*****************************************************************
05/21/07 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 15.119
*****************************************************************
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 Comment is free: Brown's nuclear opportunity
NUCLEAR REACTORS
2 US: Nukewatch: Defunct Reactor Core Readied for Shipment
3 IPS-English GULF: Peaceful nuclear programme committee meets
4 The Hindu: Rejig of Russian N-sector delays atomic power plants in I
5 SunHerald.com: Proposed nuclear reactor raises concerns
6 BBC NEWS: MSPs 'against' new nuclear power
7 Platts: UK planning, energy white papers to prepare way for new nucl
8 US: NRC: NRC Honors Employees on June 22 in Rockville, MD
9 Pravda.Ru: Fire at Russian factory that makes nuclear plant componen
10 AFP: US, Algeria to sign nuclear energy deal -
11 London Times: Fast-track planning for nuclear plants and superstores
12 US: Tennessean: We must be ready to meet the demand -
13 US: Tennessean: Simple desire for the option doesn't seal nuclear sa
14 US: NRC: NRC Announces Appointment of New Member to the Advisory Com
15 US: Brattleboro Reformer: Veto would scrap more than VY tax
16 Xinhua: Emerging opportunity in China's power industry
17 The Herald: Action and reaction for British Energy
18 US: NRC: NRC Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards to Meet in
19 Reuters: Britain's energy future hangs in balance
20 Reuters: Gulf Arabs pursue nuclear plans with Riyadh talks
21 UPI: Analysis: India, Mideast cozy over energy
22 US: UPI: Analysis: Nuclear resurrection on horizon
23 UPI: Brazil, India to talk nuclear business
24 UPI: Outside View: Nuclear CO2 warming costs
25 UPI: Japan wants G8 nuke power guidelines
26 Hemscott: Vinci unit acquires UK specialist in decommissioning nucle
27 Deccan Herald: Nuclear plants at Kudankulam will be delayed
28 US: Decatur Daily: Restart at Browns Ferry Unit 1 expected soon
29 Radio Australia: Nuclear investigator Blix awarded Sydney Peace Priz
30 AU ABC: Attitude change needed on nuclear power says Govt taskforce.
31 Hindustan Times: N-deal awaits final push by PM, Bush-
32 Hindustan Times: Amidst wrinkles in US, Russia delivers nuclear fuel
33 US: MarketWatch: States maneuver to lure new nuclear power plants -
34 MidLothian Today: 'Most MSPs oppose nuclear power'
35 Guardian Unlimited: Nuclear plant towers blown up
36 Guardian Unlimited: Holyrood to clash with Westminster over nuclear
NUCLEAR SECURITY
NUCLEAR SAFETY
37 MalaysiaSun.com: Chernobyl lurking in Himalaya's main rivers?
NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE
38 ReviewJournal.com: Barack Obama explains Yucca Mountain stance
39 US: Sioux City Journal: South Dakota uranium contamination limited
40 US: cantonrep.com: Strickland, House members push for Piketon nuclea
41 US: Rapid City Journal: Cold war-era uranium 'didn't travel very far
42 US: The Australian: ALP switch sparks uranium rush
43 US: UPI: Russian expert warns of uranium shortage
44 US: Air Force Times: McClellan toxic waste plan angers locals -
45 US: sacbee.com: Toxic-pits cleanup dropped -
PEACE
US DEPT. OF ENERGY
46 SPI: Full construction on Hanford vit plant to resume in 4 months
47 Hanford News: Known for its freedom, unique nuclear lab faces closur
48 Tri-City Herald: Massive Hanford project to resume (w/ video)
49 Hanford News: Massive Hanford project to resume
50 Hanford News: DOE sees another missed deadline in dealing with sludg
51 Chillicothe Gazette: Strickland joins push for project in Piketon
52 Inside Bay Area: Livermore Lab to expand biodefense
53 KAMR Amarillo: More Pantex Talks Scheduled - Matt Orlando
54 lamonitor.com: Contamination of Rio Grande grew after Cerro Grande
55 KnoxNews: Giant game of musical chairs coming to Y-12
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
FULL NEWS STORIES
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
1 Comment is free: Brown's nuclear opportunity
guardian.co.uk/commentisfree > Kate Hudson
Despite his unpopular replacement of Trident, the new prime minister
has a great chance to change government policy.
Kate Hudson
May 21, 2007 2:30 PM | Printable version
Where will Gordon Brown go on nuclear weapons? Last June, his
controversial Mansion House speech was widely interpreted as an
endorsement for the replacement of Trident. But could Mr Brown's
commitment to a different type of politics: "more open and frank
dialogue ... never losing touch with the concerns of people" lead to
a new look at Britain's nuclear weapons? The decision to replace
Trident, pushed through parliament at top speed in March, was not
popular with the public. A poll shortly before the debate and vote
indicated that 72% of the population were either opposed to a
replacement or to taking a decision at this point. Hardly a
resounding popular endorsement - more a result that indicates
genuine popular concern.
That concern is not confined to Britain. The nuclear
non-proliferation treaty conference, meeting in Vienna in the first
half of this month, also gave strong indications of the concern of
much of the international community about the modernisation of
nuclear weapons systems and the failure to make progress towards
nuclear disarmament, as required by the treaty.
The conference chair's summary outlined a number of very significant
issues that Mr Brown would do well to take note of, and which
Britain could actually do much to help resolve, if so minded:
• Concern was voiced about plans to replace or modernise nuclear
weapons and their means of delivery - a clear message about Trident
replacement. So far, officials have suggested that there has been
hardly any negative feedback on the decision; this is no longer the
case. A rethink is called for.
• Concern was expressed about the abrogation of the anti-ballistic
missile treaty and the development of missile defence systems - this
refers primarily to the US national missile defence programme,
popularly known as star wars. The US withdrew from the treaty so it
could develop a new system, which while posing as "defensive" will,
in reality, allow it to attack other countries without fear of
retaliation. Britain has signed up to this, without any public or
parliamentary consultation, and Blair is reported to have offered to
host interceptor missiles here in Britain. This system puts us on
the front line and contributes to a new cold war. Mr Brown should
withdraw British support and participation.
• Support was voiced for the development of a nuclear weapons
convention - banning nuclear weapons in the same vein as the
chemical and biological weapons conventions have done for other
weapons of mass destruction. This is a real opportunity for Mr Brown
to make headway on Britain's multilateral nuclear disarmament
obligations, to which the government stresses its commitment. It
should be actively supported.
• Nuclear weapons states should provide security assurances to
non-nuclear weapon states that they would not use nuclear weapons
against them. This can contribute to easing global tensions and
reduce the likelihood of further nuclear weapons proliferation. A
strong position on this from Mr Brown could help undo the damage
caused by Geoff Hoon who, prior to the Iraq war, indicated that
Britain would be willing to use nukes against a non-nuclear state.
These points are just the tip of the iceberg of international
anti-nuclear sentiment. A constructive dialogue has been started and
it is profoundly to be hoped that Mr Brown will engage with it in
good faith.
Of great interest is the statement given by Britain's disarmament
ambassador to the conference. Ambassador Duncan claimed that the
decision to replace Trident did not mean that Britain was
undermining its commitment to disarmament. In fact, his statement
made a number of claims that we very much hope will constitute the
basis for Britain's actual nuclear policy. He said:
"The UK is retaining not modernising its deterrent. There is no
change in the capabilities of the system, no move to produce more
useable weapons and no change in nuclear policy or doctrine. The
UK's nuclear weapon system will not be designed for war-fighting use
in military campaigns. It is a strategic deterrent that we would
only ever contemplate using in extreme circumstances of
self-defence."
These are all policy areas that have been the subject of extreme
concern. If this reassurance is a clear statement of government
policy, then it is extremely welcome.
Now all that is necessary is for our new prime minister to make good
on Britain's Treaty obligations and begin "good faith" negotiations
towards nuclear disarmament. A positive climate now exists to make
real headway.
Guardian Unlimited Guardian News and Media Limited 2007.
Registered in England and Wales. No. 908396
Registered office: Number 1 Scott Place, Manchester M3 3GG
*****************************************************************
2 Nukewatch: Defunct Reactor Core Readied for Shipment
Date: Mon, 21 May 2007 15:45:47 -0700
*Nukewatch*
P.O. Box 649, Luck, WI 54853
May 19, 2007
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact Nukewatch office 715-472-4185, or mobile 715-491-3813
*Defunct Reactor Core Readied for Shipment from*
*La Crosse**, Wisconsin to South Carolina
*
* *
LA CROSSE, Wisc. -- The long-defunct Genoa nuclear reactor core, closed
in 1987 after operating only 20 years, has been removed from its
containment structure here and loaded into a shipping canister in
preparation for rail shipment to a shallow burial in Barnwell, South
Carolina.
The 1,100-mile railroad journey could take the 310-ton radioactive cargo
through major metropolitan areas including Dubuque, Iowa; Moline,
Illinois; Evansville, Indiana; Nashville and Chattanooga, Tenn.;
Atlanta, Georgia and Columbia, South Carolina.
The core, known as a reactor pressure vessel, is the innermost section
of a nuclear power plant -- the heavy steel vessel used to contain the
deadly uranium chain reaction that produces heat and radioactive waste
in the generation of electricity. The unit is owned by Dairyland Power
Cooperative (608-788-4000; Deb Mirasola, Manager, Corporate
Communications, 608-787-1378, dwm@dairynet.com).
Removing the heavy reactor core required cutting a large opening through
the steel-reinforced concrete containment structure and discarding the
debris. The waste concrete is sitting on the ground, covered only with
black tarps, said Nukewatch staffer Boinnie Urfer who visited the site
May 11.
According to Dairyland Power, the core has been filled with cement and
encased in cement and steel, and, at approximately 310 tons, will
require a special 20-axle rail car to ship.
The Barnwell South Carolina Radioactive Waste Facility is one of only a
few commercial radioactive waste dumps in the country. In intends to
close in June 2008.
The Genoa Boiling Water reactors highly radioactive used fuel rods were
long ago removed from the core and are stored in a seven-story-high
cooling pool on the plant site, near the Mississippi river, in the flood
plain.
At 3:00 p.m. Saturday, May 19, the core had already been inserted into
the rail transport canister, placed on a over-sized flat bed
semi-tractor trailer for transport to the rail car. Transfer to the rail
car could take many hours before the cargo is ready for its trip to S.
Carolina.
*****************************************************************
3 IPS-English GULF: Peaceful nuclear programme committee meets
Date: Mon, 21 May 2007 15:12:00 -0700
From: WAM Service
Att.Editors: The following item is from the Emirates News Agency (WAM)
RIYADH, May 21 (WAM) - The committee entrusted with the follow-up of the
feasibility study for the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) peaceful nuclear
programme started its coordinative meeting here yesterday. The proposed
study is aimed at determining the uses of atomic energy for peaceful
purposes in the Gulf countries.
The meeting was partially attended by the GCC Secretary General Abdul
Rahman bin Hamad Al Atiyyah.
The committee held meetings with experts from the International Atomic
Energy Agency this Monday for defining the terms of reference for
conducting the study. (WAM)
(WAM)
*****************************************************************
4 The Hindu: Rejig of Russian N-sector delays atomic power plants in India
Monday, May 21, 2007 : 1650 Hrs
Mumbai, May. 21 (PTI): Delay in supply of crucial equipment by
Russia, which is consolidating its nuclear sector, has put off the
commissioning of two 1000 MW atomic power plants in India by over an
year, a top Nuclear Power Corporation (NPCIL) official said today.
The two Russian-made nuclear power plants were scheduled to be
commissioned by December at Kudankulam in Tamil Nadu but it may now
happen only by early 2009 due to delay in delivery of equipment by
Russia, NPCIL Director S K Agarwal told PTI.
He said the NPCIL will push the Russian industry to speed up the
delivery of equipment.
Agarwal attributed the delay to the reorganisation and consolidation
of Russian nuclear industry as part of the global nuclear
renaissance to control nuclear supply chain.
The pressure vessel of one the reactors has already been installed
early this year but other crucial equipment were yet to be delivered
by Russia
"We are hoping to commission both the reactors in 2009," Agarwal
said.
The large-scale nuclear sector reform in Russia led to the
establishment of 'Atomenergyoprom', a state-owned holding set up
under a presidential decree. It will take over all civilian nuclear
programmes and integrate its assets.
"If the Russians had begun their reform three years back, we would
not have had this problem of delay in delivery of equipment and even
drawings in some of the cases," he said.
'Atomenergyoprom', which is to run the country's nuclear power
industry, is a consolidation of 85 small nuclear companies in Russia.
Copyright 2007, The Hindu.
*****************************************************************
5 SunHerald.com: Proposed nuclear reactor raises concerns
Posted on Mon, May. 21, 2007
By JULIE GOODMAN THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
PORT GIBSON --
Plant operators toil away, fixated on switchboards of buttons and
blinking lights.
Waste heat is routed up a 550-foot cooling tower, and spent
high-level radioactive fuel collects in a special 50-foot-deep pool
of water.
Men with multiple weapons stand guard at every turn.
The scene is a peek into operations at Entergy's Grand Gulf Nuclear
Station.
The plant has one reactor and is on course to win permission for
another.
A consortium of energy companies, NuStart Energy Development LLC, is
pursuing a construction and operating license for the plant,
although Entergy has not decided whether it wants to build another
reactor.
A decision to build would be based on the need for power in the
service area, the costs of nuclear power, construction costs and
other factors, Entergy says. It hopes to submit its license
application to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission at the end of
the year, and it could take more than three years to review the
application.
The last application the commission received for a reactor was in
1974, for a plant subsequently built outside Phoenix. But now, 29
reactors in coming years could join the 104 in use.
"There's just been, I guess, a growing trend in the acceptance of
nuclear power over the last few years," said Jay Brister, the
plant's manager of nuclear business development.
Port Gibson, for the most part, eagerly has embraced the idea of a
second unit. But if there are concerns, they've arisen over security
and waste disposal.
Although the public has weighed in before with some angry words, a
recent NRC meeting in Port Gibson was wrapped up in about 15 minutes
and drew no questions. The commission had given the plant high marks
for its performance.
The major opposition has come from out of state.
Public Citizen, a Washington-based consumer advocacy organization,
has strongly opposed new reactors in Claiborne County and elsewhere.
The reactors, it says, are not thoroughly examined for potential
waste and security hazards.
"Building new reactors at Grand Gulf will mean additional waste will
be generated and stored on site around the facility," the group says
in material it distributed in Mississippi. "No country in the world,
including the United States, has a solution for permanently and
safely managing its nuclear waste."
"The worst-case scenario is that the waste just sits there
indefinitely," said Michele Boyd, a legislative director for the
group's energy program.
Public Citizen also has accused Grand Gulf and other plants pursuing
new reactors of increasing the country's security risks.
Brian contends the plant is one of the safest facilities of its kind
in the nation and is designed to withstand a terrorist attack,
pointing to an around-the-clock, well-trained security force.
The security is tested periodically by a team of ex-special forces,
which simulates an attack using a laser-tag system and weapons that
fire blanks.
"They come in, it's typically at night and they attempt to get into
the plant and we successfully repel them," Brian said.
The plant has an eight-week notice the mock force is coming.
Emergency diesel generators supply power in the event of any
shutdown. Fears about security are expected, he said, but Entergy is
limited in how much it can disclose about its protection.
"We can't go out and talk about what all specifically we're doing to
defend the station, but I believe if we could share a lot of the
details, some of those concerns would go away," Brian said.
*****************************************************************
6 BBC NEWS: MSPs 'against' new nuclear power
Last Updated: Monday, 21 May 2007, 07:58 GMT 08:58 UK
Hunterston is one of two remaining nuclear power plants in Scotland
The issue of nuclear power could create a political clash between
MPs and MSPs this week.
Most of the Scottish Parliament is opposed to nuclear power,
according to a survey by environmental pressure group Friends of the
Earth Scotland.
However, the UK government is expected to promote new nuclear
stations in a white paper at Westminster.
It found 24 supported new nuclear and three were undecided.
Thirty MSPs did not respond.
'White elephant'
First Minister Alex Salmond has insisted there is no prospect of new
nuclear stations in Scotland.
He told the BBC's Politics Show: "As far as Scotland is concerned, I
think we'll be saying: 'Nuclear power - no thanks'.
"There's absolutely no chance of us allowing a new generation of
nuclear power in Scotland.
"There is just no consensus in Scottish society or in the Scottish
Parliament to have foisted on us another generation of nuclear power
stations."
Trade and industry secretary Alistair Darling told the same
programme: "I certainly started off as a sceptic, as far as nuclear
was concerned.
"But I think that if we don't keep that open as an option, then
we're not going to be able to reach our targets to reduce the amount
of carbon going in to the atmosphere, and we have run a grave risk
of not having our electricity when we need it."
Towers at Chapelcross were demolished over the weekend
Friends of the Earth Scotland's chief executive Duncan McLaren said
the demolition of the cooling towers at the Chapelcross plant at the
weekend should mark the end for nuclear power in Scotland.
He said: "The closure and clean-up of Chapelcross should intensify
our drive for increased energy efficiency and clean renewables, not
a return to polluting and expensive nuclear.
"The results of our survey couldn't be clearer - new nuclear power
stations are not welcome in Scotland. Like the public, the majority
of MSPs realise that nuclear power is nothing other than a white
elephant.
"Any attempt to foist new nuclear power on Scotland would be an
expensive, ineffective and risky distraction from sensible measures
to address climate change."
Energy gap
Chapelcross nuclear plant in Dumfries and Galloway is being
decommissioned after operating for almost half a century.
More than a third of the electricity generated in Scotland comes
from its two remaining nuclear power stations.
Torness in East Lothian is expected to stay open until 2023.
Hunterston B in Ayrshire is due to close in 2011 but could be kept
open for a further decade to plug the energy gap.
It has just been switched back on after a 10-month shutdown because
of defects in its boilers.
One of the two reactors was powered up on Sunday and the other is
due to return to service soon.
To compile its survey, FoE Scotland wrote to MSPs on three occasions
over the past year.
It first asked MSPs for their views last year on the 20th
anniversary of the Chernobyl disaster.
* BBC Copyright Notice
*****************************************************************
7 Platts: UK planning, energy white papers to prepare way for new nuclear
2007-05-21
London (Platts)--21May2007
The UK government will publish planning and energy white papers this week
in a combined effort seen by many as a move to prepare the way for a new
generation of nuclear power plants.
The planning white paper is expected to be announced to the House of
Commons at 1530 BST (1430 GMT) Monday by Communities minister Ruth Kelly.
