become an attractive alternative energy source for poor countries, some of which spend six times as much money importing oil than on health care. But environmentalists have warned that the biofuel craze can do as much or more damage to the environment as dirty fossil fuels - a concern reflected throughout the report, which was being released Tuesday in New York, by U.N.-Energy, a consortium of 20 U.N. agencies and programs. While saying bioenergy represents an ``extraordinary opportunity'' to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, it warned that ``rapid growth in liquid biofuel production will make substantial demands on the world's land and water resources at a time when demand for both food and forest products is also rising rapidly.'' Changes in the carbon content of soils and carbon stocks in forests and peat lands might offset some or all of the benefits of the greenhouse gas reductions, it said. ``Use of large-scale monocropping could lead to significant biodiversity loss, soil erosion and nutrient leaching,'' it said, adding that investments in bioenergy must be managed carefully, at national, regional and local levels to avoid new environmental and social problems ``some of which could have irreversible consequences.'' It noted that soaring palm oil demand has already led to the clearing of tropical forests in southeast Asia. In addition, the diversion of food crops for fuel will increase food prices, putting a strain on the poor, as evidenced by the recent steep rise in maize and sugar prices, the report said. ``Liquid biofuel production could threaten the availability of adequate food supplies by diverting land and other productive resources away from food crops,'' it said, adding that many of those biofuel crops require the best land, lots of water and environment-damaging chemical fertilizers. While bioenergy crops can create jobs in impoverished rural areas where the bulk of the world's poor and hungry live, creating biofuels favors large-scale production, meaning small-scale farmers could be pushed off their land by industrial agriculture. It suggested that farm co-ops, as well as government subsidies, could help small-scale farmers compete. Such concerns have been raised by Greenpeace International and other environmental groups worried that the biofuel fad is being driven by big agricultural interests looking for new markets. ``More and more, people are realizing that there are serious environmental and serious food security issues involved in biofuels,'' Greenpeace biofuels expert Jan van Aken said. ``There is more to the environment than climate change,'' he said. ``Climate change is the most pressing issue, but you cannot fight climate change by large deforestation in Indonesia.'' Individual U.N. agencies have previously issued small-scale reports on biofuels, but they were largely optimistic and did not highlight negative consequences because they were not yet known, said Gustavo Best, vice chair of U.N.-Energy and a biofuels expert at the Rome-based U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization. But with the surge in interest by the private sector, the rise in commodity prices and an awareness of the strain on water supplies that has resulted from biofuel production, ``we now have to raise the red flags and say 'be careful, don't go too fast,''' he said in an interview. ``There are winners and losers,'' he said. That the report exists is something of a miracle, since there has long been opposition among U.N. member states - including OPEC, nuclear and other energy lobbies- to have any kind of international dialogue on energy. There is for example, no U.N. Millennium Goal for energy, and recent U.N. working documents on sustainable development continue to be very fossil-fuel oriented, Best said. The document is intended for governments to help them craft bioenergy policies that maximize the potential but minimize the negative impacts - even as the technology continues to change. ``We can't cross our arms and wait to have better data or better methodologies,'' Best said. ``We need to contribute to the discussion, but in a balanced way.'' Guardian Unlimited © Guardian News and Media Limited 2007 ***************************************************************** 9 UPI: Analysis: Pakistan's nukes may resurface United Press International - International Intelligence - Analysis - Published: May 9, 2007 at 1:57 PM By CLAUDE SALHANI UPI International Editor WASHINGTON, May 9 (UPI) -- The black-market nuclear network established by the father of Pakistan's nuclear program, A.Q. Khan, broken up in 2004, may be dormant but could resume operations in the future, according to a just-released report by the London-based International Institute for Strategic Studies. The IISS study found no evidence to indicate that Pakistan sanctioned or encouraged the sales of nuclear technology and equipment to Iran, Libya and North Korea as a means to fund its own nuclear program. The report by Mark Fitzpatrick, a former U.S. deputy assistant secretary of state for non-proliferation, found that Khan ran a black-market operation beyond the reach of the Pakistani government. However, the truth behind Khan's activities is unlikely to ever be fully revealed. "Pakistan would never allow any foreign intelligence organization to question Dr. Khan," said Fitzpatrick. He added that the CIA had some knowledge of Khan's proliferation activities while they were in progress, yet did not pay enough attention to them. "There's no doubt that the CIA knew about some of Khan's activities at various stages of his proliferation," Fitzpatrick told a group of journalists in Washington. "There's also no doubt that the CIA didn't give enough attention to this area of private sector proliferation in looking at Iran's nuclear development program over the years." The CIA, much like other Western intelligence services, was more focused on state-to-state activities rather than on individuals, like A.Q. Khan's network, said Fitzpatrick. Fitzpatrick, the lead author of a dossier revealing the activities of the A.Q. Khan network, stated that Khan's sales to Libya, for example, "were almost exclusively private business transactions, beyond state control." The centrifuges that Khan's black-market operation sold to Libya were produced in Malaysia, Turkey, Europe and South Africa and shipped via Dubai, in the United Arab Emirates, according to the report. But given the control Pakistan maintains over its nuclear technology it is hard to imagine that Khan did not enjoy the protection, if not the outright support of Pakistan's intelligence services -- the ISI -- who were known to be supportive of the Taliban in Afghanistan and other radical Islamist organizations, such as Osama bin Laden's al-Qaida. However, Fitzpatrick's report identified some "gray areas." It remains questionable whether prior to Sept. 11, 2001, Pakistan's government did not have knowledge of Khan's illicit activities or to what degree certain groups within the Pakistani government did not facilitate Khan's nuclear proliferation activities. Soon after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks on the United States, Washington communicated to Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf -- in no uncertain terms -- to stop Pakistan's support of Islamist groups. In an interview with Pakistan's Dawn newspaper, Fitzpatrick said that former Pakistani army chief Gen. Aslam Beg "encouraged" the Khan network's sales to other countries. "Ego, money, nationalism and a sense of Islamic fraternity" motivated Khan and his supporters to sell nuclear technology to other Muslim countries, he said. "Different motivations in different cases." Fitzpatrick said in his report that he did not think Pakistan sold its nuclear technology in order to raise money for its nuclear program. Additionally, Fitzpatrick also found no link between Khan's network of nuclear proliferators and the terrorist group responsible for the Sept. 11 attacks on the World Trade Center in New York and the Pentagon just outside Washington. Although Khan was removed from Pakistan's nuclear program in January 2004 and placed under house arrest by President Musharraf, he remains a very popular and revered figure in Pakistan. However, despite an official pardon from Musharraf, Khan remains under house arrest. Following Khan's arrest, Washington declared that the network had been shut down. But according to Fitzpatrick's report published by the IISS, it is believed that some of Khan's associates have escaped law-enforcement attention and "may resume their black-market business." According to Fitzpatrick, Khan established a procurement network to keep Pakistan's nuclear program operational. Fitzpatrick said the Khan network was made up of about 50 members that included operators from Dubai, Turkey, Malaysia, Switzerland and Germany, as well as from Pakistan. Given the strong demand for nuclear technology by governments as well as from terrorist groups, the possibility of Khan reactivating his black-market network remains a distinct possibility. -- (e-mail: Claude@upi.com) ***************************************************************** 10 AFP: India tests nuclear-capable surface missile - Wed May 9, 3:17 AM ET BHUBANESWAR, India (AFP) - India on Wednesday successfully tested a nuclear-capable ballistic missile from a site in the eastern state of Orissa, defence sources said. The test of the Prithvi-1 (Earth 1) surface-to-surface missile took place at Chandipur-on-sea, about 200 kilometers (125 miles) northeast of Orissa's state capital Bhubaneswar. The 8.5-metre-long (28-foot) missile -- which can carry a one-tonne conventional or nuclear warhead -- can travel 150 kilometres in five minutes and has a range of up to 250 kilometres. It is designed for battlefield use against troops or armoured formations. An official at the government's Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) told AFP on condition of anonymity that the test was "part of a continued effort to improve the indigenously-developed missile." Nuclear-capable India and Pakistan -- which have fought three wars, two of them over the disputed Himalayan territory of Kashmir -- routinely carry out missile tests and normally notify each other in advance. The Prithvi is India's first indigenously-built ballistic missile, and one of five being developed by New Delhi, along with the Agni, Trishul, Akash and Nag. Two other variants of the Prithvi, with a strike range of between 250 and 350 kilometres, will be handed over to the navy and air force once tests are completed. Last month, India tested the Agni-III, an intermediate range ballistic missile which can reach the Chinese cities of Beijing and Shanghai. Copyright © 2007 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 11 TheStar.com: Two sides crank up heat in nuclear power debate Energy sector gets a big boost, although critics have their own pre-election plans May 09, 2007 04:30 AM Tyler Hamilton Energy Reporter The debate over nuclear power is heating up in Ontario, with both sides preparing campaigns aimed at swaying public opinion as a provincial election looms. Nuclear proponents got a boost yesterday with the release of a report from the Society of Energy Professionals, whose 7,000 members – scientists and engineers who work in Ontario's energy sector – recommended that the province build 1,500 megawatts worth of new nuclear capacity beyond the 1,000 megawatts already targeted by the government. Meanwhile, environmental groups such as WWF-Canada, Greenpeace and the Pembina Institute are gearing up for a battle. Media conferences and "lunch-and-learn" sessions with politicians and bureaucrats will be held over the coming weeks to highlight the waste-disposal risks and high costs of going nuclear, and the benefits of conservation and renewable energy. "The coming election is going to be key and we're going to make sure nuclear is an issue," said Keith Stewart, a climate change analyst for WWF-Canada. "I think you'll be hearing a lot more about this on the airwaves soon." The McGuinty government came under pressure yesterday after it was revealed in the Toronto Star on Sunday that Ontario Power Generation has proposed to the nuclear regulator a plan to build new reactors totalling 4,800 megawatts of capacity – nearly five times what the government is targeting. Nuclear operator Bruce Power has proposed another 4,000 megawatts of new reactors in similar regulatory filings. At Queen's Park, Premier Dalton McGuinty reiterated that he plans to hold the line on the amount of nuclear power capacity in the province, now about 14,000 megawatts, but said more than 1,000 megawatts of new reactors may be needed if planned refurbishments of existing units are deemed too risky and expensive. Environmentalists argue that OPG and Bruce have no desire to refurbish old reactors, but would rather build new ones. Andrew Muller, president of the Society of Energy Professionals, said Canada's track record with nuclear is what matters most. "Nuclear power has been around for 40 years in Ontario. It's safe, it's clean, and we've had a very good experience with it." His organization is proposing that a combination of increased nuclear and renewable energy development be used to reduce dependence on coal and other fossil fuels, including natural gas. It's also strongly urging the government to let OPG into the wind-energy business to boost development of the renewable resource, particularly in areas where it's possible to locate wind turbines around existing and new hydroelectric facilities. Walking the talk, the government announced yesterday that Queen's Park is reducing the electricity it uses for air conditioning by switching to a deep lake water-cooling system. The Ministry of the Environment's head office will also be getting its electricity from Bullfrog Power, a "green" electricity retailer whose customers philosophically oppose both nuclear and coal power. "It's good that one part of the government is rejecting nuclear, but they should be talking to their colleagues over at the Ministry of Energy," said Stewart. With a file from Robert Benzie © Copyright Toronto Star online since 1996 | ***************************************************************** 12 Platts: Anti-nuclear parties dominant in Scotland after UK elections London (Platts)--7May2007 The Scottish National Party, which has pledged to build no new nuclear power plants in Scotland, has become the largest party in the Scottish devolved parliament after UK elections Thursday. The SNP took 47 seats in the Scottish parliament compared with 46 for the governing Labour party, but this falls well short of the 65 seats needed for a majority. The SNP is now likely to form a minority coalition with the Greens, who also have a strong anti-nuclear stance, but have just two seats. The SNP had been in talks with the Liberal Democrats, who until Thursday had been coalition partners with Labour in Scotland, but the Liberal Democrats said Monday that they did not plan to enter into coalition with the SNP as they did not support SNP demands for a referendum on full independence for Scotland. The Lib Dems have 16 seats and like the SNP and Greens, oppose any new nuclear power both in Scotland and across the UK. The Lib Dems had earlier ruled out any coalition with Labour. The Labour party, which came in just one seat behind the SNP, could seek to form a coalition with the Conservatives, who took 17 seats, and the Greens, but that would require compromises in a number of areas, not least nuclear power where Labour and the Conservatives have not ruled out new build. The result of the election in Scotland could be challenged, however, after former Labour minister Alan Wilson said Sunday he was discussing possible legal action over the result in the Cunninghame North constituency where he lost out to the SNP by just 48 votes, while over 1,000 ballot papers were deemed spoiled. ---Paul Whitehead, paul_whitehead@platts.com This is an excerpt. For more news, request a free trial to Platts Power UK at http://www.platts.com/Request%20More%20Information/index.xml?src=story or subscribe now at http://www.platts.com/infostore/product_info.php?cPath=2_31&products_id=57 Copyright © 2007 - Platts, All Rights Reserved ***************************************************************** 13 Burlington Free Press: House offers up new twist on Vermont Yankee tax burlingtonfreepress.com | Burlington, Vermont Published: Wednesday, May 9, 2007 By Terri Hallenbeck Free Press Staff Writer MONTPELIER -- House members offered up a different proposed tax Tuesday to pay for an energy-efficiency program -- one that still focuses on Vermont Yankee but in a way that proponents say should defuse complaints about an earlier Senate plan to tax some of the nuclear power plant's profits. The new plan nonetheless drew fire from the plant's owner, Entergy Corp., and the Douglas administration. The proposal would tax Entergy at just over one-half cent per kilowatt hour on the amount of power it generates at the Vernon plant. That would amount to about $25 million a year, a hefty increase from the $4.5 million Entergy now pays. It's also significantly more than the $37 million over six years that the Senate's proposed tax on Vermont Yankee's profits would have generated, though House members said the per-kilowatt rate is likely to be lowered. The idea, said Rep. Shap Smith, D-Morristown, is to tax the nuclear power plant at the same rate the state plans to tax wind projects. "The reason we did this is because we heard Entergy was being treated differently," Smith said. Entergy spokesman Brian Cosgrove said Entergy is still being singled out, just by a different means. "There seems to be no end to the way it's presented," Cosgrove said. "The one thing consistent is it's a tax increase." Entergy reached a deal with the state in 2003 to tax the nuclear power plant based on its generation rather than property value