*****************************************************************
05/22/07 ****     RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL)       **** VOL 15.120
*****************************************************************
   RADBULL IS PRODUCED BY THE ABALONE ALLIANCE CLEARINGHOUSE
*****************************************************************
Send News Stories to news@energy-net.org with title on subject
line and first line of body

                         NUCLEAR POLICY
 
1 Reuters: U.S., allies to complain to ElBaradei on Iran 
2 MWB: Swiss authorities question U.S. counterfeiting charges against 
3 Digital Chosunilbo: N.Korea 'Used Political Prisoners to Dig Nuke Te
4 US: deseretnews.com: Guv commits Utah to climate accord
5 Brit Appeal court to rule on islanders "right of return"
 
                         NUCLEAR REACTORS
 
6 The Hindu: Koodankulam plants to be delayed
7 WNN: International support for nuclear energy cooperation
8 Independent Online: Darling to unveil a nuclear future - 
9 London Times: Future is nuclear as work begins to license new plants
10 US: Times Daily: Restart of Unit 1 begins at Browns Ferry | 
11 Shanghai Daily: China may sign nuclear deal with Westinghouse -- 
12 AFP: Blair argues for nuclear power as government publishes proposal
13 US: Huntsville Times: Browns Ferry reactor splits first atom in 22 y
14 Xinhua: Vice premier underscores innovation in nuclear tech
15 Xinhua: Emerging opportunity in China's power industry
16 China Daily: State nuclear power firm set up
17 The Herald: Nuclear energy debate verges on combustion
18 People's Daily: China to introduce nuclear power technologies from W
19 Reuters: Major energy policy shake-up in parliament 
20 Reuters: U.S., India continue contacts on nuclear deal 
21 Reuters: U.S. to let START nuclear treaty expire | 
22 Norway Post: Statkraft considers nuclear power
23 UPI: Analysis: EU vs. U.S. over climate change
24 US: KnoxNews: TVA restarts Brown's Ferry reactor
25 US: UPI: Browns Ferry is 104th nuclear reactor
26 UPI: Brazil, India to talk nuclear business
27 Prague Daily Monitor: Temelin's first block reconnected to grid - 
28 Reuters: State of play in world nuclear power plants
29 Telegraph: Planning shake-up to fuel nuclear power revival 
30 US: BusinessWeek Debate: Room Nuclear Power - A Bad Reaction
31 US: Natchez Democrat: Nuclear growth good for country
32 AU ABC: MP backs nuclear power but not in her backyard. 
33 AU ABC: Nuclear club considering Australia for membership
34 US: KTRV FOX 12: Nuke plant public meeting
35 US: Guardian Unlimited: Ala. Reactor Restarted After 22 Years 
36 Sydney Morning Herald: Nuclear power a turn-off: Flannery changes st
37 US: NIRS: New Maps from Common Sense Campaign Reveal Another Cost of
 
                          NUCLEAR SECURITY
 
38 US: SecurityFocus: "Data storm" blamed for nuclear-plant shutdown   
39 BBC NEWS: Russian faces Litvinenko charge
40 US: APP.COM: Berkeley wants NRC analysis of potential attack | 
41 UPI: NNSA boosts Ukraine's nuclear security
 
                          NUCLEAR SAFETY
 
42 US: UPI: Bush picks D'Agostino to head NNSA
43 US: NAS: Project: Gulf War and Health: Updated Literature Review of 
 
                         NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE
 
44 US: MaineToday.com: Radioactive waste resolution
45 US: Times of India: India's uranium reserve to double in 5 yrs
46 US: WNN: New uranium conversion plant to be built in France
47 US: DOE: Senior International Energy Officials Issue Joint Statement
48 US: Las Vegas SUN: Bill out to guard Vegas water from uranium
49 US: Gallup Independent: Shirley tours toxic site; Soil being replace
50 US: The Buffalo News: West Valley nuclear footprint reduced
51 US: Hanford News: Toxic-pits cleanup dropped: Air Force's plan to se
52 Financial Express: Recycle nuclear fuel, says Kakodkar
53 US: UPI: Russian expert: Uranium market volatile
54 US: Bradford Publishing: Buildings come down at West Valley
55 US: AFP: US to power up global interest in nuclear energy - (GNEP)
 
                           PEACE
 
 
                        US DEPT. OF ENERGY
 
56 DOE: Statement from Energy Secretary Samuel W. Bodman on the 
57 Hanford News: Hanford safety expo starts today
58 Recordnet.com: Livermore Lab plans annual burn
59 KnoxNews: Regulators, DOE dispute OR cleanup deadlines
60 KFDA: Pantex Guards Tested by Strike
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
                         FULL NEWS STORIES
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
 1 Reuters: U.S., allies to complain to ElBaradei on Iran 

Tue May 22, 2007 3:21PM EDT

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The United States and some European allies
plan to complain to the head of the U.N. nuclear watchdog about his
proposal for Iran to retain some nuclear enrichment activities, a
U.S. official said on Tuesday.

The official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, told Reuters that
envoys from the United States and from France, Germany and Britain
-- the so-called EU3 -- were expected to visit International Atomic
Energy Agency head Mohammed ElBaradei this week and tell him their
concern as major powers seek to persuade Tehran to end uranium
enrichment.

The countries' ambassadors to the IAEA plan to give a "demarche", or
formal private complaint, that the agency chief's comments "were not
helpful," the official said.

ElBaradei has occasionally irked U.S. leaders but his recent
comments, including in the New York Times, rankled both American and
European officials because they were interpreted as siding with
Tehran at a critical time.

He said IAEA inspectors had concluded that Iran is starting to
enrich uranium on a much larger scale after solving technical
problems.

"We believe they pretty much have the knowledge about how to
enrich," the newspaper quoted ElBaradei as saying. "From now, it's
simply a question of perfecting that knowledge. People will not like
to hear it, but that's a fact."

ElBaradei used that conclusion to argue for a negotiated solution
that would allow Iran to retain a limited enrichment program,
diplomats said.

"I believe that demand (for enrichment suspension) has been
superseded by events," ElBaradei was quoted by the Spanish daily ABC
as saying in an interview carried online.

The U.N. Security Council -- with the United States and its European
partners in the vanguard -- has pushed through two resolutions
demanding that Iran suspend enrichment before entering negotiations
and imposing sanctions until it complies.  Continued...

Š Reuters 2007. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 2 MWB: Swiss authorities question U.S. counterfeiting charges against North Korea

McClatchy Washington Bureau | McClatchy Newspapers

05/22/2007 | 

By Kevin G. Hall

* Bank owner disputes money-laundering allegations
* Gold sales may have spurred Macau bank's blacklisting
* Money laundering allegations by U.S. false, report says
* U.S. challenged on action against key bank
* Owner of Macau bank denies illegal dealings with N. Korea

WASHINGTON - Swiss police who closely monitor the circulation of 
counterfeit currency have challenged the Bush administration's 
assertions that North Korea is manufacturing fake American $100 
bills.

President Bush has accused North Korea of making and circulating 
the false bills, so perfect they're called supernotes, and in 
late 2005 the U.S. Treasury took measures to block that country's 
access to international banking. North Korea subsequently halted 
negotiations over dismantling its nuclear weapons program, a 
process that remains in limbo because of the dispute.

The Swiss federal criminal police, in a report released Monday, 
expresses serious doubt that North Korea is capable of 
manufacturing the fake bills, which it said were superior to real 
ones.

The Swiss report includes color enlargements that show the 
differences between genuine bills and counterfeit supernotes. The 
supernotes are identical to U.S. banknotes except for added 
distinguishing marks, which can be detected only with a 
magnifying glass. In addition, under ultraviolet or infrared 
light, stripes appear or the serial numbers disappear on the 
supernotes.

The Bundeskriminalpolizei didn't hazard a guess as to who's been 
manufacturing the supernotes, but said experts agreed that the 
counterfeits weren't the work of an individual but of a 
government or governmental organization.

The U.S. Secret Service, the lead federal agency in combating 
counterfeiters, declined to provide details or respond to the 
Swiss report. But spokesman Eric Zahren said the agency stood by 
its allegations against Pyongyang.

"Our investigation has identified definitive connections between 
these highly deceptive counterfeit notes and the North Koreans," 
Zahren said. "Our investigation has revealed that the supernotes 
continue to be produced and distributed by sources operating out 
of North Korea."

The Swiss report says the Secret Service has refused to provide 
any information about its investigations. It notes that if the 
United States produced concrete evidence to back up its 
allegations, "it would have a basis for going to war." Under 
international law, counterfeiting another country's currency is 
considered a cause for war.

But if the U.S. has a reason to go to war, against whom?

The Swiss police noted that before charging North Korea with 
counterfeiting, U.S. officials had mentioned Iran, Syria and East 
Germany as possible manufacturers. North Korea's capacity for 
printing banknotes is extremely limited, because its banknote 
printing press dates from the 1970s. Its own currency is of "such 
poor quality that one automatically wonders whether this country 
would even be in a position to manufacture the high-quality 
`supernotes,' " the report says.

For years, analysts have wondered why the supernotes - which are 
detectable only with sophisticated, expensive technology - appear 
to have been produced in quantities less than it would cost to 
acquire the sophisticated machinery needed to make them. The 
paper and ink used to make U.S. currency are made through 
exclusive contract and aren't available on the open marketplace. 
The machinery involved is highly regulated.

In theory, if North Korea were producing the notes, it could 
print $50 million worth of them within a few hours - as much as 
has been seized in nearly two decades, the report said.

"What defies logic is the limited, or even controlled, amount of 
`exclusive' fakes that have appeared over the years. The 
organization could easily circulate tenfold that amount without 
raising suspicions," says the Swiss police report, which also 
says Switzerland has seized 5 percent of all known supernotes.

Moreover, it noted that the manufacturer of the supernotes had 
issued 19 different versions, an "enormous effort" that only a 
criminal organization or state could undertake. The updates 
closely tracked the changes in U.S. currency issued by the 
Federal Reserve Bank.

The fact that the Swiss are questioning the veracity of the U.S. 
allegations against North Korea carries special weight in the 
insular world of banknote printing.

"The producers of the most sophisticated products used in 
banknote printing are Swiss or at least of Swiss origin. That 
goes for the (specialty) inks and that goes for the machines," 
said Klaus Bender, a German foreign correspondent and the author 
of "Moneymakers: The Secret World of Banknote Printing."

"Can the North Koreans do it, are they doing it? The answer is 
couched in diplomatic language, (but) the answer is clearly no," 
Bender said.

EXCERPT FROM THE REPORT:

"According to the US Secret Service, $50 million worth of 
`super-fakes' were confiscated worldwide over the past 16 years, 
only a small portion of them within the United States. Measured 
against the US annual counterfeit damage of $200 million, the 
damage from $50 million worth of `super-fakes' is not that 
significant. The Federal Reserve Bank produces genuine $100 
dollar bills mainly for the foreign market. On their return to 
the U.S., the issuing bank after examination can easily 
distinguish the `supernotes' from originals using banknote 
testing equipment, due to altered infrared characteristics. For 
this reason, the United States over the years has hardly suffered 
economic damage due to the `super dollar.'


"A (banknote) printing press like the one in North Korea can 
produce $50 million worth of bills in a few hours. Using its 
printing presses dating back to the 1970's, North Korea is today 
printing its own currency in such poor quality that one 
automatically wonders whether this country would even be in a 
position to manufacture the high-quality `supernotes.' The 
enormous effort put into the making of the 19 different 
`super-fakes' that we know of is unusual. Only a (criminal) 
governmental organization can afford such an effort. What defies 
logic is the limited or even controlled amount of `exclusive' 
fakes that have appeared over the years. The organization could 
easily circulate tenfold that amount without raising suspicions."

Claudia Himmelreich in Berlin contributed.

*****************************************************************
 3 Digital Chosunilbo: N.Korea 'Used Political Prisoners to Dig Nuke Test Shaft'

Updated May.22,2007 10:00 KST

North Korea used political prisoners from a concentration camp to
prepare for its underground nuclear test on Oct. 9 last year, a
federation of North Korean refugee organizations in South Korea
alleged Monday. In a briefing in Seoul co-sponsored by the U.S.
rights watchdog Freedom House, the Committee for Democratization of
North Korea said it has testimony that North Korea was able to keep
its nuclear test secret even from citizens because it used prisoners
from a concentration camp in Hwaseong, North Hamgyeong Province.

Evidence that Pyongyang mobilized political prisoners to dig an
underground shaft near Mount Mantap where it conducted the nuclear
test, comes from Ahn Myong-chol, a former guard at the concentration
camp, it said. Some 10,000 people were taken to Mount Mantap between
1987 and 1994. "Testimony that the nuclear test was closely linked
with a political prison camp is backed by reports that North Korea
frequently mobilizes political prisoners for medical experiments or
dangerous construction projects,Ąą a spokesman for the organization
said. The concentration camp in Hwaseong reportedly houses mainly
senior political prisoners.

(englishnews@chosun.com )

*****************************************************************
 4 deseretnews.com: Guv commits Utah to climate accord

Tuesday, May 22, 2007

By Joe Bauman Deseret Morning News

With a flourish of pens followed by handshakes, Utah Gov. Jon 
Huntsman Jr. and California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger made it 
official: the Beehive State is now part of the Western Regional 
Climate Action Initiative.

Kristin Nichols, Deseret Morning News

Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman Jr., left, and California Gov. Arnold
Schwarzenegger sign documents making Utah part of the Western
Regional Climate Action Initiative. Both Huntsman and Schwarzenneger
voiced criticism of the Bush administration for inaction on lowering
greenhouse gas emissions.