The energy white paper is expected to be announced to the Commons at 1230
BST (1130 GMT) Wednesday by Trade and Industry minister Alistair Darling.
The planning white paper is expected to set out plans for a new
independent body that would take planning decisions on projects of major
national importance, speeding up the decision-making process. That could help
new nuclear power plants and gas pipelines and gas storage. At the moment
projects such as gas storage often run into fierce local opposition.
The energy white paper will set out the government's plans for reducing
carbon dioxide emissions and for replacing aging coal and nuclear plants that
are due to be decommissioned over the next two decades. The government may
publish a new consultation document on nuclear power at the same time.
The UK wants to cut CO2 emissions by 60% by 2050. Over the next two
decades the UK needs around 25 GW of new electricity generation capacity as
existing plant closes. Without new nuclear much of that could be high-carbon
coal power plants or gas-fired plants. The UK is becoming increasingly
dependent on imported gas. In 2003 the UK was self-sufficient in gas. By 2020
the UK could be importing 90% of its gas as the North Sea declines.
For simliar news, request a free trial to Power in Europe at
http://www.platts.com/Request%20More%20Information/index.xml?src=story
Copyright 2007 - Platts, All Rights Reserved
*****************************************************************
8 NRC: NRC Honors Employees on June 22 in Rockville, MD
News Release - 2007-062 -
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs
Telephone: 301/415-8200 Washington, DC 20555-0001 E-mail:
opa@nrc.gov www.nrc.gov
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission will hold its 30th Annual
Awards Ceremony at 2 p.m. on Friday, June 22, at the Bethesda
North Marriott Hotel and Conference Center. The ceremony will
also be broadcast to all four regional offices and the Technical
Training Center in Chattanooga, Tenn.
During the ceremony, NRC will acknowledge recipients of
Presidential Executive Rank Awards and the NRC's Distinguished
and Meritorious Service Awards.
The following individuals are NRC's Distinguished Executive
Rank Award Recipients for 2006: Presidential Distinguished
Executive Rank Awards Karen D. Cyr General Counsel Luis A. Reyes
Executive Director for Operations
Presidential Meritorious Executive Rank Awards Edward
T. Baker Director, Office of Information Services A. Randolph
Blough Former Director Division of Reactor Safety, Region I E.
William Brach Director, Division of Spent Fuel Storage and
Transportation Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards
Cynthia A. Carpenter Director, Office of Enforcement Charles A.
Casto Director, Division of Reactor Projects, Region II Farouk
Eltawila Director, Division of Risk Assessment and Special
Projects Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Glenn M. Tracy
Director, Division of Construction Inspection and Operational
Programs Office of New Reactors Michael F. Weber Director,
Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards
NRC Honorary Distinguished Service Awards James E.
Beall Technical Assistant, Office of Commissioner Edward
McGaffigan, Jr. Margaret V. Federline Former Deputy Director,
Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards Jesse L. Funches
Former Chief Financial Officer Ralph O. Meyer Former Senior
Technical Advisor Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Janice E.
Moore Assistant General Counsel for Operating Reactors and
High-Level Waste Programs
NRC Distinguished Service Awards Guy B. Beltz
Printing Specialist, Office of Administration James E. Kennedy
Senior Project Manager, Office of Federal and State Materials and
Environmental Management Programs Deborah V. Pulley Secretary,
Office of the General Counsel L. Raghavan Chief, Plant
Licensing Branch III-1 Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
NRC Meritorious Service Award for Equal Employment
Opportunity Excellence Rhonda C. Bethea Information Security
Specialist Office of Nuclear Security and Incident Response
NRC Meritorious Service Awards James W.
Andersen Chief, Performance Assessment Branch Office of Nuclear
Reactor Regulation Lynda J. Baker Investigations Assistant,
Dallas Field Office Office of Investigations Brendan P. Cain
Management and Program Analyst Office of Human Resources Frank
Cardile Senior Project Manager, Office of Federal and State
Materials and Environmental Management Programs Cecilia Carson
Attorney, Office of Commission Appellate Adjudication Carlotta
Ann Coates Licensing Officer, Office of International Programs
Eugene W. Cobey Chief, Reactor Projects Branch #2, Region I
John R. Cook Senior Transportation Safety Scientist Office of
Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards Amy E. Cubbage Senior
Project Manager, Office of New Reactors Deborah Ann DeMarco NRC
Center Deputy Program Manager Office of Nuclear Material Safety
and Safeguards Harold Eichenholz Senior Program Manager Office
of Nuclear Security and Incident Response Richard B. Ennis
Senior Project Manager Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Ben
Ficks Deputy Director Program Management, Policy Development,
and Analysis Staff Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Karla
Denyce Fuller Regional Counsel/Allegation Coordination and
Enforcement Staff (Team Leader), Region IV Alphonsa Gooden
Senior Fuel Facility Inspector, Region Il Sharon C. Green
Licensing Assistant, Office of New Reactors Nicholas D. Hilton
Senior Enforcement Specialist, Office of Enforcement Rosemary T.
Hogan Chief, Mechanical and Structural Engineering Branch
Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Sharon M. Hudson
Secretary, Office of the Chief Financial Officer Diane Tamai
Jackson Advisor for Organizational Effectiveness Initiatives
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Martin J. Kerlin Chief,
Financial Resources Branch, Region III Alan S. Kuritzky Senior
Reliability and Risk Engineer Office of Nuclear Regulatory
Research Ryan E. Lantz Senior Emergency Preparedness Inspector,
Region IV Richard Y. Lee Chief, Consequences and Source Term
Branch Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research George W. Lopez
Senior Telecommunications Specialist Office of Information
Services Patrick Louden Chief, Reactor Projects Branch 5,
Region III Melinda Malloy Program Manager, Office of the
Executive Director for Operations Debra Lynn McCain Management
Analyst, Office of New Reactors Jayne M. McCausland Regulation
Development Assistant Office of Federal and State Materials and
Environmental Management Programs Mary Linda McLean Regional
Agreement State Program Officer, Region IV Patricia A. Miles
Secretary, Region II Joel T. Munday Chief, Plant Support Branch
2, Region II David J. Nelson Senior Project Manager, Office of
Nuclear Reactor Regulation Sandra S. Northern Privacy Program
Officer, Office of Information Services Stephen M. Pool Chief,
Contracts Management Branch 2, Office of Administration Stephen
S. Sandin Nuclear Systems Engineer Office of Nuclear Security
and Incident Response Wayne L. Schmidt Senior Reactor Analyst,
Region I R. Michelle Schroll Policy Coordinator, Office of the
Secretary Pamela W. Shea Assistant Chief, Administration and
Correspondence Office of the Executive Director for Operations
Neil A. Sheehan Field Public Affairs Officer, Region I Public
Affairs Field Office Office of Public Affairs Wayne Slawinski
Senior Health Physicist, Region III Brian W. Smith Chief,
Enrichment and Conversion Branch Office of Nuclear Material
Safety and Safeguards Kathleen A. Venuto Secretary, Region I
Mauricio P. Vera
Small Business Program Manager Office of
Small Business and Civil Rights
NRC news releases are available through a free list server
subscription at the following Web address:
http://www.nrc.gov/public-involve/listserver.html. The NRC Home
Page at www.nrc.gov also offers a Subscribe to News link in the
News & Information menu. E-mail notifications are sent to
subscribers when news releases are posted to NRC's Web Site.
Monday, May 21, 2007
*****************************************************************
9 Pravda.Ru: Fire at Russian factory that makes nuclear plant components -
05/21/2007 17:04 Source: AP
A fire, broken out on Monday at Russian factory that makes equipment
for nuclear plants, brings no danger for it does not work with
nuclear materials, an emergency official said.
The fire erupted beneath the roof of one of the buildings at the
Atommash plant in Volgodonsk, about 1,000 kilometers (600 miles)
south of Moscow, said Oleg Ugnivenko, a spokesman for the Emergency
Situations Ministry in southern Russia. It was extinguished a few
hours later, he said.
Atommash's products include turbine and other equipment for nuclear
and other types of power plants, but it does not work with
radioactive materials, Ugnivenko said.
All news About Pravda.Ru Site map Export news STATISTICS
1999-2006. PRAVDA.Ru. When reproducing our materials in whole or
*****************************************************************
10 AFP: US, Algeria to sign nuclear energy deal -
Sun May 20, 2:41 PM ET
ALGIERS (AFP) - The United States will sign a deal next month for
closer nuclear energy cooperation with Algeria, which has already
been provided with a reactor by the Chinese, it was announced
here Sunday.
A cooperation protocol would be signed "on June 9 during a visit to
Algiers by an American expert delegation, including a senior
official of the energy department," Algeria's Energy and Mines
Minister Chakib Khelil told journalists.
Algeria has two experimental reactors, one built by China, the other
by Argentina.
The new agreement with Washington would set up cooperation
mechanisms and various exchanges in the field of civil nuclear
energy, including joint programmes, the minister was earlier quoted
as saying during a visit to the US.
"The two sides will work towards organising sharing of experience
and data, mutual visits by experts and specialists, and also
conducting joint programmes," Khelil said then.
The visiting US group was scheduled next month to visit Algerian
development centres for nuclear energy for peaceful purposes, Khelil
also announced.
Algerian specialists would later visit the US.
Algeria's two reactors have a strength of three and 15 megawatts
respectively. One was built by Argentina near the capital Algiers,
while the other, constructed by China, is situated 250 kilometres
(150 miles) south of Algiers.
Both are regularly inspected by the United Nations nuclear watchdog
body, the International Atomic Energy Authority in Vienna.
Copyright 2007 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
11 London Times: Fast-track planning for nuclear plants and superstores-
May 22, 2007
Jill Sherman, Whitehall Editor
Ambitious proposals to fast-track the construction of nuclear
plants, airports and motorways and allow the spread of out-of-town
shopping centres were outlined yesterday in the biggest reform of
planning for 20 years.
Environmental groups immediately gave warning that plans to restrict
public consultation on projects would lead to civil disobedience and
direct action.
The Government’s long-awaited White Paper recommends a
complete overhaul of planning, merging eight separate systems.
Officials claim that the move could save 1 billion within a decade.
It also proposes speeding up home improvements and small commercial
investments by allowing them to proceed without planning permission.
But ministers bowed to rural concerns by dropping plans to restrict
the green belt by developing urban fringes.
The proposal to set up an independent commission to take the final
decision on all major infra-structure developments, including
nuclear plants, infuriated rural and green campaigners. The
Conservatives accused Gordon Brown of siding with the “big,
bullying developer” and Friends of the Earth predicted a
return to “Swampy tactics”. However, the plans were
widely welcomed by the CBI and the construction industry, who stand
to gain the most.
Ruth Kelly, the Communities Secretary, said that the aim was to
streamline the planning system and allow resources to be channelled
into much needed housing developments. But environmental and rural
groups argued that a new quango would remove parliamentary
accountability, cut out consultation at the local level and make it
far easier for controversial projects to go ahead.
Hugh Ellis, the Friends of the Earth planning co-ordinator, said
that the Government wanted to force through controversial
developments such as airport expansions and road-widening schemes,
and predicted a new generation of eco-warriors in the mould of
Swampy, the anti-roads protester who became a household name after
chaining himself to tree trunks and tunnelling under a proposed
bypass.
Announcing the details of the White Paper in the Commons, Ms Kelly
said that the public would be involved during the process and that
there would be a new requirement for developers to consult before
making a planning application to the new commission.
Decision-making could be painfully slow, causing extra costs and
uncertainty, which was in nobody’s interests, she argued.
Terminal 5 at Heathrow had taken more than seven years to get
planning permission, with thirty-seven applications under seven
different pieces of legislation. It had also taken more than six
years to get a decision on the North Yorkshire Powerline upgrade and
four years for a decision on the Dibden Bay container terminal.
The new, 25-strong commission at the heart of the White Paper will
comprise experts such as lawyers, environment-alists, planners and
community experts. The Government will have to publish an initial
policy statement on a sector outlining future plans for 15-20 years.
The developers would put proposals to the independent commission,
which would undertake a public inquiry before vetoing or approving
the scheme. There would be no accountability to Parliament or
ministers apart from an annual report.
Caroline Spelman, the Conservative Shadow Communities Minister,
said: “A week after pledging to give local residents a greater
voice, Gordon Brown has shown his true control-freak instincts by
backing moves to strip local communities of their say over
incinerators, rubbish dumps and sewage plants. Gordon Brown has
sided with the large, bullying developer, rather than the people.
“Yes, the planning system needs reform – but the voice
of local communities must be preserved and a democratic, accountable
process must be maintained.”
Richard Lambert, the Direc-tor-General of the CBI, said: “The
business community will welcome the signal this legislation sends
out. It introduces necessary reforms to help deliver the major
projects, particularly in transport and energy, which the UK is
crying out for if it is to remain competitive.”
Copyright 2007 Times Newspapers Ltd
St, London E98 1XY, is the holding company for the News
International group and is registered in England No 81701. VAT
number GB 243 8054 69.
*****************************************************************
12 Tennessean: We must be ready to meet the demand -
Nashville, Tennessee - Monday, 05/21/07 - Tennessean.com
By TOM KILGORE
By the year 2030, the South is expected to add more than 43
million people more than any other region in the country and
see a 54 percent increase in the demand for electricity.
That's the equivalent of 61 gigawatts of power enough to power
more than 34 million homes in our region.
To meet the valley's need, TVA must operate with a comprehensive
strategy that includes conservation, renewable energy and nuclear
power, along with more traditional sources, such as hydro and coal.
In the past year, nuclear power generated 29 percent of TVA's
electricity production. Our existing nuclear units at Watts Bar and
Sequoyah in East Tennessee and Browns Ferry in North Alabama are
among the most efficient and cost-effective in the industry.
A reliable, cost-effective unit
This month, TVA is capping a five-year effort by a dedicated team of
skilled professionals to successfully restart a third nuclear unit
at Browns Ferry. This unit will add 1,155 megawatts of reliable,
cost-effective power that will serve the needs of 650,000 homes.
The TVA board decided to restart this unit in 2002, and its decision
has proved sound in three key ways. As the cost of other energy
sources has increased, the cost of nuclear energy compares even more
favorably than it did five years ago. Once operating, nuclear plants
generate power at a lower cost per kilowatt-hour than any resource
except hydro, and the nuclear advantage is increasing.
Nuclear plants are reliable and lessen our dependence on foreign
energy sources. Once fueled, a nuclear reactor can run for more than
a year. In 2000, Watts Bar completed 512 days of continuous
operation.
Perhaps most importantly, the cleanliness of nuclear power grows
larger in light of the climate change issue.
Nuclear power doesn't emit carbon dioxide, nitrogen oxides or other
air pollutants. Even over its entire life cycle, nuclear generation
emits fewer greenhouses gases than any electricity source except
hydro.
Weighing benefits at Watts Bar
Looking ahead, TVA is weighing the benefits of completing an
unfinished nuclear unit at Watts Bar. And we're supporting efforts
to develop a new generation of nuclear technology that could be
deployed at our Bellefonte site in North Alabama.
In the longer term, TVA joins other utilities in supporting a
national repository for safely storing used, or "spent," nuclear
fuel, and efforts to reprocess that fuel, as other nations do. Spent
fuel is one of the challenges we face with nuclear power, but
solutions are at hand. Spent fuel is currently stored safely on-site
in secure facilities.
As important as nuclear power is, it isn't the only answer to those
61 gigawatts of power the South needs by 2030. That's why TVA will
also continue to diversify its portfolio of electricity generation
by investing in renewable energy and encouraging conservation
efforts.
Tennessean.com and its related sites are pleased to be able to offer
Copyright 2007, tennessean.com. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
13 Tennessean: Simple desire for the option doesn't seal nuclear safety -
Nashville, Tennessee - Monday, 05/21/07 - Tennessean.com
Monday, 05/21/07
Time for nuclear energy revival?
Our View
As the nation warms to more nuclear power plants, it's important to
ask if nuclear energy is truly safe or if its resurgence is due to
factors that have nothing to do with nuclear power.
Just because the demand for energy is high and the filth factor of
sources such as coal-fired power plants is repulsive, those
developments alone do not make nuclear energy superior. The nation
must be cautious before it ramps up on nuclear power. A new age in
nuclear energy could be based as much on wishful thinking as on
sound scientific evidence of foolproof nuclear power plants. In
fact, it is intriguing that just as the push for renewed nuclear
power is declared cleaner and safer, nuclear plants are ramping up
security precautions for disaster preparedness and because of
worries about terrorism. It's a mixed message that calls for
studious decision-making.
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission last week said the Unit 1
reactor at the Browns Ferry plant in northern Alabama is ready to
start power production again. That comes after the Tennessee Valley
Authority sites were shut down in 1985 due to concerns about safety.
Two other units were restarted at Browns Ferry in the 1990s.
Resuming Unit 1 means the entire plant will be up and running. The
Unit 1 reactor will be the first to come on line in more than 10
years and will be TVA's sixth functioning reactor.
Assurances of the site's safety are being offered as reason to
resume activity there. But it's still worth questioning whether the
action is because of a newfound faith in nuclear power or only a
signal of the displeasure over everything else. It's a seductive
line of thought to see the shortcomings of other types of power
generation as cause to turn again to nuclear energy. It is difficult
to identify dramatic breakthroughs that have suddenly made safety at
nuclear sites a sure thing. To be sure, the factors that are driving
attention toward nuclear energy are strong. World events have forced
the United States to recognize the need to get off its addiction to
oil. The demand for affordable energy continues to climb, especially
in the South, which is growing in population. Carbon emissions from
burning fossil fuels are creating climate change on the planet.
The world is increasingly eager to reduce those emissions. The
United States is actively searching for affordable alternative
fuels. But frustration over alternative approaches should not be the
sole compelling reason to turn to nuclear energy.
Browns Ferry has undergone a five-year, $1.8 billion renovation,
with an "operational readiness" inspection by the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission. Officials are emphatic that they have taken great care
in testing and approving the site. There have been few problems
reported with the other two reactors at Browns Ferry. The renewal is
part of a process that is expected to see utility companies seek
licenses for up to 30 reactors in the next two years, 24 of which
could be in the South. The industry sees this as part of a much
cleaner and efficient age of nuclear energy. The Department of
Energy is offering incentives of risk insurance, loan guarantees and
$3 billion in tax credits. Demand for the power is certainly high.
The nation is right to be on the hunt for options in energy
production, and it is encouraging to hear some of the confidence
expressed regarding the new nuclear push. But given the history and
concerns over the safety and security of nuclear power, it is
certainly worth wondering if concentrating on cleaning up the more
conventional plants might be where the most human energy should be
directed.