because the state wanted tax stability as the plant's value decreased, Cosgrove said. Rep. Tony Klein, D-East Montpelier, argued that Entergy can't expect that tax to stay the same forever as the plant's increased power generation and storage of high-level nuclear waste have increased its value. "That's like adding a three-car garage," he said. "Wouldn't you love to have somebody tell you in 2003 you're going to pay the same property tax from here to eternity." The House plan would also tap $4.7 million that Efficiency Vermont is slated to receive in the next three years from a New England program designed to ensure future electric capacity. The new proposal was made in a six-person conference committee between the House and Senate conferees. Senate conferees are expected to respond today. "I'm not going to say no to it right now," said Sen. Richard McCormack, D-Windsor, although he indicated some discomfort with taxing wind and nuclear power. at the same rate. "I'm wondering why we would equate wind power, which is relatively benign, with nuclear, which is very dangerous." The House proposal didn't win over the Douglas administration. "What's changed?" Public Service Commissioner David O'Brien said. "You're raising their tax in a very short period of time." O'Brien noted that the tax is the third proposed means of paying for the energy-efficiency program. A tax on home heating oil was scrapped last month for lack of support in the Senate, then was replaced by the tax on Vermont Yankee profits. "The leadership seems to be desperately looking for an out," O'Brien said. Wind developers don't like the rate of just over one-half cent per kilowatt hour proposed by the House, saying it is high enough to discourage developers from coming to Vermont. Andrew Perchlik of Renewable Energy Vermont Inc. said three-tenths of a cent is more fair. That's the rate the Senate had set for taxing wind projects, and Klein said he's interested in lowering the rate the House set to meet it. Contact Terri Hallenbeck at 229-4126 or thallenb@bfp.burlingtonfreepress.com Copyright ©2007 Burlingtonfreepress.com All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 14 Oshkosh Northwestern: Point Beach nuclear unit back online Posted May 9, 2007 Point Beach Nuclear Plant Unit 1 returned to full power Wednesday morning, according to Nuclear Management Co. The unit was off line for 36 days for scheduled refueling and maintenance. Unit 1 was taken off-line on March 31 following 471 days of continuous operation. Point Beach Unit 2 continued to operate at 100 percent power throughout the Unit 1 refueling outage. The two unit Point Beach site generates 1,036 megawatts of electricity. Point Beach one of three Upper Midwest nuclear plants operated by Nuclear Management Co. of Hudson. Point Beach is owned by We Energies of Milwaukee. — Richard Ryman/Press-Gazette Contact us at 920-235-7700. thenorthwestern.com is a Gannett Company website. ***************************************************************** 15 Energy Business Review: Cernavoda nuclear power plant achieves first criticality - 8th May 2007 By Clare Watson Romanian utility Nuclearelectrica has revealed that, on May 6, 2007, unit two of its Cernavoda nuclear power plant achieved first criticality. The existing Cernavoda plant is the only nuclear facility in Romania and produces between 10% and 12% of the country's electricity. The plant uses CANDU reactor technology, which is comprised of a pressurized heavy water reactor (PHWR). Unit one of the Cernavoda plant produces 705.6MW of electricity and was finished in 1996. Nuclearelectrica said that, before the power levels of unit two's CANDU 6 reactor are increased, its main components and operating systems will be submitted to a series of low power tests. Unit two of the power plant was constructed through a joint venture between Canadian company Atomic Energy of Canada Limited and Italian firm Ansaldo. Nuclearelectrica said that the agreement was signed in 2003 and that commercial operation of the 655MW unit is expected to begin in September 2007. The Romanian utility said that the beginning of Cernavoda unit two's commercial operation will mark an important contribution to the security of Romania and the EU's energy supplies. Nuclearelectrica said that the unit would also save expense imports of primary resources from outside of Europe. According to Nuclearelectrica, the two Cernavoda units will cover almost 18% of Romania's total energy production and will contribute to the significant reduction of greenhouse gas emissions by producing clean and environmentally friendly power to Romania. Industry publication Platts has reported that units three and four of the Cernavoda nuclear plant are currently being constructed. ©2007 Business Review ***************************************************************** 16 Rutland Herald: Vermont Yankee passes annual safety review Rutland Vermont News & Information May 09, 2007 The Associated Press BRATTLEBORO -- The Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant operated safely last year with one exception, according to annual review by federal regulators. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission will hold a public meeting Monday in Putney to discuss the findings. "We have had very good performance for this cycle," said Rob Williams, spokesman for Vermont Yankee. "That's a credit to the safety focus of those who maintain and run Vermont Yankee." The one exception was a shipment of contaminated equipment to a nuclear power plant in Pennsylvania that exceeded U.S. Department of Transportation radiation limits. "No public radiation exposure occurred during the shipment because the package's surface was inaccessible to members of the public," the NRC said. "The condition had the potential to adversely affect personnel receiving the package or responding to an incident involving the package," the NRC wrote to Entergy in a March 2 letter. The NRC has planned a follow-up inspection to make sure the plant is complying with proper packaging methods. © 2007 Rutland Herald ***************************************************************** 17 Rutland Herald: Vt. legislators pursue Yankee tax plan Rutland Vermont News & Information May 9, 2007 By Louis Porter Vermont Press Bureau MONTPELIER — Legislators on Tuesday proposed a new way to fund an efficiency program designed to reduce the use of heating fuels in the state. However, the new plan would still rely on a tax imposed on Entergy Nuclear, the company that owns the Vermont Yankee nuclear plant. Under the new proposal, the power-generation tax Entergy Nuclear pays would be dramatically increased. That would replace a proposed tax on the plant's net revenue that appears in the original plan. The idea came about because the energy bill now being considered by a joint conference committee of House and Senate members contained a flat generation tax on wind projects. Lawmakers in the House suggested simply taxing Yankee at the same rate. Exactly what that rate would be is still being worked out — the House proposed a rate higher than that endorsed by the Senate. If Yankee's parent company were to be taxed at the higher rate, it would bring in roughly $12.9 million for the education fund and $12.9 million for the state's general fund annually. Some of the general fund money would be used for the new efficiency program designed to insulate homes and take other steps to reduce the use of heating fuels. The company now pays just less than $5 million in generation taxes, which were designed to offset state property taxes. Entergy officials had complained they were being singled out and treated differently than other power producers when lawmakers proposed a tax on revenue, House members said. Under the new proposal, the nuclear plant would be treated the same as a wind project, they said. "What we heard is 'why are you singling us out?'" said Rep. Shap Smith, D-Morrisville, a member of the joint committee. The new proposal would eliminate that worry, he said. But Entergy lobbyists said the tax violates a 2003 agreement with the state that the plant would pay a set tax on power generation of just less than $5 million a year. Whether you call it a waste storage tax, a revenue tax or an increase in the generation tax, it still means Entergy will pay more, they said. "This proposal is a direct attack on our agreement we made with the state in 2003," said Brian Cosgrove, an Entergy spokesman. "It's a tax increase no matter how you look at it," he said. But lawmakers said increasing the size of the generation tax — and tying it to the tax on wind projects — means the proposal is treating all large noncarbon pollution power generators equally and is not a new tax. Entergy has put a substantial amount of money into the plant to allow a 20 percent increase in its production and is making more money because of it, legislators said. That means the value and income of the plant has increased since the 2003 agreement. And if the plant were to be taxed as other taxpayers are on their property, it would pay more than it does currently, said Rep. Tony Klein, D-East Montpelier, a member of the conference committee. Sen. Virginia Lyons, D-Chittenden, said the proposal is worth looking at. "It puts Vermont Yankee on a level playing field with other large merchant generators, like wind," said Lyons, another member of the House and Senate combined committee. However, the exact tax rate must still be worked out. The House proposal is too high, and could prevent wind power projects from being built in Vermont, she said. Andrew Perchlik of Renewable Energy Vermont agreed. "If the state wants to promote wind power," it needs to use the Senate's lower proposed tax rate, he said, adding that the House proposal is "a kill wind tax." It is not really fair to compare a new wind power project that can sell all of the electricity it produces into the open market at higher rates, to Yankee, which has fixed-rate contracts for the majority of its output, Cosgrove said. Vermont gets about a third of its power from Yankee until its license expires or is renewed in 2012. Those agreements have meant that Vermonters have paid as much as $668 million less for electricity over the decade-long contracts than they would have if they bought power at market rates, Cosgrove said. Commissioner of Public Service David O'Brien said the new proposal is substantially the same as the proposed revenue tax, which he opposed. "They have simply re-cast it," he said. "I don't think anything has changed." "It still sends a chilling signal to the business community in Vermont and outside of it," O'Brien said. James Moore of Vermont Public Interest Group said Entergy has not been paying its fair share toward property taxes, and perhaps its generation tax rate should be higher than that for wind power projects. "At a minimum they should be on a level playing field. The fact that nuclear power produces nuclear waste means it should be taxed at an appropriately higher level," Moore said. But Rep. Joyce Errecart, R-Shelburne, a member of the House Natural Resources and Energy Committee, said the proposal is worrisome for another reason. In the past, the company has reached agreements with the state under which it was taxed, but if pushed, Entergy might go to court to un-do not only the new tax, but those old agreements as well, said Errecart, who is also a former state tax commissioner. Contact Louis Porter at louis.porter@rutlandherald.com. © 2007 Rutland Herald ***************************************************************** 18 Brattleboro Reformer: VY cries foul over new tax Lawmakers pursue climate change funds By ROSS SNEYD, Associated Press Wednesday, May 9 MONTPELIER -- Another proposal designed to pay for lawmakers' cherished global climate change initiative was unveiled Tuesday and, like the others, it would apply primarily to the Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant. Advocates said it was fair because it was based on an existing tax that Yankee already pays, although that would be restructured and greatly expanded. A Yankee executive said it was yet another example of lawmakers trying to extract money from a company that's already contributed heavily to energy conservation. Under the current draft, the tax would raise about $25 million a year, although another version of it would set the rate to generate about $15 million. Even though there are a lot of details yet to be worked out, including what the tax rate would be, the proposal did represent some significant progress on a bill that legislative leaders have identified as one of their top priorities. The new proposal was offered by members of the House who are negotiating a compromise bill with senators. It was the Senate that first proposed taxing Yankee to pay for an expansion of an energy efficiency utility. Finally, House members have endorsed the idea, although they have proposed a different way of raising the money. The new proposal calls for using an existing tax on the amount of electricity generated at Vermont Yankee, which raises about $4.5 million. It suggests charging roughly a half-penny for every kilowatt hour generated at the Vernon plant, although that's subject to further negotiation and may go down to a third of a cent. The tax was designed to mirror one that's been proposed for wind generating projects. Lawmakers want to tax wind generators at between a half a cent and a third of a cent for every kilowatt hour produced. "This, we believe, would be fair for wind and would be the same for Vermont Yankee," said Rep. Shap Smith, D-Morristown. Senators did not say whether they'd accept the proposal but they were clearly receptive to it. Yankee, though, was not receptive. "This is the third week of this," said Yankee executive Brian Cosgrove. "It's almost like there's a determination there to extract a new tax from Vermont Yankee." He argued that Yankee's owner, Entergy Nuclear, already has contributed to an energy conservation fund, paid for the right to expand the amount of energy it produces, and gives Vermont utilities a deal on electricity that's about a 50 percent discount from current market rates. But advocates say the plant is more valuable now than it was when many of those deals were struck and it's appropriate to tax it the same as wind, which also does not produce climate-damaging carbon. The money would be used to expand the Efficiency Vermont conservation utility. It now promotes electricity conservation. The expansion would enable it to work with property owners to reduce their heating fuel consumption. Copyright © 2006 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This ***************************************************************** 19 Brattleboro Reformer: VY gets passing grade in annual safety review BRATTLEBORO, VT By BOB AUDETTE, Reformer Staff Wednesday, May 9 BRATTLEBORO -- Vermont Yankee is operating in a safe manner, according to a press release from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. "Overall, the Vermont Yankee Plant operated safely during 2006," it reads. On the evening of May 14, representatives from the NRC will explain how the agency came to its conclusion during a public meeting at the Quality Inn on Putney Road at 6 p.m. At the meeting, an annual event, NRC staff and Entergy representatives will discuss the safety assessment, which covers the period from Jan. 1 to Dec. 31, 2006. After representatives from the NRC and Entergy discuss the safety assessment, NRC staff will make themselves available to answer questions from the public about the performance of Vermont Yankee, as well as NRC's role in providing plant oversight. The public is encouraged to participate, said Neil Sheehan, spokesman for the NRC. "We have had very good performance for this cycle," said Rob Williams, spokesman for Vermont Yankee. "That's a credit to the safety focus of those who maintain and run Vermont Yankee. We have a very good combination here of good people, good processes and good equipment and we continually work to improve all areas with safety as the highest priority." The NRC uses a color-coded system -- green, white, yellow and red -- to signify the status of safety findings. "With one exception, there were no inspection findings for the plant that were identified as greater than 'green' at this time," according to the press release. That one exception was flagged "white" after a shipment from Vermont Yankee to a nuclear power plant in Pennsylvania was found to have exceeded U.S. Department of Transportation radiation limits. According to the press release, a package containing a contaminated control rod crusher/shearer had radiation readings that exceeded safety limits. However, "no public radiation exposure occurred during the shipment because the package's surface was inaccessible to members of the public." "The condition had the potential to adversely affect personnel receiving the package or responding to an incident involving the package," wrote NRC staff in a March 2 letter to Entergy. In response to its white finding, the NRC has scheduled a follow-up inspection for 2007 to insure proper packaging procedures are being followed. Routine inspections are performed by two NRC resident inspectors who are assigned to the plant. They are supplemented by additional inspection staff from the NRC's Region I office in King of Prussia, Pa. This year, inspectors are expected to evaluate the installation of an on-site dry cask facility to store spent fuel. They will also be assessing area emergency planning, radiological safety and Vermont Yankee's problem identification and resolution program. The performance review does not include information on the physical protection of the plant as that information is exempt from public disclosure. That was sent to Entergy in a confidential letter. Over the next 12 months, the NRC will perform a variety of safety inspections of the plant. Those inspections