      First reactions to the agreement were mixed.
      Other members of the partnership to curb climate change,
besides Utah and California, are New Mexico, Arizona, Washington,
Oregon and the Canadian province of British Columbia. They have
agreed to work toward setting standards to reduce greenhouse
emissions under a market-based program called "cap and trade."
      During a news conference Monday in the Governor's Mansion,
Huntsman and Schwarzenegger were highly critical of the Bush
administration's failure to take significant action to lower
greenhouse gas emissions, notably carbon dioxide, that are blamed
for global warming.
      "Gov. Schwarzenegger's leadership on this issue, where the
federal government has failed, has been instrumental," said
Huntsman. He added that a regional approach is the best way to take
action soon.
      "We are leading the charge. We're not waiting for Washington
any longer," he said.
      Schwarzenegger said the agreement is huge and that it sends a
clear message to the federal government: "We are creating this
partnership because of lack of leadership there."
      Asked by the Deseret Morning News if a reduction in CO2 might
cause the country to become more dependent on nuclear power,
Schwarzenegger replied that when thinking about alternative power
sources, "I think the key thing is to make sure that it is
environmentally sound. And I always personally feel that until we
find a way of disposing with the nuclear waste and dealing with that
issue, that is still a problem."
      Huntsman added, "I'll just say to that, that we have worked
very, very hard to ensure that our state never becomes a dumping
ground for waste. We worked very hard the last couple of years on
that.
      "And we're not going to turn around as a state and say that
all of a sudden we open it up for nuclear energy, just to see things
dumped here."
      Huntsman said technology should progress to the point that
nuclear power plants will have on-site storage and reprocessing of
waste.
      "This is a period of great innovation and breakthrough, in
terms of technology in the energy sector," he added. "And when that
happens I think we'll all feel a lot better about nuclear being part
of a shared approach."
      The initiative would work out emissions limitations on a state
and regional basis. It also would set up the "cap and trade" policy
in which pollution control credits could be purchased.
      Huntsman said the memorandum brings the two states together as
never before in achieving goals concerning climate change. "This
will set the stage for much-needed improvements ... in our air
quality, and in our state making meaningful contributions in
addressing climate change."
      Utah should be at the vanguard on the issue, he said. Working
together, states of the region can reduce greenhouse gas emissions,
encourage new economic initiatives that create jobs and move more
rapidly toward energy independence for the United States, according
to Huntsman.
      He cited "advanced research" at the University of Utah on
carbon sequestration, which could help to reduce pollution from
power plants. Such technology might offer a way to continue using
coal, of which Utah is an important producer, without releasing
dirty air.
      "Our air isn't just ours," Huntsman said. "It blows in from
other states and other regions. The same happens with our water.
      "And as the old saying goes, 'We all live downstream.'"
      If the region does nothing, Huntsman added, it will suffer
from climate change because of prolonged droughts, decreased
snowfall and more severe wildland fires. "We can either be part of a
regional solution ... or we can maintain the status quo, which for
this state and this governor is totally unacceptable."
      Schwarzenegger called the agreement "this historic initiative
to fight global warming."
      Westerners understand how the climate can jeopardize precious
resources, he said. "Higher temperatures are an economic threat to
all of us," he added.
      "We need to do everything that we can in order to do things
and create the action, rather than just stay and cry,"
Schwarzenegger said. "I think that's what leadership is all about,
and that's what Gov. Huntsman has shown ? great, great leadership."
      With 5 percent of the world's population, the United States is
emitting 25 percent of the world's greenhouse gases. The federal
government "has failed to act so it is up to us, the states, to
really step up and to lead, and to set an example for the rest of
the nation and the rest of the world."
      Tim Wagner of the Sierra Club's Utah Chapter called the
agreement a positive development.
      "It clearly indicates that the state is finally stepping up to
the plate, in a big way, to start addressing this very serious issue
of climate change," he said.
      Wagner added that this indicates a strong willingness by
Huntsman to "take a leadership role" for which he will be highly
regarded for a long time.
      But Sen. Darin Peterson, R-Nephi, had questions about the
pact. Implementing any significant new pollution controls likely
would require legislative action.
      Peterson stressed that he is not sure of all the details, so
he needs to be careful, but he has concerns.
      "It's clear to me that man's influence on the environment is
so limited that we could ruin an economy chasing something we could
never catch," he said Monday afternoon.
      "The biggest greenhouse gas is water vapor." Chasing after
controls of greenhouse gases "makes me very nervous," he added.
      Peterson, chairman of the Senate's Natural Resources,
Agriculture and Environment Committee, said people should work for
economic improvements "rather than chase those skeletons."

E-MAIL: bau@desnews.com

Š 2007 Deseret News Publishing Company
*****************************************************************
 5 Brit Appeal court to rule on islanders "right of return"
 
Date: Wed, 23 May 2007 00:05:03 -0500 (CDT)


Chagos is a bunch of Brit "owned" islands in the Indian Ocean - one of 
which is Diego Garcia.

Nearly half a century ago the Brits exchanged  nuiclear info with the US 
in exchange for allowing a US base on Diego Garcia - they cleared off all 
the natives and left one  Brit-uniformed bobby to raise the Brit flag at 
dawn and lower it at sunset. In fact they cleared all the islands because 
the U$ claimed leaving them there would create a security risk to the 
military base.

The inhabitants have been to court and won the right of return home axept 
that the US won't agree even if they return only to islands other than the 
one used as an air base.

##########

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6682437.stm

BBC  Wednesday, 23 May 2007, 00:50 GMT 01:50

APPEAL COURT TO RULE OVER CHAGOS

The appeal comes after rulings went in the islanders' favour

The  UK  government  is  due  to  find  out whether it can stop Chagos 
Islanders returning to their homeland.

Some  2,000  residents  were forced out when the British colony in the 
Indian  Ocean was leased to the US in the 1960s to build an airbase at 
Diego Garcia.

The  government took the case to the Court of Appeal after two earlier 
rulings declared the actions unlawful.

Many  former residents, who have been granted British citizenship, now 
live in Mauritius or in the UK.

ROYAL PREROGATIVE

The  residents were evicted from their homes on the Chagos archipelago 
between Africa and Indonesia, in the late 1960s and early 1970s.

The  Diego  Garcia  base,  which  was crucial during the Cold War, has 
gained  new  significance  in  recent  years  as a launching point for 
bombing missions in Iraq and Afghanistan.

In 2000, the courts ruled that Chagossians could return to their homes in 
65  of  the  islands,  but  not  to Diego Garcia. The then Foreign 
Secretary, Robin Cook, said the government would not appeal.

But  in  2004  the government used the royal prerogative - powers that 
allow  action without reference to Parliament - to effectively nullify the 
decision.

Last  year the High Court overturned the order and rejected government 
argument  that  the  royal  prerogative, exercised by ministers in the 
Queen's name, was immune from scrutiny.

The  government  took the case to the Court of Appeal, saying the High 
Court  ruling seriously affects the government's control over security 
matters and its legal relationship with overseas territories.
*****************************************************************
 6 The Hindu: Koodankulam plants to be delayed

Tuesday, May 22, 2007

Mumbai: Delay in supply of crucial equipment by Russia will delay
the commissioning of two 1,000 MW atomic power plants at Koodankulam
in Tamil Nadu by over a year, Nuclear Power Corporation of India
Limited (NPCIL) Director S.K. Agarwal has said.

The two plants were scheduled to be commissioned by December, but
they may be commissioned only by early 2009, Mr. Agarwal told PTI.

He said the NPCIL would urge the Russian industry to speed up the
delivery.

Mr. Agarwal attributed the delay to the reorganisation and
consolidation of the Russian nuclear industry as part of the global
nuclear renaissance to control the supply chain.

The pressure vessel of one of the reactors was installed early this
year, but other crucial equipment are yet to be delivered.

The large-scale nuclear sector reform in Russia has 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 reforms three years ago, we would not have had this problem of
delay in delivery of equipment and even drawings in some of the
cases,'' he said.

Mr. Agarwal said, however, other construction activities are on at
Koodankulam and the NPCIL was also preparing itself for the next two
units at the site for which memorandum had been signed with Russia.
? PTI

Copyright Š 2007, The Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the
*****************************************************************
 7 WNN: International support for nuclear energy cooperation

22 May 2007

Senior energy officials from some of the world's leading 
economies issued a joint statement in support of the Global 
Nuclear Energy Partnership (GNEP) and nuclear energy cooperation.

US Secretary of Energy Samuel W. Bodman speaking at the ministerial
meeting (Image: US DOE)

Officials from China, France, Japan, Russia and the USA issued the
statement after a ministerial meeting in Washington, DC, on 21 May.
The UK and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)
participated in the meeting as observers. The statement addresses
the prospects for international cooperation in peaceful uses of
nuclear energy, including technical aspects, especially in the
framework of GNEP.

The statement said: "The participants believe in order to implement
the GNEP without prejudice to other corresponding initiatives, a
number of near- and long-term technical challenges must be met. They
include development of advanced, more proliferation resistant fuel
cycle approaches and reactor technologies that will preserve
existing international market regulations."

It continued, "The participants recognized that national priorities,
legislation and capabilities result in each country having unique
nuclear energy needs and challenges and that a variety of approaches
and technical pathways may be necessary to achieve their long-term
goals. The participants share a common view that a long-term vision
of the global nuclear fuel cycle cannot be achieved without broader
cooperation and partnerships involving nations that currently
utilize, or are planning to develop, civilian nuclear energy."

In addition to providing overviews on each country's national and
international nuclear energy policies in relation to GNEP, senior
officials also discussed topics considered crucial to GNEP's
development. The topics included: infrastructure development needs
for countries considering nuclear power; development of advanced
fuel cycle and safeguards technology; establishment of reliable fuel
services; used nuclear fuel management; and building the partnership
and next steps to pursue this major global initiative.

"Today's Joint Statement officially puts the 'P' in the Global
Nuclear Energy 'Partnership,'" US Secretary of Energy Samuel W.
Bodman said. "For Americans, pursuing nuclear power is wise policy;
for industry it can be good business; internationally, it is
unmatched in its ability to serve as a cornerstone of sustainable
economic development, while offering enormous potential to satisfy
the world's increasing demand for energy in a clean, safe and
proliferation-resistant manner."

GNEP, first announced by President George Bush in 2006, is part of
his Advanced Energy Initiative. It seeks to develop worldwide
consensus on enabling expanded use of nuclear energy to meet growing
electricity demand. This will use a nuclear fuel cycle that enhances
energy security, while promoting non-proliferation. It would achieve
its goal by having countries with secure, advanced nuclear
capabilities provide fuel services - fresh fuel and recovery of used
fuel - to other countries who agree to employ nuclear energy for
power generation purposes only. The closed fuel cycle model
envisioned by this partnership requires development and deployment
of technologies that enable recycling and consumption of long-lived
radioactive waste. GNEP includes key research and technology
development programs as well as international policy cooperation.

Further information

GNEP website

WNA's Cooperation in the Nuclear Power Industry information paper
WNN: Funding for GNEP studies announced
WNN: JNFL joins GNEP consortium
*****************************************************************
 8 Independent Online: Darling to unveil a nuclear future - 

By Thair Shaikh

Published: 23 May 2007

A new generation of nuclear power stations will get the go ahead
today as the Government unveils its blueprint of Britain's future
energy supplies.

The Labour party will present its energy White Paper, endorsed by
Gordon Brown, which is expected to confirm that nuclear power must
be a part of the country's future energy market.

Published by Alistair Darling, the Trade and Industry Secretary, the
paper will justify the replacement of existing nuclear power
stations with newer ones, all of which will be privately funded. The
paper will stress the need to reduce carbon emissions and to enhance
"security of supply", relying less on other oil- and gas-producing
countries.

The expansion of renewable energy will also be stated, and will
include new incentives for offshore wind farms and tidal power. Sian
Berry, the Green Party's principle speaker, said: "If the Government
do go down the nuclear route, they will be committing the UK to a
dirty, dangerous and astronomically expensive future."

Š 2007 Independent News and Media Limited
*****************************************************************
 9 London Times: Future is nuclear as work begins to license new plants-

May 23, 2007

Greg Hurst and Christine Buckley

A new generation of nuclear power stations will move closer today as
the Government unveils plans to guarantee Britain&rsquo;s future
energy supply.

Writing in The Times, Tony Blair confirms the Government&rsquo;s
view that nuclear power must be part of Britain's future energy
market, alongside an expansion of renewable energy.

&ldquo;It is only right that we consider how nuclear power can help
underpin the security of our energy supply without increasing our
reliance on fossil fuels,&rdquo; Mr Blair writes.



But it will provoke fierce protests from environmentalists, and some
dissent within the Labour party, as critics question whether the
nuclear industry could meet all the costs and highlight risks posed
from disposing of nuclear waste.

The Times can reveal that work has already begun to license new
nuclear power stations, even though ministers have been forced to
begin another consultation on the decision alongside an Energy White
Paper setting out the Government&rsquo;s preliminary view.

The Health and Safety Executive, a Government agency, has received
one formal application for the design of a nuclear station already
and three other expressions of interest submitted for three other
designs.

The move by the HSE to carry out &ldquo;preparatory work&rdquo; on
licences is likely to provoke fresh accusations that ministers are
determined to press ahead with new nuclear power plants regardless
of objections or alternative views.

A new consultation process was forced on them after Greenpeace, the
environmental pressure group, won a court challenge to the
Government in February, claiming its initial consultation on energy
policy was seriously flawed.

Despite this embarrassment, the White Paper will make clear the
Government&rsquo;s view that new nuclear power stations should be
part of Britain&rsquo;s energy supply market for the next generation.

Alistair Darling, the Trade Secretary, will not say how many new
nuclear power plants are envisaged by the Government, saying it will
be for power companies to come forward with plans. He has said fewer
will be needed than at present, as new stations will be more
efficient.

Neither will he say what proportion of Britain&rsquo;s future energy
supply should come from nuclear power, although he will recommit the
Government to a target that, by 2020, a fifth of electricity should
be from renewable sources.

There will be moves to encourage low carbon technologies, such as
&ldquo;clean&rdquo; coal and gas power stations, regulations to
phase out products that use energy inefficiently, such as standard
light bulbs, by 2011, and encouragement for energy efficient homes
and biofuels and hybrid cars.

The HSE has organised a group of people to assess the
&ldquo;licenceability&rdquo; of the approaches made to it,
effectively looking at whether they pass the first stage and should
go on to be considered fully.

Some power companies such as EDF and E.On have been pushing for
action to make the process as quick as possible after the final
decision has been taken.

The HSE only has jurisdiction over the design and safety and no
authority over planning issues. Its deliberations can take up to 3˝
years depending on the issues it has to consider.

A spokesman for the HSE said the length of time and the uncertainty
over the number of applications led to the decision to begin
preliminary work now.

The Department of Trade and Industry asked the HSE to look at
&ldquo;prelicensing&rdquo; when it launched its energy review last
year. But the decision to go ahead despite the successful Greenpeace
legal challenge is likely to be controversial.