Tennessean.com and its related sites are pleased to be able to offer
Post a Comment View All Comments
Copyright 2007, tennessean.com. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
14 NRC: NRC Announces Appointment of New Member to the Advisory Committee
on Medical Uses of Isotopes
News Release - 2007-063 -
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs
Telephone: 301/415-8200 Washington, DC 20555-0001 E-mail:
opa@nrc.gov www.nrc.gov
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission today announced the appointment
of Bruce R. Thomadsen, Ph.D., as the medical physicist in
radiation therapy expert on the Advisory Committee on the Medical
Uses of Isotopes (ACMUI). The ACMUI was established in 1958 and
advises the NRC on policy and technical issues related to the
regulation of the medical use of radioactive material.
Dr. Thomadsen is board certified by the American Board of
Radiology in radiologic physics, the American Board of Health
Physics in comprehensive health physics and the American Board of
Medical Physics in radiation oncology physics. He holds an
undergraduate degree in physics and political science from the
University of Michigan, a master of science in physics from
Michigan State University, and a master’s degree and Ph.D.
in medical physics from the University of Wisconsin.
Dr. Thomadsen was a resident in radiological physics at Henry
Ford Hospital in Detroit. He served as a medical physicist at
Hurley Hospital, in Flint, Mich., and St. Barnabas Medical
Center, in Short Hills, N.J., before going to the University of
Wisconsin in 1975, where he has served as the chair of the
University Radiation Safety Committee since 1992 and has been
very active in clinical service, research and teaching. His
lengthy service to the university was only interrupted by a
one-year exchange with Copenhagen County Hospital in Denmark from
1985 to 1986.
Dr. Thomadsen was made a fellow of the American Association
of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM), and has served on and chaired
many AAPM committees, including the Radiation Safety Committee.
He has also been active in the American Brachytherapy Society and
served on panels for the International Commission on Radiation
Units and Measures, and the National Council on Radiation
Protection and Measurements. Dr. Thomadsen has been active in the
Commission on Accreditation of Medical Physics Education Programs
and with the American Board of Radiology both as an examiner and
with the maintenance of certificate program.
NRC news releases are available through a free list server
subscription at the following Web address:
http://www.nrc.gov/public-involve/listserver.html. The NRC Home
Page at www.nrc.gov also offers a Subscribe to News link in the
News & Information menu. E-mail notifications are sent to
subscribers when news releases are posted to NRC's Web Site.
Monday, May 21, 2007
*****************************************************************
15 Brattleboro Reformer: Veto would scrap more than VY tax
BRATTLEBORO, VT
By ROSS SNEYD, Associated Press
Monday, May 21
MONTPELIER -- If Gov. Jim Douglas makes good on his promise to veto
a global climate change bill, more will be lost than a tax on the
Vermont Yankee nuclear plant.
New incentives to build renewable energy projects will be thrown
out, as will a chance to create jobs in the emerging field of
greenhouse gas emission reduction, supporters of the legislation say.
"For too long, Vermont has had a green image with nothing behind the
mirror," said Jeff Wolfe, of Gro Solar in White River Junction, one
of the nation's biggest solar energy providers. "And this bill is a
tremendous start for Vermont to start addressing a problem that will
radically affect all of our lives, whether we address it or not and
hopefully less radically if we address it."
Douglas says the bill's benefits are outweighed by what he sees as
an unnecessary new tax and the creation of an unproven bureaucracy.
There already are efforts to accomplish the same thing without
expanding Efficiency Vermont, an energy efficiency utility
established in 2000 to help homeowners reduce their electric bills,
he said.
"He said before he would have signed the House bill," said Douglas
spokesman Jason Gibbs.
"There was an opportunity for legislative leadership and he to reach
agreement."
But essentially tripling a tax that replaces a statewide property
tax on Vermont Yankee is farther than he was willing to go.
Senate Natural Resources Committee Chairwoman Virginia Lyons,
D-Chittenden, is among those disappointed by the prospect of a veto
that would scuttle the Efficiency Vermont expansion and the Vermont
Yankee tax, both of which she supported.
"I don't think the funding source is so onerous and I think it's
outweighed significantly by the benefits that are in the bill," she
said.
Among the initiatives contained in the bill approved by the
Legislature and awaiting Douglas' signature:
* a goal set in state law that 25 percent of the energy consumed in
Vermont by 2025 come from renewable sources, "particularly from
Vermont's farms and forests."
* "Smart-metering," allowing utilities to use two-way signals on
meters that let consumers qualify for price breaks based on the time
of day they use the electricity. It's significantly less expensive
during certain periods of the day or seasons of the year.
* the use of expanded "net metering" to allow larger systems and to
allow neighbors to cooperatively generate their own electricity on
the same system. Net metering allows consumers to install solar
panels, windmills or farm methane systems to generate power. If
excess power is generated, it could be sent to the electrical grid
to supplement what's provided by utilities.
* a stable tax rate on commercial wind projects, which advocates
said would encourage more to be built.
* extension of a tax credit for businesses seeking to install solar
projects and further study to determine whether it could be expanded.
* a study of the feasibility of building or refurbishing small
hydroelectric projects. The state also would be directed to work
with developers of community hydro projects of 2 megawatts or less,
easing them through the permit process, so they could be used as
pilot projects for other efforts.
Douglas supports most of those things and would have liked to see
them enacted, Gibbs said. Because of that, the administration is
going to try to ensure they become state policy.
"He is disappointed but he has asked the administration what
provisions of the bill the administration can implement without
legislative authorization," Gibbs said. "The governor will pursue
those and other initiatives that are not in the bill. That
underscores the fact that the difference of opinion in this is not
on the need to address global climate change."
Copyright 2006 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This
*****************************************************************
16 Xinhua: Emerging opportunity in China's power industry
www.chinaview.cn 2007-05-21 13:54:28
BEIJING, May 21 -- To fuel China's rapid economic development,
the country's demand for power is seeing an astonishing surge.
However, the industry is facing a dilemma brought on by fast
development and higher efficiency requirements.
What is the future development strategy of China's power industry?
And what opportunities can global investors find in the blooming
market?
Francois Nguyen, senior policy advisor from the IEA, or the
International Energy Agency. He joined energy experts from around
the world over the weekend in Beijing to attend the China Power and
Alternative Energy Summit.
"For many countries, China has a golden opportunity for
investment in clean and more efficient power plants."
Francois says his organization has estimated that in the near
future the electricity sector will account for a larger part of the
global investment in the energy infrastructure sector."In terms of
the generation sector, there will be a global requirement of 5.2
trillion U.S. dollars, China alone will account for 23 percent of
the global generation investment. The investment for China will
reach 1.2 trillion dollars over the 2005-2030 period."
In accordance with the global economic growth, demand for power
is urging, especially in emerging developing countries. Therefore,
diminishing finite fossil fuel resources and the increasing cost of
oil, gas and coal have become a significant threat to future energy
security worldwide.
The serious environmental problems caused by traditional sources
have also attracted more and more attention.
"It is a good time, it is a golden opportunity to implement more
efficient generation technologies in most countries, as they are
going to enter a new face of investment and those investments will
remain for 30 to 50 years, or may be more."
As one of the fastest growing economies and a major power
consumer, China is seeking to build a more intelligent structure for
energy production.By the end of 2006, the country's total
installation capacity reached 622 million kilowatt, rising 20
percent compared with the same period the previous year. The total
electricity generation topped 2.8 trillion kilowatt last year, up
13.5 year-on-year.
China's power generation mainly relies on coal-fire
generation.Sha Yiqiang, a Chinese energy expert, says such a fact is
mind-disturbing.
"China's consumption of electricity has seen an average growth
rate of over 10 percent over the past several years. If it continues
to follow this rate, by 2020 China's overall electricity demand will
reach 11trillion kilowatt. Therefore, the relative demand of coal
will exceed 3 billion tons, which is 3 times the current amount.
This is unpractical and unsustainable."
The electricity industry has long been a major resource consumer
and polluter. It consumes over half of China's coal supplies, 40
percent of the water used by industry, and it also discharges over
60 percent of the overall sulfur dioxide emissions.China's power
industry is facing challenges to achieve a sustainable
development.Wang Qiang, a senior official from the state electricity
regulatory Commission, says the situation must be changed.
"The problems accumulated during the recent development will
limit the industry's healthy development, thus the requirement to
accelerate the reform will become more and more urgent."
To move away from the current reliance on coal-fire generation,
China is promoting the development of alternative energy, including
nuclear energy and all kinds of renewable energy such as wind power,
solar power and bio-fuels. According to the guidelines of China's
renewable energy development, by 2020, renewable energy will account
for 30 percent of the overall power generation.But, so far,
alternative energy only accounts for a small part of China's energy
structure.
The Association of China Electricity Enterprises has said that
nuclear power currently only accounts for nearly 2 percent of the
total installation capacity, while wind power accounts for even
less, 0.5 percent. Sha Yiqiang says the gap may mean opportunities
for business.
"To promote the development of alternative energy is an
important target and challenge for China's power sector. Therefore,
there are lots of good business opportunities for all the global
companies who want to participate in building China's alternative
energy industry."
For businesses eyeing China's power market, IEA's Francois
Nguyen believes it is a good time to choose the right technology and
the smart investment. But to do that, investors need sound policy
signals to support their decision.
"The market mechanisms work if reforms are properly implemented.
The ingredients necessary for efficient investments are competitive
market drive, a good competitive framework and cause reflecting
pricing. These are required for efficient initial investment,
therefore the government should commit to a clear, stable and
predictable energy strategy to provide confidence for the market."
The state electricity regulatory Commission's Wang Qiang says
building a more energy efficient power industry is of major
importance to build an energy-efficient and environmentally friendly
country, following the blueprint of China's 11h five year program.
"Reducing energy consumption and pollutant emissions has been
highlighted in China's electricity industry's reform agenda. For
example, pricing mechanisms will be used to encourage cleaner energy
development. Some measures will also be taken to ensure the priority
of renewable energy development."
(Source: CRIENGLISH.com)
Editor: Lin Li
*****************************************************************
17 The Herald: Action and reaction for British Energy
MARK WILLIAMSON May 22 2007
Comment
British Energy said it had restarted production from one reactor at
the Hunterston B nuclear power station and received permission to
restart another at the Ayrshire plant.
The generator confirmed that reactor four at Hunterston B had
restarted supplying electricity to the national grid on Sunday.
The restart came within a week of British Energy receiving
permission from the Nuclear Installations Inspectorate to bring the
reactor back on line.
Yesterday, British Energy said the inspectorate had given permission
for reactor number three at Hunterston B to be restarted.
Both reactors had been shut down since last autumn to allow for
inspection, repair and the preparation of safety cases related to
boiler tube cracking issues.
Two reactors at Hinkley Point B nuclear station in Somerset were
shut down for the same reason.
The company received permission yesterday to restart production from
reactor three at Hinkley Point B.
On May 11 the inspectorate said production could be restarted from
reactor four at Hinkley Point B.
A spokesman said preparations for the restart of reactor four were
continuing. He said no significance attached to the fact it remained
offline while Hunterston three had been brought back on line.
The permissions allow the four reactors to return to service at
around 70% of full capacity.
All rights reserved. Reproduction in whole or in part without
permission is prohibited.
Copyright 2007 Newsquest (Herald & Times) Limited. All Rights
*****************************************************************
18 NRC: NRC Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards to Meet in
Rockville, Maryland, June 6-8
News Release - 2007-064 -
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs
Telephone: 301/415-8200 Washington, DC 20555-0001 E-mail:
opa@nrc.gov www.nrc.gov
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s Advisory Committee on
Reactor Safeguards (ACRS) will hold a public meeting June 6-8, in
Rockville, Md., to discuss, among other items, a draft NRC staff
report on demonstrating the feasibility and reliability of
operator manual actions in response to fire. In addition, the
committee will be briefed on the maximum extended load and line
limit analysis topical report. The ACRS advises the Commission on
licensing and operation of nuclear power plants and related
safety issues.
The meeting will be held in Room T-2B3 of the agency’s
Two White Flint North building, at 11545 Rockville Pike. The
session on Wednesday and Thursday will run from 8:30 a.m. to 7:00
p.m.; Friday’s session will run from 8:30 a.m. to 1:30 p.m.
A complete agenda is available on the NRC’s Web site at:
http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/acrs/agenda/2007.
NRC news releases are available through a free list server
subscription at the following Web address:
http://www.nrc.gov/public-involve/listserver.html. The NRC Home
Page at www.nrc.gov also offers a Subscribe to News link in the
News & Information menu. E-mail notifications are sent to
subscribers when news releases are posted to NRC's Web Site.
Monday, May 21, 2007
*****************************************************************
19 Reuters: Britain's energy future hangs in balance
Mon May 21, 2007 9:18AM EDT
By Daniel Fineren - Analysis
LONDON (Reuters) - Unless the British government makes some
potentially vote-losing decisions this week, the country faces
possible power cuts and rising carbon emissions, analysts and
industry leaders say.
A white paper due on Monday, aimed at speeding major planning
decisions, and Wednesday's energy policy proposals must succeed in
getting new nuclear and renewable power plants built.
Cutting demand by changing the way Britons behave is also essential
to avoid a supply shortfall and contribute to the fight against
climate change.
Britain could enjoy secure energy supplies and lower emissions of
carbon dioxide -- the gas which causes climate change -- for decades
to come.
But it means people will probably have to live with new nuclear
power plants and higher energy prices -- political gambles that the
Labour government may not take.
"That's always been the problem with white papers on energy the last
few times, it has been the bottling out of taking those hard
choices," David Cox, managing director of Poyry Energy Consulting
said.
He said experience suggested the government would again stop short
of radical decisions that would risk losing votes.
Environmental groups reject new nuclear plants as expensive, unsafe
and vulnerable to terrorist attack. Continued...
Reuters 2007. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
20 Reuters: Gulf Arabs pursue nuclear plans with Riyadh talks
Mon May 21, 2007 10:00AM EDT
RIYADH (Reuters) - Gulf Arab states began working on feasibility
studies for a joint nuclear program on Monday and a leading Gulf
official said they were set on pursuing atomic energy for peaceful
purposes only.
"The promising future of nuclear energy in electricity generation
and desalination can make it a source for meeting increasing needs,"
Gulf Cooperation Council head Abdul-Rahman al-Attiya told the first
meeting of Gulf nuclear experts.
The GCC, a major energy producing group that includes Saudi Arabia,
Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates, agreed
with the U.N. atomic watchdog in February to cooperate in early
preparations for atomic energy.
But their program has raised concerns in the West about a regional
arms race with Iran, which is in a standoff with the West over its
own nuclear program.
Saudi Arabia and other Gulf countries share Western concerns that
Iran's nuclear energy program will lead to it acquiring atomic
bombs, a claim Tehran denies.
While not a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty,
Israel is widely assumed to possess nuclear weapons and is seen as
more of a threat than Iran by most Arabs.
Reiterating GCC claims in December that their program would be
peaceful and transparent, Attiya said it aimed to cut carbon dioxide
emissions from the Gulf region.
"A large part of Gulf Cooperation Council oil and gas products can
be used for export in light of expected high prices and demand,"
Attiya said. "It will also help to limit the increase in carbon
dioxide emissions in the Gulf region."
Reuters 2007. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
21 UPI: Analysis: India, Mideast cozy over energy
United Press International - Energy - Analysis
Published: May 21, 2007 at 12:56 PM
By DEREK SANDS UPI Energy Correspondent
WASHINGTON, May 21 (UPI) -- India's economic growth is driving
increasing energy ties with the Middle East, at a time when China,
the United States and Japan are all ramping up efforts to lock in
access to oil and natural gas in the region.
India has shown explosive growth over the past several years. Real
gross domestic product grew by 9.1 percent over a six-month period
in 2006, according to the Energy Information Administration, the
data arm of the U.S. Department of Energy.
That growth is being fueled in large part by foreign oil and natural
gas. India was the world's sixth-largest oil importer in 2004, and
it imported more than 812 million barrels of crude oil in 2006-2007,
up more than 11 percent from the year before, according to the
Indian Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas.
With about 65 percent of those imports coming from the Middle East,
India is attempting to secure supplies from the region. Indian
company Essar Group is considering a $3.4 billion refinery in
northern Egypt that will process 300,000 barrels per day.
Middle East countries, especially those bordering the Persian Gulf,
are also conscious of the opportunities India represents. The Middle
East sends 66 percent of its exports to Asia each day, a percentage
that will almost certainly increase in the coming decades.
In early May, Riyadh hosted the second (the first was held in New
Delhi) Asian Ministerial Energy Roundtable to discuss energy
cooperation among 17 Middle East and Asian nations.
"Today, Asia is a massive oil market, and it is the most important
oil market. Moreover, it has a vital role in the world economy. It
is also expected that a big share of the oil demand in the future
will be from Asia," Ali Ibrahim Al-Naimi, Saudi minister of
petroleum and mineral resources, said at the meeting.
Indeed, in Asia, India is not alone in its efforts to guarantee
energy supplies from the Middle East. Along with quickly expanding
efforts in South America, Africa and Asia, China is aggressively
approaching oil and gas producers in the Middle East. And Japan's
prime minister recently toured the region, putting in place the
foundation for energy agreements.
While India will face competition from other major developed and
developing countries for oil and gas, it is at the same time
reaching out to form cooperation agreements with its competitors as
well.
"It would much rather cooperate in terms of global energy markets
than compete, as well as with companies of other countries, because
it doesn't have the resources to compete and win in a number of
these fields," Tanvi Madan, an authority on Indian energy issues,
said in January during a panel discussion at the Brookings
Institution in Washington.
In fact, India is not only working with countries in the Middle East
for its future energy supplies, it is also reaching out to China to
expand oil and gas pipelines, as well as working together in
developing their petroleum know-how, according to the Paris-based
International Energy Agency.
"India's basic approach to energy diplomacy -- both oil and gas --
has been to develop as many potential supply arrangements, with as
many potential suppliers, as it possibly can, and to try to
neutralize its potential competitors (principally China) with
cooperation agreements," Vibhuti Hate wrote in a report about
India's energy future for the Washington-based think tank Center for
Strategic & International Studies.
And its approach to energy diplomacy bleeds into every aspect of its
foreign relations.
"Almost every of India's main geopolitical relationships these days
have an energy dimension to it, whether it's the U.S., Russia, even
China," Madan said.
Iran, which is desperate for development of its oil and gas
industry, has also been eager to increase relations with India.