include an evaluation of the plant's fire safety programs, a check on the plant's radiation monitoring instruments and its protective equipment and an emergency preparedness drill scheduled for October. Bob Audette can be reached at raudette@reformer.com or 802-254-2311, ext. 273. ***************************************************************** 20 Daily Press: New nukes Opinion Today Hampton Roads, Virginia - May 10, 2007 12:42 AM Adding reactors in Virginia is a welcome development May 9, 2007 The prospect of a new nuclear reactor at Dominion Resources' North Anna plant is good news. Not unmitigated good news, of course. But on the whole, a welcome development, for many reasons. A growing Virginia is demanding more electricity, and nuclear plants are a reasonable way to provide the power. And it's better that that juice should come from in-state than that Virginia should depend on out-of-state sources that may be less reliable or efficient than Dominion. Additional generation capacity at home will reduce the nation's reliance on imported natural gas. And anything that will reduce Virginia's reliance on dirty, noxious, coal-fired plants to meet its power needs is a blessing. Coal plants as we know them are foul, and clean coal-fired plants are still a pipe dream. Coal-burning plants spew pollution into our air - including mercury - that ends up in our soil and water, in our wildlife and in our lungs. That pollution causes disease and death. And the plants are the backbone of Dominion's existing electricity generating capacity. Nuclear power, in contrast, is clean. And nuclear power is relatively cheap to produce - especially if you factor in the huge environmental costs of burning fossil fuels. Nukes are not without their downside. The biggest is spent fuel, which will remain dangerous for eons to come. The nation has balked at making provisions for that fuel, and that has to change. Too, there is the potential, however small, for disaster, which helps account for why no plants have been built since the 1979 accident at Three Mile Island. And the discovery of diagrams of American nuclear plants among al-Qaida caches supplied a new worry: They could be a target for terrorists. There is much Dominion can and should do to make its new reactor better protected against such attacks than its old ones. But critics are skeptical about whether the Nuclear Regulatory Commission has stepped up to mandate the kind of protection of nuclear plants that seems appropriate post-Sept. 11, 2001. That leaves it up to public to insist that Dominion incorporate into the new reactor the lessons learned from recent history - whether the government requires it or not. The stars are aligning in favor of nuclear power. The burdensome permitting process is being streamlined. Dominion has started the process of getting a site permit for new reactors at North Anna, and the next step will be a construction and operating license, when (and if) Dominion decides to go ahead with the first one (the second will probably be a good ways off). The General Assembly agreed to give Dominion a financial incentive to develop nuclear capacity, and that legislative lift is helping propel it forward - the most recent step, last week, was placing a big order for reactor parts. The nation's awareness of the downside of dependence on fossil fuel - environmental, financial, and in terms of national security - is providing additional impetus. It cannot be said too often: Adding supply will be only part of the solution to the nation's energy needs. Controlling demand - eliminating waste, squeezing out unnecessary consumption - is as important, and probably more important. We can't afford to be profligate with any energy source, whether it's oil or natural gas or nuclear. But profligate is precisely what we have been. Nuclear plants may be part of the solution. So must conservation. Copyright ©2007 Daily Press ***************************************************************** 21 Reuters: Finnish town votes against E.ON nuclear plant Wed May 9, 2007 2:55PM EDT HELSINKI, May 9 (Reuters) - The city council of Finnish town Loviisa has nullified the town's preliminary agreement to sell land to Germany's E.ON (EONG.DE: Quote, Profile, Research for a nuclear power plant, a senior city official told Reuters on Wednesday. "The town council voted 16-11 against the deal," Loviisa city head Olavi Kaleva said. "The decision was a bit of a surprise ... Part of the nuclear power supporters turned against it." The town in southeastern Finland had agreed to sell the land, located north of an existing nuclear power plant owned by Fortum (FUM1V.HE: Quote, Profile, Research, to E.ON for 6.5 million euros ($8.8 million) in April, but the council's vote overruled the agreement. Kaleva said the city had no alternative plans at this stage to pursue a land deal with E.ON, but it would still consider whether to proceed in some way. "But there is little choice for alternative plots. This area had been designed for energy generation use in terms of zoning. It was currently the only option we had to offer," Kaleva said. Finland is already building a nuclear power reactor, one of four under construction in Europe as atomic power gains favor again. Europe has 165 of the world's 435 nuclear plants. The 1,600 megawatt plant under construction was originally scheduled to start up in 2009 but was put off to the second quarter of 2010, then to early 2011, due to slower-than-expected construction work. The Finnish parliament is widely expected to give the go-ahead for another reactor to be built to the country during the next few years due to growing energy consumption. Fortum and utility Teollisuuden Voima (TVO) have also started preparations to ask for this licence. Finland now has two reactors at TVO's Olkiluoto plant and two at Fortum's Loviisa. © Reuters 2007. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 22 UPI: India to U.S.: Free to pick energy allies United Press International - Energy - Briefing Published: May 9, 2007 at 4:15 PM NEW DELHI, May 9 (UPI) -- India says it is free to pursue ties with any country, a position with implications for two deals: the IPI pipeline and the U.S.-India nuclear deal. External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee told the upper house of India's Parliament that New Delhi had informed Washington in the context of the Iran-Pakistan-India gas pipeline that it is free to pursue its energy relations with any country. The remarks were reported by the semi-official Press Trust of India. No direct quotes were provided. Mukherjee said India's message was given to U.S. Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman by Indian Petroleum and Natural Gas Minister Murli Deora during a recent meeting in New Delhi, PTI reported Wednesday. The $7.4 billion, 1,700-mile IPI pipeline would run from Iran to India via Pakistan and supply some 90 million cubic meters of Iranian gas to India and 60 million cubic meters to Pakistan every day. Talks have been stalled on that issue because of two factors: the price of Iranian gas and transit fees that India must pay to Pakistan. Iran wants to sell natural gas to the two countries at $4.93 per mBtu, using the price of oil at $60 per barrel as a benchmark. The future of the IPI pipeline is uncertain, however, because of strong U.S. opposition to the deal. Washington fears international agreements with Iran will only embolden the country to acquire nuclear weapons. Funding may also be difficult because of the countries the pipeline would traverse. Washington has said it backs a pipeline that supplies Turkmen gas to South Asia. The U.S. Congress opposes India's ties with Iran, and its concerns may scuttle the nuclear energy pact, struck in 2005, which would provide India access to U.S. nuclear technology and material. Nuclear power currently makes up 3 percent of India's power mix. It is expected to remain at those levels in the future, primarily because of India's expected increased demand for energy. © Copyright 2007 United Press International, Inc. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 23 Prague Daily Monitor: Czech solar power plants post record output in sunny spring - By Prague Daily Monitor/CTK / Published 9 May 2007 Prague, May 8 (CTK) - Solar power plants in the Czech Republic generated a record amount of electricity thanks to the sunny weather in the first two months of spring this year, CTK has learned from their operators. The country's largest solar power plant, in Busanovice, south-western Bohemia, generated double the planned amount of electricity in April. "The amount of solar energy in April this year was equal to the usual amount for April and May combined," said Ales Korostensky, the owner of Korowatt, operating the Busanovice plant. Two weeks ago, Busanovice generated a record 4,820 kilowatthours of power in a single day, twice the average amount. In contrast, last Saturday, when it started to rain at last after a long spell of sunny and dry weather, it produced only 420 kilowatthours (kWh). The solar power plant in Hradek nad Nisou, northern Bohemia, generated 9.2 megawatthours (MWh) of electricity in April, while 6 MWh had been planned. The solar power plant operated by HiTechMedia Systems of Uherske Hradiste, southern Moravia, generated 9,437 kWh of electricity in April, 70 percent more than planned. The solar power plants' contribution to overall production of electricity in the country will gradually rise, as new ones are being built. However, the share has been negligible so far. The combined capacity of the solar power plants in the Czech Republic is around 1 MW. The Temelin nuclear power plant in southern Bohemia has a capacity of 2,000 MW. The world's largest solar power plant in Wuerzburg, Germany has a capacity of 12 MW. Experts say conditions for the production of electricity in solar power plants are good in the Czech Republic, where the sun shines for 1,400 to 1,700 hours a year, translating into an average 1,100 kWh per square metre. The Czech Republic has pledged to the EU to produce 8 percent of electricity from renewable sources by the year 2010, double the current amount. This story is from the Czech News Agency (CTK). The Prague Daily Monitor and Monitor CE are not responsible for its content. Copyright 2007 by the Czech News Agency (CTK). All rights reserved. Copying, dissemination or other publication of this article or parts thereof without the prior written consent of CTK is expressly forbidden. copyright 2007 monitor ce media services s.r.o. | all rights reserved ***************************************************************** 24 Business Report: Nuclear power 'part of the future' May 9, 2007 By Donwald Pressly Johannesburg - Nuclear power is part of the future and the debate on climate change and security of supply "is not complete without the discussion on nuclear energy", South Africa's minerals and energy department director general Sandile Nogxina told Members of Parliament on Tuesday. Addressing the National Assembly minerals and energy committee, the director general said South Africa was at risk of falling behind in the enrichment of uranium as "people are applying for prospecting rights" and this was allowing stockpiling elsewhere in the world "at our own disadvantage". He noted that South Africa was rich in uranium. South Africa planned to build conventional nuclear power stations in addition to any plans for pebble bed modular reactors, he said. The department said in a written report to the committee that "we are accelerating our work to ensure greater reliance on nuclear power generation". It was in this context that the department was developing a nuclear energy policy that responded to this challenge. It noted that a draft nuclear energy policy had already been submitted to the cabinet to enable consultation with other government departments. "We are concomitantly addressing issues of nuclear fuel supply," the department said. "The proposed programme of uranium beneficiation is a response to this need. The development of a comprehensive nuclear energy industrial complex is inevitable given the envisaged scale of the nuclear programme," the department reported. A strategy for the development of skills required to support the programme would be developed. Legislation emanating from the radioactive water management policy and strategy "will also be finalised during this year". - I-Net Bridge BUSINESS SERVICES Accommodation: Hotels, B&Bs B2B Services Business Education Car Hire Car Insurance Car Insurance for Women Cars Online Cellphones Dating Free Fax to Email Home Loans Life Insurance Medical Aid Personal Loans Play Euro & UK Lotteries Residential Property USA Green Card Program Win Now For Real MOBILE SERVICES Get Business Headlines & Indicators on your phone - dial *120*IOL*5# Click here to find out more (SA only) Related Articles Nuclear power gains ground, but concerns persist SA's nuclear plans fire up French companies More News Fed keeps interest on hold Rio Tinto soars on bid talk Outrage over 'unjustifiable' new R30 tax on vehicles Motor sector gives lift to profit of insurers Markets Agricultural Futures - May 10, 2007 Rand holds on to gains with firm metals Commodities - May 10, 2007 World Markets - 10 May, 2007 Technology Blogging economists draw cyber crowds Domain name fees to go up Murdoch plans business channel launch Will PlayStation 3 be the new Betamax? Company News Overoptimistic theory of economic bubbles risks going pop AngloGold is on an expansion spree Balanced UK portfolio delivers 74% profit growth to Ciref Strike shuts Kroondal platinum mine International Screws turn on Bush toshow Wolfowitz the door Sino Gold tackles Chinese poverty to dig ore Hong Kong is becoming New York of east Asia Business is slowing, say London cabbies OPINION/ ANALYSIS Features Complexity theory and the science of finance What determines the price of an asset? Like "what is love?", this age-old question has yet to be answered satisfactorily. But unlike love, the value of material assets should be quantifiable.[Full Story...] Inside Business In China, a cellphone can take the place of a map and tour guide I had to pop into the equivalent of the local spaza on my way out again the other day to top up the credit on my cellphone. I know little about cellphones anywhere in the world but in China I am fast learning that when you receive a call, you also pay, which is why I keep running out of credit even though I don't make that many calls.[Full Story...] Opinion/ Analysis Six reasons to celebrate Blair's departure In the past decade, Europe has had no more successful politician than UK Prime Minister Tony Blair - successful at winning elections, that is.[Full Story...] More Opinion & Analysis stories NEWS BY SECTOR Finance Platinum firms' market cap hits R570bn The market capitalisation of platinum mining companies on the JSE has risen to more than double the value of gold stocks.[Full Story...] Economy Parastatal directors sit on too many boards - DA The number of directorships held by individual directors of state-owned bodies raised serious questions, Democratic Alliance (DA) transport spokesperson Stuart Farrow said in parliament yesterday.[Full Story...] Finance Sappi may quadruple quarterly profit Sappi's second-quarter profit might have more than quadrupled after it raised European prices for the first time in six years and its South African unit boosted sales on greater demand from China, analysts forecast yesterday.[Full Story...] Finance Ranbaxy SA to spend R100m on expanding drug factory Ranbaxy Laboratories, India's largest drug maker, would spend R100 million to expand and upgrade its manufacturing facility in Roodepoort, Desmond Brothers, the chief executive of Ranbaxy South Africa, confirmed yesterday.[Full Story...] News Energy-saving laws will target the home A new law laying down what kind of energy appliances will be allowed in homes, offices and factories is to be brought forward by the department of minerals and energy.