Š Copyright 2007 Times Newspapers Ltd
*****************************************************************
 10 Times Daily: Restart of Unit 1 begins at Browns Ferry | 

TimesDaily.com | | Florence, AL

By Dennis Sherer Staff Writer

Published: May 22. 2007 2:35PM

ATHENS  Operators at Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant began the formal
step early today of restarting Unit 1 after a shutdown that has
lasted 22 years.

The process began at 12:28 a.m. today when operators began a nuclear
reaction, according to Craig Beasley, a Tennessee Valley Authority
spokesman.

Creating the nuclear reaction is a necessary step in getting Unit 1
back on line.

The reactor at the nuclear plant east of Rogersville had been idle
since 1985 when it was shut down over safety concerns.

The restart of the reactor came following a five-year, $1.8 billion
construction project that involved several hundred Shoals workers.

Beasley said the restart is being monitored closely by TVA and
Nuclear Regulatory Commission investigators.

Other New York Times Regional Media Group Alabama sites:
Tuscaloosa News | The Gadsden Times | Tide Sports
Š Copyright 2007 TimesDaily. All Rights Reserved.
*****************************************************************
 11 Shanghai Daily: China may sign nuclear deal with Westinghouse -- 

By Staff reporters 2007-5-22 

NEGOTIATIONS for the introduction of third-generation nuclear power
technology into China with the US-based Westinghouse Electric are
entering their final stages, the State Nuclear Power Technology Co
said today.

Conditions for a possible contract with the US's biggest nuclear
power technology provider will "mature" next month, said Wang
Binghua, board chairman of the company at its inaugural meeting in
Beijing.

The State Nuclear Power Technology, a company under the management
of the central government, is financed by the State Council, China
Power Investment Corp, China Nuclear & Construction Group, China
Guangdong Nuclear Holding Co and the National Technical Import &
Export Co.

China now has 10 nuclear reactors in use or under construction. The
country plans to spend more than US$50 billion to build another 30
nuclear reactors by 2020 as the nuclear power will be a key focus in
the country's clean energy development plans in the future.

Westinghouse and the Chinese nuclear company signed a framework
agreement in March under a technology-transfer agreement approved in
December by the US and Chinese governments.

Westinghouse is to supply reactors for power plants in the eastern
cities of Sanmen in Zhejiang province and Haiyang in Shandong
province, according to Xinhua.

Last year, Toshiba acquired a 77 percent stake in Westinghouse,
based in Monroeville, Pennsylvania, for US$4.16 billion, making it a
Toshiba group company.

Shanghai Daily Home | Copyright ÂŠ 2001-2007 Shanghai Daily
*****************************************************************
 12 AFP: Blair argues for nuclear power as government publishes proposals -

Tue May 22, 7:29 PM ET

LONDON (AFP) - Departing Prime Minister Tony Blair put forth the 
case for a new generation of nuclear power stations in Britain as 
his government was set to publish Wednesday proposals to secure 
the country's energy supplies.

The proposals come after the government suffered a political blow in
February when the British High Court ruled that a decision last year
to approve plans for new nuclear power plants was illegal because
public consultations were flawed.

Writing in The Times, Blair said that "it is right that we consider
how nuclear power can help to underpin the security of our energy
supply without increasing our reliance on fossil fuels."

"We can meet our carbon dioxide emissions targets, but only if we
are willing to think ahead and take tough decisions over new wind
farms -- and give serious consideration to nuclear power."

His comments were set to kick off a debate on Britain's energy
security and how the government would also meet its legally-binding
targets of reducing carbon emissions by 60 percent by 2050, against
a 1990 baseline.

Britain has about a dozen nuclear power stations, most of them built
in the 1960s and 1970s, providing about 25 percent of the country's
electricity, compared with natural gas which provides about 40
percent.

Advocates of new reactors -- which emit virtually no carbon dioxide
-- argue they would help Britain meet its pledge to reduce
greenhouse gas emissions.

Blair, who will be succeeded by finance minister Gordon Brown on
June 27, wrote that Britain faces "a serious challenge in securing
our energy supplies ... we will be required to look at importing
energy from less stable parts of the world."

He added that Britain will be exposed to international energy
markets "at precisely the same time that emerging economies, such as
China and India, are increasing their energy consumption.

"As if that were not enough, we are now faced with countries such as
Russia, who are prepared to use their energy resources as an
instrument of policy."

Blair continued: "We need a policy that conforms to the rising
concern about climate change and gives Britain the secure, safe and
politically acceptable supplies of energy that our livelihood
demands."

Copyright Š 2007 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 13 Huntsville Times: Browns Ferry reactor splits first atom in 22 years - 

al.com

Posted by Brian Lawson May 22, 2007 11:05 AM

The long-dormant Browns Ferry Unit 1 nuclear reactor was restarted
Monday and achieved a nuclear reaction early today, some 22 years
after it was shut down for safety reasons.

Federal regulators gave TVA, which operates Browns Ferry, permission
to restart the reactor last week, culminating a five-year, $1.8
billion rebuilding effort.

TVA said its operators will increase power over the next several
days and test related plant systems to ensure proper operation.

Testing on the reactor will continue for several weeks, TVA said,
and will include "brief connections to the power grid, followed by
deliberate 'automatic' trips, or shutdowns to ensure the plant
safety systems operate correctly."

Š2007 al.com. All Rights Reserved. RSS Feeds | Complete Index
*****************************************************************
 14 Xinhua: Vice premier underscores innovation in nuclear tech

www.chinaview.cn 2007-05-23 01:27:31

BEIJING, May 22 (Xinhua) -- Chinese Vice Premier Zeng Peiyan
called for innovation in nuclear technologies on Tuesday at the
launch of the State Nuclear Power Technology Co. in Beijing.

    The new company is authorized by the State Council, or cabinet,
to sign contracts for third-generation nuclear power technologies
transfer from other countries.

    Zeng said the company should speed up the re-innovation of
foreign nuclear power technologies to ensure China's energy supply.

    China is seeking alternatives to coal and oil as its
double-digit economic growth faces energy bottlenecks.

    Zeng noted the company should strive to invent key nuclear
technologies and build advanced pressurized water reactors using its
own patents and brands as soon as possible.

    Nuclear energy will play a key role in helping China build a
resources saving and environment friendly society, the vice premier
said.

    The State Nuclear Power Technology Co. is co-funded by the State
Council and four large state-owned enterprises, including the China
National Nuclear Corporation, with registered capital offour billion
yuan (519.5 million U.S. dollars).

    Wang Binghua, 53, has been appointed chairman of the company. He
had previously served as the general manager of the state-owned
China Power Investment Corporation and deputy general manager of the
China National Nuclear Corporation.

    The company signed a framework contract on February 28 to buy
four third-generation pressurized water reactors from the U.S.-based
Westinghouse Electric Co.

    Talks on the final agreement are still underway, and the
official contract could be signed next month, according to Wang.

    He said two pressurized water reactors will be installed in
Sanmen City, east China's Zhejiang Province, and the other two in
Haiyang City, east China's Shandong Province. The two sites have
finished preliminary preparations for the 'AP1000' project.

    Of the 11 nuclear power reactors operating in China, three use
domestic technologies, two use Russian technologies, four use French
technologies, and two are Canadian designed. All the reactors employ
second-generation nuclear power technologies.

    The third generation program developed by Westinghouse is the
only one that has received final approval from the U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission.

    China's present installed capacity of nuclear power plants is
less than nine million kilowatts, about one percent of all its power
generating capacity. It will be increased to 40 million kilowatts by
2020.


Editor: Yan Liang

*****************************************************************
 15 Xinhua: Emerging opportunity in China's power industry

www.chinaview.cn 2007-05-22 11:13:49

    BEIJING, May 22 -- 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 US dollars, China alone will account for 23 percent of the
global generation investment. The investment for China will reach
1.2 trillion US 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 11 trillion 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: Gao Ying
*****************************************************************
 16 China Daily: State nuclear power firm set up

CHINA / National

By Wan Zhihong (China Daily) Updated: 2007-05-23 06:50

A nuclear-power company which will mainly be in charge of using
advanced foreign technology and indigenous development was
officially launched yesterday.

State Nuclear Power Technology Corp Ltd (SNPTC) - the preparation
for whose establishment began more than two years ago - is close to
completing a deal with US-based Westinghouse Electric Co to build
third-generation nuclear power generators, said Wang Binghua,
president of the company.

"We expect to sign an agreement with Westinghouse next month," he
said.

SNPTC and Westinghouse signed a framework agreement on March 1 under
which China will use the AP1000 technology of Westinghouse for four
third-generation nuclear reactors, two in Sanmen of Zhejiang
Province; and two in Haiyang of Shandong Province.


Related readings:

China to introduce nuclear power tech from Westinghouse
China opens 'nuclear city' to tourists
Nuclear industry seeks self-reliance

Westinghouse, which was bought by Japan's Toshiba for $4.16 billion
in October last year, outbid its competitor, France's Areva, after
two years of negotiations.

SNPTC has a registered capital of 4 billion yuan ($520 million),
said Zhang Guobao, vice-minister of the National Development and
Reform Commission, the country's top economic planner.

The central government will fund 60 percent of the company, with the
remaining shares held by four large State-owned enterprises, he
added.

They are China National Nuclear Corp, China Power Investment Corp,
China Guangdong Nuclear Power Holding Co Ltd - which control all
existing nuclear-power facilities in the country - and China
National Technical Imp & Exp Corp, with each taking up 10 percent.

"As the world's second-largest energy consumer, China is looking
more to nuclear power for a balanced mix of power generation," said
Han Xiaoping, executive vice-president of China5e.com, a top energy
website in China.

The nation has become the third-biggest nuclear-energy producer in
Asia after Japan and South Korea, according to a 2006 BP Statistical
Review of World Energy. Nuclear power has become the third important
source of electricity generation in China after thermal power and
hydropower.

The 2006 annual report of the State Electricity Regulatory
Commission showed that at the end of last year, nuclear power
accounted for 1.1 percent in the total installed power capacity. The
plan is to increase nuclear power capacity to 40 gigawatts by 2020,
accounting for 4 percent of the total generating capacity.

*****************************************************************
 17 The Herald: Nuclear energy debate verges on combustion

IAN BELL May 23 2007

A colleague poses a hypothetical question, a good one. Suppose that
an SNP administration keeps its nerve and Scotland, unlike England,
rejects proposals for more nuclear power stations. Suppose, further,
that we wake up in the 2020s to discover that ambitious targets for
renewable energy, like most ambitious targets, have not been met. Do
we then import English electricity?

That would be logical, but embarrassing, not to say expensive. If
the country happened to be politically independent, it would also
place us in a position of energy dependence, the very antithesis of
self-determination. It might also make us seem a bit silly.

Such, though, is the problem with the anti-nuclear argument in a
carbon-averse age. It is the problem that faces all those who say,
often quite reasonably, that giant wind farms are a monstrous blight
on a precious landscape. Where is the power to come from?

Alex Salmond has set his face against a new generation of nuclear
stations to replace Torness and Hunterston: "no chance", he said at
the weekend. His pair of Green allies at Holyrood naturally agree.
In contrast, Alistair Darling, the Westminster Trade and Industry
Minister, will today publish a white paper that is expected to
nominate nuclear as an essential "option".

Politically, this is combustible stuff. It will produce a great deal
of background heat, but not much light. It will suit the Scottish
government's rhetorical purposes, for a while. But it does not
answer the question: if not nuclear, what? If - a big if -
Hunterston shuts in 2011, as scheduled, and if Torness follows in
2023, how do you replace fully 40% of our electricity needs?

You could rely on Vladimir Putin's gas, if that's your taste, the
commodity that an authoritarian regime is deploying even now to
bully and blackmail Europe's former Soviet states. You could pin
your hopes for a while longer on diminishing oil reserves and the
shrinking hopes of stability in the Middle East: just forget all
pious talk of a carbon-neutral world and "energy security".

Meanwhile, you could, in theory, return to coal for base-load power
to supplement renewables and compensate for their natural vagaries.
Scotland still has plenty of seams to be worked, though the geology
is challenging. Open-cast mining is more problematic, obviously, for
environmentalists, but the SNP is perfectly correct to claim that
coal could again be burned to generate power. New carbon-capture
technologies promise minimal risk to the environment. At the moment,
however, that's all they do: promise, at an unquantifiable cost.

If Hunterston shuts, how do we replace 40% of our power needs?

Salmond would like to see a million domestic wind turbines as part
of the energy mix. The idea - power from the people, to the people -
is probably one whose time is coming. But when? How? At what price?
It is one thing for David Cameron to stick up a vanity windmill in
central London to improve his green credentials and power a couple
of light bulbs, quite another to rewire all of Scotland. Whoever
pays, and putting aside consumer resistance, that's a long-term,
multi-billion pound project.

Such is the energy conundrum, however. There are no quick, perfect
answers. There is no single clean, cheap, flawless resource capable
of commanding universal support. Press a committed environmentalist
on choices and brisk dismissals follow: no nuclear, minimal carbon
on sufferance and nothing of any other variety capable of making a
malign "impact". What's left?

The authentic environmental case turns, always, on the need to
reduce energy use at every turn. Only then do renewables become
viable. Wind power, wave power, biomass and the rest will not
replace 40% of our electricity, even if an environmentalist could be
persuaded to countenance a return to coal-mining as an alternative
to clean-but-dirty nuclear. Green arguments depend on reduced
consumption, almost as a moral imperative.

You might wonder, though, why the N word arouses such loathing.
Friends of the Earth Scotland has been pleased to discover that a
majority of MSPs agree with the campaigners in opposing new nuclear
stations. But why should the planet's guardians detest an energy
source that bears no guilt for global warming, that produces no CO2
to speak of, and that may even offer a solution to climate change?
What's so bad about nuclear?

Three answers spring to mind. One is that nuclear accidents tend to
be definitive. They do not resemble any other sort of industrial
calamity. The promoters of nuclear say that a Chernobyl or a Three
Mile Island is impossible these days. The public responds: they
would say that, wouldn't they? The nuclear industry tells us that
modern generators cannot lead to catastrophe, but the industry was
free with such claims long before catastrophes struck. Hence the
second answer. Rightly or wrongly, like it or not, nuclear is not
trusted. You could say, accurately, that Torness and Hunterston have
hummed away quietly for decades with few real problems. People think
instead of Dounreay and Sellafield: different technologies for a
different job, perhaps, but symbolic of reckless pollution, "mishap"
after mishap, and a culture of dishonesty.