"The Indian government has signed a $40 billion gas deal with Iran
which guarantees India 7.5 million tons of LNG over a 25-year
period," Hate said.
A planned pipeline to move gas from Iran's massive South Pars fields
through Pakistan to southern India has been discussed for more than
a decade, but U.S. pressure on India and political tensions between
India and Pakistan have delayed the project.
The United States has been pushing the international community to
stop investment in Iran, hoping the pressure will drive Tehran to
abandon its ambitions to develop the capability to build nuclear
weapons. But Iran may prove an undependable source of energy for
India for more than political reasons.
"When it looks for energy security with countries like Iran, it has
met with failure in some instances. Iran recently canceled a major
LNG deal at the last moment on the issue of price. That has given
many Indian analysts a reason to doubt they can depend on Iran in
the future," Madan said.
--
(e-mail: energy@upi.com)
Copyright 2007 United Press International, Inc. All Rights
Reserved.
*****************************************************************
22 UPI: Analysis: Nuclear resurrection on horizon
United Press International - Energy - Analysis
Published: May 21, 2007 at 11:38 AM
By ROSALIE WESTENSKOW UPI Correspondent
WASHINGTON, May 21 (UPI) -- After a long lapse in growth, the U.S.
nuclear power industry seems ripe for revival, particularly as the
simmering climate-change debate reaches a boil.
More than 30 nuclear power plant proposals are in the approval
process, and in early March the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
authorized the first new site in 30 years that could potentially
host a nuclear power reactor.
Amid the controversy of capping carbon emissions, many of the
technology's proponents push nuclear as the only viable alternative
to fossil fuels, especially when faced with the increasing demand
for energy.
In the past three decades the U.S. population grew 40 percent, while
energy demand surged 47 percent. Within the next 25 years experts
predict energy consumption will increase 34 percent, while
production grows 27 percent.
"When you look at projected growth and where we are today, you get
the feeling we need to be do something besides standing still,"
Christine Todd Whitman, co-chair of the Clean and Safe Energy
Coalition and former New Jersey governor, said at a
CASEnergy-sponsored event Tuesday. "Conservation alone will not
supply the energy needed."
Neither will renewable energy sources, such as hydroelectric, wind,
solar or geothermal, others say.
"Renewables have to be a big part of the picture, but in our world
today, with the exception of hydroelectric, only half a percent of
our nation's energy is coming from renewables," said Patrick Moore,
CASEnergy co-founder and former leader of Greenpeace. "If we're
really going to make a serious dent in fossil fuel consumption,
nuclear has to be part of the mix. ... Otherwise there's no hope of
decreasing fossil fuel consumption."
Currently, fossil fuels provide 85 percent of the world's energy,
nuclear power constitutes 7 percent, hydroelectric power another 7
percent and the remaining 1 percent comes from a mix of renewable
energy sources, according to most estimates. Despite
hydroelectricity's relatively high contribution to the mix, Moore
and others argue it has nearly reached its potential in most
countries and cannot provide the large-scale energy production
needed to replace coal.
While the initial cost of a nuclear power plant exceeds that of a
coal plant, if the current energy dichotomy stays stagnant and
fossil-fuel prices continue to rise, American businesses may find
nuclear power more economically attractive.
"As the prices of natural gas rise, so do the costs of doing
business in the U.S.," said Keith McCoy, vice president of energy
and resource policy at the National Association of Manufacturers.
Soaring energy costs have driven companies to set up shop elsewhere,
causing 3 million lost jobs in the country, NAM estimates.
And while a carbon tax or cap on emissions might be environmentally
counteractive if it increases the business emigration rate,
encouraging nuclear power development could entice companies to stay
and clean up the atmosphere at the same time.
"The nuclear power industry needs a victory in the United States,"
McCoy said.
Although the U.S. nuclear rebirth is progressing slowly, officials
have responded on several levels with pro-nuclear policies.
Under President Bush's fiscal 2008 budget, the Office of Nuclear
Energy receives a 38-percent boost in spending, or an extra $875
million. Several legislators have nudged the nation to catch up with
the liberal nuclear power policies in many other countries and
advocate its use.
One appealing aspect of the technology to Rep. James Clyburn,
D-S.C., is its potential to decrease dependence on foreign oil.
"(Our energy supply) aught to be homegrown and American-owned," said
Clyburn, majority whip.
Another legislative proponent of nuclear power, Sen. Pete Domenici,
R-N.M., actually published a book on the subject, "A Brighter
Tomorrow: Fulfilling the Promise of Nuclear Energy." Domenici
sponsored the Energy Policy Act of 2005 that established several
incentives to invest in nuclear power, including $500 million of
risk insurance for the first two power plants.
"We now have 30 new power plant applications at one stage or another
and before this act we had none -- zero -- for a period of 27
years," Domenici told United Press International. What we're doing
right now is watching the process unfold."
The technology has gained greater acceptability in many circles. For
instance, the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change pointed
to nuclear power as a possible path toward decreasing greenhouse-gas
emissions in a report released earlier this month.
"It's less controversial now than it was," said Matthew Letourneau,
Domenici's spokesman.
But that doesn't mean everyone likes it.
Nuclear waste raises concerns for many, including Mark Brownstein,
managing director of business partnerships for Environmental
Defense, a non-profit environmental organization.
"It's foolish to move forward with a nuclear reactor if you haven't
addressed what to do with the waste that's left over," Brownstein
said at Tuesday's conference.
Safety has also been an issue, particularly as power plants pop up
around the globe.
"What happens as this technology becomes more common in the rest of
the world?" Brownstein asked. "We have to be really concerned about
how this technology gets commercialized in the developing world."
--
(e-mail: energy@upi.com)
Copyright 2007 United Press International, Inc. All Rights
Reserved.
*****************************************************************
23 UPI: Brazil, India to talk nuclear business
United Press International - Energy - Briefing
Published: May 21, 2007 at 6:34 PM
NEW DELHI, May 21 (UPI) -- An upcoming meeting of Brazilian and
Indian leaders in New Delhi will discuss energy issues -- like
nuclear and ethanol -- among other business concerns.
President Lula da Silva and 100 of Brazil's business leaders will
head to India June 3 for an economic summit, which the country's
ambassador to India, Jose Vicente Pimentel, called "one of the most
important visits" of the year for Lula.
Two of the largest economies in the world, Brazil and India will
discuss strengthening economic cooperation, India's Economic Times
newspaper reports.
India intends to meet its booming demand for energy with nuclear
power. While Brazil supports the goal, Pimentel said India must
first make good on nuclear pacts with both the United States and the
International Atomic Energy Agency. Both deals may be hampered by
India's determination to keep its nuclear weapons program strong and
outside the purview of outsiders.
Brazil sits on the Nuclear Suppliers Group, an international body of
countries that have signed non-proliferation deals and thus govern
international nuclear commerce. India wants entry to the group.
"Brazil will not have qualms about helping India in civilian uses of
nuclear energy. Brazil will help India as best as it can," Pimentel
said. He added any NSG position will come after India's IAEA and
U.S. deals.
Brazil, a large producer of ethanol from sugarcane, will also talk
with India about international commerce in the gasoline substitute.
Copyright 2007 United Press International, Inc. All Rights
Reserved.
*****************************************************************
24 UPI: Outside View: Nuclear CO2 warming costs
United Press International - Security & Terrorism - Analysis
Published: May 21, 2007 at 2:23 PM
By HELEN CALDICOTT UPI Outside View Commentator
MELBOURNE, May 21 (UPI) -- The fact is, it takes energy to make
energy -- even nuclear energy. And the true "energetic costs" of
making nuclear energy -- the amounts of traditionally generated fuel
it takes to create "new" nuclear energy -- have not been tallied up
until very recently.
What exactly is nuclear power? It is a very expensive, sophisticated
and dangerous way to boil water. Uranium fuel rods are placed in
water in a reactor core, they reach critical mass and they produce
vast quantities of heat, which boils the water. Steam is directed
through pipes to turn a turbine, which generates electricity.
The scientists who were involved in the Manhattan Project creating
nuclear weapons developed a way to harness nuclear energy to
generate electricity. Because their guilt was so great, they were
determined to use their ghastly new invention to help the human
race. Nuclear fission harnessed "atoms for peace," and the nuclear
PR industry proclaimed that nuclear power would provide an endless
supply of electricity -- referred to as "sunshine units" -- that
would be good for the environment and "too cheap to meter."
They were wrong. Although a nuclear power plant itself releases no
carbon dioxide, the production of nuclear electricity depends upon a
vast, complex, and hidden industrial infrastructure that is never
featured by the nuclear industry in its propaganda, but that
actually releases a large amount of carbon dioxide as well as other
global warming gases. One is led to believe that the nuclear reactor
stands alone, an autonomous creator of energy. In fact, the vast
infrastructure necessary to create nuclear energy, called the
nuclear fuel cycle, is a prodigious user of fossil fuel and coal.
The production of carbon dioxide, or CO2 is one measurement that
indicates the amount of energy used in the production of the nuclear
fuel cycle. Most of the energy used to create nuclear energy -- to
mine uranium ore for fuel, to crush and mill the ore, to enrich the
uranium, to create the concrete and steel for the reactor and to
store the thermally and radioactively hot nuclear waste -- comes
from the consumption of fossil fuels, that is, coal or oil. When
these materials are burned to produce energy, they form CO2,
reflecting coal and oil's origins in ancient trees and other organic
carboniferous material laid down under the earth's crust millions of
years ago. For each ton of carbon burned, 3.7 tons of CO2 gas are
added to the atmosphere, and this is the source of today's global
warming.
The total energy input of the nuclear fuel cycle -- the energetic
costs of nuclear power -- must be openly and honestly assessed if
nuclear power is to be compared fairly with other energy sources.
Very few studies are yet available that analyze the total life cycle
of nuclear power and its final energy input versus output.
One of the best is a study by Jan Willem Storm van Leeuwen and
Philip Smith titled "Nuclear Power -- the Energy Balance." To quote
the final conclusion of their lengthy analysis, "The use of nuclear
power causes, at the end of the road and under the most favorable
conditions, approximately one-third as much carbon dioxide (CO2)
emission as gas (from) electricity production. The rich uranium ores
required to achieve this reduction are, however, so limited that if
the entire present world electricity demand were to be provided by
nuclear power, these ores would be exhausted within nine years. Use
of the remaining poorer ores in nuclear reactors would produce more
CO2 emission than burning fossil fuels directly." In this instance,
nuclear reactors are best understood as complicated, expensive and
inefficient gas burners.
Setting aside the energetic costs of the whole fuel cycle, and
looking just at the nuclear industry's claim that what transpires in
the nuclear plants is "clean and green," the following conditions
would have to be met for nuclear power actually to make the
substantial contribution to reducing greenhouse gas emissions that
the industry claims is possible. This analysis assumes 2 percent or
more growth in global electricity demand:
-- All present-day nuclear power plants -- 441 in all -- would have
to be replaced by new ones.
-- Half the electricity growth would have to be provided by nuclear
power.
-- Half of all the world's coal-fired plants would have to be
replaced by nuclear power plants.
This would mean the construction over the next 50 years of some
2,000 to 3,000 nuclear reactors of 1,000 megawatt size -- one per
week for 50 years! Considering the eight to 10 years it takes to
construct a new reactor and the finite supply of uranium fuel, such
an enterprise is simply not viable.
--
(This piece originally appeared in Dr. Helen Caldicott's "Nuclear
Power Is Not the Answer," The New Press, 2006. This piece is
published here with the permission of The New Press. Helen Caldicott
is president of the Washington-based Nuclear Policy Research
Institute. She was a founder of the International Physicians for the
Prevention of Nuclear War, the organization that won the 1985 Nobel
Peace Prize.)
--
(United Press International's "Outside View" commentaries are
written by outside contributors who specialize in a variety of
important issues. The views expressed do not necessarily reflect
those of United Press International. In the interests of creating an
open forum, original submissions are invited.)
Del.icio.us | Digg it | RSS
Copyright 2007 United Press International, Inc. All Rights
Reserved.
*****************************************************************
25 UPI: Japan wants G8 nuke power guidelines
United Press International - Security & Terrorism - Briefing
Published: May 21, 2007 at 2:41 PM
TOKYO, May 21 (UPI) -- With nuclear power development spreading in
Asia, Japan is set to push for G8 international guidelines and help
with plant safety and security.
The pitch will be made at the G8 summit in Germany next month, with
concrete proposals in place for agreement in time for the 2008
summit in Hokkaido, the Kyodo news agency quoted unidentified
government sources as saying.
Sources in the report, published by The Japan Times, said the push
has three purposes. The first is to promote civilian nuclear power
to cut down on atmospheric damage caused through using fossil fuels.
Second is to prevent nuclear materials getting into the hands of
terrorists and other questionable entities, and lastly, to burnish
market prospects of Japan's nuclear reactor manufacturers.
The G8 initiative would only apply to nuclear reactors built in
cooperation with G8 nations, which are the world's leading economic
powers. The regime would include provisions to assist nations
developing nuclear power with training of personnel, technology
management, materials handling and safety.
According to the International Atomic Energy Agency, Asia is the
biggest area of expansion in the nuclear power field. Seven of the
29 reactors now under construction in the world are in India and
four are in China.
Vietnam is said to be eyeing nuclear power as well.
India plans an eight-fold increase in the number of reactors by
2022, while China plans a five-fold increase by 2015 as each aims to
power their economic growth.
China's current thirst for fossil fuel from the Middle East is often
cited in the rising cost of oil worldwide.
The Japanese push for G8 guidelines will also include a call for G8
nations to increase their financial contributions to the IAEA, the
report said.
There are currently 449 nuclear reactors worldwide.
Copyright 2007 United Press International, Inc. All Rights
Reserved.
*****************************************************************
26 Hemscott: Vinci unit acquires UK specialist in decommissioning nuclear plants
PARIS (Thomson Financial) - Construction group Vinci said that
its Freyssinet unit has acquired Nukem Ltd, the UK's leading
specialist in the decommissioning of nuclear power facilities.
The financial terms were not given.
Nukem employs 1,000 people and is expecting sales of nearly 120
mln eur this year, Vinci said.
'The company is ideally positioned on its markets to take part in
the accelerated decommissioning of existing sites recently
decided by the British government,' Vinci added.
Vinci's Freyssinet unit provides services to the nuclear power
industry in France.
tfn.paris@thomson.com gt/slj
COPYRIGHT
Copyright AFX News Limited 2007. All rights reserved. The copying,
Hemscott PLC - Serious Investment Research
*****************************************************************
27 Deccan Herald: Nuclear plants at Kudankulam will be delayed
Monday, May 21, 2007
Mumbai, PTI:
The two nuclear power plants may now be commissioned only by early
2009 due to delay in delivery of equipment by Russia.
The two nuclear power plants may now be commissioned only by early
2009 due to delay in delivery of equipment by Russia, NPCIL director
S K Agarwal told PTI.
The pressure vessel of one the reactors has been installed early
this year but other crucial equipment were yet to be delivered by
Russia and if there are no more delay, "we are hoping to commission
both the reactors in 2009," he said.
But "we will be pushing Russian industry in the next two to three
months to speed up the delivery of equipment," he said.
There was reorganisation and consolidation of Russian nuclear
industry as part of the global nuclear renaissance to control
nuclear supply chain, which also contributed to the delay, he added.
The establishment of the state-owned holding 'Atomenergyoprom' under
a recent presidential decree was a result of a large-scale reform of
the nuclear sector in Russia which began in 2006.
"If the Russians had begun their reform three years back, we would
not have had this problem of delay in delivery of equipment and even
drawings in some of the cases," Agarwal said.
The new Russian joint-stock company, 'Atomenergyoprom', which is to
run the country's nuclear power industry, will be entirely
controlled by the state and is a consolidation of 85 small nuclear
companies in Russia.
Its charter is being drafted, and a list of assets to be
incorporated into it is being compiled. Atomenergyoprom will take
over all civilian nuclear programmes and integrate all civilian
nuclear assets.
In the first phase, it will take over state shares in about 30
companies, the largest of them being TVEL, Techsnabexport (Tenex)
and Atomenergomash, and in the second phase the remaining 55
companies.
The vertical structure of the holding will unite all segments of the
nuclear cycle, from uranium ore mining and enrichment to the
production and enrichment of nuclear fuel, and the designing and
construction of nuclear power plants.
This is a process similar to the consolidation done globally between
General Electric and Hitachi, AREVA and Siemens and Westinghouse and
Toshiba in nuclear stock holdings, which the Nuclear Suppliers Group
consider important to control nuclear supply chain, one of the top
NPCIL officials told PTI.
"We are hoping that since the final decision of consolidation
process of Atomenergyoprom is over last week, the delivery of
equipment for the two reactors at Kudankulam will not be delayed
further," the official added. The two Russian-made 1000 MW nuclear
power plants at Kudankulam in Tamil Nadu, scheduled to be
commissioned by December, may be delayed by 12-18 months, a top
Nuclear Power Corporation (NPCIL) official said today.
Copyright 2007, The Printers (Mysore) Private Ltd., 75, M.G. Road,
Post Box No 5331, Bangalore - 560001
Tel: +91 (80) 25880000 Fax No. +91 (80) 25880523
*****************************************************************
28 Decatur Daily: Restart at Browns Ferry Unit 1 expected soon
MONDAY, MAY 21, 2007
Officials at Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant were preparing Sunday to
bring the refurbished Unit 1 reactor online, following a shutdown
that lasted almost 22 years.
Although no precise date has been set for the restart, it is
expected to come online this month.
An official at the plant said late Sunday that preparations were
continuing and that officials would release a statement following
the restart.
Officials idled the three Browns Ferry reactors in 1985 over
management and operational concerns.
Units 2 and 3 were placed back in service in 1991 and 1995.
Chris Paschenko
THE DECATUR DAILY 201 1st Ave. SE P.O. Box 2213 Decatur, Ala.
35609 (256) 353-4612 webmaster@decaturdaily.com
www.decaturdaily.com
*****************************************************************
29 Radio Australia: Nuclear investigator Blix awarded Sydney Peace Prize
Last Updated 21/05/2007, 14:56:32
Former United Nations weapons inspector Doctor Hans Blix has been
awarded the 2007 Sydney Peace Prize.
The jury was unanimous in the decision to give the award to Dr Blix,
who notified the UN Security Council in March 2003 that no evidence
of weapons of mass destruction had been found in Iraq.
The Director of the Sydney Peace Prize, Professor Stuart Rees, says
Mr Blix could be seen as a controversial choice.