[Full Story...] ©2007 Business Report & Independent Online (Pty) Ltd. All rights ***************************************************************** 25 Columbia Missourian: MU nuclear reactor security is already compliant Columbia, Missouri: Wed., May 9, 2007 / 11:41 p.m. By ALAN SCHER ZAGIER The Associated Press In a concession to the continuing specter of terrorist threats, the dozens of nuclear reactors on college campuses nationwide are tightening the security checks required for employees. The federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission issued an order April 30 requiring the nation’s 33 research and test reactors, most of which are located at universities, to fingerprint and conduct FBI background checks of anyone with “unescorted access” to radioactive material. The order follows an identical requirement put in place eight months ago for reactor workers with access to sensitive security information. Compared to commercial power reactors, the core size and amount of irradiated fuel at research reactors is minuscule. But unlike commercial nuclear power plants, research reactors can be found in densely populated areas, near college dormitories and classrooms, and are often overseen by campus security guards. The MU site — the nation’s largest campus-based reactor — is within earshot of the school’s football stadium and basketball arena. And the reactor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, the nation’s second largest, is ensconced in the urban Cambridge campus near Boston. Technical and financial limitations prevent those two reactors from immediately converting their power source. Both Missouri and MIT use highly enriched uranium, an ingredient crucial to building nuclear weapons. The new federal requirements duplicate existing security precautions at the Missouri reactor, said director Ralph Butler. “We continually look at, review and adjust our access controls,” he said. “This order really codifies what we’re already doing.” MIT also had such safeguards in place before the NRC directive, said reactor director John Bernard. Research reactors sprouted worldwide after President Eisenhower’s “Atoms for Peace” program in 1953, including at dozens of American colleges. By 1978, Cold War tensions and security concerns prompted a Department of Energy initiative to convert the fuel used at research reactors to the low-enriched alternative more commonly found at commercial power reactors. Three decades later, that process remains unfinished. At least 40 research reactors worldwide have already been converted, including those at the University of Michigan, Ohio State University and the Georgia Institute of Technology. University research reactors at Oregon State, Purdue, Washington and Wisconsin are scheduled for conversion during the next several years. Columbia's morning newspaper: In print every day and open late on the Web. Copyright 2007. All rights reserved. About the Missourian Pri ***************************************************************** 26 Middletown Press: End is near for Connecticut Yankee By: Luther Turmelle and Abbe Smith, Journal Register News Service 05/09/2007 The Connecticut Yankee power plant in Haddam Neck is shown photographed from Portland. Catherine Avalone/The Middletown Press (Buy Middletown Photos) HADDAM - It has been closed for more than a decade, but the end is near for the Connecticut Yankee, at least as a federally licensed facility. Sometime this summer, the federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission is expected to terminate the license for the 550-acre facility, said Bob Capstick, a spokesman for the consortium that owns the plant. Then, all that will remain on a portion of the plant property on the eastern banks of the Connecticut River is a storage facility, where 43 dry-cask storage units of spent nuclear fuel from the plant are being kept until a national repository for nuclear wastes is developed. Some in Haddam actually view the plant's slow fade into history with some nostalgia. Seamus Danaher, who grew up in Haddam Neck, remembers hanging out near the power plant with friends as a kid. Danaher said Connecticut Yankee has always been a good neighbor to nearby residents, even donating money and equipment to the Haddam Neck Volunteer Fire Department, where Danaher used to be a firefighter. He said the power plant, which began operating in 1968, kept taxes low in town and maintained a quiet, unobtrusive presence in Haddam Neck, something that changed as the plant came tumbling down and the debris filled dirt was carted away. "It's louder now with all the construction trucks going in and out," Danaher said. The trucks are doing grading projects on the site, one of the final steps before decommissioning becomes official. A contractor working for the NRC, the Oak Ridge Institute for Science and Education (ORISE), visited the Connecticut Yankee site late last month, said Neil Sheehan, a spokesman for the NRC Northeast regional office in Philadelphia. ORISE performed surveys and took soil samples to verify that any radioactivity left over at the site is below allowable levels, Sheehan said. In order for the NRC to give clearance for the Connecticut Yankee land to be used for any type of activity - what the agency refers to as "unrestricted release" - radioactivity levels at the site must be below 25 millirems per year, he said. "That is, a member of the public who stayed on the site for an entire year should not receive more than 25 millirems," Sheehan said. "A millirem is a measure of exposure to radiation and the yardstick we always use is that the average American is exposed to about 360 millirems of radiation each year from natural and man-made sources." Connecticut's limit is 19 millirems, he said. Until the NRC determines whether the Connecticut Yankee site can be released for unrestricted use, exactly what the future holds for the site remains unclear. Connecticut Yankee has hired a consultant to determine the best possible use for the majority of the land, Capstick said. And Dennis Schain, a state Department of Environmental Protection spokesman, said Monday that the state agency has had preliminary discussions about purchasing the Connecticut Yankee property. "It is so close to several state parks in the area," he said, adding: "It would be safe and suitable for recreational use once the decommissioning of the plant is completed." Connecticut is not alone in considering a former nuclear plant site for park land. Michigan officials announced last July that they were considering buying the 500-acre site that was formerly home to the Big Rock Point Nuclear Power Plant. The plant, which has a mile of shoreline on Lake Michigan, is located in the northernmost reaches of Michigan's Lower Peninsula. Haddam First Selectman Tony Bondi said residents are split over what they would like to see happen with the land. He said open space or another generating plant - or both - would be welcome. One thing state and local officials don't want to see the site become is a permanent storage facility for spent nuclear fuel. For the past year. Connecticut Gov. M. Jodi Rell has been waging a high-profile campaign, along with other governors whose states host nuclear facilities, to convince the federal government to honor its commitment to build a permanent nuclear waste storage facility in Nevada. The federal government established a fund in the early 1980s to build a centralized, permanent storage facility at Yucca Mountain, 90 miles north of Las Vegas. But the project has seen numerous construction delays and isn't expected to be completed until 2017. Further complicating efforts to keep the Yucca Mountain plan moving forward is that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., has vowed to block the multibillion-dollar project's completion. All the gamesmanship between the state and federal government has Bondi worried. "From the smell we get, I'm going to have nuclear spent fuel over here in Haddam Neck for the next 20 to 30 years," he said. ©The Middletown Press 2007 ©2006 The Middletown Press -- a Journal Register Property. All ***************************************************************** 27 Petoskey News Review: Nuclear opponents call for Big Rock hearing Petoskey, Michigan edition Updated: May 09, 2007 - 10:40:33 EDT CHARLEVOIX — A coalition of environmental groups appealed to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission for a hearing to address the risk that the high-level radioactive wastes stored at the former site of the Big Rock Point Nuclear Power Plant near Charlevoix are vulnerable to terrorist attack. The critics believe that a successful attack would release catastrophic amounts of radioactivity long distances downwind and downstream into the Lake Michigan shoreline ecosystem. The groups, including Don’t Waste Michigan and Nuclear Information and Resource Service, challenge the commission’s approval of Mississippi-based Entergy Nuclear taking over management of the wastes at Big Rock as part of its purchase of Consumers Energy Company’s sole operating nuclear reactor at Palisades, near South Haven. The groups allege that Entergy cannot be trusted to guarantee safety, given its poor track record on security at its other nuclear power plants. They also point to Entergy’s on-going bankruptcy after the devastation of Hurricane Katrina in its home service district — in New Orleans and on the Gulf Coast — as a significant distraction to Entergy’s focus and financial ability to properly safeguard and secure the eight concrete-and-steel silos holding the wastes at Big Rock. Mike Savage, the communications director for Entergy Pallisades said the dry fuel storage continues to be monitored on site at Big Rock. “The fuel storage at Big Rock has been and will continue to be safely monitored,” Savage said. “There are professional security services on site to ensure the safety of the facility.” Savage said dry fuel storage is a practiced safe method. Savage said the fuel is in a pellet form and does not contain liquids. But, Michael Keegan of Coalition for a Nuclear-Free Great Lakes in Monroe, said, “(The) NRC has inappropriately ruled that because Big Rock shut down 10 years ago and most of its facilities have been dismantled, there’s little to nothing to worry about anymore. There are no longer any emergency sirens, on-site fire protection or even an active plan for evacuation in a radiological emergency.” Alice Hirt of Don’t Waste Michigan in Holland, is concerned about potential environmental impacts. “The vast majority of the long-lasting radioactivity ever generated by the Big Rock reactor is still on-site, stored in those casks as high-level radioactive waste,” Hirt said. “Those casks could be breached by terrorist attack, and catastrophic amounts of harmful radioactivity could escape in the flames and smoke, to contaminate Lake Michigan and fallout downwind.” NRC may deny a hearing because the non-profit citizen interveners missed a deadline to respond to Consumers and Entergy’s motion to dismiss by late March. Terry Lodge of the Toledo Coalition for Safe Energy has served as the interveners’ pro bono legal counsel. Attorneys from Clark Hill in Lansing, acting on behalf of Michigan Environmental Council and Public Interest Research Group in Michigan appealed to NRC for reconsideration of their intervention against the sale agreement between Consumers and Entergy. Christa-Maria wrote on May 9, 2007 05:28 pm: " Very important to let the people know, that there is still a lot of dangerous stuff stored at the Big Rock facility. " Petoskey News-Review P.O. Box 528, 319 State St., Petoskey, MI 49770 · (231) 347-2544 · Fax: (231) 347-6833 ***************************************************************** 28 Times of India: Nuclear countdown Editorial-Opinion-The [10 May, 2007 l 0000 hrs ISTl ANUPAM SRIVASTAVA] Statements to the press on the Indo-US nuclear deal, following the day-long 123 negotiations on May 1, in Washington were sparse, yet revealing. The terms employed were deliberately cryptic, such as "extensive progress (across the) entire spectrum of outstanding issue areas". The two sides have agreed that neither will provide details on any specific topic in the public domain, at least for the next few weeks, as they attempt to expedite the conclusion of these negotiations. In early April 2007, US undersecretary of state and point-person in the negotiations, Nicholas Burns, conveyed the "growing frustration" in Washington over India's apparent lack of speed in concluding the agreement. While outstanding technical issues can be resolved, political intervention at the highest levels is urgently required to re-frame the parameters of the dialogue so that a mutually acceptable set of benchmarks could be established. The May 1 deliberations would suggest that the Indian side did arrive with a clear mandate and pragmatic responses to recent US suggestions on the key outstanding issues. The US reciprocated, making "extensive progress" possible. The "informal understanding" on not divulging specifics in the public domain is significant. First, at every crucial stage of the negotiations since July 2005, final documents and public addresses by the senior leadership on each side have provided much material and insight into the ongoing dialogue. Indeed, according to some, the negotiations so far have adhered a bit too closely to the prescription of former US president Woodrow Wilson, "for open covenants...openly arrived at". Second, through the agreement, the two countries seek to overcome decades of mistrust, and establish a technology partnership across key economic, non-proliferation, energy security, and military security areas. Hence, the need for caution. Third, inordinate public scrutiny of the negotiations has generated strong positions of support and opposition, limiting the flexibility of the official negotiators. It becomes incumbent upon the strategic community in both countries to permit the negotiators requisite space to pursue work on multiple fronts, and withhold judgment until the more final set of agreed-upon steps are made available in the public domain in the next several weeks. It is apparent that substantial progress has been made on each of the deadlocked issues. On the issue of testing, India has presumably stated that it would not convert its unilateral moratorium into a legally binding document, but also provided a restricted set of conditions under which it might revoke its moratorium and conduct fresh tests. These would include resumed testing by the US, China or Pakistan, and create a situation where either for political reasons, or to re-validate the credibility of its nuclear deterrent, India would test to safeguard its supreme national interests. Under such a situation, the US law requires termination of cooperation, but the US president would retain his waiver authority and proceed based upon his assessment of the merits of the Indian decision. But the 123 document is likely to skip a direct reference to this issue. On reprocessing, the US might grant India the "consent right" to reprocess US-origin spent fuel, and in return India has provided details of how the fuel would remain under IAEA safeguards in perpetuity, irrespective of the application of the spent fuel. One assumes here that the US side has also agreed not to make this the benchmark for the NSG, and instead permit India to negotiate separate deals with suppliers such as Russia, France, Japan, and Australia, and what safeguards they would require the IAEA to monitor and regularly certify. On the issue of strategic fuel reserves, one assumes that India has provided a set of technical benchmarks that it would adhere to, which will be monitored by the IAEA, to prove its compliance. Presumably, the US side would agree that it would use the above technical benchmarks, and not any extraneous political considerations, to cease co-operation and assert the right of return for its fuel. US is expected not to make its benchmarks the operative standard for other NSG members, instead leaving them free to negotiate with India. The writer is with the Center for International Trade & Security, University of Georgia. Copyright © 2007 Times Internet Limited. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 29 UPI: More nations join anti-nuclear terror plan United Press International - Published: May 9, 2007 at 10:35 AM WASHINGTON, May 9 (UPI) -- The global effort to combat nuclear terrorism is gaining steam, the U.S. State Department says. Cape Verde, Cyprus, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Georgia, Montenegro, the Netherlands and Spain Tuesday joined the U.S.-Russian joint initiative to fight nuclear terrorism, the State Department reported. Since the plan was launched last July, a total of 32 countries as well as the International Atomic Energy Agency have joined the group, which will meet in Kazakhstan next month to review progress of activities and address gaps in implementation, the department said in a statement. The initiative aims not only to reduce the threat of nuclear terror, but also to combat use of weapons of mass destruction worldwide. To further that objective, the plan strives to improve accounting and control of nuclear material and facilities, as well as detecting and suppressing illicit trafficking of such materials, among other efforts. © Copyright 2007 United Press International, Inc. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 30 WNN: Military event revealed after over a year 09 May 2007 The US Nuclear Regulatory Commission's (NRC's) annual report on 'abnormal events' has revealed a serious spill of high-enriched uranium (HEU) solution at a facility used to make nuclear fuel for naval reactors. No workers were hurt. A recently published NRC report to Vice President Dick Cheney, published in the US Federal Register, details the events from FY2006 which commissioners consider to be significant from the standpoint of public health and safety. One passage details the HEU spillage, which took place at Nuclear Fuel Services' (NFS's) fuel fabrication facility in Erwin, Tennessee, on 6 March 2006. HEU is uranium enriched to the point that between 20-90% of the material is U-235, the isotope usually split to release energy. Military reactors for naval power and propulsion are fuelled by HEU fuel, which is made at certain designated facilities under NRC oversight. The event occurred when 35 litres of HEU solution leaked into a glovebox while being transferred. The glovebox would normally have been sealed tightly, but workers had recently moved it and failed to reseal it correctly. The HEU solution was thus able to leak from the glovebox onto the floor and then into an elevator pit where it accumulated. The NRC report states that criticality would have been possible both in the glovebox and in the elevator pit, but not that criticality ever occurred. It continues to say that "the total volume of the transfer would have been more than enough for criticality in the glovebox or the elevator pit." Criticality is when a chain reaction releasing heat and large amounts of radiation is initiated within a body of material containing a critical mass of U-235 or another fissile element such as U-233, Pu-239, or Pu-241. This is normally made impossible by very strictly limiting amounts and locations of materials and also by the geometry of vessels made to contain them. The report says that if a criticality accident had occurred in the glovebox or the pit "it is likely that at least one worker would have received an exposure high enough to cause acute health effects or death." In response to the event, NFS stopped HEU processing in the area of the event and removed the processing enclosure and all its pipework. NFS also filled in the elevator pit with concrete and conducted an extensive review to identify any similar configuration issues. US Federal Register: Report to Congress on Abnormal Occurences Fiscal Year 2006 ***************************************************************** 31 BBC NEWS: Council u-turn on Litvinenko home Last Updated: Wednesday, 9 May 2007, 16:58 GMT 17:58 UK Mr Litvinenko, 43, died in London after being poisoned A council involved in a row over the clean-up of a former Russian spy's radioactive house has decided to pay for a substantial part of the work. Haringey had previously said it would not write a "blank cheque" for the remediation of Alexander Litvinenko's Muswell Hill property in north London. But it said it will pay for a Ł15,000 survey to determine the extent of the contamination, the BBC has learned. Health hazard The council has made repeated attempts to contact the owner of the Osier Crescent house, Russian billionaire Boris Berezovsky. Mr Berezovsky has told the BBC News website he has no intention of paying for the clean-up, saying Mr Litvinenko's killers should pay. The Ł500,000 house has been sealed off by Haringey Council and residents have expressed concern about health hazards. After failing to persuade Mr Berezovsky to act, Haringey has now decided to foot the bill for the survey. Councillor Nilgun Canver said: "I have authorised a characterisation survey of the Litvinenko family home so as to formally reassure neighbours that there is no risk to them or their families from living near the house." The survey will involve specialist contractors using monitoring equipment to determine the extent of the contamination inside the premises. * BBC Copyright Notice ***************************************************************** 32 Guardian Unlimited: Charity criticises Gulf veterans' treatment Staff and agencies Wednesday May 9, 2007 An oil field burns in Iraq during the Gulf War. Photograph: AP More than two-thirds of MPs believe the government has failed to provide adequate help to ex-services personnel suffering from Gulf war illnesses, a leading veterans' charity said today. A poll of 121 MPs by the Royal British Legion found that more than 70% thought that government support for ill veterans of the first Gulf war had been "very poor" or "inadequate". The charity published the survey to coincide with a Gulf war veterans' conference in Birmingham today, where ex-service personnel will demand a one-off payment of Ł10,000 for those suffering from illnesses related to the conflict in 1990-1991. Sue Freeth, the Royal British Legion's director of welfare, said the payment was needed as compensation for "the government's failure to protect veterans, the treatment they have received and the resulting anxiety". The British Legion has criticised successive governments' failures to monitor and treat the ill health of Gulf war veterans. The veterans minister, Derek Twigg, will address the conference - the first time in 10 years that a veterans minister has publicly spoken to those who fought in the war about their illnesses. Ms Freeth said: "Even though 16 years have passed, the veterans and the scientific community are still no clearer on the causes of their illnesses, some of which have proved terminal." She said research had confirmed that Gulf War veterans were more than twice as likely to report symptoms of poor health and to be suffering more severely from them than other service personnel of equivalent age, gender and rank. A study by Boston University, published earlier this month, found that brain scans of Gulf war veterans showed neurological differences that may have been caused by exposure to toxic chemicals such as nerve agents and pesticides used during the conflict. Some scientists have conducted tests showing that veterans have been contaminated with depleted uranium used in armour-piercing shells, but other studies suggest that most of the veterans' problems are more closely linked to post-traumatic stress disorder. Around 53,000 UK service personnel took part in the campaign, of whom 7,000 have received a payment or are in receipt of an ongoing war pension for illness or injury relating to service in the Gulf. Useful links Ministry of Defence National Gulf veterans and families association UK Gulf war help US Gulf war veteran resources Royal British Legion Guardian Unlimited © Guardian News and Media Limited 2007 ***************************************************************** 33 Calgary Sun: Prof lauds storing nuclear waste on surface drivingcalgary.com Wed, May 9, 2007 By JEREMY LOOME A planned nuclear plant in Alberta could likely ease pollution fears through over-ground storage, says a former consultant to the British and U.S. nuclear industries. "The fuel for a Candu is actually quite condensed and highly radioactive, it's basically spent uranium, which is radioactive for a very long time," said Martyn Unsworth, now a professor at the University of Alberta who once worked on a project to determine the geological safety of underground nuclear waste storage. "But it's pretty concentrated and the policy in Canada has been to store on site, on the surface in a secure compound." As first reported by Sun Media, Calgary-based Alberta Energy has announced it plans to build a Candu nuclear reactor, likely in Whitecourt, by 2016. The plant would derive its energy from the heat generated by radioactive decay, the process of uranium atoms collapsing and expelling their radioactive material. But placing such material underground -- as has been proposed in Ontario, Britain and the U.S. -- adds geological and hydro-geological instability into the mix of potential problems, Unsworth said. "Surface storage really has held up for a long time as the best way to go, because once you put it underground, that can't be undone. "You can't go and get it later if there are problems," he said. Copyright © 2006, Canoe Inc. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 34 DOE: DOE Offers $60 Million to Spur Industry Engagement in GNEP Global Nuclear Energy Partnership May 9, 2007 WASHINGTON, DC - The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Deputy Secretary Clay Sell today announced that DOE will provide up to $60 million, over two years (FY’07-’08), to engage industry experts in the conceptual design of the initial nuclear fuel recycling center and advanced recycling reactor as part of President Bush’s Global Nuclear Energy Partnership (GNEP). Studies from this Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA) will include scope, schedule and cost information of the proposed facilities and will also identify technological needs that will be used to inform, and effectively and efficiently implement GNEP’s Research & Development (R&D) activities. “Nuclear energy is a safe, environmentally sensitive, and affordable way to meet the world’s growing need for baseload electricity. By further engaging engineering and design experts in the nuclear industry, we can spur radical development of new nuclear recycling technologies that are more proliferation-resistant and economically attractive,” Deputy Secretary Sell said. Deputy Secretary Sell announced today’s FOA while addressing the United States Energy Association in Washington, DC. This FOA is intended to promote and develop nuclear industry expertise that DOE could use to make GNEP a reality. It seeks applicants to provide conceptual design studies, technology roadmaps, and business and communications plans essential to GNEP’s initial development. The applicants would also be asked to explore the technical and business parameters that would support the design, construction, and operation of GNEP’s initial nuclear fuel recycling center and advanced recycling reactor. In conjunction with the conceptual design studies, the recipients of funding will also develop technology development roadmaps to describe the state of the current technology, perform a technology “gap” analysis, and define the methods and plans to acquire technology needed to achieve the GNEP goals. The business plans will address how the market may facilitate DOE plans to develop and commercialize the advanced fuel cycle technologies and facilities. The communications plans will address the dissemination of scientific, technical, and practical information relating to nuclear energy and closing the nuclear fuel cycle. DOE will use the information and recommendations provided by these studies, as well as other information and analyses, to assist in evaluating the development and deployment of proposed activities under GNEP, and to inform a Secretarial decision on the path forward for GNEP. This FOA is comprised of $15 million from DOE’s FY’07 Spend Plan, and $45 million from FY’08, subject to appropriation from Congress. Three to six awards are expected to be determined later this year. Applications for the FOA are due by June 22, 2007. GNEP is part of President Bush’s Advanced Energy Initiative and seeks to develop worldwide consensus on enabling expanded use of safe, clean and affordable nuclear energy to meet growing electricity demand. This will use a nuclear fuel cycle that enhances energy security, while promoting non-proliferation. Additonal information on the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership and the Funding Opportunity Announcement. 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 ***************************************************************** 35 Platts: Ux, TradeTech report uranium spot price rises to $120/pound Washington (Platts)--8May2007 The spot price of uranium has jumped to $120 a pound U3O8, up $7, according to price reporting companies Ux Consulting and TradeTech. The increase, according to both companies, was the result of buyers trying to entice sellers into offering material by submitting bids with prices above the then-prevailing spot price of $113/pounds of U3O8. But sellers appeared unresponsive, TradeTech said it its weekly report, adding that Texas-based Mestena Uranium is expected to offer uranium for sale in an auction later this month and that possibility has encouraged a "wait and see" approach on the part of several potential sellers. Ux Consulting said the first trading day for the new NYMEX uranium futures contract saw limited activity with 26 contracts, representing 6,500 pounds of U3O8, being traded. NYMEX Tuesday said the June 2007 uranium contract settled Monday at $135/pound, while the January 2008 contract settled at $150.50/pound. --Mike Knapik, newsdesk@platts.com Copyright © 2007 - Platts, All Rights Reserved ***************************************************************** 36 THERECORD.COM | INSIDER: Reactor waste not safe GEORGE FELTHAM (May 9, 2007) The Ontario Liberal government and nuclear energy industry would have us believe energy produced by a nuclear reactor is safe, clean and cheap, and that spending to make coal-burning plants safer is too costly. As we know it will take an extremely long time for radioactive material from nuclear plants to be safe. We won't be around to see this. The 20 nuclear plants are producing 100 tonnes a year of material that is radioactive. No wonder they are in a quandary to bury these rods as soon as possible. Out of sight, out of mind. Will they assure the people of Ontario that this radioactive material will be safe buried underground? At least we can see the fumes from coal plants, but once buried these radioactive rods could possibly become unstable and erupt. A safer way to burn coal can be accomplished by using scrubbers. The government should look into new ways to burn coal. There are people who can do this if only someone would listen to them. The Liberals are in a panic to bury these radioactive rods. George Feltham Guelph 160 King Street East, Kitchener, Ontario, Canada, N2G 4E5 519-894-2231 ***************************************************************** 37 GSA: 20 years of Yucca Mountain research now available for scientific review Public release date: 9-May-2007 Contact: Ann Cairns acairns@geosociety.org 303-357-1056 Geological Society of America Boulder, Colorado, USA -- The scientific community can now take a long-awaited look at the research behind the selection of Yucca Mountain, Nevada, as the nation's high-level radioactive waste repository. The Geology and Climatology of Yucca Mountain and Vicinity, Southern Nevada and California, published by the Geological Society of America, presents important results of a significant part of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Yucca Mountain site characterization study. The study was conducted by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) and the DOE National Laboratories. The book includes discussion of the mountain's tectonic setting and detailed structural geology and stratigraphy, evaluation of tectonic models that have been proposed, and a study of the climate history and possible climate change that could affect the mountain's ability to isolate radioactive waste. According to co-editor John Stuckless, U.S. Geological Survey, Denver, CO, more than $6 billion has been spent thus far to study geologic, engineering, and transportation issues associated with Yucca Mountain. The site characterization study contained results of more than 20 years of scientific research and analysis by hundreds of scientists. "A major challenge of producing the book was coping with the sheer volume of research," said Stuckless. "We needed to boil it down and make it usable, retaining key findings as well as important nuances." Stuckless expects the book to draw significant interest from beyond the scientific community. "This research will be the prime support for DOE's application for licensing, which will be submitted to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission in 2008," he said. "The research reported in this Memoir will be studied and used by the legal community, Congressional staffs, and virtually everyone involved with or having a stake in Yucca Mountain." Stuckless and co-editor Robert Levich, U.S. Department of Energy (retired), are now at work on a second volume. It will summarize current understanding of the hydrology and geochemistry of the Yucca Mountain area. They hope to have it ready to submit to GSA by the end of 2007. ### Journalists may request review copies by contacting Jeanette Hammann at jhammann@geosociety.org. Individual copies may be purchased through the Geological Society of America online bookstore (http://rock.geosociety.org/bookstore/default.asp"oID=0&catID=8&pID=MW R199) or by contacting GSA Sales and Service, gsaservice@geosociety.org. The Geology and Climatology of Yucca Mountain and Vicinity, Southern Nevada and California John S. Stuckless and Robert A. Levich (Eds.) Geological Society of America Memoir 199 2007, 205 pages, US$65.00, GSA member price US$46.00 ISBN-13 978-0-8137-1199-7 www.geosociety.org ***************************************************************** 38 UPI: Nuke industry gets $60M for GNEP United Press International - Energy - Briefing Published: May 9, 2007 at 6:30 PM WASHINGTON, May 9 (UPI) -- The U.S. Energy Department has put forward $60 million for nuclear industry insight into President Bush's Global Nuclear Energy Partnership. The money, to be dispersed in fiscal years 2007 and 2008, pending congressional budget approval, will be spent on nuclear industry experts taking a look at the "conceptual design of the initial nuclear fuel recycling center and advanced recycling reactor" aspects of GNEP, a department release said. GNEP is a program designed to enhance the global nuclear energy industry by using new technology to make nuclear plants more affordable and extend the life of fuel while preventing weapons proliferation. "Nuclear energy is a safe, environmentally sensitive, and affordable way to meet the world's growing need for baseload electricity," said Deputy Energy Secretary Clay Sell. "By further engaging engineering and design experts in the nuclear industry, we can spur radical development of new nuclear recycling technologies that are more proliferation-resistant and economically attractive." Applicants for the $60 million will "provide conceptual design studies, technology roadmaps, and business and communications plans essential to GNEP's initial development," the release said. "The applicants would also be asked to explore the technical and business parameters that would support the design, construction, and operation of GNEP's initial nuclear fuel recycling center and advanced recycling reactor." © Copyright 2007 United Press International, Inc. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 39 Hemscott: Tritium in New York nuke plant sewage BUCHANAN, N.Y. (AP) - A trace of radioactive tritium has been found in sewage at the Indian Point nuclear power plant, which could mean that some of the facility's contaminated groundwater is being carried to the village of Buchanan's treatment system. A spokesman for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission said Wednesday there was no danger to the public. The sample, taken April 30 from pipes leading to the village sewers, yielded tritium at a level of 8,000 picocuries per liter; the NRC standard for sewage is 10 million picocuries per liter. The spokesman, Neil Sheehan, also noted that there is no nearby source of drinking water. The standard for drinking water is 20,000 picocuries per liter. A spokesman for Indian Point owner Entergy Nuclear, Jim Steets, said, 'Except for everything else you would find in sewage, the water would be perfectly safe to drink.' Sheehan said it was not known how the tritium got into the sewage system, which is a closed pipe system that should not contact groundwater. He said one possibility was that a damaged underground sewer pipe could have let in some of the groundwater. He said sewage plants like Buchanan's commonly deal with low-level radioactivity, usually stemming from a patient who has been treated with nuclear medicine, such as a radioactive dye. Entergy discovered nearly two years ago that the groundwater beneath the two Indian Point reactors in Buchanan, about 35 miles north of New York City, was contaminated with tritium and the more dangerous strontium-90 and has been hunting for the source ever since. The company had said that the only contaminated water leaving the site was leaking into the Hudson River, where the dilution rendered it harmless. Sheehan said tritium was the only isotope found in the sewage. He said Entergy would be responsible for solving the sewage mystery. 