Not cheap, either. In the 1950s, famously, we were promised
electricity from "atomic energy" so cheap it would hardly be worth
metering. Instead, construction proved vastly expensive and the cost
of decommissioning - never mentioned at the outset - turned out to
be mind-boggling. That was before waste become an enormously costly
and emotionally-charged conundrum.

Hence the final answer. For many, nuclear waste is the sticking
point. They have good reason. They may have grown up in an
industrial Scotland littered with slag heaps, where miners died
young in their tens of thousands, where coal-tainted air blighted
bodies and lives, but nuclear residue is different. It is different
because the nuclear industry has no real solution for effluent that
remains toxic for millenniums, beyond sticking the stuff in a very
deep hole and hoping - I simplify the science somewhat - for the
best.

Deal with these three factors and nuclear power becomes as
advertised, the wonder of the age. Fail to deal with them and you
offer, at best, a possible least-worst alternative. As is
well-known, that has been good enough for the French. Lacking real
mineral wealth, and disinclined again to be held hostage entirely by
Opec, France chooses to rely on nuclear for 70% of its electricity.
You can dispute the wisdom, but you can at least say this: good or
bad, it amounts to a coherent energy policy.

That's our real problem, in Scotland and in Britain. Too many
governments have ducked the challenge for too long. We wrecked coal,
we dashed for gas, we embraced then rejected nuclear. Meanwhile, we
spent an oil bounty on everything save preparations for a post-oil
era. Then, ever alert, we discovered energy insecurity and global
warming. If Scotland's new government appears short on perfect
solutions that may be because it has arrived very late in this game.
And because there are, actually, no perfect solutions.

Convince me of the viability, sooner rather than later, of coal and
carbon capture and I will pick up where I left off, years ago, among
those protesting against the construction of Torness. I'll even
think about my own little windmill. I have a strange feeling,
however, that the anti-nuclear argument is being overtaken, and
overtaken fast, by the unfolding climate crisis.

Š All rights reserved. Reproduction in whole or in part without


"Golby said E.ON believes private companies will be able to fund
fully the next generation of stations, but added: 'It clearly
requires sustained political and public support.'"

Private finance will build the new nuclear stations, to buld in
scotland is only viable via public subsidy, nothing due to scotland
via the barnett formula, case closed.


Posted by: douglas eckhart on 11:01pm Tue 22 May 07

I think we should be suspicious of ian Bell's assertion that
renewable energy could only ever provide '40%' or our energy needs.
Who exactly does he mean when he says 'our'? So far in the nuclear
argument, we keep hearing how renewables can only ever answer part
of the 'UKs energy needs'. One politician on Question time said
renewables would only give us '20% of Britain's energy needs'. Never
mind 20% of Britain's needs, what about 100% of Scotland's? Thats
the problem with the current energy debate: it's UK centric, trying
to find ways to power the whole of the UK. The fact is, Scotland has
the potential to provide for 100% of its OWN electricity needs if
the money that was to be poured into new nuclear power stations was
to be put into renewables, including especially wave generators.
Scotland has a chance here to lead the rest of Europe. If we wimp
out now and go for the nuclear option then we lose that initiative.
Once a new generation of nuclear power stations are finalised then
serious funding and effort in renewables will be set aside and the
opportunity will be lost. Don't let Westminster policy dictate in
this argument.

I think we should be suspicious of ian Bell's assertion that
renewable energy could only ever provide '40%' or our energy needs.

Who exactly does he mean when he says 'our'?

So far in the nuclear argument, we keep hearing how renewables can
only ever answer part of the 'UKs energy needs'.

One politician on Question time said renewables would only give us
'20% of Britain's energy needs'.

Never mind 20% of Britain's needs, what about 100% of Scotland's?

Thats the problem with the current energy debate: it's UK centric,
trying to find ways to power the whole of the UK.

The fact is, Scotland has the potential to provide for 100% of its
OWN electricity needs if the money that was to be poured into new
nuclear power stations was to be put into renewables, including
especially wave generators.

Scotland has a chance here to lead the rest of Europe. If we wimp
out now and go for the nuclear option then we lose that initiative.

Once a new generation of nuclear power stations are finalised then
serious funding and effort in renewables will be set aside and the
opportunity will be lost.

Don't let Westminster policy dictate in this argument.

Posted by: Dougthedug on 11:49pm Tue 22 May 07

Renewables are the future. It's going to upset the bobble-hats and
the professional conservationists but unless we have a policy on
building hydro, wind, tidal, wave power and solar in our countryside
and combine them with some form of pumped storage and an energy
efficiency scheme, we will be in trouble. Oil, coal or nuclear, it
doesn't matter, in the long run all the lights go out. Nuclear
sounds good, very good, but uranium reserves are also finite, and if
more and more countries turn to nuclear power as the oil runs out
then the uranium runs out much faster. Economic reserves of uranium
are about 2 million tonnes if $80 dollars a ton is economic to mine,
5 million tonnes at $139 dollars a ton. The roughly 450 world-wide
operated nuclear power plants can be supplied for several decades on
these figures. How long the reserves last if everyone starts
building nuclear is another matter. "Too many governments have
ducked the challenge for too long. " Lets make sure Scotland leads
the way in this one. All a dash for Nuclear does is to put off
making the hard decisions about energy supply for another decade or
so.

Renewables are the future.

It's going to upset the bobble-hats and the professional
conservationists but unless we have a policy on building hydro,
wind, tidal, wave power and solar in our countryside and combine
them with some form of pumped storage and an energy efficiency
scheme, we will be in trouble. Oil, coal or nuclear, it doesn't
matter, in the long run all the lights go out.

Nuclear sounds good, very good, but uranium reserves are also
finite, and if more and more countries turn to nuclear power as the
oil runs out then the uranium runs out much faster.

Economic reserves of uranium are about 2 million tonnes if $80
dollars a ton is economic to mine, 5 million tonnes at $139 dollars
a ton.

The roughly 450 world-wide operated nuclear power plants can be
supplied for several decades on these figures. How long the reserves
last if everyone starts building nuclear is another matter.

"Too many governments have ducked the challenge for too long. " Lets
make sure Scotland leads the way in this one. All a dash for Nuclear
does is to put off making the hard decisions about energy supply for
another decade or so.


Copyright Š 2007 Newsquest (Herald & Times) Limited. All Rights
*****************************************************************
 18 People's Daily: China to introduce nuclear power technologies from Westinghouse

UPDATED: 15:22, May 22, 2007

China's State Nuclear Power Technology Co., which was officially
inaugurated Tuesday, is already close to concluding the talks with
Westinghouse Electric Co. on introduction of the latter's
third-generation nuclear power technologies, the Chinese company's
president, Wang Binghua, revealed Tuesday.

An agreement is expected to be signed next month, Wang said.

The two companies signed a framework contract on March 1, which says
Westinghouse will provide four third-generation pressurized water
reactors: two for Sanmen City, east China's Zhejiang Province, and
two for Haiyang City in east China's Shandong Province.

The State Nuclear Power Technology Co., co-funded by the State
Council and four large state-owned enterprises including China
National Nuclear Corporation, is in charge of developing China's
third-generation nuclear power technologies.

Source: Xinhua

Copyright by People's Daily Online, all rights reserved
*****************************************************************
 19 Reuters: Major energy policy shake-up in parliament 

Tue May 22, 2007 11:55PM BST

By Jeremy Lovell

LONDON (Reuters) - The government will on Wednesday set out plans
for a major policy shake-up to secure energy supplies and fight
global warming, calling for new nuclear power plants and stressing
key roles for businesses and individuals.

Britain's oil and gas from the North Sea are dwindling and it is
keenly aware of when Russia briefly cut gas supplies to Ukraine last
year, disrupting supplies to Europe. It also wants to meet its
carbon emission cut targets which are due to become legally binding.

The government wants more energy from renewable sources and to
encourage businesses and individuals to trim electricity use.

The European Union aims to get 20 percent of its energy from
renewable sources by 2020, and a white paper going through
parliament calls for the country to cut emissions of climate warming
carbon dioxide by 60 percent by 2050.

But Prime Minister Tony Blair and many of his ministers insist
Britain must have a new generation of nuclear power plants to
replace the 20 percent of electric power its ageing network
provides, angering some environmental groups.

"I am determined that we should not become over-dependent on more
and more imported oil and gas," Secretary for Trade and Industry
Alastair Darling has said. "I believe that nuclear has to be part of
the energy mix along with more renewables, local energy and carbon
capture from fossil fuels."

The Energy White Paper that Darling will present to parliament on
Wednesday will cover all the energy options and make it clear that
the government wants nuclear power, a spokesman for Darling's
Department of Trade and Industry told Reuters.

But because it was rapped over the knuckles earlier this year for
failing to consult the public adequately on the nuclear issue, the
government will also on Wednesday be forced to launch a full
consultation process lasting several months.  Continued...

Š Reuters 2007. All rights reserved. | Learn more about Reuters
*****************************************************************
 20 Reuters: U.S., India continue contacts on nuclear deal 

Mon May 21, 2007 9:41PM EDT

By Carol Giacomo, Diplomatic Correspondent

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. and Indian technical experts met in
London on Monday in another attempt to work through persistent
serious differences over a nuclear cooperation agreement, U.S.
officials said.

Assistant Secretary of State Richard Boucher told Reuters the U.S.
experts have had "continuing contacts" with the Indian experts and
have exchanged written proposals in an effort to bridge the gaps on
details of the deal.

The much-heralded agreement would give India access to U.S. nuclear
fuel and reactors for the first time in 30 years, even though New
Delhi tested nuclear weapons and never signed the Nuclear
Non-Proliferation Treaty.

On May 1, the two countries claimed extensive progress during two
days of talks in Washington aimed at salvaging their landmark deal,
and Undersecretary of State Nicholas Burns, the chief U.S.
negotiator, said he would "visit India in the second half of May to
find closure."

But last week Burns postponed his trip and the decision was made to
send technical experts to London this week to continue working on
the issues, said officials who spoke on condition of anonymity.

It was not immediately known if the London talks made progress.
India's nuclear establishment is vigorously opposed to the deal,
U.S. experts say.

The deal is the touchstone of new U.S.-India relationship that
Washington envisions as a pillar of 21st century international
security, but its history has been rocky.

'POTENTIAL SOLUTIONS'  Continued...


Š Reuters 2007. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 21 Reuters: U.S. to let START nuclear treaty expire | 

11:36PM EDT, Tue 22 May 2007

By Carol Giacomo, Diplomatic Correspondent

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The United States plans to let a landmark
nuclear arms reduction treaty with Russia expire in 2009 and replace
it with a less formal agreement that eliminates strict verification
requirements and weapons limits, a senior U.S. official says.

This would continue President George W. Bush's practice of
repudiating arms control as a means of curbing nuclear weapons while
relying more on countermeasures like export controls, interdiction
and sanctions.

This approach makes many arms control experts uneasy, but the
Democratic-led U.S. Congress has shown little interest in the START
treaty's fate. Some congressional aides say whatever Bush does, his
successor -- who takes office in January 2009 -- could seek
modifications.

While the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty or START "has been
important and for the most part has done its job," Assistant
Secretary of State Paula DeSutter told Reuters the pact is
cumbersome and its complicated reporting standards have outlived
their usefulness.

In the post-Cold war era, many provisions of the 1991 START accord,
which mandated deep nuclear weapons cuts, "are no longer necessary.
We don't believe we're in a place where we need have to have the
detailed lists (of weapons) and verification measures," added
DeSutter, who handles arms control and verification issues.

Russia agrees the treaty should not be extended but wants it
replaced with another legally binding treaty that makes further cuts
in strategic forces, so the two sides have significant differences.

2007 TARGET

DeSutter said concluding a START replacement pact by year's end is
"one of my top priorities."  Continued...

Š Reuters 2007. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 22 Norway Post: Statkraft considers nuclear power

/ The Norway Post / Business / Genbus /

Norway's Statkraft is considering plans to build a nuclear power
plant, using Thorium as fuel, rather than Uranium.

 22.05.2007 06:53

Norway has some of the world's largest deposits of Thorium.

Bergen Energi has already applied for a lisence to build a
Thorium-based nuclear power plant.

According to experts, reactors driven with Thorium will never be
exposed to a melt-down.

In addition, the problem with nuclear waste is minimal, and cannot
be used to develop nuclear arms.

(NRK)

Rolleiv Solholm


Imaker Content Management Systems - Š 1996 - 2005 Imaker as
*****************************************************************
 23 UPI: Analysis: EU vs. U.S. over climate change

United Press International - Energy - Analysis

Published: May 21, 2007 at 6:44 PM

By STEFAN NICOLA UPI Germany Correspondent

BERLIN, May 21 (UPI) -- Europe is at odds with the United States
over climate change less than three weeks before the Group of Eight
summit in Germany is to unite the world to stop global warming.

According to the BBC, Washington is trying to block parts of a draft
agreement prepared by the German government for the June 6-8 G8
summit, which Berlin hosts in the Baltic Sea resort of Heiligendamm.

A phrase in the draft stating that "Climate change is speeding up
and will seriously damage our common natural environment and
severely weaken (the) global economy ... resolute action is urgently
needed in order to reduce global greenhouse gas emissions" is struck
out, the BBC said. Another statement deleted by Washington was that
"we are deeply concerned about the latest findings confirmed by the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change." Reportedly, Washington
also objects to the draft's targets to halve greenhouse-gas
emissions by 2050 and wants to remove firm energy-efficiency
benchmarks and a pledge to establish a global carbon dioxide market.

The United States has traditionally been against binding
greenhouse-gas caps (this opposition has kept the United States out
of the Kyoto Protocol), and observers say this could create tensions
before the summit. German Chancellor Angela Merkel, a former
environment minister, has made climate change one of the key issues
of the top-level meeting, which will also be attended by the leader
of China, the second-largest greenhouse-gas emitter behind the
United States.

While Beijing and Washington are expected to be cautious on the
issue, Merkel reportedly has the backing of British Premier Tony
Blair and Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe.