"He reminds us of the illegality of the Iraq war," Professor Rees
said.
"He reminds us that a pack of lies were systematically told to
justify the armed intervention in Iraq.
In that respect it could be seen as controversial, but he is a man
of enormous principle."
Radio Australia
*****************************************************************
30 AU ABC: Attitude change needed on nuclear power says Govt taskforce.
21/05/2007. ABC News Online
A conference in Perth has been told nuclear power will never be
considered as a serious alternative to fossil fuels unless community
opinion on global warming changes.
The head of the Federal Government's Uranium Taskforce Ziggy
Switkowski has told the forum of business people and academics that
Australia still needs to come to a shared view about the seriousness
of climate change and the implications of global warming.
He says unless those attitudes change, nuclear power won't be
considered as part of the solution.
Print Email
© 2007 ABC | Privacy Policy
*****************************************************************
31 Hindustan Times: N-deal awaits final push by PM, Bush-
Nilova Roy Chaudhury
New Delhi, May 21, 2007
It will take a meeting between Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and
United States President George Bush to provide the final push to the
bilateral 123 Agreement, to operationalise the Indo-US civil nuclear
deal. The two are scheduled to meet in Heiligendamm on the Baltic
coast of Germany on the sidelines of the outreach meeting of the G-8
summit on June 7.
Speaking to HT, External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee said he
did not think the agreement would be finalised before that. Foreign
Secretary Shivshankar Menon has been talking with US Under Secretary
of State Nicholas Burns to iron out differences on the deal.
“It is very difficult for us to go out of the framework and
parameters of the agreement reached on July 18, 2005 and the
Separation Plan of March 2, 2006 and the Prime Minister's statement
to the Rajya Sabha,” (on August 17, 2006) he said.
The bilateral 123 Agreement will have to adhere to the PM’s
commitments to Parliament, he said.
The minister explained that the problem areas remain the
reprocessing of spent fuel, assurances of permanent fuel supply, the
right to return (which the United States must invoke, according to
its domestic law) and the ban on India conducting a nuclear test.
“We have declared a voluntary moratorium on testing,” Mukherjee
said. “There is no question of agreeing to a binding, legal
obligation.”
While the civil nuclear collaboration is not intended to impact
India's strategic programme, “a lot of scientists feel this deal
will disturb the indigenous programme,” Mukherjee said.
When asked if the deal was in danger of not happening, he said he
did not think so and remained optimistic that it could be done.
*****************************************************************
32 Hindustan Times: Amidst wrinkles in US, Russia delivers nuclear fuel to India-
May 21, 2007
Russia has delivered fresh nuclear fuel for two Indian reactors,
ignoring a US request for a delay until rules are formally changed
to allow such transfers, American officials said in recent
interviews.
The delivery, which experts say violates international rules, comes
as the US Congress is considering whether to approve an agreement
that would allow India to obtain nuclear fuel, reactors and
technology from the United States and other countries for the first
time in three decades.
The Russian fuel for the two Tarapur power plants "has been
delivered but it has not yet been used. It's in a storage facility,"
a senior US official said.
"This kind of activity should not take place, in our view, until the
NSG has acted. It's not good precedent," he said.
The United States has asked India to refrain from using the fuel and
believes this request will be honored, he added.
The official, who spoke anonymously because of the sensitivity of
the matter, insisted that while the transfer is an "irritant ...
(it) has not been a major issue."
The 45-nation Nuclear Suppliers Group has not yet altered its rules
to permit nuclear transfers to India and is not expected to do so
until Congress votes. That could take months because of concern that
the US-India civilian nuclear co-operation agreement could undermine
efforts to control nuclear proliferation.
"Russia has clearly violated NSG rules," Daryl Kimball, director of
the nonprofit Arms Control Association, said of Moscow's nuclear
fuel delivery.
"This is a further step towards the erosion of the NSG guidelines
and the United States must speak out more strongly against Russia
and India pursuing this."
Democratic Rep. Edward Markey of Massachusetts, a leading critic of
the US-India deal, expressed concern that the agreement has "pretty
much neutralized the ability of the US to block this type of
shipment."
"The United States can't plausibly tell other nations not to ship
nuclear material or technology to India if we are preparing to do so
ourselves," he said.
As a member of the NSG, which controls global nuclear trade, Russia
should not supply fuel to countries like India, which have not
signed the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty.
The uranium fuel for Tarapur was delivered recently following a
Russia-India agreement announced last month.
US Undersecretary of State Nicholas Burns, who is negotiating the
deal with India, mildly criticized the sale at the time.
While acknowledging that India needs energy for its fast-growing
economy, Burns said Russia should delay the transfer until Congress
and the NSG formally change their rules.
In supplying the fuel, Russia invoked an NSG "safety exemption
clause" which allows fuel transfers if there is reason to believe
that starving a reactor of fuel could result in a nuclear hazard.
But many non-proliferation experts reject this argument, reasoning
that if there was a real safety issue, the reactors should be shut
down, not refueled.
The United States believes "there is no immediate safety concern ...
but you could make a case in the next year or two that there could
be safety problem" at Tarapur, the senior US official said.
Russia used the same safety rationale when it sold India nuclear
fuel in early 2001. At that time, the US State Department accused
Russia of violating its NSG commitments and urged Moscow to cancel
the deal.
*****************************************************************
33 MarketWatch: States maneuver to lure new nuclear power plants -
By MarketWatch
Last Update: 1:40 PM ET May 21, 2007
NEW YORK (MarketWatch) -- In a positive shift for U.S. power
companies planning a new fleet of nuclear facilities, nuclear power
has gained popularity in several states as a solution to high power
prices and growing demand.
Louisiana, Florida, South Carolina and Georgia are offering
incentives to develop new nuclear generation, hoping that nuclear
power prices will be lower and less volatile than power generated by
natural gas. State regulators also hope new nuclear power plants
will create jobs and bolster local industry. Nuclear operators say
state rules ensuring cost recovery of new plants - particularly
pre-construction costs - will likely affect their decisions about
where to build new plants.
Louisiana and Florida have approved measures that would allow New
Orleans-based Entergy Corp. (ETR :
ETR
, , ) to pass on some pre-construction nuclear plant development
costs to their customers, while Georgia regulators are considering a
similar move.
A new nuclear plant in Florida would diversify the state's energy
sources, protecting customers from fluctuations in oil and natural
gas prices, said Lisa Polak Edgar, chairwoman of the Florida Public
Service Commission.
FPL hasn't confirmed that it will build a nuclear reactor in
Florida. Progress Energy (PGN :
PGN
, , ) last year chose Levy County as a potential site for a new
plant, but hasn't applied for an early site permit from the U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
In May, the South Carolina legislature passed a law that guarantees
utilities can recover costs from the construction of nuclear and
coal plants in the state. Duke Energy Corp. (DUK) is working with
lawmakers in North Carolina to pass a similar bill.
Charlotte, N.C.-based Duke is considering building a new nuclear
plant in the Carolinas. although it hasn't applied for an early site
permit.
Southern Co. (SO :
SO
, , ) utility Georgia Power Co. last year asked Georgia regulators
to approve licensing and pre-construction expenses for a new nuclear
plant near Augusta.
Even though the company hasn't confirmed it'll proceed with
construction, Georgia Public Service Commission Chairman Stan Wise
said he hopes his commission approves Southern's request so it will
build the new plant.
Georgia needs a robust source of baseload power to keep up with
growing demand, Wise said. "Somebody has got to figure out how to
keep the lights on," he said. "Renewable energy and energy
efficiency are important, but I'm not sure that's going to be enough
to take care of the 4 million new Georgians."
Louisiana Prepares To Compete
Entergy Corp. is considering building two new plants: one near its
River Bend nuclear plant in St. Francisville, La. and another near
the Grand Gulf plant in Port Gibson, Miss.
"State regulatory treatment is going to be key" to Entergy's
development decisions, said Randy Hutchinson, Entergy's senior vice
president of nuclear business development and new plant activities.
Under Louisiana's cost-recovery policy, Entergy can pass through
about 10% of its River Bend development costs to consumers before
the new plant is operational. Jay Blossman, chairman of the state
Public Service Commission, said he hopes the policy will encourage
Entergy to choose Louisiana over Mississippi for a new nuclear plant.
"We wanted to be very aggressive in encouraging (Entergy) to build
here," Blossman said.
A new nuclear plant in the state would reduce electricity customers'
exposure to rising natural gas prices and would create at least
2,000 permanent jobs, he said. Two Louisiana parishes have have
benefited from existing nuclear plants, Blossman said.
"In both of those parishes, the school districts are among some of
the top in the state," he said. "It's a win-win for everybody."
Louisiana's need for new sources of power outweighs concerns about
nuclear waste disposal, Blossman said. Storing the waste on-site
indefinitely isn't seen as a problem, he said.
Nuclear operators have been storing the waste from their plants for
years. The nation's troubled waste repository at Yucca Mountain in
Nevada is more than 18 years overdue and isn't expected to be
permitted or operational anytime soon.
Investors Demand Rules Investors won't back new nuclear plants
unless clear rules for cost recovery are in place. Financing is
vital to the development of a new nuclear plant, which can run
between $1.5 billion and $2 billion, according to the Nuclear Energy
Institute, the industry's Washington-based lobbying group.
In the 1970s and 1980s, nuclear power companies faced significant
cost overruns in building new reactors, with some plants' final
costs surpassing $5 billion. The cost of new power plants should be
lower because next-generation reactors are more standardized and the
NRC's licensing process has been streamlined, power companies say.
The southern states' cost-recovery policies mark a sea change from
the nuclear plant building boom of the late 1970s and early 80s,
when state regulators often saddled developers with cost overruns.
Still, state regulatory incentives are no guarantee that a new
nuclear plant will be built. Power companies must weigh a number of
factors, including the need for new power generation and the cost of
alternative sources of energy, when deciding whether to develop new
nuclear generation.
"State incentives do play a role, but they're not the driver for
us," said Beth Thomas, a spokewoman for Southern Co.
Entergy Corp. will consider the costs of supplies and materials
needed for construction and federal tax credits for nuclear power
production before deciding whether or not to build a new nuclear
plant, said Hutchinson.
Corrected May 21, 2007 10:56 ET (14:56 GMT)
Duke Energy Corp. (DUK) is based in Charlotte, N.C.
("Power Points: States Maneuver To Lure New Nuclear Pwr Plants,"
published at 12:11 p.m. EDT Friday and at 9:35 a.m. EDT Monday
misstated the company's headquarters.)
-Contact: 201-938-5400
Dow Jones Online Network:
Copyright 2007 MarketWatch, Inc. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
34 MidLothian Today: 'Most MSPs oppose nuclear power'
Tuesday, 22nd May 2007
The Scottish Parliament and Westminster are on a collision course
over nuclear power, green campaigners claimed.
A clear majority of MSPs are opposed to building new nuclear power
stations in Scotland, according to a new survey.
It found that 72 MSPs (56%) oppose new nuclear stations while 24
(19%) support this option and 33 (25%) either failed to respond or
were undecided, said Friends of the Earth Scotland.
The findings came ahead of the Westminster government's energy white
paper on Wednesday which is expected to say new nuclear stations are
essential for Britain's energy requirements and hitting carbon
emission targets.
First Minister Alex Salmond has insisted there is no prospect of new
nuclear stations in Scotland. He told the BBC's Politics Show: "As
far as Scotland is concerned, I
think we'll be saying: `Nuclear power - no thanks`.
"There's absolutely no chance of us allowing a new generation of
nuclear power in Scotland.
"There is just no consensus in Scottish society or in the Scottish
Parliament to have foisted on us another generation of nuclear power
stations."
Trade and industry secretary Alistair Darling told the same
programme: "I certainly started off as a sceptic, as far as nuclear
was concerned.
"But I think that if we don't keep that open as an option, then
we're not going to be able to reach our targets to reduce the amount
of carbon going in to the atmosphere, and we have run a grave risk
of not having our electricity when we need it."
Friends of the Earth said the energy white paper looked like putting
Westminster on a collision course with the Scottish Parliament.
Copyright (c) Press Association Ltd. 2007, All Rights Reserved.
Last Updated: 22 May 2007
*****************************************************************
35 Guardian Unlimited: Nuclear plant towers blown up
Lee Glendinning
Monday May 21, 2007
The Guardian
They have been one of the hallmarks of the Dumfriesshire horizon for
more than 50 years, but yesterday the four cooling towers of
Chapelcross nuclear power station were demolished in under 10
seconds.
The 300ft stacks near Annan in south-west Scotland, which can be
seen from the Cumbrian coast, were blown up at 9am as part of a
decommissioning process at the plant.
People crowded into the surrounding streets to watch as the stacks
were exploded from the bases upwards so they would tumble in on
themselves.
Mike Travis, site director at Chapelcross, said: "There will be many
a tear shed in the local community. It's the end of an era. It's
been a great day and everything went to plan."
Useful links
British Energy
Department of Trade and Industry
British Nuclear Fuels Ltd
Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament
Greenpeace
Come Clean WMD awareness programme
UK atomic energy authority
National Radiological Protection Board
Friends of the Earth
World Nuclear Association
World Nuclear Transport Institute
Guardian Unlimited Guardian News and Media Limited 2007
*****************************************************************
36 Guardian Unlimited: Holyrood to clash with Westminster over nuclear power
Press Association
Monday May 21, 2007
The Scottish parliament and Westminster are on a collision course
over nuclear power, green campaigners claimed today.
A clear majority of MSPs are opposed to building new nuclear
power stations in Scotland, a according to a new survey.
It found that 72 MSPs (56%) oppose new nuclear stations while 24
(19%) support this option and 33 (25%) either failed to respond
or were undecided, said Friends of the Earth Scotland.
The findings came ahead of the Westminster government's energy white
paper on Wednesday, which is expected to say new nuclear stations
are essential for Britain's energy requirements and hitting carbon
emission targets.
The first minister, Alex Salmond, has insisted there is no prospect
of new nuclear stations in Scotland.
He told the BBC's Politics Show yesterday: "As far as Scotland is
concerned, I think we'll be saying: 'Nuclear power - no thanks'.
"There's absolutely no chance of us allowing a new generation of
nuclear power in Scotland.
"There is just no consensus in Scottish society or in the Scottish
parliament to have foisted on us another generation of nuclear power
stations."
The trade and industry secretary, Alistair Darling, told the same
programme: "I certainly started off as a sceptic, as far as nuclear
was concerned.
"But I think that if we don't keep that open as an option, then
we're not going to be able to reach our targets to reduce the amount
of carbon going in to the atmosphere, and we have run a grave risk
of not having our electricity when we need it."
Friends of the Earth said the energy white paper looked like putting
Westminster on a collision course with the Scottish parliament.
FoE Scotland chief executive Duncan McLaren said: "Should Gordon
Brown attempt to implement Blair's radioactive legacy - by imposing
nuclear power stations on Scotland - he can now be sure it will be
met with stiff opposition.
"The results of our survey couldn't be clearer - new nuclear power
stations are not welcome in Scotland.
"Like the public, the majority of MSPs realise that nuclear power is
nothing other than a white elephant."
He went on: "Any attempt to foist new nuclear power on Scotland
would be an expensive, ineffective and risky distraction from
sensible measures to address climate change.
"Continued investment in energy efficiency and clean renewables are
the only sure fire ways to reduce Scotland's climate change
emissions."
Guardian Unlimited Guardian News and Media Limited 2007
*****************************************************************
37 MalaysiaSun.com: Chernobyl lurking in Himalaya's main rivers?
Tuesday 22nd May 2007 Issue 1125
Malaysia Sun
(IANS)
If concerted efforts are not made to recover two missing radiation
detectors in the Himalayan ranges, another Chernobyl could erupt,
poisoning two of Asia's biggest rivers, a Japanese filmmaker has
warned.
Yoichi Shimatsu, a former editor of Japan Times who now runs an
independent documentary-making agency, is asking all SAARC countries
along with China and Unesco to mobilise search and recovery
operations on the slopes of Mt Everest and another Himalayan range,
the Nanda Devi, to locate two radiation detectors planted there by
Western governments to spy on China's nuclear programme.
The Ganges and the Brahmaputra are under threat from these devices,
says Shimatsu, who was here to release his presentation on the
misuse of scientific research on Mt Everest.
The first incident goes back to the 1960s after China conducted its
first nuclear test in 1964, unnerving both neighbour India and the
US, both of whom wanted to know what was happening on the other side
of the bamboo curtain. New Delhi and America's CIA formed an
alliance to plant a nuclear-powered sensing device on the Nanda Devi
to intercept messages from China and spy on its missile launches.
CIA operators and accomplished mountaineers from the Indo-Tibet
Border Police were entrusted with the mission, which however ended
in a fiasco with the detector getting lost in the mountain. In 1968,
the CIA and the Indian authorities launched a frantic search of the
slopes to locate the sensor that contains plutonium, a highly
radioactive element but were unsuccessful.
When news of the missing sensor became known, it created a furore in
Indian parliament, forcing then prime minister Morarji Desai to make
a detailed statement.
Though the Indian government says there is little danger of the
plutonium breaking out of its protective sheath, Shimatsu says the
menace can't be ruled out and once that happens, the waters of the
Ganga, one of Asia's biggest and most sacred rivers, will be
poisoned.
The danger of a potential environmental disaster, he warns, has
increased with the loss of a second radiation sensor on Mt Everest,
the highest peak in the world.
After the G-7 Summit in London in 1991, the group decided to plant a
'weather robot' on the 8,848-metre peak to record weather changes.
In 1993, climbers from the Tokai Mountaineering Club in central
Japan put the robot on the peak, without being told what it
contained. Later, when the team went down and tried to radio contact
the robot, there was no sign, making them realise it was lost.
Shimatsu claims the robot actually contained a radiation detector to
spy on Asian nuclear sites and was powered by plutonium.
He thinks it must have fallen into Tibet, near the watershed of the
Brahmaputra, another of Asia's greatest rivers.
Eventually, he says, growing heat from the plutonium will cause it
to break free and contaminate the surroundings, which in turn will
affect Shigatse in Tibet, Assam in India and Bangladesh.
There are parallels with Chernobyl in Russia where radioactive
material leaked out from a nuclear plant in 1986, killing at least
56 people and exposing thousands to diseases like cancer.
Shimatsu says the only way to avert potential disaster in the
Himalayas is for the international community to start afresh the
search for radiation detectors, the cost of which should be borne by
the countries responsible. He also fears that not all Everest
expeditions are simply mountaineering trips. Some, he says, are a
facade for planting spying devices and some to retrieve them.