'They're going to have to add this to their program for dealing with groundwater contamination at the site,' he said. Steets said there was so little tritium in the sample that it might be 'a false positive.' He said sampling would continue. Copyright 2007 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. Hemscott PLC - Serious Investment Research Copyright 2007 Hemscott Group Limited. ***************************************************************** 40 ScrippsNews: UC keeps hand in at Livermore By MICHAEL DOYLE McClatchy Newspapers Wednesday, May 09, 2007 The University of California on Tuesday survived recurring controversy to retain a hand in running the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. The renowned nuclear weapons lab, located in the shadow of Altamont Pass, will now be managed by a new partnership of corporate and university collaborators. The Energy Department calls the seven-year contract a fresh start for a lab that's sometimes squirmed under the spotlight. "For the first time in the history of the laboratory, a new contractor is coming to Livermore," Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman said Tuesday. Called Lawrence Livermore National Security, the winning lab contractor includes as partners Texas A&M University and the engineering giant Bechtel. Lawrence Livermore National Security can earn up to $45.5 million a year if it does a good job running the lab. The University of California, which has managed Lawrence Livermore since the lab's founding in 1952, created the new corporation and remains a major player in it. "We are delighted at the opportunity to continue playing a role in supporting the laboratory's mission of scientific achievement in the interests of national security and global cooperation," University of California President Robert C. Dynes said. The University of California team bested another partnership led by defense contractor Northrop Grumman. It was the first time there was formal competition for the lab contract. With its $1.6 billion budget, Lawrence Livermore has long put its stamp on both national security and the Northern San Joaquin Valley. Nearly one-quarter of the lab's 8,600 employees live in the Valley, and the lab's contaminated Site 300 test area west of Tracy typically stores an average of 10,000 pounds of high explosives. More famously, Lawrence Livermore scientists designed Polaris nuclear warheads in the 1950s, multiple-entry warheads in the 1960s and the world's most powerful laser in the 1980s, among other breakthroughs. "It fostered the creation of the United States' nuclear deterrent," noted Rep. Ellen Tauscher, the Antioch Democrat whose district includes the 7,000-acre lab facility, "and today it enables the safety, security and reliability of our strategic deterrent without live testing." Lawrence Livermore has repeatedly been lauded by federal overseers. "(The lab) has continued to make 'outstanding' contributions to research and development," the National Nuclear Security Administration concluded in its 2004 formal appraisal. Recurring management problems, though, also helped prompt the university to look for additional partners when the Lawrence Livermore contract came up for renewal. The current contract expires Sept. 30. Critics, for instance, once questioned whether the lab's plutonium supplies were vulnerable to terrorist attack. The federal government's otherwise laudatory 2004 appraisal warned the lab was at "an unsatisfactory performance level" in facility safety. "We had significant problems with lost keys at ... Lawrence Livermore," Linton F. Brooks, administrator of the National Nuclear Security Administration, told a House panel in March 2005. "Although in no case could those keys allow access to special nuclear material ... we saw their loss as a sign that security procedures needed improvement." More recently, government auditors noted that Lawrence Livermore's stadium-sized laser, called the National Ignition Facility, will cost at least $1.7 billion more than originally planned and will be opening six years late. Experienced partners are supposed to help fend off such problems. The Lawrence Livermore partnership also includes Battelle Memorial Institute, Washington Group International and several smaller firms. All bring something to the table. Battelle already runs nuclear facilities including the Oak Ridge National Laboratory in Tennessee, while Washington Group International owns the firm that previously helped build the Golden Gate Bridge and Hoover Dam. (Contact Michael Doyle at mdoyle(at)mcclatchydc.com.) (Distributed by Scripps-McClatchy Western Service.) All materials copyright 2006 Scripps Media Center and Scripps Howard ***************************************************************** 41 DOE: DOE Announces Additional Public Comment Meetings for Draft National Corridor Designations May 8, 2007 WASHINGTON, DC – The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) today announced that it will hold four additional public meetings for the two draft National Interest Electric Transmission Corridors (National Corridors) during the 60-day public comment period, which will close on July 6, 2007. The four additional meetings will be held in June in: Phoenix, Arizona; Las Vegas, Nevada; Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania; and Rochester, New York. Dates and locations will be published in the Federal Register in the coming days. DOE previously announced it would host three public meetings at the following locations: Arlington, Virginia on May 15, 2007; San Diego, California on May 17, 2007; and New York, New York on May 23, 2007. These draft National Corridors cover geographic areas where millions of consumers are currently adversely affected by transmission capacity constraints or congestion. The draft Mid-Atlantic Area National Corridor includes counties in Ohio, West Virginia, Pennsylvania, New York, Maryland, Virginia, all of New Jersey, Delaware, and the District of Columbia. The draft 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 DOE last August. DOE recognizes the broad public interest in this process and, 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. DOE has issued the draft National Corridors because timely and effective attention to the transmission congestion problems in these areas is extremely important. DOE recognizes there are various ways in which transmission congestion may addressed, including enhanced energy efficiency, demand response, more local generation, and additional transmission capacity. To submit comments or for information please visit 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 ***************************************************************** 42 KnoxNews: Uranium Center of Excellence: more than just a fancy name? By FRANK MUNGER, munger@knews.com May 9, 2007 George Dials, general manager at the Y-12 National Security Complex, is pushing the plant's designation as the Uranium Center of Excellence. During a recent visit to the News Sentinel, Dials said that role - as outlined in the government's Complex 2030 plans for nuclear weapons work - is an important part of Y-12's future. Naming Y-12 as the Uranium Center of Excellence would seem to state the obvious, since the Oak Ridge plant has been a hub for uranium work since the World War II Manhattan Project. Y-12 enriched the uranium that was used in the "Little Boy" atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima, Japan. After the war, the plant transitioned to a bomb-making facility, manufacturing uranium components for the U.S. arsenal throughout the Cold War. Dials said Uranium Center of Excellence is more than just a designation, although he offered few details. He indicated the work will become increasingly international, including nonproliferation projects, and he emphasized the plant's research capabilities. He said announcements in regard to that work would be forthcoming. Meanwhile, he said construction of the Highly Enriched Uranium Materials Facility is now 52 percent complete, and he expressed confidence that the high-security storage facility would be completed within the current cost estimate of $549 million, more than double the original price tag. Dials also confirmed that the cost of the Uranium Processing Facility, a proposed manufacturing center for Y-12, could reach $2 billion - double the earlier estimate of about $1 billion. The general manager said the current estimate is between $1.4 billion and $2 billion. He said the biggest factor in the cost increase is meeting the Design Basis Threat, the standard to counter terrorism. Dials said the schedule for building the production facility, which will be next door to the uranium storehouse, is slipping significantly as officials await the next step - called Critical Decision-1 - in the federal approval process. With the design still in its earliest stages, construction apparently won't be accomplished until well after 2015 - the original target. That's not good news from the Y-12 perspective, obviously, but Dials did manage to find a positive. He suggested the stretched-out schedule for UPF could improve the chances of getting such a big project funded through Congress. As noted in a recent story, security police at the government's Oak Ridge facilities now have grenades in their arsenal. They have hand grenades and 40-millimeter devices used in grenade launchers, as part of the M4 rifle system, which have a range of about 350 meters. At this time, however, security police train exclusively with dummy grenades - inert devices - because the Central Training Facility doesn't have a range approved for the explosives. That's the word from Jean "John" Burleson, general manager of Wackenhut Services, the government's security contractor in Oak Ridge. "The only difference is you don't get the big boom," Burleson said of the dummy grenades. There are plans to develop a grenade range in Oak Ridge, but that isn't going to happen anytime soon. In the meantime, training with live grenades apparently would have to take place at one of the military bases. According to Wackenhut, the Lenco Bearcat, a fully armored vehicle that totes a Dillon Aero Gatling gun capable of firing 3,000 rounds per minute, is quite a nimble machine. The 19-foot vehicle can reportedly do a complete turn in a 17-foot radius. Why's that important? Apparently so that these mean machines can maneuver in the tight quarters around the production and storage facilities at Y-12. By the way, a fully loaded Lenco Bearcat - with its big gun - costs about $450,000. Security police also have a fleet of Advanced Concept Armored Vehicles, which are Ford F-350 trucks that have been armored and equipped with remotely operated weapon systems. They cost about $330,000 apiece. Senior writer Frank Munger covers the Department of Energy for the News Sentinel. He may be reached at 865-342-6329 or at munger@knews.com. Copyright 2007, Knoxville News Sentinel Co. ***************************************************************** 43 Hanford News: Hanford cleanup: Delay requested for tax decision - Senators ask Department of Revenue to allow time for Legislature to act This story was published Tuesday, May 8th, 2007 Chris Mulick, Herald Olympia bureau OLYMPIA - State Sen. Jerome Delvin and Rep. Bill Grant, D-Walla Walla, sent a letter to the Department of Revenue on Monday asking it to hold off on charging Lockheed Martin a higher business tax rate until the Legislature can address it next year. And House Speaker Frank Chopp, D-Seattle, said recently that he'd be willing to reconsider a bill to resolve the issue that languished during this year's recently completed session. "It is our intention to build on the momentum created by SB 6071/HB 2330 and to introduce similar bills during next year's legislative session," Delvin and Grant wrote in their letter. "Support for such legislation is growing." In 1996 the Legislature approved a preferential business and occupation tax rate of 0.471 percent of gross receipts for contractors cleaning up Hanford. But in 2005 the Department of Revenue revised an agency rule determining what kind of work would qualify for the tax break, indicating that support services would not. Lockheed Martin, which provides information technology services at Hanford, pushed a bill in Olympia this year to clarify that such services would qualify, hoping to not only avoid higher taxes in the future but also a bill for a decade's worth of unpaid taxes. Bills were introduced in both chambers in February but just two weeks before they had to clear their first cutoff hurdles. Even after they failed hope remained one might emerge late in session. Senate leaders indicated they might be willing but House leaders favored tax breaks for other causes. "Jerome and I worked on that but in the end we simply couldn't jar it loose," Gregoire told the Herald recently. Chopp said after the Legislature adjourned that he is willing to take a second look. "The wish list on tax incentives was shrunk," he said. "We were not sure it was the right policy. This one just didn't jell but we're open to considering it in the future." The Department of Revenue estimated the bill would cost the state about $1.1 million a year to start with. Supporters say that's money that will come out of cleanup activities if the tax break isn't allowed. © 2007 Tri-City Herald. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 44 Hanford News: University nuclear reactors tighten security This story was published Wednesday, May 9th, 2007 By Alan Scher Zagier, Associated Press writer COLUMBIA, Mo. (AP) - In a concession to the continuing specter of terrorist threats, the dozens of nuclear reactors on college campuses nationwide are tightening the security checks required for employees. The federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission issued an April 30 order requiring the nation's 33 research and test reactors, most of which are located at universities, to fingerprint and conduct FBI background checks of anyone with "unescorted access" to radioactive material. The order follows an identical requirement put in place eight months ago for reactor workers with access to sensitive security information. Compared to commercial power reactors, the core size and amount of irradiated fuel at research reactors is minuscule. But unlike commercial nuclear power plants, research reactors can be found in densely populated areas, near college dormitories and classrooms, and are often overseen by campus security guards. The University of Missouri site - the nation's largest campus-based reactor - is within earshot of the school's football stadium and basketball arena. And the reactor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, the nation's second largest, is ensconced in the urban Cambridge campus near Boston. Technical and financial limitations prevent those two reactors from immediately converting their power source to a safer fuel. Both Missouri and MIT use highly enriched uranium, an ingredient crucial to building nuclear weapons. The new federal requirements duplicate existing security precautions at the Missouri reactor, said director Ralph Butler. "We continually look at, review and adjust our access controls," he said. "This order really codifies what we're already doing." MIT also had such safeguards in place before the NRC directive, said reactor director John Bernard. "We're already in compliance with the order," he said. "It's no big deal." Research reactors sprouted worldwide after President Eisenhower's "Atoms for Peace" program in 1953, including at dozens of American colleges. By 1978, Cold War tensions and security concerns prompted a Department of Energy initiative to convert the fuel used at research reactors to the low-enriched alternative more commonly found at commercial power reactors. Three decades later, that process remains unfinished. At least 40 research reactors worldwide have already been converted, including those at the University of Michigan, Ohio State University and the Georgia Institute of Technology. University research reactors at Oregon State, Purdue, Washington and Wisconsin are scheduled for conversion during the next several years. The emphasis on conversion of American research reactors increased after the 2001 terrorist attacks, when the NRC ordered enhanced security at nuclear sites because of concerns that terrorists would target such power supplies. © 2007 Tri-City Herald. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 45 Hanford News: Audit doubts vit plant system This story was published Wednesday, May 9th, 2007 Annette Cary, Herald staff writer A $13 million control system purchased for Hanford's vitrification plant may not meet nuclear safety standards, according to an audit of the Department of Energy's Office of Inspector General. If further tests or studies cannot show the system is adequate, it may need to be improved or replaced at substantial cost, said the audit, which was released Tuesday. The cost would come out of the contingency budget for the $12.2 billion plant, according to DOE. Contractor Bechtel National said it split the control systems for the plant into those that affect nuclear safety and those that do not pose a radiological threat to workers, the public or the environment. The control system being questioned by the audit meets high standards, but an engineering analysis showed it did not have a safety-related function that would require it to meet nuclear safety standards, said John Britton, spokesman for Bechtel National. The system monitors the status of pumps, mixers and flow rates of radioactive waste in the plant during a treatment process to turn it into a stable glass form for permanent disposal. The plant will be used to treat millions of gallons of high-level radioactive waste left from the past production of plutonium for the nation's nuclear weapons program. But the audit said that the system, as part of the larger control network, affects the quality of the glassified high-level radioactive waste. Commercial software and hardware were purchased for the system when Bechtel National received no bids that would have met nuclear quality standards, the audit found. There was some confusion at the time as procurement standards were being changed for the vitrification plant with DOE approval, the audit said. But the higher standard, which requires extensive documentation of materials and methods, may be necessary for the glassified waste to be accepted at a federal repository in Yucca Mountain, Nev., the audit said. DOE is investigating whether the system as purchased will meet disposal requirements. Like Bechtel, it questions whether the control system falls under nuclear safety requirements. DOE plans to make improvements in procedures, however. It will provide better oversight of Bechtel National's procurement process and is starting a review of the contractor's procurement system, complying with a recommendation of the auditor. DOE also has begun a separate review of its own and Bechtel National's quality assurance standards to see if there are issues that need to be addressed. © 2007 Tri-City Herald. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 46 Tri-City Herald: Hanford budget discussion tonight Published Wednesday, May 9th, 2007 By the Herald staff The public may comment on the Hanford budget being prepared for fiscal year 2009 at 5 p.m. today at the Clarion Hotel, 1515 George Washington Way, Richland. A brief overview of proposed cleanup of the nuclear reservation in 2009 will start the meeting. The event is being held by the Department of Energy, the Environmental Protection Agency and the Washington Department of Ecology. Comments also may be made online at www.hanford.gov. For a recap of the meeting, read Thursday's Herald. © 2007 Tri-City Herald, Associated Press & Other Wire Services ***************************************************************** 47 SF Chronicle: UC-led team to manage nuclear lab / University lowered fee to keep Livermore National Lab deal Zachary Coile and Keay Davidson, Chronicle Staff Writers Wednesday, May 9, 2007 (05-09) 04:00 PDT Washington -- The University of California kept its $1.7 billion contract to manage Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory for at least the next seven years by creating a partnership with private companies and underbidding its chief competition, defense giant Northrop Grumman. The university has now won both competitions to run the nation's premier nuclear weapons labs -- Livermore and Los Alamos National Lab in New Mexico -- despite a checkered history that has included safety incidents, lost and mishandled classified data and, at Los Alamos, theft and fraud by employees. Energy Department officials announced the decision Tuesday, saying the bidding team led by UC and San Francisco engineering firm Bechtel appeared stronger on science and technology, making it the clear choice to run the 8,500-employee lab. "Livermore National Laboratory is a critical part of our nuclear weapons complex and has been for the last 55 years," Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman said. "For the first time since the beginning of the laboratory, a new contractor is coming to Livermore." But Livermore's "new" managers are hardly that: UC has run the lab since 1952 and has managed Los Alamos since 1943, and its scientists have played a lead role since UC Berkeley physicist J. Robert Oppenheimer launched the age of atomic weapons. What's new is the structure UC officials put together to save the contract. The university formed a new entity -- Lawrence Livermore National Security LLC -- with Bechtel, BWX Technologies and Washington Group International, the same partners it tapped to secure the Los Alamos contract last year over defense contractor Lockheed Martin. The university also added Battelle, an Ohio-based nonprofit corporation that helps run five other national labs and has a stellar reputation with the Energy Department. Battelle will be in charge of raking in more money from other federal agencies for Livermore's research on homeland security, climate change, energy and other non-nuclear weapons work. UC even recruited another university partner: Texas A&M University, a school with engineering expertise that has been looking for a role at a national lab. "We used the same model as the Los Alamos bid," said UC Regent Gerald Parsky, who played a key backstage role and is now board chairman of the Los Alamos and Lawrence Livemore management entities. UC clearly had an edge in the science, with its world-class reputation and stable of Nobel Prize winners. But Energy Department officials, frustrated with the university's inability to halt security breaches and safety lapses, has been demanding a more corporate style of management at the labs. "This puts the university in a position where it has its maximum strengths -- namely in science and technology -- but it leaves the management, operations and security in the hands of the private sector," Parsky said. "It's a good example of public-private cooperation." The decision was cheered by California officials, who once feared the Bush administration would deal a blow to UC's prestige by yanking the contract for the Livermore lab, located in Alameda County just west of the Altamont Pass. Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger called it "a great victory for the people of California and the University of California." But some critics complained the Energy Department was rewarding the university and lab managers for a history of management failures. "Obviously, past performance means nothing to the officials at the Department of Energy," said Peter Stockton, a senior investigator at the Project on Government Oversight. "It is ridiculous that after years of security breaches and safety debacles (the department) would decide that the best way to fix these problems is by hiring the same incompetent contractors." But officials at the Energy Department's National Nuclear Security Administration said the two competitions for Los Alamos and Livermore forced UC to change the way it operates. "I think they recognized that things had to be done differently," said Tyler Przybylek, a top federal official in charge of the Livermore decision. The UC team won in part by offering to accept a smaller management fee than Northrop Grumman and its partners, agency officials said. They will be paid $45.5 million a year for seven years to run the lab, which has an annual budget of $1.7 billion. The deal also includes the possibility of extending the contract by up to 13 additional years, one year at a time -- so UC and its partners could earn $910 million in management fees over the 20-year life of the contract. But those fees would be cut by the agency if UC and its partners failed to meet certain performance targets. Livermore Director George Miller, who will head the new entity, said the announcement will not significantly affect any existing programs at the lab -- including its selection as designer of the nation's new nuclear warhead, the Reliable Replacement Warhead. Miller also said the selection of the UC-Bechtel consortium won't affect jobs at the lab: Under the new contract, "all current employees will be offered a job." Miller said the lab "absolutely" remains committed to removing all plutonium stored on site by 2014, as it has previously promised to do. Where the plutonium will be sent remains unclear, though. The lab is estimated to have hundreds of pounds of plutonium -- enough to make dozens of nuclear weapons -- on site. This article appeared on page B - 1 of the San Francisco Chronicle ***************************************************************** 48 Guardian Unlimited: UC Team Gets Livermore Contract From the Associated Press Wednesday May 9, 2007 8:16 AM By ERICA WERNER Associated Press Writer WASHINGTON (AP) - A team co-led by the University of California is getting the management contract for Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory despite past problems at the lab under the university's management, the Energy Department announced Tuesday. The decision comes after a series of financial and security gaffes at the nation's premier nuclear weapons labs - Lawrence Livermore in northern California and Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico - led the federal government to require competitive bidding for the management contracts for the first time. The University of California had managed both labs since their inception. ``The University of California knows how to do research and development. It's the largest research institution at least in the country if not in the world,'' Tyler Przybylek, senior adviser at the National Nuclear Security Administration, said in announcing the decision. At the same time Przybylek emphasized that UC will be partnering with Bechtel National Inc. to provide the management know-how that has sometimes been lacking at Lawrence Livermore. A UC-Bechtel team won the Los Alamos contract in 2005. Los Alamos has struggled with security lapses, credit card abuses, theft of equipment and other instances of mismanagement that subjected it to withering criticism from Congress, and led to the 2003 decision to bid out the contracts. Problems at Livermore were less dramatic but included the disappearance of an electronic key card and the loss of keys to perimeter gates and office doors. California officials welcomed the decision to keep UC involved at both Lawrence Livermore and Los Alamos. Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger said it ``reaffirms the high standards of our public university system and the high quality of the talented and insightful employees at our research institutions.'' The UC-Bechtel team also includes BWX Technologies Inc.; Texas A&M University; Washington Group International; and Battelle Memorial Institute. The group beat out a team led by Northrop Grumman Corp. The seven-year contract allows a maximum payment of $45.5 million per year depending on performance, with possible extensions for 13 more years. The annual budget of the lab is $1.6 billion. In March, the Bush administration selected Lawrence Livermore for a controversial new weapons program that could lead to a new generation of nuclear warheads. Congress has reacted skeptically. Lawrence Livermore, an 8,000-employee lab that opened its doors about 50 miles east of San Francisco in 1952, also works on stewardship of existing nuclear weapon stockpiles and conducts a variety of scientific research. The Energy Department's decision to stick with UC drew criticism from a government watchdog group. ``It is ridiculous that after years of security breaches and safety debacles DOE would decide that the best way to fix these problems is by hiring the same incompetent contractors,'' said Peter Stockton, senior investigator for the Project On Government Oversight. Guardian Unlimited © Guardian News and Media Limited 2007 ***************************************************************** 49 ContraCostaTimes.com: Livermore lab still in UC control University beats out defense contractor in bid to run lab for another seven years; institution will work with private sector The University of California has beat out defense giant Northrop Grumman to remain at the helm of Lawrence Livermore nuclear weapons lab for at least seven more years, Article Launched: 05/09/2007 03:04:23 AM PDT The University of California has beat out defense giant Northrop Grumman to remain at the helm of Lawrence Livermore nuclear weapons lab for at least seven more years, albeit in a private partnership with corporations and even another university. The news, announced Tuesday by the Energy Department, surprised almost no one. The decision on the management of the $1.6 billion-a-year lab preserves UC's long monopoly over the design of U.S. nuclear explosives and for the first time hands that research over to a private-sector team. It also passes most responsibility for safety, security and other headaches of running a national-security lab to San Francisco-based Bechtel National and other industrial partners. "We think the approach is the right approach," said Tyler Przybylek, senior adviser to the Energy Department's weapons arm. He said the UC/Bechtel-led team offered a "more integrated approach of operations, security, safety, business, joining in to enable better science. More science for the same money; safer, less time wasted on responding to screw-ups. I think that's what we're going to see, and we're willing to put our money and our time where our mouth is." What the new, private business approach means remains to be seen. An almost identical new management team at Livermore's sister lab, Los Alamos in New Mexico, still is having problems with security and lost weapons secrets. The drive for new bomb lab management turned serious in 2004, after persistent problems with waste, poor safety and lax security under the sole UC management of Los Alamos. The Bush administration and Congress grew fed up and ordered every national lab operated by a single contractor for 50 years or more put up for competitive bid. The measure clearly targeted UC and its operation of Lawrence Berkeley basic science lab and the nuclear explosives labs, Los Alamos and Lawrence Livermore. At the time, the smart money among defense scientists and government contractors said UC would lose at least one of those prestigious labs, probably Los Alamos, the most distant from California and the most troubled. Outside die-hard UC partisans, almost no one figured UC would keep running all three. Yet that's what happened. UC and its cadre of scientist-managers ended up beating two of the world's biggest defense contractors and their professional acquisitions teams. The core victory for UC came in December 2005 at Los Alamos against Lockheed Martin, the world's largest defense firm and veteran operator of weapons labs in the United States and United Kingdom. Initially, the university spurned 50-50 partnerships first with Lockheed Martin and then with another veteran national lab contractor, Battelle Memorial Institute. But UC eventually dropped its insistence on being the dominant player and, with Bechtel, managed to convince federal contracting officials that past management failures -- losses of classified nuclear weapons information, repeated and serious accidents, plus misspending and equipment thefts -- were largely irrelevant because a new private industry-academic partnership could not help but do better. In the Livermore competition, Northrop Grumman, the nation's third-largest defense firm, pitched a novel consolidation between the lab and the Northrop-operated Nevada Test Site. But the Northrop team, which also featured environmental and cleanup specialists AECom and CH2M Hill, lacked any academic or basic research component. The UC-Bechtel-led team -- nuclear specialists BWX Technologies and Washington Group, plus Battelle, with expertise in defense and homeland security work, and Texas A&M University -- submitted a slightly lower cost bid and scored higher overall, especially for senior executive management and science and technology. The UC-Bechtel team also had another leg up: In March, the DOE's weapons arm selected UC scientists at Livermore to design the first of several proposed "reliable, replacement warheads" for the U.S. arsenal. That choice, according to some observers, made it unlikely the government would hand management of the lab over to Northrop, a defense contractor that has never carried a nuclear weapon through design to production. With good performance, the UC-Bechtel team could make more than $297.5 million during the next seven years and win extensions one year at a time for another 13 years. The shift began Tuesday from UC-only management to private management by the UC-Bechtel-led consortium and will be complete Oct. 1, when all 8,500 Livermore lab workers become employees of Lawrence Livermore National Security LLC. DOE officials say the posh new fees -- several times what the nonprofit university was paid -- are incentive to find new efficiencies and drive out waste. But the lab's federal budgets are staying roughly the same. That means new contractor fees of more than $40 million a year, plus as much as $140 million in state franchise taxes and an undisclosed amount in contributions to a newly formed pension plan will be new and unreimbursed costs. The lab will be running on less. But lab director and LLNS president George Miller suggested the savings are expected from efficiencies, attrition and other changes rather than subcontractor layoffs such as Los Alamos resorted to last year. "We have anticipated this and put programs in place to allow a very smooth transition," Miller said of the added costs. "The new company will be making changes but it's more in the context of within the normal processes that go on within the laboratory. We will be making changes to strengthen the individual safety security, business practices within the laboratory." UC partners The University of California's partners in the Lawrence Livermore National Security LLC, which won the contract to manage Lawrence Livermore Laboratory for the next seven years, include Texas A&M University and four companies: BECHTEL NATIONAL INC.