The United Nations has struggled to agree on a post-Kyoto regime
despite urgent warnings over the dangerous effects of climate change
from experts, the most extensive study being the IPCC report. At the
end of a year, a conference on climate change in Bali, Indonesia, is
to hammer out a post-Kyoto agreement. The G8 summit is seen as a key
meeting to gain new momentum to keep global warming below 2 degrees
C until 2020, a level seen as critical.

Half of the G8 (Germany, France, the United Kingdom and Italy) is
also in the European Union, and these countries earlier this year
agreed on a set of binding targets to curb climate change: Led by
Merkel, EU leaders agreed to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions by 20
percent by 2020, push the share of renewables by 20 percent and
raise energy efficiency by 20 percent.

At the 2005 Gleneagles, Scotland, summit, leaders also began to
draft a statement on climate change, which got more watered down
with each day.

Germany, which holds the rotating EU presidency, has recently
demonstrated it was not willing to adopt half-hearted papers.

In the name of the EU, German Environment Minister Sigmar Gabriel
caused considerable commotion when he refused to sign the U.N. draft
document on sustainable development, citing disappointment over the
lack of attention given to the issue of climate change.

"The European Union deeply regrets that the United Nations
Commission on Sustainable Development (CSD) was unable to agree on
an ambitious text on energy, climate, air pollution and industrial
development," Gabriel together with EU Environment Commissioner
Stavros Dimas said in a statement.

Because of opposition from developing countries and China, the
Europeans had also failed to push through their plan to commit all
countries to a long-term energy plan until 2010.

Merkel and her fellow EU leaders now hope that the G8 summit can tip
the scale in their favor.

--

(e-mail: energy@upi.com)

Š Copyright 2007 United Press International, Inc. All Rights
Reserved.
*****************************************************************
 24 KnoxNews: TVA restarts Brown's Ferry reactor

By ANDREW EDER, edera@knews.com
May 22, 2007

Operators at TVA's Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant restarted the Unit 
1 reactor early today after a 22-year shutdown.

The completion of the five-year, $1.8 billion restoration marks 
the country's first increase in nuclear generating capacity since 
TVA's Watts Bar Nuclear Plant came online in 1996.

According to TVA, operators began the process of restarting the
reactor on Monday and achieved a self-sustaining nuclear reaction at
12:28 a.m. today.

Operators will conduct tests on the reactor and other plant systems
during the next few weeks before reconnecting the unit to TVA's
power grid. When at full power, the reactor will add 1,155 megawatts
of capacity to TVA's system, enough to power about 650,000 homes.

Browns Ferry, located near Athens, Ala., now has three operating
reactors. All three were shut down in 1985 because of safety
concerns. Unit 2 was restarted in 1991, Unit 3 in 1995.

More details online and in Wednesday's News Sentinel.

 Copyright 2007, Knoxville News Sentinel Co.
*****************************************************************
 25 UPI: Browns Ferry is 104th nuclear reactor

United Press International - Energy - Briefing

Published: May 22, 2007 at 7:47 PM

ATHENS, Ala., May 22 (UPI) -- There are now 104 reactors serving a
fifth of U.S. electricity demand as nuclear proponents applaud the
restart of TVA's Browns Ferry Unit 1.

The Tennessee Valley Authority operation was brought back to service
after a 22-year mothballing, an initial spark to a resurgence of
nuclear energy in the country, the industry hopes.

"Returning Browns Ferry Unit 1 to our nuclear fleet gives TVA
another dependable, safe and emissions-free source of generation to
help meet the growing demand for power in the Tennessee Valley,"
said Tom Kilgore, head of TVA, The Chattanoogan reports.

The plant is located near Athens, Ala., on the Tennessee River. The
TVA spent $1.8 billion to bring the reactor back online. It was
shuttered in 1985, 10 years after a fire caused major damage and a
yearlong outage. All three of the Browns Ferry reactors have a
capacity of 1,113 megawatts each.

Frank "Skip" Bowman, head of the Nuclear Energy Institute, the
industry's trade arm, praised the restart.

"Browns Ferry 1 will provide electricity to more than 600,000 homes
and businesses in one of the fastest growing regions of the
country," he said in a statement. "We believe this project will mark
the beginning of nuclear energy's rejuvenation in the United States."

The United States has more nuclear plants than any country in the
world, though it hasn't licensed a new reactor since 1978. The
Browns Ferry fire was dwarfed by the accident at Three Mile Island
in Pennsylvania and the disaster of Chernobyl, in what is now
Ukraine. That, along with the high construction costs of nuclear
power and low cost of natural gas at the time, led to a virtual
freeze in nuclear energy growth in the country.

But a growing demand for electricity, and federal incentives, has
motivated nuclear firms. The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
expects around 30 applications for new reactor licenses in coming
years.

Š Copyright 2007 United Press International, Inc. All Rights
Reserved.
*****************************************************************
 26 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.

Š Copyright 2007 United Press International, Inc. All Rights
Reserved.
*****************************************************************
 27 Prague Daily Monitor: Temelin's first block reconnected to grid - 

By Prague Daily Monitor/CTK / Published 22 May 2007

Temelin, May 20 (CTK) - The first unit of the nuclear power plant in
Temelin, southern Bohemia, has been reconnected to the grid this
morning, having been shut down for a day for regular tests of the
equipment, Temelin spokesman Marek Svitak told CTK.

The second unit has been shut down in early May for refuelling.

The staff will now gradually raise the output of the first unit
which is expected to be operating at full capacity again this
evening.

The second unit will remain shut down until early July as a quarter
of the fuel is being replaced.

This story is from the Czech News Agency (CTK).
The Prague Daily Monitor and Monitor CE are not responsible for its
content.

Copyright 2007 by the Czech News Agency (CTK). All rights reserved.
Copying, dissemination or other publication
of this article or parts thereof without the prior written consent
of CTK is expressly forbidden.

copyright 2007 monitor ce media services s.r.o. | all rights reserved
*****************************************************************
 28 Reuters: State of play in world nuclear power plants

22 May 2007 22:40:45 GMT

Source: Reuters

LONDON, May 23 (Reuters) - Britain on Wednesday will give the
strongest signal yet that it wants a new fleet of nuclear power
plants to be built as part of its plan to secure energy supplies and
combat global warming.

Nuclear power supplies some 20 percent of the country's electricity,
but most of the stations are to be closed within a decade due to old
age, and the youngest one -- Sizewell B -- is due to close in 2035.

Nuclear power proponents say it is a clean power source that, in
contrast to fossil fuels, does not emit climate warming carbon
dioxide. They also say its fuel can be easily stockpiled and does
not leave countries at the mercy of oil and gas exporting nations
such as Russia.

Following are some facts about nuclear power:

* Nuclear power supplies 16 percent of the world's electricity and
34 percent of the European Union's.

* 15 of the EU's 27 members have nuclear power plants, with the
percentage of electricity supplied ranging from 78 percent in France
to just 3.5 percent in the Netherlands.

* Attitudes vary across the bloc. France has committed to renewing
its reactor fleet, Finland is building a new plant, Germany and
Sweden have committed to phasing out nuclear power and the Dutch
have reversed a previous decision to phase it out.

* Italy used to have four nuclear power reactors, but it shut down
the last two following the Chernobyl nuclear accident in 1986.
Consideration is being given to nuclear new build.

* Nuclear power accounts for 20 percent of electricity in the United
States, and the government is actively promoting new nuclear plants
through tax breaks.

* Boom economy China gets just 1.9 percent of its electricity from
11 nuclear reactors, but four more are under construction, 23 are in
the planning stages and there are proposals for another 54.

* Worldwide there are 437 working reactors, with another 30 under
construction, 74 planned and 162 proposed.

Statistics from the World Nuclear Association.


*****************************************************************
 29 Telegraph: Planning shake-up to fuel nuclear power revival 

Wednesday 23 May 2007

By Russell Hotten, Industry Editor

Planning regulations that have held up the building of major
infrastructure projects such as airports and railways are to be
simplified, in a move that will also help pave the way for a new
generation of nuclear power stations.

Industry welcomed a government announcement yesterday that an
Independent Planning Commission (IPC) is to be created that will
rule on projects of national importance and speed up the planning
process.

The news came ahead of tomorrow's Energy White Paper, which is
expected to promote the merits of more nuclear plants, the building
of which could have been expected to be caught up in years of
planning red tape.

Ruth Kelly, the Communities and Local Government Secretary, said
yesterday that Britain faced "significant and growing challenges. If
we are to meet these challenges successfully, planning is part of
the solution. In its current form, the system is not up to the job."

The Government will set out a national strategy, but it will be the
IPC that decides which major projects should receive planning
approval. There will be a legal duty to ensure that the public is
consulted.

The IPC's final decision will not have to go before the Secretary of
State for approval. However, Faraz Baber, director of regeneration
and development at the British Property Federation, thinks it could
take one or two test cases in the appeal courts to define more
clearly the limits of the IPC's power.

Mr Baber said: "The IPC will help the planning process. The
decision-making will be less emotive. And it will help deliver key
things that we need. It will help energy security."

Britain must replace a third of its power generation plants by 2020,
since many of its current nuclear plants are nearing the end of
their lives. Delays in the planning process would exacerbate the
"energy gap" during the next decade, leading to the UK becoming more
dependent on imports of gas.

British Energy waited six years for the go-ahead to build the
Sizewell B nuclear station, which entered service in 1995. But it is
not just power stations that get mired in red tape. Getting
permission to build a new terminal at Heathrow Airport took eight
years.

The creation of the IPC was welcomed by business leaders. Miles
Templeman, director-general of the Institute of Directors, said:
"The current system is an obstacle to progress in the provision of a
modern and well-functioning infrastructure, and this is damaging to
the long run prosperity of the country. An independent IPC that is
capable of balancing a national strategic view against local
concerns is a good step forward and one that we welcome."

Meanwhile, Richard Lambert, director-general of the Confederation of
British Industry, said: "The new proposals should streamline the
system without losing its democratic responsibilities. In
particular, the CBI welcomes the establishment of statements of
strategic objectives for the most important projects, backed by an
IPC. This should ensure that decisions are made which are both
timely and legitimate."

But not everyone believes the democratic process will be
safeguarded. Nigel Howorth, a partner at law firm Clifford Chance,
said: "There is no question that the consenting of major
infrastructure projects takes too long.

"However, in speeding up the process by the creation of an IPC, it
is difficult to see how this would not be at the expense of the
rights of stakeholders to have their say on those projects.

"The potential for a consequent increase in local protest and
potentially legal challenge is clear."

&copy; Copyright of Telegraph Media Group Limited 2007. |
*****************************************************************
 30 BusinessWeek Debate: Room Nuclear Power - A Bad Reaction

Thanks to new evidence showing nuclear energy as more of a polluter
than previously thought, the U.S. should reconsider approval for new
plants. Pro or con?

Pro: Peril Then, Peril Now

by Jim Riccio, Greenpeace USA

The nuclear industry and its friends in the Bush Administration have
been attempting to change the nuclear industrys image. With the
Three Mile Island and Chernobyl disasters fading from most
Americans memories, industry lobbyists are anxious to paint this
most dangerous and volatile energy source as the answer to U.S. oil
addiction and global warming.

The unproven assertion that atomic energy can solve global warming
has helped further the collective amnesia about the past business
failures of nuclear energy. In February, 1985, Forbes magazine
declared that [t]he failure of the U.S. nuclear power program ranks
as the largest managerial disaster in business history, a disaster
on a monumental scale. The utility industry has already invested
$125 billion in nuclear power, with an additional $140 billion to
come before the decade is out, and only the blind, or the biased,
can now think that most of the money has been well spent.

Nonetheless, more than 20 years later, the very biased are indeed
trying to keep us blind to the fact that nuclear energy is still a
money pit that can have little or no impact on oil consumption or
our ability to abate catastrophic climate change.

Last month, the Oxford Research Group found that contrary to
industry claims, nuclear power does not qualify as a carbon-free
technology and cannot be promoted as an environmental panacea (see
BusinessWeek.com, 3/26/07, &#8220;New Debate Over Nuclear
Option&#8221;). Nuclear scientists at MIT also have acknowledged
that nuclear is arguably a CO2-emitting energy source and that the
Bush Administration scheme for spreading nuclear power around the
planet constitutes a goofy idea.

Rather than wasting tax dollars to entice nuclear corporations to
construct reactors the industry would never build on its own,
Congress and the White House should support energy efficiency and
renewable technology, which are seven to 10 times more effective
than nuclear power at displacing carbon dioxide.

We can mitigate the catastrophic effects of global warming without
incurring the economic, environmental, and security risks associated
with nuclear power. After all, terrorists are not targeting
windmills and solar panels.

Con: Eco as Ever

by Scott Peterson, Nuclear Energy Institute

At a time when global decision-makers are trying to reduce
greenhouse gases, we should be increasing our reliance on nuclear
energy and taking advantage of the most widely expandable clean-air
electricity source on the list of options. As a result, greenhouse
gas emissions would drop far lower.

In the U.S., safe and efficient nuclear power produces electricity
for one of every five homes and businesses, and it ranks as the
largest source of electricity that emits no greenhouse gases. In
fact, electric-sector carbon emissions would be approximately 30%
higher without nuclear energy.

But is nuclear power really as emissions-free as supporters contend?

One of the most common claims is that nuclear power emits greenhouse
gases during the entire life cycle, from mining uranium for fuel to
building the power plants. Using such a life-cycle approach to
calculating emissions, one could say that all energy sources produce
greenhouse gases. Research from the University of Wisconsin shows
life-cycle emissions from nuclear energy are lower than those from
renewables such as solar and hydropower and dramatically lower than
those for power plants fueled by coal or natural gas.

For this and other reasons, many environmentalists and organizations
such as the Earth Institute at Columbia University and the Pew
Center for Climate Change support an expanded role for nuclear
energy.

No single greenhouse gas mitigation measure can reduce carbon
dioxide to the levels contemplated by emerging state and regional
programs or international agreements. Nor can a comprehensive regime
like the Princeton University stabilization wedge theory&mdash;a
concept for halting the proliferation of CO2 emissions&mdash;succeed
without nuclear energy.

Nuclear power is the only energy source that combines the attributes
of large-scale electricity production, high reliability, and zero
greenhouse gas emissions during the electricity production process.
It should remain an essential part of our diverse energy portfolio
to meet fast-growing electricity demand, increase energy security,
and protect the environment in which we live. Opinions and
conclusions expressed in the BusinessWeek Debate Room do not
necessarily reflect the views of BusinessWeek, BusinessWeek.com, or
The McGraw-Hill Companies.