His warnings could sound like a madman's ramblings but for the
revelation made by an Everest hero and former officer of the Indian
Navy.
'Spies in the Himalayas: Secret Missions and Perilous Climbs', a
book jointly written by Captain M.S. Kohli and Kenneth Conboy,
describe the CIA-India project and its failure in graphic details.
By Anonymous, 05-21-07, 10:29 AM
*****************************************************************
38 ReviewJournal.com: Barack Obama explains Yucca Mountain stance
Opinion -
May. 20, 2007
To the editor:
In response to Erin Neff's Tuesday column, "Obama and Yucca":
I want every Nevadan to know that I have always opposed using Yucca
Mountain as a nuclear waste repository, and I want to explain the
many reasons why I've held that view.
In my state of Illinois, we have faced our own issues of nuclear
waste management. There are some who believe that Illinois should
serve as a repository for nuclear waste from other states. My view
on this subject was made clear in a 2006 letter to Sen. Pete
Domenici, who at the time was chairman of the Senate Energy
Committee. "States should not be unfairly burdened with waste from
other states," I wrote. "Every state should be afforded the
opportunity to chart a course that addresses its own interim waste
storage in a manner that makes sense for that state."
That is a position I hold to this day when it comes to both Illinois
and Nevada.
After spending billions of dollars on the Yucca Mountain Project,
there are still significant questions about whether nuclear waste
can be safely stored there. I believe a better short-term solution
is to store nuclear waste on-site at the reactors where it is
produced, or at a designated facility in the state where it is
produced, until we find a safe, long-term disposal solution that is
based on sound science.
In the meantime, I believe all spending on Yucca Mountain should be
redirected to other uses, such as improving the safety and security
of spent fuel at plant sites around the country and exploring other
long-term disposal options.
There is no doubt that this is a difficult issue. But I believe our
approach must be based on sound science above all else. I do not do
the bidding of any special interest or industry, including the
nuclear industry, which has a major presence in my state.
In my own campaign, I have not accepted donations from political
action committees or Washington lobbyists. In fact, I've often taken
positions at odds with special interests. When I learned that
radioactive tritium had leaked out of an Exelon nuclear plant in
Illinois, I led an effort in the Senate to require utilities to
notify the public of any unplanned release of radioactive substances.
All Nevadans should know that as president, I will bring to this
issue not just independent judgment and careful deliberation, but a
personal appreciation that comes from my own experience of living in
the back yard of hazardous nuclear materials. The safety and
security of Nevadans and all Americans requires nothing less.
Barack Obama
WASHINGTON, D.C.
The writer represents Illinois in the U.S. Senate and is seeking the
Democratic presidential nomination.
*****************************************************************
39 Sioux City Journal: South Dakota uranium contamination limited
May 22, 2007 ONLINE EDITION
SIOUX FALLS (AP) -- Contamination from Cold War-era uranium mines in
northwest South Dakota spread mainly to the surrounding land and
water, although some was detected 15 miles downstream, according to
a new report.
"It's like it's a no-brainer that stuff was moving," said Laurie
Walters-Clark with the U.S. Forest Service in Camp Crook. "The
report simply proved what was suspected."
An earlier study of Forest Service land, on which the old mines from
the 1950s and 1960s are located, found levels of arsenic, uranium
and other contaminants in concentrations higher than what occurs
naturally.
The latest report -- available at http://uranium.sdsmt.edu -- is the
first to detail contamination on nearby private land and water.
"It didn't travel very far," said Jim Stone, assistant professor in
the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering at the South
Dakota School of Mines & Technology in Rapid City.
The area studied for heavy metals and radioactive elements was
around the North Cave Hills near Custer National Forest.
The Environmental Protection Agency also paid for studies of two
other nearby mined areas, the South Cave Hills, which should be done
this summer, and Slim Buttes, which will be started this year, Stone
said.
Charmaine White Face of Rapid City, coordinator of the American
Indian treaty rights group Defenders of the Black Hills, said she
believes rain carried waste from the mines much farther downstream
and deposited it during dry times.
"I'm still concerned about the water, surface water and groundwater.
That report did not alleviate my fears," she said.
Because of that concern, researchers will survey land and water
beyond the 15 miles where the study confirmed mining-related
contamination, Stone said.
"We plan to collect sediment samples farther downstream into North
Dakota," he said.
Near the mines, the uranium level in one creek was 23 times higher
than normal, Stone said. Another hot spot on private land is a
roughly 5-acre, 8-foot-deep deposit of uranium-containing coal
called uraniferous lignite, he said.
"We know that's one area that needs to be cleaned up," Stone said.
Another place in need of more testing is a large abandoned mine on
private land northeast of Ludlow that appears to be contaminating
nearby water, Stone said.
"There are some fairly high concentrations and it appears to be
moving off the site," he said.
Besides going over the results with landowners and checking for
long-distance contamination, researchers also will do other surveys
this summer that will help them develop a cleanup plan, which could
include removing it or capping it, he said.
The estimated cost likely will top $22 million.
The company responsible, Oklahoma City-based Tronox, formerly
Kerr-McGee Chemical, has started working with landowners,
Walters-Clark said.
Its vice president of communications, Debbie Schramm, said Tronox
will study the area this summer to come up with a plan to control
runoff and reclaim the land.
She said one urgent need is a retention pond to capture sediment
from Bluff B, which is the most contaminated.
Tronox will also review the School of Mines report and work with
private landowners to reach agreements with them, Schramm said.
Field work will take several years and the areas then will be
monitored for at least three years, she said.
Randy Feist, who owns land near the mines and lives there, lost a
kidney to cancer and said he believes the contamination is
responsible for it and other people's health problems in the area.
But because there are so few residents, health experts can't compile
statistics that prove anything and, consequently, no law firm is
interested in representing them, he said.
Feist would like to see less calculation of the contamination and
more cleanup.
"Now we have a feel for how far it's gone," he said. "Let's just get
it done."
On the Net:
http://uranium.sdsmt.edu/
*****************************************************************
40 cantonrep.com: Strickland, House members push for Piketon nuclear-waste project
Monday, May 21, 2007
PIKETON, Ohio (AP) Gov. Ted Strickland and U.S. House members are
voicing support for a nuclear-waste recycling project that could
bring much-needed jobs to a county that suffers from a 9.6 percent
unemployment rate.
But Sen. George Voinovich remains unsure of the multibillion-dollar
projects safety. The Republican is worried it wont be
cost-effective and will turn the Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant
near Piketon into a waste dump, spokesman Chris Paulitz said.
The U.S. Department of Energy wont decide where to put the project
until next year. But Ohio officials are already lobbying for the
project, since ten other potential locations submitted site-study
reports this month.
Strickland wrote to Secretary of Energy Samuel Bodman last month,
urging that the site be placed at the plant. Republican Rep. Jean
Schmidt, whose district includes the Pike County site, and
Democratic Reps. Charlie Wilson and Zack Space sent a similar letter
on May 10.
The Piketon Initiative for Nuclear Independence, a partnership that
includes Cleveland industrialist Dan T. Moore III, used a $637,000
federal grant to submit its site study for the plant, which enriched
uranium for weapons and nuclear fuel before closing in 2001.
The Energy Department is proposing three projects to handle used
nuclear fuel rods: a recycling plant to reuse fuel-rod uranium, a
reactor to destroy other byproducts while generating electricity and
a fuels research laboratory.
Thousands of jobs would be created, but the three projects wouldnt
necessarily be at the same site.
Strickland and the three House members said their continued
endorsement depends on whether the federal government would ever use
the site as a radioactive waste dump. The three lawmakers have
introduced legislation to prevent that from happening.
Democratic Sen. Sherrod Brown supports the project as long as local
residents have been consulted, spokeswoman Joanna Kuebler said.
Critics have said Piketon will not qualify to host the recycling
component of the departments proposal, but fear it could become a
dump for long-term storage of spent nuclear fuel rods.
Strickland and Schmidt know Piketon will not be selected for the
project, said Geoffrey Sea of the Southern Ohio Neighbors Group.
Its only under consideration for spent fuel storage, he said.
But supporter Greg Simonton, of the Southern Ohio Diversification
Initiative, an economic-development nonprofit, bristled at that
suggestion.
Its a flat-out lie we want to bring a dump here, he said.
Information from: The Columbus Dispatch, http://www.dispatch.com
2007 The Repository
E-mail the webmaster at: webmaster@cantonrep.com
*****************************************************************
41 Rapid City Journal: Cold war-era uranium 'didn't travel very far'
By Carson Walker, The Associated Press
SIOUX FALLS -- Contamination from Cold War-era uranium mines in
northwest South Dakota spread mainly to the surrounding land and
water, but some was detected 15 miles downstream, according to a
new report.
A sediment pit holds runoff from old uranium mines in Ludlow in
this 2005 photo. Reflected in the water is the largest of 13
bluffs mined in the 1960s. The pond collects contaminated
sediment from the runoff in northwest South Dakota. (Photo by
Carson Walker, The Associated Press)
"It's like it's a no-brainer that stuff was moving," said Laurie
Walters-Clark with the U.S. Forest Service in Camp Crook. "The
report simply proved what was suspected."
An earlier study of Forest Service land, on which the old mines
from the 1950s and 1960s are located, found levels of arsenic,
uranium and other contaminants in concentrations higher than what
occurs naturally.
The latest report is the first to detail contamination on nearby
private land and water.
"It didn't travel very far," said Jim Stone, assistant professor
in the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering at the
South Dakota School of Mines & Technology in Rapid City.
The area studied for heavy metals and radioactive elements was
around the North Cave Hills near Custer National Forest.
The Environmental Protection Agency also paid for studies of two
other nearby mined areas, the South Cave Hills, which should be
done this summer, and Slim Buttes, which will be started this
year, Stone said.
Charmaine White Face of Rapid City, coordinator of the American
Indian treaty rights group Defenders of the Black Hills, said she
believes rain carried waste from the mines much farther
downstream and deposited it during dry times.
"I'm still concerned about the water, surface water and
groundwater. That report did not alleviate my fears," she said.
Because of that concern, researchers will survey land and water
beyond the 15 miles where the study confirmed mining-related
contamination, Stone said.
"We plan to collect sediment samples farther downstream into
North Dakota," he said.
Near the mines, the uranium level in one creek was 23 times
higher than normal, Stone said. Another hot spot on private
land is an about 5-acre, 8-foot-deep deposit of
uranium-containing coal called uraniferous lignite, he said.
"We know that's one area that needs to be cleaned up," Stone
said.
Another place in need of more testing is a large abandoned mine
on private land northeast of Ludlow that appears to be
contaminating nearby water, Stone said.
"There are some fairly high concentrations and it appears to be
moving off the site," he said.
Besides going over the results with landowners and checking for
long-distance contamination, researchers will also do other
surveys this summer that will help them develop a cleanup plan,
which could include removing it or capping it, he said.
The estimated cost will likely top $22 million.
The company responsible, Oklahoma City-based Tronox, formerly
Kerr-McGee Chemical, has started working with landowners,
Walters-Clark said.
Its vice president of communications, Debbie Schramm, said Tronox
will study the area this summer to come up with a plan to control
runoff and reclaim the land.
She said one urgent need is a retention pond to capture sediment
from Bluff B, which is the most contaminated.
Tronox will also review the School of Mines report and work with
private landowners to reach agreements with them, Schramm said.
Field work will take several years and the areas then will be
monitored for at least three years, she said.
Randy Feist, who owns land near the mines and lives there, lost a
kidney to cancer and said he believes the contamination is
responsible for it and other people's health problems in the
area.
But because there are so few residents, health experts can't
compile statistics that prove anything and, consequently, no law
firm is interested in representing them, he said.
Feist wants to see less calculation of the contamination and more
cleanup.
"Now we have a feel for how far it's gone," he said. "Let's just
get it done."
WhatIF wrote on May 21, 2007 4:31 PM:
" What if we mined uranium and build a nuclear power plant and your
electric bill was cut 1/3? I bet that would change a lot of opinions
around here. "
Clarence wrote on May 21, 2007 3:01 PM:
" It's funny how stuff that was in the ground and now is on the
ground has become excessively horrid. Yeah, it needs a cleanup,
yeah, I don't want it in my back yard either. Clean it up. ASAP. But
two things: First, life was different in the 1960s, if anybody
remembers. I'm told that you hardly needed a lantern near Edgemont
100 years ago because the ground virtually glowed from surface
outcrops. Second, notice that the FDA and EPA even have different
sets of mercury rules for eating fish - as from northeast South
Dakota lakes where it comes from plants. How much is a problem and
how do you stop plants from creating it and fish storing it? If we
want 0 radiation, we'd best find homes down in Homesteak, 'cuz we
get it ever day from the sun and galaxy. Maybe we should mine all
the uranium and anything else radioactive to make the area safe, eh?
"
pahasapaboy wrote on May 21, 2007 10:50 AM:
" Big Oil, Big Uranium, Big Mining. Same ol', Same ol'. Money,
money, money (and it sure isn't going to stay here.) Locals? Who
cares. "
BBI wrote on May 21, 2007 8:49 AM:
" It amazes me how we have already experienced problems in this very
state yet there is "exploratory drilling" taking place right now. I
guess the folks in Pierre really don't care about what happens to SD
residents. Maybe if the mining site was within 20 miles of one of
their great big houses and their own children were at risk they
might reconsider. But as long as it's happening on the other side of
the state, away from the ones who make the decisions and their
important families, it's really no big deal. What an atrocity. I
can't believe I live in a place that values money over health.
Pathetic. "
BBI wrote on May 21, 2007 8:42 AM:
" 23 times higher than normal levels 50+ years later. That sounds
like a safe way for SD to make $$$. I'm really glad we have elected
officials who value our health over the health of big business. Oh,
I forgot, we don't have leaders like that in this state anymore.
Have fun drinking radioactive water for the next 50 years Edgemont
residents. I hope you make enough from the peanuts thrown at you by
the mining company to buy really good health insurance coverage.
You're gonna need it. "
"glowing" resident wrote on May 21, 2007 7:57 AM:
" Check with the healthcare professionals who have served the people
in the contaminated areas for the past 40+ years. There has been a
high rate of "unexplained" cancer for years for this specific area.
No one listened to the "whites" who were ill, so I thank the
"natives" who sent out a cry for help. Now perhaps someone will
listen and do something. "
The Rapid City Journal Phone: 605-394-8300 Contact Us 2007 Rapid
City Journal. All Rights Reserved. rediscover the web
*****************************************************************
42 The Australian: ALP switch sparks uranium rush
NEWS.com.au |
* May 21, 2007
This story is from our news.com.au network Source: NEWS.com.au
* By Mark Schliebs
URANIUM companies are flooding onto the Australian Stock Exchange at
a rate of almost one a week – and analysts say it is because
of Labor's policy reversal on supporting new mines in the country.
Nearly one in five companies listed on the ASX since January has
interests in uranium mining or exploration.
There have been 14 new uranium companies listed so far this year
– compared with the 2006 total of just 22.
Australian Uranium Association (AUA) executive director Michael
Angwin has said research suggests Labor’s decision to allow
more uranium mining could lead to a total of 15 to 20 mines in
Australia within six years.
Mr Angwin has said a recent poll commissioned by the AUA found that
50 per cent of respondents support uranium mining and exploration.
“There’s research… which shows there are 13
projects that could potentially become mines by 2013,” he has
said.
Labor’s resources spokesman Chris Evans has acknowledged there
has been a growth in the market, but he has said all companies
wishing to mine must still gain approval from the relative state or
territory government.
“Companies looking at uranium mining now know they will
receive export licences if they meet certain safety
requirements,” Mr Evans has said.
Professor of mining geology at the University of Adelaide Ian Plimer
has said many companies had predicted as early as last year that
Labor would dismiss its “no new mines” policy.
Professor Plimer has said that even before the policy was scrapped
last month, new companies were preparing to start operations.
“There has been an inordinate growth of exploration in
Australia,” Professor Plimer has said.
“It’s a very high risk business and people are taking
the risk.”
But Nuclear Free Australia spokesman Hillel Freedman has said there
is a fair chance that many new companies will collapse.
Mr Freedman has said the costs of mining the mineral could exceed
the expectations of investors.
“Is it going to be economically worth it to dig it out?”
Mr Freedman said. “It seems very speculative.”
Mr Freedman has also said that he sees no sign that the majority of
Australians will want more uranium mining.
But many of the newly listed uranium companies have already had the
value of their shares skyrocket.
Shares in the latest uranium company listed, Oklo Uranium Limited,
has doubled in price since being listed last Wednesday.
There are currently three uranium mines in Australia: Olympic Dam
and Beverly in South Australia; and Ranger in the Northern Territory.
The Australian
*****************************************************************
43 UPI: Russian expert warns of uranium shortage
United Press International - Energy - Briefing
Published: May 21, 2007 at 6:32 PM
MOSCOW, May 21 (UPI) -- A leading Russian nuclear expert warns
record prices for uranium will continue to rise as supply stays
tight and demand worldwide booms.
Yevgeny Velikhov, head of the Kurchatov Institute, told reporters at
a RIA Novosti news conference that the recent surge in uranium
prices "may still grow by another order of magnitude."
Uranium has settled at $120 per pound since earlier this month. It
was $56 per pound last October and averaged around $10-$15 per pound
in the 1980s through 2000.
"The global energy market is very turbulent," Velikhov said. "The
uranium price can hit any mark at a time of crisis."
While 435 nuclear reactors provide 16 percent of the world's energy
demand, another 28 are under construction. Even in the United
States, where a new reactor hasn't been licensed since 1978, the
Nuclear Regulatory Commission expects applications for around 30 new
reactors in coming years.
The low prices depressed the supply of uranium, which is enriched
for both nuclear energy and weapons. Jeff Combs, president uranium
analysts The Ux Consulting Co., said this reduced investment in
exploration and mining uranium.
Accidents and weather-related incidents at mines in Canada and
Australia have hurt large projects aimed at bringing more uranium to
market.
Meanwhile, Russia, the United States and others are seeking to
create a global nuclear fuel market while keeping it from the hands
of weapons makers.
Del.icio.us | Digg it | RSS
Copyright 2007 United Press International, Inc. All Rights
Reserved.
United Press International, UPI, the UPI logo, and other trademarks
and service marks, are registered or unregistered trademarks of
United Press International, Inc. in the United States and in other
countries.
*****************************************************************
44 Air Force Times: McClellan toxic waste plan angers locals -
Staff report
Posted : Monday May 21, 2007 17:13:11 EDT
Defense Department plans to seal off toxic waste at a former Air
Force base instead of cleaning it out has angered the local
government, according to a report in the Sacramento Bee.