-- Based in San Francisco with 40,000 employees in 50 countries, Bechtel specializes in engineering, construction and project management. The company has worked on environmental cleanup projects at Department of Energy sites and is also a partner in managing several National Nuclear Security Administration sites including Los Alamos Lab and the Y-12 National Security Complex in Tennessee and the Pantex Plant in Texas. BWX TECHNOLOGIES INC.-- Based in Lynchburg, Va., with 11,000 employees in 11 states, BWXT specializes in managing nuclear and national security operations and has supplied nuclear products and services to the U.S. government. The company is a partner in operations at the Y-12 National Security Complex, the Pantex Plant and Los Alamos and Idaho National Laboratories. WASHINGTON GROUP INTERNATIONAL -- Based in Boise, Idaho, the company has been a contractor for the DOE (and its predecessors) since 1942, specializing in integrated engineering, construction and management solutions. Washington Group is involved in management and operations at numerous DOE sites including Los Alamos and Idaho National Laboratories and the Savannah River Site. BATTELLE -- Based in Columbus, Ohio, with 20,000 employees worldwide, Battelle is the world's largest nonprofit independent research-and-development organization. The organization specializes in solutions to important problems such as climate change, health-care diagnostics and security. Battelle is involved in managing five DOE sites and is a new addition to the team for the Livermore bid. LaWrence Livermore fast facts One of the nation's two nuclear weapons labs, Lawrence Livermore Laboratory has been run by the University of California since it opened its doors in 1952. The lab's official mission is to ensure national security and apply science and technology to the important issues of our time. The lab employs more than 8,000 people with an annual budget of $1.6 billion dollars. ***************************************************************** 50 Guardian Unlimited: Atty: Former Lab Worker to Be Charged From the Associated Press Wednesday May 9, 2007 4:46 AM By DEBORAH BAKER Associated Press Writer SANTA FE, N.M. (AP) - The former Los Alamos National Laboratory worker who took secret data home will face a single misdemeanor charge of negligent handling of classified documents, her lawyer said Tuesday. Jessica Quintana, 23, is scheduled to be arraigned May 15 before a federal magistrate in Albuquerque, her attorney Stephen Aarons said. ``She hasn't been charged, but we've reached an agreement as to what she will be charged with,'' Aarons said in an interview. Police found the data - on a portable computer storage drive and in about 200 pages of paper documents - last October during a drug bust at her Los Alamos home. The discovery renewed the furor over security problems at the nuclear weapons lab. The Department of Energy's inspector general found that security was ``seriously flawed,'' and the breach was the subject of congressional hearings. Aarons said Quintana, who formerly worked for a lab contractor, plans to plead guilty and could face up to a year in prison. Federal prosecutors would not agree to make any recommendation as to sentencing, he said. ``We're hoping that she gets no jail time, but that's going to be up to the federal judge,'' the lawyer said. The U.S. attorney's office did not immediately return a phone message left late Tuesday seeking comment. Quintana was working as an archivist at the lab when she took the data. Aarons has said she was converting documents to an electronic format and took them home to catch up on her work. Pleading guilty would be ``an acceptance of responsibility,'' Aarons said. ``We've always said she made a mistake here.'' Lab officials said none of the material was top secret and that it did not contain the most sensitive nuclear weapons information. Most of it was classified at the lowest levels and was 20 to 30 years old, officials said. The drug bust involved Justin Stone, a self-described meth addict who was renting a room in Quintana's home. He pleaded guilty last month to receiving stolen property and a probation violation, and was sentenced to five years' probation and ordered to a rehabilitation program. Guardian Unlimited © Guardian News and Media Limited 2007 ***************************************************************** 51 # People's Defender: A Piketon update and clarification Thursday May 10, 2007 Editorial Jean Schmidt U.S. Rep. One of the biggest challenges that public officials face is separating facts from rhetoric. A while back, handbills were distributed and phone calls made claiming that I supported a nuclear waste dump at the Department of Energy's facility at Piketon. In fact, quite the opposite is true. I will be introducing legislation this week that will prevent such a thing from ever happening at the Piketon Plant. The confusion centered around a proposal for the Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion plant - more commonly known as the Piketon Plant - located in Pike County. The proposed study is part of the Department of Energy's new program known as "GNEP," which stands for the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership. GNEP is a program that plans to recycle spent fuel rods and convert them to new fuel for our nation's nuclear power plants. GNEP holds promise for revitalizing nuclear power in the United States, increasing our national security and reducing nuclear waste in our environment. In the United States, nuclear power provides one-fifth of our electricity and reduces the annual release of millions of tons of CO2 emissions. Nuclear power will continue to play a significant role in meeting our energy needs. The major draw back to nuclear power is the waste. Spent fuel rods are to be stored in Yucca Mountain, which is located in Nevada, once construction of the waste storage site is completed. The GNEP recycling program will allow us to reduce both the volume of waste at the Yucca Mountain site and the radioactivity of that waste. The Department of Energy's Piketon facility currently houses a uranium-enrichment facility - the American Centrifuge Project. Soon all of the nuclear fuel made in America will be enriched at the Piketon Plant. The plant has a long and proud history of enriching uranium. With the full support of the local unions, local elected officials, and businesses, community leaders have submitted a proposal to add the GNEP project to the Piketon facility's responsibilities. In fact, Piketon has been chosen as one of eleven sites the Department of Energy is reviewing. Billions of dollars of investment and thousands of jobs will go to the final site selected. Some have mischaracterized dramatically the proposed GNEP project. They use rhetoric describing the program as a plan to put a nuclear waste dump at Piketon. Yucca Mountain is the repository for nuclear waste in the Untied States and no one is trying to alter that. My legislation makes that point crystal clear. Under my legislation it would be illegal for the government to build a so-called GNEP nuclear waste dump at Piketon. I don't know if Piketon will be selected. The GNEP competition is fierce. I do know there will be no nuclear waste dump constructed in Piketon or anywhere else in the Second Congressional District. I will continue to keep you updated on the proposed GNEP project. Software © 1998-2007 1up! Software, All Rights Reserved ***************************************************************** 52 lamonitor.com: Bechtel, UC chosen for Livermore contract The Online News Source for Los Alamos Los Alamos formula pleases nuke managers ROGER SNODGRASS Monitor Assistant Editor A twin of Los Alamos National Security, with a remarkably similar if not identical pedigree, has won the contract to manage Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. The new contract for LLNL goes to Lawrence Livermore National Security, or LLNS, the Department of Energy announced Tuesday. Rather than the University of California running the two nuclear weapons design laboratories, as it had done more than half a century, the operators are now LANS and LLNS (pronounced "LINS"). Despite similarities, they are legally distinct, stand-alone, limited liability manifestations of UC and Bechtel and miscellaneous partners. At Los Alamos National Laboratory, Director Michael Anastasio, a former director of LLNL congratulated George Miller, who is the current and the designated director of LLNL, as well as the chief executive officer of the new management company, LLNS. "I look forward to building on our many successful collaborations with Livermore as well as creating new ones in support of U.S. national security," Anastasio said in a prepared announcement. Among Miller's first acts was to name Steve Liedle, a principal vice-president of Bechtel, to be deputy director of LLNL, much as Anastasio immediately named John Mitchell of Bechtel to be his deputy. Mitchell retired at the end of 2006. Gerald Parsky, chairman of the board of regents of UC and chairman of the board of governors of LANS will also be chairman of the board of governors of LLNS. LLNS vice-chair will be Tom Hash, president of Bechtel National, the government services arm of the Bechtel Group, who is also vice-chair of the Los Alamos laboratory's board of governors. While UC has lost its preeminence at the two laboratories, Bechtel has moved in to capture second place at LANL and first place at LLNL, according to the federal officials who managed the competition and selection. Tyler Przybylek, who chaired the source evaluation board that selected LANS in December 2005, was the selecting official who has now chosen LLNS. Although he said he was not at liberty to discuss the specifics, Przybylek said "UC has the largest but not controlling share (at LANL)," whereas "in the case of LLNS, Bechtel owns the largest share." Of the two remarkably similar entities managing the two labs, Przybeylek added, "They are two separate limited liability corporations. They are distinct. They just have a lot of things in common." Contract highlights For those who experienced the change in management at Los Alamos National Laboratory on June 1, 2006, there will be many familiar aspects to the Livermore deal. The contract runs for seven years, with 13 years of optional extensions, depending on performance. The maximum performance fee amounts to $45.5 million per year to manage LLNL. It is less than LANL's maximum performance fee of $80 million, largely because LLNL's contract with DOE is relatively smaller, but is based on similar fractions of guaranteed and performance-based fees. Current employees will be retained with "substantially equivalent" compensation and benefits. New employees pensions and benefits will be based on a "market plan" devised by the employer. The new managers at LLNL, as at LANL include Washington Group International and BWX Technologies. A new marquee partner Batelle Memorial Institute which manages five national laboratories, has been added to the Livermore team, along with Texas A&M University, rather than the consortium of New Mexico Universities that were included in the LANL bid. "The LLNS team members will bring lessons learned and best practices to the laboratory from their experience in managing a majority of NNSA's weapons complex sites and a majority of the department's national laboratories," the NNSA announcement stated, echoing the rationale for having chosen LANS to manage LANL. The announcement said the new company would have a goal of saving 20 percent in support costs in three years. New budget demands anticipated In a press conference after the announcement, Miller was asked if his proposal anticipated the kind of funding problems LANL encountered as it laid off hundreds of sub-contractor employees and reduced laboratory employment through attrition during its first year in business. Miller was asked if he was taking into account new costs, management fees, taxes and pension expenses that would have to come out of the existing budget. "A simple answer is 'yes," we're taking it into account," Miller said, although he deferred the answer until the LLNS contract takes effect Oct. 1. Pressed on budget impacts, Miller said, "We do not yet have a detailed breakdown of all that." He added that there would be negotiations with other legal entities "to help us decide what taxes we are going to be subject to." As a for-profit entity, LANL immediately faced an increase in state and local gross receipts taxes that was estimated at about $50 million for the first year. Miller said he did not anticipate any substantial change in number of full- time employees at Lawrence Livermore. "Speaking as the current lab director, we have anticipated this and put programs in place to allow for a very smooth transition," he said. A partnership lead by Grumman lost the contract. That bid included Nuclear Fuel Services, CH2M Hill, AECOM and Wackenhut. Przybylek said that the LLNS proposal was both the highest rated and the lowest cost of the two finalists. Not all observers were enthusiastic about the selection. Peter Stockton, senior investigator for the Project on Government Oversight, sent out a statement in response to the selection. "It is ridiculous that after years of security breaches and safety debacles DOE would decide that the best way to fix these problems is by hiring the same incompetent contractors. This decision truly fits the definition of 'insanity,'" he wrote. Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman, in his announcement to the employees at LLNL, said the contract would average about $1.7 billion a year over the seven-year initial term. © 2003 Los Alamos Monitor All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 53 sacbee.com: UC will remain major player at lab - A new partnership will run Livermore nuclear facility. By Michael Doyle - Bee Washington Bureau Published 12:00 am PDT Wednesday, May 9, 2007 WASHINGTON -- The University of California on Tuesday survived recurring controversy to retain a hand in running the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. The renowned nuclear weapons lab, located in the shadow of Altamont Pass, will now be managed by a new partnership of corporate and university collaborators. The Energy Department calls the seven-year contract a fresh start for a lab that's sometimes squirmed under the spotlight. "For the first time in the history of the laboratory, a new contractor is coming to Livermore," Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman said Tuesday. Called Lawrence Livermore National Security, the winning lab contractor includes as partners Texas A&M University and the engineering giant Bechtel. Lawrence Livermore National Security can earn up to $45.5 million a year if it does a good job running the lab. The University of California, which has managed Lawrence Livermore since the lab's founding in 1952, created the new corporation and remains a major player in it. "We are delighted at the opportunity to continue playing a role in supporting the laboratory's mission of scientific achievement in the interests of national security and global cooperation," University of California President Robert C. Dynes said. The University of California team bested another partnership led by defense contractor Northrop Grumman. It was the first time there was formal competition for the lab contract. With its $1.6 billion budget, Lawrence Livermore has long put its stamp on both national security and the northern San Joaquin Valley. Nearly one-quarter of the lab's 8,600 employees live in the Valley, and the lab's contaminated Site 300 test area west of Tracy typically stores an average of 10,000 pounds of high explosives. More famously, Lawrence Livermore scientists designed Polaris nuclear warheads in the 1950s, multiple-entry warheads in the 1960s and the world's most powerful laser in the 1980s, among other breakthroughs. "It fostered the creation of the United States' nuclear deterrent," noted Rep. Ellen Tauscher, the Antioch Democrat whose district includes the 7,000-acre lab facility, "and today it enables the safety, security and reliability of our strategic deterrent without live testing." Lawrence Livermore has repeatedly been lauded by federal overseers. "(The lab) has continued to make 'outstanding' contributions to research and development," the National Nuclear Security Administration concluded in its 2004 formal appraisal. Recurring management problems, though, also helped prompt the university to look for additional partners when the Lawrence Livermore contract came up for renewal. The current contract expires Sept. 30. Critics, for instance, once questioned whether the lab's plutonium supplies were vulnerable to terrorist attack. The federal government's otherwise laudatory 2004 appraisal warned the lab was at "an unsatisfactory performance level" in facility safety. "We had significant problems with lost keys at ... Lawrence Livermore," Linton F. Brooks, administrator of the National Nuclear Security Administration, told a House panel in March 2005. "Although in no case could those keys allow access to special nuclear material ... we saw their loss as a sign that security procedures needed improvement." More recently, government auditors noted that Lawrence Livermore's stadium-sized laser, called the National Ignition Facility, will cost at least $1.7 billion more than originally planned and will be opening six years late. Experienced partners are supposed to help fend off such problems. The Lawrence Livermore partnership also includes Battelle Memorial Institute, Washington Group International and several smaller firms. Battelle runs nuclear facilities including the Oak Ridge National Laboratory. About the writer: * The Bee's Michael Doyle can be reached at (202) 383-0006 or mdoyle@mcclatchydc.com. Copyright © The Sacramento Bee, (916) 321-1000 ***************************************************************** 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: *****************************************************************