Reader Comments

May 21, 2007 01:30 AM

Let us be completely thorough and honest. When comparing the cost of
energy produced by different sources we should take into account all
energy-cost factors. For nuclear energy, we must take into account
the costs for exploration, then mining of the uranium ore, its
processing into fuel rods, the production health impact cost (how
many cancers are to be linked to this mining and processing?), the
political impact (where do we have to buy our uranium and what is
the political cost of securing the source?), distribution, then
post-processing of the spent fuel rods and disposal of the
radioactive materials for 100 years? (Maybe 1,000 years or 10,000
years, nobody knows. Who by the way can honestly evaluate the cost
of such containment? Add the megacost of building and certifying the
power plants then of decommissioning and cleaning them after 30
years or 40 years, who knows.)

Solar power has a very few costs, all identified and none of them
long term or very hypothetical to assess: produce the silicon
wafers, from silicon widely available anywhere in the world from
silica (sand) and assemble them in solar panels, then transport and
install the panels and connect to the power grid.

I urge all my fellows citizens to keep questioning every statement
made by the energy producing industries. It is too easy to provide
partial information and make the people believe that the solution
they propose is the best.

I also question the studies from the Earth Institute at Columbia
University and the Pew Center for Climate Change. These studies
allegedly support an expanded role for nuclear energy, based only on
carbon emission. I am not sure that the study took into account all
the factors I have listed above (and I certainly forgot a few..).
What about the (total, real) cost of energy? What about the human
cost (cancers and associated suffering)? We need to focus on the big
picture here.



Steve

May 21, 2007 11:00 PM

Copyright 2000-2007 by The McGraw-Hill Companies Inc. All rights
reserved.
*****************************************************************
 31 Natchez Democrat: Nuclear growth good for country

Call or email our newsroom at (601) 442-9101. 

Published: May 22, 2007 - 12:09:01 am CDT

If beauty is in the eye of the beholder, then fear is in the heart
of the worrier.

Three decades of fear have caused America to fall behind the world
in finding a reliable, clean source of electrical power.

Despite being considered one of the most technologically advanced
countries in the world, we still lag behind some other countries in
what would seem among the most basic of modern necessities 
electrical power generation.


Northern and western portions of the United States are no strangers
to rolling blackouts or brownouts, during which power is cut off or
diminished regionally.

Ironically, weve had the technology to fix this problem since the
1970s, but something has prevented us from resolving this  fear.

Long-term solutions include all sorts of Buck Rogers like answers,
none of which are ready for prime time. For short-term solutions,
however, nuclear power is an obvious answer.

Nuclear power isnt perfect, but it is generally better, and cleaner
than most coal-burning power generating plants.

A group is working on plans to bring a second nuclear reactor to
Entergys Grand Gulf Nuclear Station just up the road from us near
Port Gibson.

If that deal takes wings it will be a few years before the plans are
approved and several more before construction could be completed.

Such a facility would step us closer to energy independence and also
reduce the emissions from coal-fired plants.

One day, our dependence on fossil fuels will be behind us, and our
fears of nuclear power a thing of the past. That will truly be a
beautiful day.

Call Us Today: 601-442-9999 or 866-765-3392

101 N. Wall St. Natchez, MS 39120

Š 2005 Natchez Newspapers Inc. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 32 AU ABC: MP backs nuclear power but not in her backyard. 

22/05/2007. ABC News Online

Last Update: Tuesday, May 22, 2007. 9:27am (AEST)

The federal Member for Gilmore, Joanna Gash, says she now supports
the idea of nuclear power, but still strongly opposes a nuclear
plant in her electorate on the NSW south coast.

Ms Gash has modified her views after attending a briefing by nuclear
scientists in Canberra yesterday, to hear about the potential for
nuclear energy in Australia.

She now says she believes nuclear power is "a way of the future" and
is able to deliver base-load power while cutting greenhouse gas
emissions.

"After today I'm very much convinced that nuclear power is the way
to go," she said.

"I was very close to accepting that in the past, but I just wanted
to see the other side of things - these professors were very clear
and very concise in their instructions to me about nuclear power."

*****************************************************************
 33 AU ABC: Nuclear club considering Australia for membership

The World Today - Tuesday, 22 May , 2007  12:26:00

Reporter: Kim Landers

ELEANOR HALL: A US-led nuclear club which is meant to foster the
development of safe and affordable nuclear power worldwide is
considering letting Australia join its ranks.

Representatives from the United States, Russia, China, France and
Japan have held the first meeting of the Global Nuclear Energy
Partnership in Washington today.

But should Australia be a part of it?

In Washington, Kim Landers reports.

KIM LANDERS: The Bush Administration has long wanted to promote
nuclear energy while finding a way to limit proliferation.

Last year it unveiled its Global Nuclear Energy Partnership plan. It
would allow countries to build nuclear power plants without having
to master the technology of uranium enrichment and without having to
dispose of the waste.

Countries like the United States would lease nuclear fuel to those
nations, a move that would limit the potential for the material to
be used for nuclear weapons.

So far, only the US, Russia, China, Japan and France are members of
this Global Nuclear Energy Partnership.

US Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman denies it's a cartel.

SAMUEL BODMAN: This is not a cartel. This is a group of countries,
all of which have invested a great deal of money over the years in
nuclear technologies. This is called a partnership and we would
expect to expand the number of partners in a substantial way.

KIM LANDERS: But which countries will be allowed to join?

The ABC tried asking Secretary Bodman at a media conference in
Washington today.

KIM LANDERS: This is a question for Secretary Bodman. You mentioned
that you wanted to expand the partnership of GNEP, and I'm wondering
if that could possibly include countries like Australia, which has a
third of the world's uranium deposit and is now considering moving
into nuclear power itself.

SAMUEL BODMAN: Yes.

KIM LANDERS: So Australia could be allowed to join, but the US
Energy Secretary didn't elaborate about when this might happen or
under what conditions.

Prime Minister John Howard had talks with US officials about the
nuclear partnership program during his visit to Washington last year.

So would and should Australia want to be part of it?

Henry Sokolski is the executive director of the Non-proliferation
Policy Education Centre in Washington.

HENRY SOKOLSKI: I guess it seems to get the nuclear cart way before
the horse of what it is Australia ought to be focused on in the
nuclear realm.

And it, it could drag Australia into a host of activities that
frankly are so distant from anything that would be of economic
interest and could in fact even be dangerous.

Because you're talking about fast reactors and playing with
plutonium-based fuels - two things which certainly up until now, the
United States Government has been very careful to avoid because it
involves machines and materials that are most closely associated
with making bombs.

KIM LANDERS: Jim Riccio is the nuclear policy analyst for Greenpeace
in the United States.

JIM RICCO: If Australia wants to get into the business of shipping
nuclear power plants round the planet, and hopes that they won't
come back in the form of a dirty bomb or a nuclear weapon, then
perhaps Australia can go that route.

But there's a reason that the Bush Administration has some real
credibility problems when it comes to the nuclear issue, both here
in the United States and abroad. It's because this GNEP scheme just
doesn't work.

KIM LANDERS: Why doesn't it work?

JIM RICCO: Basically we've taken a whole bunch of different
technologies, none of which have functioned in any of the countries
that they're looking at.

You, know, advanced burner reactors, reprocessing and then shipping
this waste all over the planet are three ideas, which never should
get off the ground. And we would encourage the Australians not to
participate.

KIM LANDERS: The five existing members of the Global Nuclear Energy
Partnership will meet again in September.

This is Kim Landers in Washington for The World Today.
*****************************************************************
 34 KTRV FOX 12: Nuke plant public meeting

Boise, Idaho News, Weather & Traffic - 


Mountain Home, Idaho -- A public hearing has now been scheduled to
discuss the building of a nuclear power plant in Owyhee County.

Alternate energy holdings, inc., wants to build the plant in an area
near C.J. Strike Reservoir.

The meeting is for residents of Owyhee and Elmore counties,
especially those living near the proposed site.

It will take place at Rimrock Junior-Senior High School, Thursday,
May 31, at 7:00 PM.


 All content Š Copyright 2000 - 2007 WorldNow and KTRV. All Rights
Reserved.



*****************************************************************
 35 Guardian Unlimited: Ala. Reactor Restarted After 22 Years 

Tuesday May 22, 2007 7:01 PM

By JAY REEVES Associated Press Writer

BIRMINGHAM, Ala. (AP) - Utility officials restarted a 
long-dormant nuclear reactor Tuesday, 22 years after it was shut 
down because of safety concerns at what was once the nation's 
largest nuclear power plant.

    The restart capped a five-year, $1.8 billion renovation at 
the Tennessee Valley Authority's Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant.

     Plant spokesman Craig Beasley said there were no reports of 
problems. Extensive testing remained to be done before 
electricity from the Unit 1 reactor began flowing on transmission 
lines. The plant's other two reactors remained at full power.

 ``Right now they're looking at the pressure inside the reactor. 
They will keep the power very low for several days, and then 
increase it to 35 percent,'' he said.

    The entire three-reactor plant was idled in 1985 amid 
mounting worries over plant safety and management. The Unit 2 and 
3 reactors were restarted in the 1990s after extensive 
renovations and upgrades.

   Restarting the reactor ``gives TVA another dependable, safe 
and emissions-free source of generation to help meet the growing 
demand for power in the Tennessee Valley,'' TVA Chief Executive 
Tom Kilgore said in a statement.

  Capable of powering 1.95 million homes total, Browns Ferry was 
the nation's largest nuclear plant until it was shut down.

 In 1975, an employee using a candle to check for air leaks in 
Unit 1 sparked a fire that was considered the nation's worst 
nuclear power accident until the partial core meltdown of the 
Three Mile Island plant in 1979 in Pennsylvania.

  The Browns Ferry plant is along the banks of the Tennessee 
River, about 95 miles north of Birmingham.

                                 ---

                             On the Net:

            Tennessee Valley Authority: http://www.tva.gov

Guardian Unlimited Š Guardian News and Media Limited 2007
*****************************************************************
 36 Sydney Morning Herald: Nuclear power a turn-off: Flannery changes stance - 

www.smh.com.au

Wendy Frew May 23, 2007

THE Australian of the Year, Tim Flannery, has rejected the use of
nuclear power in Australia, reversing his position that electricity
could be generated using uranium with less risk to the environment
than that posed by coal.

In a speech at a Sydney business function in which he criticised the
Federal Government's position on coal, the Kyoto Protocol and
funding for climate change research, he said nuclear energy might
have a role to play in some countries but Australia's wealth of
renewable energy ruled it out here.

He asked whether Australia, a country on a continent "the size of
the 48 contingent states of the US", would ever need nuclear power.
"The answer is so resoundingly 'no' it is embarrassing," he said.
"We are, potentially, the new Saudi Arabia of renewable energy ...
it is massive, unimaginable amounts of energy and we have some
fantastic technology in Australia to harness that."

His comments contrasted with earlier statements in which he said
Australians needed to decide what role, if any, nuclear power could
play in combating climate change.

Last August he said: "I'm confident that by using modern nuclear
reactor technology, Australia's electricity could be generated with
less risk to human health than that posed by the current coal-based
industry."

Dr Flannery repeated his criticism of the Government's refusal to
ratify the Kyoto Protocol, and rejected the Prime Minister's
argument that the economy would suffer if the price of pollution was
built into electricity prices.

*****************************************************************
 37 NIRS: New Maps from Common Sense Campaign Reveal Another Cost of New
Nuclear Power: Southbound Mobile Chernobyl - 

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE May 22, 2007
 
CONTACT Kevin&nbsp;Kamps, NIRS 301-270-6477 14 John  Sticpewich,  
828-675-1792

New Maps from Common Sense Campaign Reveal Another Cost of New 
Nuclear Power: Southbound Mobile Chernobyl

May 22  Today 41 community-based groups nationwide teamed with
Nuclear Information and Resource Service and the Common Sense at the
Nuclear Crossroads Campaign are releasing new maps showing one set
of likely transport routes (road, rail and water) that high-level
radioactive waste (irradiated or spent fuel) would take from nuclear
power reactors to the federal Savannah River Site in South Carolina
for reprocessing, if that location is chosen under the federal
Global Nuclear Energy Partnership (GNEP). Eleven sites are currently
under consideration for GNEP; two in South Carolina. Implementation
of GNEP would redirect the transportation of this waste, previously
assumed to target the flawed and unsuitable Yucca Mountain site in
Nevada.

Part of a study by John Sticpewich entitled "A Study of the Problems
With Transport and Reprocessing of Nuclear Waste in the Carolinas,"
the maps were generated using Department of Energy (DOE) data and
the on-line DOE routing program, TRAGIS. "Credit analysts on Wall
Street have suggested that moving the accumulated high-level waste
from the reactor sites would make investment in new nuclear power
more likely," said Sticpewich. "This report documents the huge
tonnage of radioactive waste that must be dealt with, the very high
costs of transporting it, and the potential for impact that such a
move would have on hundreds of communities along the way." John
Sticpewich did this work on behalf of the Common Sense at the
Nuclear Crossroads Campaign based in Asheville, NC. The maps and his
report are available at:
http://www.nuclearcrossroads.org/secondreport.htm .

If implemented, GNEP would move accumulated waste from 75 sites in
33 states. Due to limited resources, the new maps show only a
defined "study area:" waste sites that are east of the Mississippi
River, and from the Carolinas, north. While routes are shown in all
states east of the Mississippi, those in MS, AL, GA and FL include
only out-of-state waste  the reactors in those states are not
included as a points of origin  though they would be under the GNEP
program.

"This case study of one scenario and a limited study area includes
two thirds of the nation's reactors. It is a good start on looking
at the impact of bringing the nation's high-level waste into the
South," said Mary Olson, Director of the Southeast Office of Nuclear
Information and Resource Service. "Another scenario we do not show
is a possible plan for this deadly waste to be centralized for
storage at a "parking-lot dump" -- a top candidate for so-called
"temporary" storage is the Piketon site in Appalachian Ohio"
concluded Olson. Piketon is another of the 11 sites being considered
under GNEP.