The former McClellan Air Force Base in Sacramento is one of the
costliest Superfund sites the DoD had promised to clean up. Numerous
trenches and shallow underground dumps on the base still contain
radioactive and toxic materials, and the Air Force would like to
save millions of dollars by permanently capping them instead of
removing the waste, the Bee reported.
On May 16, the Air Force announced an agreement with Sacramento
officials to transfer a 62-acre parcel of contaminated land to the
county for cleanup and development. The move, which requires the
approval of the Environmental Protection Agency and Gov. Arnold
Schwarzenegger, would be the first ever relinquishment of
contaminated land by the government. But that land does not contain
any toxic dumps, the Bee reported.
The deal, under which the DoD would pay Sacramento Country $11.2
million to clean up the land, is part of an effort to hasten cleanup
and transfer of control of McClellan. But while Sacramento County
officials cheered the deal last week, they were strongly upset at
the revelation of the federal plan not to remove any of the toxic
waste from the rest of the base, the Bee reported.
The capping plan would cost the Air Force an estimated $39 million
over 30 years, as opposed to the $500 million it would cost to ship
the toxic and radioactive waste to special landfills, the Bee
reported. The Air Force admitted that such a plan would limit the
number and placement of new buildings on the site for safety
reasons, and that someone would have to monitor the pollution levels
on the site forever, the report said. The service did promise to
share the costs of that monitoring and to pay for all groundwater
testing and cleaning, according to the report.
All content 2007, Army Times Publishing Company
*****************************************************************
45 sacbee.com: Toxic-pits cleanup dropped -
Air Force's plan to seal sites at old McClellan base stirs outcry
over safety.
By Chris Bowman - Bee Staff Writer
Published 12:00 am PDT Monday, May 21, 2007
The Defense Department plans to skip cleanup of the largest and most
hazardous waste sites at the former McClellan Air Force Base as it
transfers the old graves of radioactive and toxic junk to private
development.
State health officials say the plan is unacceptable and are calling
for the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission to intervene.
Air Force officials were surprised to find as many as 43
deteriorating barrels of high-level radioactive waste in a 2000-02
excavation of one site, according to a state health review of the
proposal obtained by The Bee.
Ten more unlined waste trenches have not been exhumed, leading
health authorities to question whether those pits also contain
strongly radioactive plutonium, americium and cesium.
The Air Force's plan would save the federal government hundreds of
millions of dollars. Rather than digging up and cleansing or
removing the toxic waste, the military strategy is to cap the waste
pits in perpetuity.
Air Force officials maintain this would be safe.
Yet the experts who spent the past 25 years investigating the
McClellan Superfund Site say up front they do not really know what
is buried in the shallow, underground dumps, which date from World
War II through the Cold War. That's not good enough, say radiation
experts with the state Department of Health Services.
"Without this information, any proposal of the Air Force cannot be
determined to meet California health and safety code," wrote Robin
Hook, the health department's environmental management chief, in an
April 23 critique of the military's plan.
Even the Air Force plan openly admits "there is significant
uncertainty on the type and levels of radioactive wastes that may be
present in these pits."
Air Force officials nevertheless maintain that enough is known about
the contamination to evaluate risks and remedies, and they are
pushing for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency approval by year's
end.
"We have a lot of specialized people at the table that are talking
through these issues," said Kathleen Johnson, EPA's manager of
military Superfund sites in California.
The cap-and-leave plan has no precedent, according to the state
health reviewers.
"This project will be the first instance where the Air Force has
left radioactive waste in place at closure or site transfer," Hook
said. "In fact, it may be the first ... anywhere in the country that
includes radioactive waste and is planned for transfer out of
federal jurisdiction."
The Pentagon has targeted McClellan to be among the first of the
nation's military Superfund sites to be put into private ownership
before completion of toxic cleanup.
The Defense Department recently agreed to pay Sacramento County
$11.2 million to clean up a 62-acre parcel that does not include any
of the known waste dumps. County officials are negotiating similar
privatization deals to hasten redevelopment of the 3,000-acre base,
a growing industrial and commercial complex run by the county and
the McClellan Park development company.
But the opportunity to develop some areas into office buildings may
be jeopardized by leaving the toxic waste in place, said county
Supervisor Roger Dickinson, whose district includes McClellan. While
acknowledging there's "a lot of pressure on the Air Force to reduce
costs" as the war in Iraq drags on, Dickinson nonetheless said he is
holding the military to its original promise of full restoration.
"You can imagine saying to a prospective McClellan business tenant,
'By the way, the Air Force says they'll be monitoring the pollution
forever, and don't worry,' " Dickinson said.
Sacramento County opposes the Air Force plan. So does a group of
police and fire officials that has invested more than $200,000 in
planning a statewide fire and rescue training center at McClellan,
according to Kathryn Broderick, the county's economic development
coordinator.
"Conveying the responsibilities and costs associated with
left-behind waste and owners' land-use restrictions to future
property owners would greatly undermine the tremendous success that
we have achieved here at McClellan," Broderick said at a November
hearing on the plan.
Copyright The Sacramento Bee, (916) 321-1000
*****************************************************************
46 SPI: Full construction on Hanford vit plant to resume in 4 months
Seattle Post-Intelligencer
Last updated May 21, 2007 9:51 a.m. PT
RICHLAND, Wash. -- More than 300 workers will be added as Bechtel
National prepares to resume full construction of a huge nuclear
waste processing plant in about four months, officials said.
Many if not most of the additional employees may work in other
states on design of the long-awaited $12.2 billion vitrification
plant, which is supposed to convert highly toxic radioactive waste
sludge at the Hanford nuclear reservation to glasslike logs for
long-term storage, company officials told the Tri-City Herald.
Work on the pretreatment and high-level waste buildings has been
stalled for more than a year because of concern about whether the
overall project was adequately designed to withstand a severe
earthquake.
The Energy Department plans to resume work on both buildings on Oct.
1, the start of the fiscal year, said John R. Eschenberg, the DOE's
manager of the vitrification project.
Much of the hiring will be done in July, August and September, and
by the end of the year the number of construction employees should
rise to about 580 from 470 at present, not including onsite support
staff, Bechtel spokesman John Britton said.
Those figures are in addition to 171 subcontractor employees now on
site.
Bechtel is making about 30 job offers a week, partly to offset
attrition among the approximately 2,500 employees working design and
construction, Britton said.
The company also is boosting white-collar employment, including
engineering staff, procurement workers and project control monitors
who handle scheduling and management duties. Bechtel's goal is to
add 200 engineering jobs for a total of 850.
Because of a high demand for engineers nationwide, Bechtel National
has opened a satellite office in the San Francisco Bay area for
engineers to work from there, and others will work from an office in
Maryland, Britton said.
"That allows us to tap into Bechtel's engineering resources" as well
as engineering schools and engineers who prefer to stay in
metropolitan areas, Britton said.
Construction work has continued on a low-activity waste operation,
an analytical laboratory and about 23 smaller support functions that
would not be dealing with the worst of the waste and thus are not
affected by seismic issues.
The vit plant is the centerpiece of cleanup work at Hanford, the
nation's most polluted nuclear site. It is designed to convert
liquid and sludge now stored in leak-prone underground tanks, and
generated as far back as World War II from production of fuel for
atomic bombs, into a stable form for safer disposal beginning in
2019.
Resumption of full construction depends on resolving the seismic
issues by Oct. 1, officials said.
New bore holes have been drilled in the center of the 65-acre plant
site, and sound waves have been transmitted through the rock and
soil to indicate how much an earthquake might shake the complex. A
report is expected early next month, and a final decision on whether
to resume work is up to Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman.
"The early indications of the data indicate results are very, very
favorable," Eschenberg said.
---
Information from: Tri-City Herald, http://www.tri-cityherald.com
101 Elliott Ave. W.
Seattle, WA 98119
(206) 448-8000
Send comments to newmedia@seattlepi.com
Send investigative tips to iteam@seattlepi.com
1996-2007 Seattle Post-Intelligencer
*****************************************************************
47 Hanford News: Known for its freedom, unique nuclear lab faces closure
This story was published Sunday, May 20th, 2007
By Greg Bluestein, Associated Press Writer
AIKEN, S.C. (AP) - It seems far-fetched that a heavily guarded
government complex where scientists spent decades building
nuclear weapons has also become a playground for
environmentalists.
Here, at the Savannah River Site, researchers have been free
since 1951 to test the environmental impact of man's most
dangerous developments.
More than 3,000 scientific papers have been written by Savannah
River Ecology Laboratory researchers who study the effect of toxic
radiation on wildlife, the affects of acid pools on the ecosystem,
and other possibilities both wonkish and wild.
And over the years, the lab has become a rare independent voice on
the secretive U.S. Energy Department campus, where scientists long
celebrated their freedom to disclose their findings without sending
them first to government officials.
But the lab may pay the price for its freedom. It's in danger of
losing its vaunted foothold on the 300-square-mile site as a funding
crisis threatens to cripple its operations after May 31. The lab's
budget is being slashed from around $4.5 million to about $1.8
million, and there's no commitment for federal funding beyond Dec. 1.
The cut has director Paul Bertsch and other researchers wondering
why the federal government would target the only independent lab
dedicated to studying how nuclear energy affects the ecosystem at a
time when the Bush administration is pushing a nuclear renaissance.
"There's a complete disconnect there," Bertsch said.
The Energy Department said the cuts should come as no shock. It said
it was adhering to an agreement brokered last year with the
University of Georgia, which operates the lab, that encourages the
lab to seek outside funding.
"This agreement was signed by both parties," said spokeswoman Julie
Peterson. "It is what it is."
The lab has stood out for its independence since its founding in
1951 by Eugene Odum, the University of Georgia professor considered
by many in the scientific community as the father of modern ecology.
Researchers working at other Energy Department sites must often
submit their work to government bureaucrats before publication, but
Bertsch said his lab's free rein has allowed it to offer sharp,
objective criticism - sometimes, to the embarrassment of federal
officials.
In one case, a 1981 cover story of the BioScience journal detailed
how discharged heated water from the site's nuclear reactors
devastated forests miles away.
"It's an independent, unbiased, uncensored reporting system," said
Whit Gibbons, a researcher who co-authored the report and who has
worked at the lab for 39 years.
Gibbons and other staffers said they consider themselves scientists
first, but watchdogs a close second.
"What we do gives the community some sense of comfort, some sense of
security," said Chris Romanek, an associate professor of geology.
The Savannah River complex was built during the Cold War to make
nuclear weapons. Eventually five nuclear reactors were up and
running, but after the fall of the Soviet Union, the site's mission
has transformed from creating nuclear weapons to cleaning up nuclear
waste.
The federally protected land, which is ringed by security
checkpoints and guard gates, has another advantage: While polluted
streams offer an endless array of research possibilities, so do the
untouched creeks crisscrossing the "Green Emerald" - a nickname the
mostly pristine forest and wetlands site earned from its satellite
footprint.
Yet the site's curator began to crack down in 2005, when the Energy
Department proposed slashing the lab's entire $7.7 million budget.
Congress intervened and restored about $4.5 million, but Bertsch
still had to fire 50 employees - about a third of his staff.
The latest cuts will go deeper and Bertsch is considering whether to
fire all but six of the lab's 110 employees.
The Energy Department hinted the lab is being targeted because its
mission does not match up with government priorities.
Any proposed work conducted by the lab "must further the mission of
the department and they must provide greater information that
enables the DOE to be a good steward of taxpayer dollars," said an
April letter from James Rispoli, the department's assistant
secretary for environmental management.
U.S. Rep. John Barrow, the Democrat who represents the University of
Georgia, has been one of the lab's most vocal political supporters.
"This is the only lab that does this," he said. "They're carrying
the burden for the entire energy community. If Congress is serious
about investing in nuclear energy, we have to invest in the research
that makes nuclear energy safe and sustainable."
Other backers have also begun to push back. They've started a "Save
SREL" Web site, highlighting the achievements of its researchers.
Lab staff also has promoted how its environmental outreach programs
have reached thousands of students and adults through public talks,
workshops, exhibits and tours.
One of the favorite features of the lab is a gated area filled with
rare animals, a strange sort of petting zoo locked deep within a
nuclear complex where the lab uses its extra space to house animals
as part of its outreach program. There are brightly colored snakes,
giant fish, even a three-legged alligator called Stumpy.
(Experiments are not conducted on the animals.)
Tracey Tuberville, a research coordinator, sighed after she showed
off a baby gopher turtle relocated to the site after its home in
south Georgia was destroyed.
"We have programs that can only be done here," she said.
© 2007 Tri-City Herald. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
48 Tri-City Herald: Massive Hanford project to resume (w/ video)
Waste Treatment Plant Project tour
Published Monday, May 21st, 2007
By Annette Cary, Herald staff writer
Work is gearing up at Hanford's massive vitrification plant to
return to full construction operations in about four months.
Bechtel National is planning to add about 300 workers, although some
may work on design of the plant from offices in other states.
The construction workers should increase from about 470 on site now
to about 580 by the end of the year, not including support staff on
site. Much of the construction hiring will be done in July, August
and September, said Bechtel National spokesman John Britton. Those
numbers also do not include about 171 subcontractor construction
workers already on site.
Bechtel National already is making about 30 job offers a week,
Britton said. Part of the hiring is to offset attrition among the
approximately 2,500 employees working for Bechtel on the design and
construction of the plant.
But Bechtel also is increasing the size of its white collar
workforce for the project. That includes engineering staff, plus
procurement workers and project control staff assigned to cost and
schedule and management duties.
Bechtel's goal is to fill 200 engineering positions to bring total
engineering staff to 850. However, many of those engineers may not
move to the Tri-Cities.
Demand for engineers nationwide has made finding candidates
difficult, and Bechtel National has responded by opening a satellite
office in the San Francisco Bay area for engineers who will work
from there on the Hanford project. It also will have staff at its
Maryland office.
"That allows us to tap into Bechtel's engineering resources,"
Britton said. It also allows Bechtel to more easily tap engineers in
metropolitan areas near engineering schools.
Construction halted more than a year ago on the plant's Pretreatment
Facility and High Level Waste Facility because of questions about
whether the design standard was adequate to withstand a severe
earthquake.
Now DOE is preparing to resume construction on those buildings at
the start of the next fiscal year, Oct. 1, said John Eschenberg, DOE
manager of the vitrification plant project.
The $12.2 billion plant is planned to turn much of Hanford's worst
radioactive waste into a sturdy glass form for permanent disposal
starting in 2019. Now, the waste is stored in leak-prone underground
tanks. It was generated as early as World War II during the
production of plutonium for the nation's nuclear weapons program.
The resumption of construction on the two buildings that will handle
high level radioactive waste is dependent on resolving seismic
issues for the site by Oct. 1.
New bore holes have been drilled in the center of the plant's
65-acre campus, and tests have been conducted with sound waves sent
into layers of rock and soil to get a clear idea of how much an
earthquake might shake the vit plant's buildings.
A report is expected to be published in early June. Then, Energy
Secretary Samuel Bodman must sign off on the results.
"The early indications of the data indicate results are very, very
favorable," Eschenberg said.
To resume full construction Oct. 1, significant preparation work
must be done at the site. That includes staging equipment and tools
at the buildings, developing work plans, lining up already shipped
materials and training workers.
Bechtel National has continued construction work on the Low Activity
Waste Facility, the Analytical Laboratory and about 23 smaller
support facilities which are not affected by the seismic issue
because they do not handle large volumes of the most radioactive
waste.
The Analytical Laboratory has seen the most dramatic changes this
year. A network of structural steel has risen as high as a
four-story building from the lab's foundations a few months ago.
Although the lab is the smallest of the four main buildings at the
plant, it has a footprint the size of a football field. The lab will
collect nearly 10,000 waste samples each year it operates to come up
with the correct "recipe" for each batch of glass made.
DOE and Bechtel also have used the last year to complete more design
work on the plant. Because of the need to finish the plant quickly
to get waste out of leak-prone underground tanks, construction
started on the plant before design was complete.
Now more than a year of design work has been completed ahead of the
construction schedule, Eschenberg said.
© 2007 Tri-City Herald, Associated Press & Other Wire Services
*****************************************************************
49 Hanford News: Massive Hanford project to resume
This story was published Monday, May 21st, 2007
Annette Cary, Herald staff writer
Work is gearing up at Hanford's massive vitrification plant to
return to full construction operations in about four months.
Bechtel National is planning to add about 300 workers, although
some may work on design of the plant from offices in other
states.
The construction workers should increase from about 470 on site now
to about 580 by the end of the year, not including support staff on
site. Much of the construction hiring will be done in July, August
and September, said Bechtel National spokesman John Britton. Those
numbers also do not include about 171 subcontractor construction
workers already on site.
Bechtel National already is making about 30 job offers a week,
Britton said. Part of the hiring is to offset attrition among the
approximately 2,500 employees working for Bechtel on the design and
construction of the plant.
But Bechtel also is increasing the size of its white collar
workforce for the project. That includes engineering staff, plus
procurement workers and project control staff assigned to cost and
schedule and management duties.
Bechtel's goal is to fill 200 engineering positions to bring total
engineering staff to 850. However, many of those engineers may not
move to the Tri-Cities.
Demand for engineers nationwide has made finding candidates
difficult, and Bechtel National has responded by opening a satellite
office in the San Francisco Bay area for engineers who will work
from there on the Hanford project. It also will have staff at its
Maryland office.
"That allows us to tap into Bechtel's engineering resources,"
Britton said. It also allows Bechtel to more easily tap engineers in
metropolitan areas near engineering schools.
Construction halted more than a year ago on the plant's Pretreatment
Facility and High Level Waste Facility because of questions about
whether the design standard was adequate to withstand a severe
earthquake.
Now DOE is preparing to resume construction on those buildings at
the start of the next fiscal year, Oct. 1, said John Eschenberg, DOE
manager of the vitrification plant project.
The $12.2 billion plant is planned to turn much of Hanford's worst
radioactive waste into a sturdy glass form for permanent disposal
starting in 2019. Now, the waste is stored in leak-prone underground
tanks. It was generated as early as World War II during the
production of plutonium for the nation's nuclear weapons program.
The resumption of construction on the two buildings that will handle
high level radioactive waste is dependent on resolving seismic
issues for the site by Oct. 1.
New bore holes have been drilled in the center of the plant's
65-acre campus, and tests have been conducted with sound waves sent
into layers of rock and soil to get a clear idea of how much an
earthquake might shake the vit plant's buildings.
A report is expected to be published in early June. Then, Energy
Secretary Samuel Bodman must sign off on the results.
"The early indications of the data indicate results are very, very
favorable," Eschenberg said.
To resume full construction Oct. 1, significant preparation work
must be done at the site. That includes staging equipment and tools
at the buildings, developing work plans, lining up already shipped
materials and training workers.
Bechtel National has continued construction work on the Low Activity
Waste Facility, the Analytical Laboratory and about 23 smaller
support facilities which are not affected by the seismic issue
because they do not handle large volumes of the most radioactive
waste.
The Analytical Laboratory has seen the most dramatic changes this
year. A network of structural steel has risen as high as a
four-story building from the lab's foundations a few months ago.
Although the lab is the smallest of the four main buildings at the
plant, it has a footprint the size of a football field. The lab will
collect nearly 10,000 waste samples each year it operates to come up
with the correct "recipe" for each batch of glass made.
DOE and Bechtel also have used the last year to complete more design
work on the plant. Because of the need to finish the plant quickly
to get waste out of leak-prone underground tanks, construction
started on the plant before design was complete.
Now more than a year of design work has been completed ahead of the
construction schedule, Eschenberg said.
© 2007 Tri-City Herald. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
50 Hanford News: DOE sees another missed deadline in dealing with sludge
This story was published Sunday, May 20th, 2007
Annette Cary, Herald staff writer
Problems in controlling radioactive sludge at Hanford's K Basins
likely will mean another missed deadline for the Department of
Energy, but the agency believes it can minimize delays by making
changes now to the sludge treatment system design.
A recent report from Hanford representatives for the Defense
Nuclear Facilities Safety Board said that continuing problems
with the sludge likely would lead to a "significant delay" in
meeting a November 2009 deadline to have the sludge treated and
ready for disposal.
But DOE may be able to hold the delay to a year or two by making
changes to the design of the treatment system before it begins
operating, said Dave Brockman, DOE project director for closure of
the K Basins.
"We believe it's very solvable," he said.
DOE projects that the treatment system as planned will run into
troubles as sludge is moved within it.
A review by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory of the oxidation
process within the treatment system found that the mock sludge it
used in testing was forming a stiff solid that adhered to test
vessels.
Fluor Hanford, the contractor on the project, already has learned
how difficult it is to keep the sludge in a consistent solution.
It's struggled to keep the waste in a liquid solution that contains
1.5 percent sludge to pipe it from the K East Basin to the K West
Basin where it will await treatment.
It's had trouble getting as much as 1 percent of the sludge to mix
in a consistent solution without forming slugs that clog the system.
For the treatment system, the sludge needs to be in a consistent 12
percent solution.
"If we are not able to mobilize and transport it at 12 percent
solution, our treatment schedule goes out the window," Brockman said.
There are safety issues involved with a higher percentage solution,
and at lower percentages, the waste would take longer to treat and
generate more drums of waste. Waste that would take about a year to
treat in a 12 percent solution would take 12 years to treat in a 1
percent solution.
"They do need to figure out how to deliver sludge at a constant 12
percent," agreed Larry Gadbois, a scientist for the Environmental
Protection Agency, the regulator for the project.
DOE is looking at potential solutions, including possibly adding a
system to circulate the waste and keep it well mixed before it
begins to move through the treatment system.
Brockman said the November 2009 deadline for sludge treatment was
set when only 5 percent to 10 percent of the design for the
one-of-a-kind treatment system had been completed.
The sludge is left from past production of plutonium for the
nation's nuclear weapons program. After fuel was irradiated in
nuclear reactors and before it was processed to remove plutonium, it
was cooled in deep indoor pools of water that shielded workers from
radiation.
But at the K East and K West Basin, 2,300 tons of fuel were stranded
when processing fuel stopped at Hanford. The last of the fuel was
removed in 2004, but it left behind an estimated 70 cubic yards of
radioactive sludge from decayed fuel, desert dust and concrete that
sloughed off the sides of the pools.
Plans call for the sludge to be vacuumed from the water-filled pools
and then treated. It would be heated to oxidize the metal in it and
then mixed with grout for permanent disposal.
Legal deadlines have been revised at least 10 times by EPA's
recollection as Fluor has struggled to control the sludge.
Currently Fluor is working to remove all the sludge from the
leak-prone K East Basin by the end of this month, transferring it to
K West. Most of the sludge was earlier vacuumed into underwater
containers.
DOE notified regulators in February that it might not be able to
meet that deadline because sludge was proving so difficult to pipe
from K East to underwater containers in the more sturdy and less
contaminated K West Basin.
However, now less than 10 percent of the sludge remains to be
transferred and Fluor Hanford has a chance of meeting the deadline.
"They are very, very close," Gadbois said.
Completing the transfer will allow work to start on tearing out the
K East Basin. Earlier plans had called for adding grout to the basin
to encase hundreds of tons of debris and some residual sludge. The
grout would have then been cut into blocks and lifted out of the
basin in pieces weighing up to 1,300 tons. But Fluor Hanford ended
up removing much of the debris, such as old fuel racks, from the
basin to make vacuuming sludge into underwater containers easier.
That will allow a more conventional and quicker demolition of the
basin. Most of the basin will be turned into rubble after concrete
surfaces are treated with a hydrolaser, a high-pressure water
sprayer that will scrape off more than 140,000 pounds of concrete
with embedded radiation.
Water should be drained by the basin next spring, according to Fluor.
© 2007 Tri-City Herald. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
51 Chillicothe Gazette: Strickland joins push for project in Piketon
www.chillicothegazette.com - Chillicothe, OH
Monday, May 21, 2007
PIKETON (AP) - Gov. Ted Strickland and U.S. House members are
voicing support for a nuclear-waste recycling project that could
bring jobs to a county that suffers from a 9.6 percent
unemployment rate.
But Sen. George Voinovich remains unsure of the
multibillion-dollar project's safety. The Republican is worried
it won't be cost-effective and will turn the Portsmouth Gaseous
Diffusion Plant near Piketon into a waste dump, spokesman Chris
Paulitz said.
The U.S. Department of Energy won't decide where to put the project
until next year. But Ohio officials are already lobbying for the
project, since 10 other potential locations submitted site-study
reports this month. Strickland wrote to Secretary of Energy Samuel
Bodman last month, urging that the site be placed at the plant.
Republican Rep. Jean Schmidt, whose district includes the Pike
County site, and Democratic Reps. Charlie Wilson and Zack Space sent
a similar letter on May 10.
The Piketon Initiative for Nuclear Independence, a partnership that
includes Cleveland industrialist Dan T. Moore III, used a $637,000
federal grant to submit its site study for the plant, which enriched
uranium for weapons and nuclear fuel before closing in 2001.
The Energy Department is proposing three projects to handle used
nuclear fuel rods: a recycling plant to reuse fuel-rod uranium, a
reactor to destroy other byproducts while generating electricity and
a fuels research laboratory.
Thousands of jobs would be created, but the three projects wouldn't
necessarily be at the same site.
Strickland and the three House members said their continued
endorsement depends on whether the federal government would ever use
the site as a radioactive waste dump. The three lawmakers have
introduced legislation to prevent that from happening.
Democratic Sen. Sherrod Brown supports the project as long as local
residents have been consulted, spokeswoman Joanna Kuebler said.
Critics have said Piketon will not qualify to host the recycling
component of the department's proposal, but fear it could become a
dump for long-term storage of spent nuclear fuel rods.
Strickland and Schmidt know Piketon will not be selected for the
project, said Geoffrey Sea of the Southern Ohio Neighbors Group.
"It's only under consideration for spent fuel storage," he said.
But supporter Greg Simonton, of the Southern Ohio Diversification
Initiative, an economic-development nonprofit, bristled at that
suggestion.
"It's a flat-out lie we want to bring a dump here," he said.
---
Information from: The Columbus Dispatch, http://www.dispatch.com
Copyright 2007 Chillicothe Gazette
*****************************************************************
52 Inside Bay Area: Livermore Lab to expand biodefense
Article Last Updated: 05/21/2007 09:14:37 AM PDT
COME THIS SUMMER, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory scientists
plan to start using a new biological research laboratory for
biodefense and public health that will help better protect the
United States.
Called a Biosafety Level 3 (BSL-3) laboratory, the facility will
allow Livermore scientists to conduct more detailed experiments on a
wider range of microorganisms than can currently be handled at LLNL.
This research will assist in the development of faster and more
efficient detection technologies to protect against bioterrorism. It
also will help in discovering new ways to fight emerging diseases,
such as Avian influenza.
For years, long before 9/11, Livermore scientists have worked on ?
and been among the nation's leaders in developing ? biological
monitors and detection tests to help defend against the malicious
release of harmful biological agents.
One detection system developed by Livermore and Los Alamos
scientists today provides the core technology for the nation's
BioWatch system, which is deployed in more than 30 American cities,
providing warnings to local public health officials and Department
of Homeland Security (DHS) officials if there has been a
bioterrorist attack. Faster detection permits earlier medical
treatment and saves lives.
Researchers from Livermore also have developed many of the tests ?
based on unique sequences of DNA ? used by BioWatch to detect
pathogens.
Just as microscopes started becoming common tools in research
laboratories years ago, today's BSL-3 facilities are a standard
capability for scientists conducting serious research to counter
bioterrorism and protect against emerging diseases.
Beyond these fields, Livermore's new biological research facility
offers the nation several other benefits.
-In bioforensics, researchers will use the facility to better
understand the variabilities, for example, between different strains
of anthrax. Our scientists want to create advanced standards to
assist law enforcement in prosecuting suspected terrorists.
-Another research thrust is aimed at improving our understanding of
the fundamental properties of biological pathogens. This information
is needed to determine how long specific types of pathogens can
survive in various environments. If an airport is subjected to a
bioterrorist attack, for example, officials would then be able to
determine when the airport could safely resume operations.
-On the public health front, Livermore researchers would like to use
the new laboratory to develop a multiple disease detection test for
mosquito-borne viruses, including West Nile, Eastern equine
encephalitis, Venezuelan equine encephalitis and others. The
envisioned test would reduce the cost ? and perhaps the time ? of
detecting these diseases.
Despite the manifold benefits of this research laboratory, the
Livermore BSL-3 facility has been the subject of an almost
three-and-a-half-year-old lawsuit filed by activist opponents.
In October 2006, the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that,
with the exception of not including an analysis of the possibility
of a terrorist attack, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) had taken
a fully informed and well-considered look at all other environmental
concerns.
*****************************************************************
53 KAMR Amarillo: More Pantex Talks Scheduled - Matt Orlando
Reported by: Matt Orlando
Monday, May 21, 2007 @12:34pm
AMARILLO -- The Pantex guards are going back to the negotiating
table. The guard union and Pantex are scheduled resume talks
Tuesday.
Guards have been on strike for more than 30 days.
Last Monday, union president Robert Lynch stepped down.
According to the union, he crossed the picket line the next day.
There's a lot of speculation. But the new union president says
they're moving past that and want to stay focused on negotiating.
Pantex would not comment on Lynch's job.
We have been unable to get a hold of Lynch.
Copyright (c) 1998- 2007 Nexstar Broadcasting, Inc. All rights
reserved.
*****************************************************************
54 lamonitor.com: Contamination of Rio Grande grew after Cerro Grande
The Online News Source for Los Alamos
MONITOR STAFF REPORT
Effects from the Cerro Grande Fire of May 2000 have increased the
discharge of radioactive contaminants into the Rio Grande, according
to a study released Friday by the state's Environment Department.
In an announcement, Environment Secretary Ron Curry said the report
was a call for action.
"Since the Cerro Grande Fire, elevated levels of contaminants
continue to flow from the Pajarito Plateau into the Rio Grande
during floods," Curry said. "Los Alamos National Laboratory must
take action to reduce and control the movement of contaminated
sediments from lab boundaries."
The report by the NMED Department of Energy Oversight Bureau was
started in 1998 as a five-year study, but the period was extended
after the Cerro Grande Fire to document additional effects.
Some of the radionuclides released during the early years of lab
operations were washed downstream into the Rio Grande during a
period of heavy flooding, and some contaminants were buried under
new sediment deposits.
After the Cerro Grande Fire, more powerful floods coming off the
bare flanks of the mountains eroded the banks of the canyons,
exposing and transporting the old contaminants.
The NMED analysis investigated isotopes of plutonium, uranium,
americium, strontium and cesium, and made use of a laboratory
methodology that can identify percentages of plutonium that can be
attributed to discharges from LANL.
Historically, the largest transport rate of plutonium 239 and 240
was 44 millicuries (mCi) in 1957, according to the report, followed
by 22 mCi in 1968 and 18 and 17 mCi in 1952 and 1951 respectively.
(A millicurie is one-thousandth of a curie which is equivalent to
the amount of radioactivity in one gram of radium, the element
discovered by Pierre and Marie Curie in 1898.)
In comparison with the historical transport of plutonium, 55 mCi was
measured in 2001, 24 mCi in 2002 and 8 mCi in 2000.
"Preliminary assessments of storm water since 2002 to the end of
2006 indicates an additional 111 mCi of (plutonium 239 and 240) has
been transported out of Pueblo Canyon," the report continues.
"Transport rates as large as these have not been seen since the
1950s and 1960s."
NMED scientists Ralph Ford-Schmid and David Englert, who contributed
to the study, recommend the laboratory construct additional weirs,
or filtering devices, like the one that was build in Los Alamos
Canyon after the fire, to capture sediment.
They also suggest the laboratory notify officials in Santa Fe when
water is flowing in Los Alamos Canyon, so that the city can stop
drawing water from the Rio Grande.
2003 Los Alamos Monitor All Rights Reserved.
*****************************************************************
55 KnoxNews: Giant game of musical chairs coming to Y-12
By FRANK MUNGER, munger@knews.com
May 21, 2007
The Y-12 National Security Complex is known for doing the
difficult.
The Oak Ridge plant specializes in building secondaries -
high-precision assemblies that serve as the second stage of
nuclear warheads. As the saying goes, Y-12 puts the "boom" in
ka-boom.
But in all its many years, dating back to the World War II
Manhattan Project, the nuclear facility has never done anything
quite like this.
Y-12 is going to relocate about a third of its employees and their
office belongings over a period of a few weeks.
It's being called the Mega Move.
"We're treating this like a project," said Randy Spickard, assistant
general manager at BWXT Y-12, the government's managing contractor.
"We've had several project managers assigned to this."
In other words, Y-12 is giving the moving plan the same kind of
attention it gives to building weapons, and that's serious stuff.
About 1,100 people currently working in 50 buildings at the
sprawling plant site will be moved to the new Jack Case Center, a
U-shaped, 412,000-square-foot facility that will become Y-12's
central office and administrative hub.
Another 300 employees now occupying space in about 15 buildings will
be consolidated at the New Hope Center, a $137,000-square-foot
facility at Y-12's entrance on Scarboro Road.
Construction of the new privately financed facilities is nearing
completion, with just a few finishing touches left to accomplish.
The moves will take place in phases, but most of the employees will
be relocated over the span of four weekends, starting in mid-July.
Employees will leave their old places on a Thursday (most Y-12ers
are on four-day work weeks) and report to their new office digs on a
Monday.
There are obvious complications in charting such a massive move of
personnel and making sure their stuff gets relocated to the right
office.
Spickard said project managers decided on a strategy that
concentrated on emptying employees out of certain facilities, rather
than trying to move people all going to the same location.
Although BWXT is orchestrating the move, the company hired GEM
Technologies to lend some expertise to the planning. The Y-12 folks
also consulted with their counterparts at Oak Ridge National
Laboratory, which had a similar experience a couple of years ago
when moving lab employees into new buildings.
Preparations have been under way for many months. Before packing up
their boxes for the move, Y-12 employees were told to get rid of old
and unnecessary clutter.
Since March, about 20,000 pounds of paper have been collected and
shredded or incinerated. Many employees used the move as an
opportunity to scan or digitize old documents.
Spickard said most workers are excited about the move to new
quarters, although he acknowledged that change is difficult for some
people - especially those who have been in one place for 20 or 30
years.
There are move coordinators for individual work groups, and more
checklists than Santa keeps on Christmas Eve.
The first move will take place on the weekend of July 21-22. The
guinea pigs will be the plant's engineering staff currently housed
in Buildings 9733-1, 9733-2 and 9733-3.
In addition to individual employees moving into new offices, the
plant's cafeteria and medical clinics are being relocated to Jack
Case.
Preparations have been time-consuming and trying, but Spickard said
now is no time to relax.
"I think the hardest part will be the actual move," he said.
Green or brown for GNEP? There's plenty of controversy regarding the
Global Nuclear Energy Partnership, the Bush administration plan to
expand the use of nuclear energy in the U.S. and abroad.
That's true locally and nationally.
Some area folks are upset by the decision to propose a 500-acre site
near Oak Ridge National Laboratory as a location for a nuclear
processing operation for spent fuel. They argue that if a facility
is built to handle highly radioactive spent fuel, it should be on a
"brownfield" site already contaminated by Oak Ridge's Cold War
nuclear operations - such as the former K-25 uranium-enrichment
facility.
There have been suggestions that planners backed off K-25 because of
pressure from folks over at the Rarity Ridge housing development
west of K-25 on the other side of the Clinch River.
Lawrence Young, president of the Community Reuse Organization of
East Tennessee, said he wasn't pressured by Rarity Ridge. "If there
was (pressure), it wasn't directed towards me," he said.
Young, however, acknowledged the community's presence was a factor
in the decision-making.
"That's a reality. There wasn't overt pressure, but we're reasonably
smart," he said, noting that it wouldn't make sense to locate a
nuclear facility close to a community with a future potential of
5,000 rooftops.
Young also said he takes exception to the proposed GNEP site being
called greenfield. Although it's not a contaminated property such as
K-25, it has been used in the past, he said.
He said CROET and its contractor chose the site, in part, because
the Department of Energy wanted participants in the preliminary
program to study areas that are relatively unknown. Should the DOE
be interested in K-25 as a GNEP-related plant site, there's already
a lot of information available, he said.
"That's also why we didn't consider the old Breeder site (acreage
once targeted for the Clinch River Breeder Reactor project in the
early 1980s)," Young said.
Senior writer Frank Munger covers the Department of Energy and its
contractors. He may be reached at 865-342-6329.
Copyright 2007, Knoxville News Sentinel Co.
*****************************************************************
NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 this
material is distributed without profit or payment to those who
have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for
non-profit research and educational purposes only. For more
information go to:
*****************************************************************