"NIRS coined the slogan 'Mobile Chernobyl' back when Congress
weighed shipping this high-level nuclear waste to Nevada to a
parking-lot style dump. It refers to the elevated risk of accidents
or incidents that will travel with this deadly waste if put on the
roads and rails," said Kevin Kamps, Nuclear Waste Specialist with
Nuclear Information and Resource Service. "The risk of terrorist
attack means that these shipments are potential dirty bombs on
wheels or water," says Kamps. "The big news in these maps is the
water routes to SRS  the Great Lakes could be hit by many hundreds
to thousands of these shipments, along with rivers, canals, and
coastlines in every region." Although Yucca Mountain cannot be
approached directly by water, DOE proposed barge shipments for
segments of transports there as well.

"Coincidentally, Dairyland Power's intensely radioactive Genoa
atomic reactor pressure vessel shipment by train from LaCrosse,
Wisconsin to Barnwell, South Carolina for dumping in a ditch, is
about to roll  perhaps as early as today -- down the tracks, most
likely via IL, IN, KY, TN, and GA, the very routes identified in
this new study," said Kevin Kamps of NIRS. "This real-life shipment,
happening right now, has its own radiological hazards, but these are
dwarfed by the many thousands of high-level radioactive waste
shipments that would follow it in years ahead if South Carolina
opens a reprocessing facility," said Kamps.

"There are 32 new reactors moving forward, and of these 30 are in
the South," said Mary Olson. "In 2005 Congress started talking about
reviving the failed, unprofitable reprocessing technology  that
would bring the worst nuclear waste to South Carolina. This is a
major shift in 'the deal.' We were told that nuclear waste would not
be a problemeffectively it would be dumped on someone else! Now if
GNEP goes forward, more of the real cost of those new nuclear power
reactors will be clear: nuclear waste would stay here in the South
and more would come from all over the country  and possibly the
world!" concluded Olson.

Groups taking participating in the May 22nd release: Common Sense at
the Nuclear Crossroads (Asheville, North Carolina); Nuclear
Information and Resource Service (Takoma Park, MD and Asheville,
North Carolina); Physicians for Social Responsibility of Western
North Carolina; Citizen's Awareness Network (Massachusetts); Green
Party of Onondaga County (New York); Central New York Citizens
Awareness Network; Syracuse Peace Council (New York); Don't Waste
Michigan; Nuclear Energy Information Service (Chicago, Illinois);
Earth Day Coalition (Cleveland, Ohio); Southern Ohio Neighbors
Group; Citizen Action Coalition of Indiana; Yggdrasil/Earth Island
(Kentucky); Blue Ridge Environmental Defense League; The Canary
Coalition (North Carolina); Nuclear Watch South (Atlanta, Georgia);
Citizens For Environmental Justice (Savannah, Georgia); Atlanta WAND
(Georgia); Action for A Clean Environment (Georgia); South Carolina
Chapter, Sierra Club; HIPWAZEE (Columbia, South Carolina);
Environmentalists Inc. (Columbia, South Carolina); Carolina Peace
Resource Center (Columbia, South Carolina); Columbia Meeting of the
Religious Society of Friends (South Carolina); Charleston Peace
(South Carolina); Thinking People (Mt. Pleasant, South Carolina);
South Carolina Alliance for Sustainable Campuses + Communities;
Environmental Coalition on Nuclear Power (Pennsylvania); Energy
Justice Network (Pennsylvania); Don't Waste Connecticut; Connecticut
Coalition Against Millstone; North American Water Office (Lake Elmo,
Minnesota); Citizen Alert (Las Vegas, Nevada); Southern Nevada Group
of the Toiyabe Chapter of the Sierra Club; NatCap Inc. (Colorado);
Coalition for a Nuclear-Free Great Lakes (Monroe, Michigan);
Citizens Resistance at Fermi Two (Livonia, Michigan); Toledo
Coalition for Safe Energy (Ohio), Port Hope Community Health
Concerns Committee (Port Hope, Ontario), Canada Voices for Earth
Justice (Roseville, MI), Citizens for Alternatives to Chemical
Contamination (Lake Station, MI), Huron Environmental Activist
League (Alpena, MI).
                                 -30-

*****************************************************************
 38 SecurityFocus: "Data storm" blamed for nuclear-plant shutdown   
 
Date: Tue, 22 May 2007 17:40:16 -0700


<x-flowed>
http://www.securityfocus.com/print/news/11465

"Data storm" blamed for nuclear-plant shutdown
Robert Lemos, SecurityFocus 2007-05-18

The U.S. House of Representative's Committee on Homeland Security  
called this week for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) to  
further investigate the cause of excessive network traffic that shut  
down an Alabama nuclear plant.

During the incident, which happened last August at Unit 3 of the  
Browns Ferry nuclear power plant, operators manually shut down the  
reactor after two water recirculation pumps failed. The recirculation  
pumps control the flow of water through the reactor, and thus the  
power output of boiling-water reactors (BWRs) like Browns Ferry Unit  
3. An investigation into the failure found that the controllers for  
the pumps locked up following a spike in data traffic -- referred to  
as a "data storm" in the NRC notice -- on the power plant's internal  
control system network. The deluge of data was apparently caused by a  
separate malfunctioning control device, known as a programmable logic  
controller (PLC).

In a letter dated May 14 but released to the public on Friday, the  
Committee on Homeland Security and the Subcommittee on Emerging  
Threats, Cybersecurity, and Science and Technology asked the chairman  
of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission to continue to investigate  
the incident.

"Conversations between the Homeland Security Committee staff and the  
NRC representatives suggest that it is possible that this incident  
could have come from outside the plant," Committee Chairman Bennie G.  
Thompson (D-Miss.) and Subcommittee Chairman James R. Langevin (D-RI)  
stated in the letter. "Unless and until the cause of the excessive  
network load can be explained, there is no way for either the  
licensee (power company) or the NRC to know that this was not an  
external distributed denial-of-service attack."

The August 2006 incident is the latest network threat to affect the  
nation's power utilities. In January 2003, the Slammer worm disrupted  
systems of Ohio's Davis-Besse nuclear power plant, but did not pose a  
safety risk because the plant had been offline since the prior year.  
However, the incident did prompt a notice from the NRC warning all  
power plant operators to take such risks into account.

In August 2003, nearly 50 million homes in the northeastern U.S. and  
neighboring Canadian provinces suffered from a loss of power after  
early warning systems failed to work properly, allowing a local  
outage to cascade across several power grids. A number of factors  
contributed to the failure, including a bug in a common energy  
management system and the MSBlast, or Blaster, worm which quickly  
spread among systems running Microsoft Windows, eventually claiming  
more than 25 million systems.

No digital contagion has been fingered in the latest incident, said  
Terry Johnson, spokesman for the Tennessee Valley Authority, the  
public power company that runs the Browns Ferry power plant.

"The integrated control system (ICS) network is not connected to the  
network outside the plant, but it is connected to a very large number  
of controllers and devices in the plant," Johnson said. "You can end  
up with a lot of information, and it appears to be more than it could  
handle."

The device responsible for flooding the network with data appears to  
be a programmable logic controller (PLC) connected to the plant's  
Ethernet network, according to an NRC information notice on the  
incident (PDF). The PLC controlled Unit 3's condensate demineralizer  
-- essentially a water softener for nuclear plants. The flood of data  
spewed out by the malfunctioning controller caused the variable  
frequency drive (VFD) controllers for the recirculation pumps to hang.

Such failures are common among PLC and supervisory control and data  
acquisition (SCADA) systems, because the manufacturers do not test  
the devices' handling of bad data, said Dale Peterson, CEO of  
industrial system security firm DigitalBond.

"What is happening in this marketplace is that vendors will build  
their own (network) stacks to make it cheaper," Peterson said. "And  
it works, but when (the device) gets anything that it didn't expect,  
it will gag."

In many cases, a simple vulnerability scan will even cause the  
devices to crash, Peterson said. During tests in an electrical  
substation, Nessus running in safe scan mode crashed devices, he  
said. In some cases, sending out broadcast data on the network will  
crash several of connected devices, he added.

"If you were to test any control systems that have any more than  
three or four different network-connected devices, they could be  
knocked over very easily," Peterson said.

The Browns Ferry nuclear power plant has had its share of  
difficulties. All three units of the plant were shutdown in 1985 due  
to performance and management problems, according to the NRC. Unit 2  
was restarted in 1991, and Unit 3 started operating again in 1995. On  
Tuesday, the NRC gave the Tennessee Valley Authority permission to  
restart Unit 1.

The Committee on Homeland Security gave the NRC until June 14 to  
respond to its letter.

Privacy Statement
Copyright 2006, SecurityFocus




</x-flowed>
*****************************************************************
 39 BBC NEWS: Russian faces Litvinenko charge

Last Updated: Tuesday, 22 May 2007, 18:14 GMT 19:14 UK

Alexander Litvinenko in hospital

A Russian former KGB officer should be charged with the murder by
poisoning of Alexander Litvinenko, the UK's director of public
prosecutions has recommended.

Sir Ken Macdonald said Andrei Lugovoi should be tried for the "grave
crime".

Mr Litvinenko, 43, an ex-FSB agent and a critic of Russian President
Vladimir Putin, died in London last November.

Mr Lugovoi met Mr Litvinenko on the day he was taken ill.

Radioactive isotope polonium-210 - the substance found in Mr
Litvinenko's body - has been detected in a string of places Mr
Lugovoi had visited in London.

But Mr Lugovoi has insisted he was a witness and a victim but not a
suspect.

'Well-founded distrust'

"I consider that this decision to be political, I did not kill
Litvinenko, I have no relation to his death and I can only express
well-founded distrust for the so-called basis of proof collected by
British judicial officials," Russian news agencies quoted Mr Lugovoi
as saying.

The formal submission of a request for Mr Lugovoi's extradition is
expected to take place before the end of the week, after it has been
translated.

A spokesman for the Kremlin said Russia's constitution did not allow
its nationals to be extradited.


Andrei Lugovoi has strongly denied involvement


Profile of accused


The spokesman added it was waiting for the "British side to actually
do something rather than make statements".

The Russian general prosecution service also said there was "no way"
Mr Lugovoi could be extradited because of constitutional constraints.

But the service's spokesman added that a Russian citizen who had
committed a crime in another country "should be prosecuted in Russia
with evidence provided by the foreign state".

UK Foreign Secretary Margaret Beckett said she had told the Russian
ambassador that she expected "full co-operation" with regards
extraditing Mr Lugovoi.

And Prime Minister Tony Blair's official spokesman said people
should wait and see what Russia's "considered legal response" was to
the extradition request.

He pointed out that in 2001 Russia had signed the 1957 EU convention
on extradition.

Mr Litvinenko, who was granted political asylum in the UK in 2000
after leaving Russia and went on to take British citizenship, died
at University College Hospital on 23 November.


I have instructed CPS lawyers to take immediate steps to seek the
early extradition of Andrei Lugovoi from Russia


Sir Ken Macdonald


CPS statement on Litvinenko

Sir Ken Macdonald told a news conference: "I have today concluded
that the evidence sent to us by the police is sufficient to charge
Andrei Lugovoi with the murder of Mr Litvinenko by deliberate
poisoning.

"I have further concluded that a prosecution of this case would
clearly be in the public interest.

"In those circumstances, I have instructed CPS lawyers to take
immediate steps to seek the early extradition of Andrei Lugovoi from
Russia to the United Kingdom, so that he may be charged with murder
- and be brought swiftly before a court in London to be prosecuted
for this extraordinarily grave crime."

International investigation

Mr Litvinenko's widow Marina said that she welcomed the decision on
what was a "big day" for her.

She said: "I am now very anxious to see that justice is really done
and that Mr Lugovoi is extradited and brought to trial in a UK
court."

A period of tense relations between Britain and Russia is expected

Paul Reynolds
World affairs correspondent, BBC News website

'Stand-off' over spy case

She added that any court case should be held in Britain, and that
she believed more than one person was responsible for her husband's
death.

The counter-terrorism command of the Metropolitan Police has been
conducting a detailed international investigation into Mr
Litvinenko's death. The police inquiry, during which officers
followed a trail of polonium radioactivity at a series of locations
visited by Mr Litvinenko in London before he died, eventually took
them to Moscow.

His friends, including London-based Russian tycoon Boris Berezovsky,
have accused the Kremlin of ordering his assassination but the
Russian government has rejected such claims.

Police passed a file to the Crown Prosecution Service in January.


* BBC Copyright Notice
*****************************************************************
 40 APP.COM: Berkeley wants NRC analysis of potential attack | 

Asbury Park Press Online

Oyster Creek relicensing at issue

Posted by the Asbury Park Press on 05/22/07

BY BONNIE DELANEY TOMS RIVER BUREAU Post Comment

BERKELEY  The Township Council wants the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission to consider the potential impact of a terrorist attack
when the federal agency considers the relicensing review of the
Oyster Creek nuclear power plant in Lacey.

On Monday night, the council passed a resolution supporting the
state Department of Environmental Protection's efforts to get the
NRC to require the analysis of the potential impact of a terrorist
strike at the facility. State Attorney General Stuart Rabner filed a
petition with the Third Circuit Court of Appeals April 25
questioning a Feb. 26 decision by the NRC that rejects the state's
contention that the analysis should be a component of the
relicensing process.

Mayor Jason J. Varano said that the township has been at the
forefront of making sure the plant is not a threat to residents.

"Berkeley was the first municipality to recommend it not be
relicensed," he said. "We talked about the threat many years ago and
passed numerous resolutions over the years."

Resident Edith Gbur, a Costa Mesa Drive resident who is a member of
Jersey Shore Nuclear Watch Inc., urged the mayor and council to
speak out at the May 31 public hearings on the relicensure of the
plant scheduled by the NRC's Atomic Safety and Licensing Board.


"Maybe they'll listen to you," she said.

Dennis Zannoni, of Florence Township, who formerly was the
supervising nuclear engineer for the DEP, said he believes any
relicensing should be decided by Gov. Corzine and the people of New
Jersey.

"The frustration I've sensed from people is that they can't do
anything and the NRC is a very powerful agency," he said.

Gbur said that 20 municipalities have gone on record calling for the
closure of the power plant.

"It's vulnerable to terrorist attacks. It's in a heavily populated
area. There's the threat of fire," she said.

Resident Grace Costanzo, of St. Kitts Drive, said the council should
request a meeting with the governor to express opposition to the
relicensing of the power plant.

IF YOU GO

The Oyster Creek nuclear power plant, and the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission's annual assessment of the plant's safety performance,
will be on the agenda at a public meeting scheduled for May 23 at
plant owner AmerGen Energy Co.'s emergency operations facility, 1268
Route 37 West, Toms River.

Before the formal meeting at 7 p.m., the NRC will conduct an
informational open house from 5:30 to 7 p.m. to allow the public to
discuss topics related to Oyster Creek with agency staff members.

Before the 7 p.m. meeting is adjourned, the NRC staff will be
available to answer questions on the performance of Oyster Creek, as
well as the role of the NRC in providing oversight of plant safety.

The NRC's Atomic Safety and Licensing Board has also scheduled two
public hearings for May 31 at the Ocean County Administration
Building, Hooper Avenue, Toms River, to receive comments on the
relicensing of the plant. The sessions will be held from 2 to 4 p.m.
and 7 to 9 p.m.

Copyright Š 2007 Asbury Park Press. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 41 UPI: NNSA boosts Ukraine's nuclear security

United Press International - Security & Terrorism - Briefing

Published: May 22, 2007 at 2:22 PM

WASHINGTON, May 22 (UPI) -- The U.S. National Nuclear Safety
Administration said Monday it was supplying Ukraine with radiation
detection equipment at 30 sites.

The NNSA, which is an agency of the U.S. Department of Energy, said
it was working in partnership with the Administration of the State
Border Guard Service of Ukraine, or ASBGS. A new checkpoint was
equipped with the radiation detection equipment at the Kuchurgan
vehicle crossing in Ukraine.

The equipment was provided as part of the "ongoing cooperation
between the United States and Ukraine to prevent the trafficking of
nuclear and radioactive material across Ukrainian borders," the NNSA
said in a statement.

"Under a 2005 agreement, NNSA's Second Line of Defense program
assisted the Ukrainian border guard service by conducting training,
holding technical workshops, and providing and maintaining radiation
detection equipment at border crossings and other points of entry,"
the statement said. "As part of the assistance, NNSA has deployed
radiation detection equipment at five sites in Ukraine on the
Moldovan border, including Kuchurgan.

"... NNSA will work with Ukraine to equip an additional 25 sites,"
it said.

"Ukraine and the United States are working closely together to stop
nuclear smuggling. This partnership plays a critical role in the
global fight against illicit trafficking and proliferation of
weapons of mass destruction," said William Tobey, leader of NNSA's
nuclear non-proliferation programs.

The NNSA said its Second Line of Defense program "works with foreign
governments around the world at border crossings, airports and
seaports to install specialized radiation detection equipment and to
train officials to detect smuggled nuclear and other radioactive
materials. To date, the program has installed equipment at over 100
different sites."

The Bush administration has made international cooperation on
nuclear security a major priority to try and prevent the smuggling
of nuclear substances or weapons into the United States.


Š Copyright 2007 United Press International, Inc. All Rights
Reserved.
*****************************************************************
 42 UPI: Bush picks D'Agostino to head NNSA

United Press International - Security & Terrorism - Briefing

Published: May 22, 2007 at 12:52 PM

WASHINGTON, May 22 (UPI) -- President George W. Bush has chosen
Thomas D'Agostino as the next head of the U.S. National Nuclear
Safety Administration.

The NNSA is an agency of the U.S. Department of Energy, and last
week U.S. Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman announced that President
Bush had decided to select D'Agostino as undersecretary of energy
and NNSA administrator.

D'Agostino "served as NNSA's acting administrator for three months
and as deputy administrator for defense programs for the past 14
months. In these roles, (he) has done an outstanding job and has
earned my full confidence," Bodman said.

"With this nomination, we are making NNSA even stronger and I am
eager to have Tom step into the NNSA administrator role on a
permanent basis," Bodman said. "I look forward to working with Tom
as we continue to pursue NNSA's national security mission. While the
nomination is under consideration by the U.S. Senate, Bill
Ostendorff will continue serving as NNSA's acting administrator."

D'Agostino took over as NNSA acting administrator when his
predecessor, Linton Brooks, was forced to resign in January after
revelations of serious security shortcomings at the Los Alamos
National Laboratory. D'Agostino is credited with restoring morale to
the agency and running it with a steady hand.

Š Copyright 2007 United Press International, Inc. All Rights
Reserved.
*****************************************************************
 43 NAS: Project: Gulf War and Health: Updated Literature Review of Depleted
Uranium

Project Title:

 Gulf War and Health: Updated Literature Review of Depleted Uranium
PIN: PHPH-H-06-01-A        

Major Unit:

 Institute of Medicine

Sub Unit: Board on Population Health and Public Health Practice

RSO: Mitchell, Abigail

Project Scope
A committee of the Institute of Medicine (IOM) will review,
evaluate, and summarize scientific and medical literature regarding
the association between exposure to depleted uranium and chronic
human health effects. The study committee will focus on literature
published since the IOM's 2000 report, Gulf War and Health, Volume
1: Depleted Uranium, Pyridostigmine Bromide, Sarin, and Vaccines was
written.

The committee will make determinations on the strength of the
evidence for associations between exposure to depleted uranium and
human health effects. The report might include recommendations for
additional scientific studies to resolve areas of continued
scientific uncertainty.

The findings will not be limited to veterans of the 1991 Gulf War.
They also will be applicable to veterans of Operation Iraqi Freedom
and Operation Enduring Freedom.

This project is sponsored by the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs.
The start date for the project is September 18, 2006.
A report will be issued at the end of the project in approximately
15 months.

Project Duration: 15 months    

Provide FEEDBACK on this project.

Contact the Public Access Records Office to make an inquiry or to
schedule an appointment to view project materials available to the
public.

Committee Membership

Meetings
 Meeting 1 - 03/22/2007
 Meeting 2 - 06/28/2007
 Meeting 3 - 09/27/2007

Reports
Reports having no URL can be seen
at the Public Access Records Office

 Email: info@nas.edu
*****************************************************************
 44 MaineToday.com: Radioactive waste resolution


AUGUSTA The Maine House of Representatives this morning adopted a
resolution urging Congress and President Bush to fund radioactive
waste management.

The resolution, which will now be sent to the Senate for
consideration, calls on the federal government to appropriate $495
million for the civilian radioactive waste program.

The resolve notes that Maine stores high-level radioactive waste in
dry casks in Wiscasset that was once used at the Maine Yankee
electric plant.

Copyright Š 2007, Blethen Maine Newspapers, Inc.






*****************************************************************
 45 Times of India: India's uranium reserve to double in 5 yrs

22 May, 2007 l 1700 hrs ISTlPTI

KOLKATA: India is moving aggressively on its uranium exploration
programme to double its reserves within the next five years,
Secretary of the Atomic Energy Commission Anil Kakodkar said on
Tuesday.

"We are moving very aggressively on uranium. We are looking at new
reserves. We want the reserves to be augmented two-fold in the next
five years," Kakodkar told reporters after receiving the 'Raja Ram
Mohan Puraskar, 2007' from the Ram Mohan Mission.

He said the exploration would be done with technology developed by
the Bhaba Atomic Research Centre.

India's confirmed uranium reserve currently is now 78,000 tonne and
it requires 1,00,000 tonne in the near future to sustain the growth
of nuclear power projects.

There was a huge potential in N-power generation and the Nuclear
Power Corporation of India, now being expanded, was capable of
producing 1,000 MW on its own. "But that would require a lot of
adjustment on acts and policies," he said.

Paper work for amendment to the Atomic Energy Act, 1962, was now on
and the matter would be placed before Parliament as soon as possible
for a decision, he said.

According to Kakodkar, the country's first Fast Breeder Reactor
would be ready by 2011.

Strongly advocating reactor fuel recycling despite objections by the
US, he said the process cuts down fuel wastes to a negligible level,
besides enabling upto 80 times of energy generation out of the same
fuel.

"I would expect the US to agree to it. The July 18, 2006, agreement
says this could be negotiated," he said.

Copyright Š 2007 Times Internet Limited. All rights reserved. For
*****************************************************************
 46 WNN: New uranium conversion plant to be built in France

22 May 2007

Areva has announced the launch of a EUR 610 million ($821 million)
project to build new uranium conversion facilities in southern
France. The project, Comurhex II, will see the construction of the
new plant at Malvesi in the Narbonne region and at Tricastin in the
Rhone valley.

Areva CEO Anne Lauvergeon described Comurhex II as "a key element in
our strategy of offering customers a complete range of products and
services to operate their nuclear reactors." The new project will
integrate technological innovations from research and development
programs with over 40 years of experience from the existing Comurhex
operations, according to the company. The new facilities will also
lead to major savings in terms of water and energy consumption, and
reduced effluents.

Before uranium can be manufactured into nuclear fuel, most reactors
require it to be enriched - that is, the concentration of
uranium-235 in the natural uranium has to be increased. Enrichment
requires the uranium first to be converted into a gas, uranium
hexafluoride (UF6). At a conversion facility, uranium is first
refined to uranium dioxide (which can be used as the fuel for those
types of reactors that do not require enriched uranium) and then
converted into uranium hexafluoride, ready for the enrichment plant.

Areva is already operating conversion plants through its Comurhex
subsidiary at the sites proposed for Comurhex II. At Malvesi,
uranium ore concentrates are purified and converted to uranium
tetrafluoride (UF4). The UF4 is converted to UF6 at the Pierrelatte
plant, on the Tricastin nuclear site. The plant also produces UF6
from reprocessed uranium. Comurhex also produces gaseous
fluorochemicals for the automobile and electronics industries.

The Comurhex II site will be "launched" in summer 2007, according to
Areva, with first industrial production planned for 2012, based on
15,000 tonnes of uranium per year. This could be increased to 21,000
tonnes depending on market requirements.

Areva
Comurhex WNA's The Nuclear Fuel Cycle information paper

*****************************************************************
 47 DOE: Senior International Energy Officials Issue Joint Statement 
in Support of the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership

May 21, 2007

WASHINGTON, DC  U.S. Secretary of Energy Samuel W. Bodman today
announced that the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and senior energy
officials from some of the worlds leading economies issued a joint
statement in support of the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership (GNEP)
and nuclear energy cooperation.  The Peoples Republic of China,
France, Japan, Russia and the United States issued the Joint
Statement, which addresses the prospects for international
cooperation in peaceful uses of nuclear energy, including technical
aspects, especially in the framework of GNEP.

Todays Joint Statement officially puts the P in the Global
Nuclear Energy Partnership, Secretary Bodman said.  For
Americans, pursuing nuclear power is wise policy; for industry it
can be good business; internationally, it is unmatched in its
ability to serve as a cornerstone of sustainable economic
development, while offering enormous potential to satisfy the
worlds increasing demand for energy in a clean, safe and
proliferation-resistant manner.

The Joint Statement was agreed upon today in Washington, DC, after
high-level international officials participated in a DOE-hosted
ministerial meeting, bringing together some of the leading nuclear
fuel cycle states to discuss GNEP and its path forward toward
increasing the use of safe, reliable and affordable nuclear power
worldwide.  Chairman Ma Kai of the Peoples Republic of China
(National Development and Reform Commission); Chairman Alain Bugat
of France (Commissariat a l'Energie Atomique); Minister Sanae
Takaichi of Japan (Minister of State for Okinawa and Northern
Territories Affairs, Science and Technology Policy, Innovation,
Gender Equality, Social Affairs and Food Safety); Deputy Director
Nikolay Spasskiy of the Russian Federation (Federal Atomic Energy
Agency); and Secretary of Energy Samuel W. Bodman of the United
States participated in todays ministerial meeting on GNEP and
nuclear energy cooperation.   The United Kingdom and the
International Atomic Energy Agency also participated as observers to
the ministerial.

In addition to providing overviews on each countries national and
international nuclear energy policies in relation to GNEP, senior
officials are also moving forward on topics considered crucial to
GNEPs development.  The topics include: infrastructure development
needs for countries considering nuclear power; development of
advanced fuel cycle and safeguards technology; establishment of
reliable fuel services; spent fuel management; and building the
partnership and next steps to pursue this major global initiative.

GNEP is a Presidential initiative, which includes key research and
technology development programs as well as international policy
cooperation.  It addresses two long-standing barriers to enable
expansion of nuclear power: (1) the means to use sensitive
technologies responsibly in a way that protects global security, and
(2) the pathway to safe management and disposition of spent fuel. 
GNEP focuses on overcoming these barriers, and doing so in
cooperation with other advanced nuclear nations, to bring the
benefits of nuclear energy to the world safely and securely.  To
meet the goals of GNEP, collaboration among industry, the U.S.
national laboratories and other nations will be essential.

GNEP, first announced by President Bush in 2006, is part of his
Advanced Energy Initiative, which aims to change the way we power
our lives by utilizing alternative and renewable fuels to increase
energy, economic and international security.  GNEP seeks to develop
worldwide consensus on enabling expanded use of clean, safe, and
affordable nuclear energy to meet growing electricity demand. GNEP
proposes a nuclear fuel cycle that enhances energy security, while
promoting non-proliferation.   Additional information on GNEP.

Joint Statement on the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership and Nuclear
Energy Cooperation

Media contact(s): Julie Ruggiero, (202) 586-4940 

 U.S. Department of Energy | 1000 Independence Ave., SW | 
Washington, DC 20585 1-800-dial-DOE | f/202-586-4403
*****************************************************************
 48 Las Vegas SUN: Bill out to guard Vegas water from uranium

Today: May 22, 2007 at 7:41:1 PDT

By Steve Kanigher &ltsteve@lasvegassun.com&gt
Las Vegas Sun

The Energy Department would have to more quickly move a 
radioactive uranium pile away from a site in Utah near the 
Colorado River, which supplies Southern Nevadans' drinking water, 
under a bill approved last week by the House of Representatives.

The amendment to a Defense Department bill, sponsored by Rep. Jim
Matheson, D-Utah, would require the 16 million-ton pile near Moab,
Utah, to be moved by 2019 from a site 750 feet from the river to
Crescent Junction, Utah, about 30 miles away.

The Energy Department, citing budgetary constraints, had planned to
move the pile but not before 2028.

"DOE has a miserable record here to be honest and I've fired many
shots across the bow before , but this was the time for the direct
hit," Matheson said in prepared remarks. "This business to say 2028
is just unacceptable."

The uranium tailings, representing waste from mining activities for
the manufacture of nuclear bombs, were produced by a mine that
closed in 1984. The Energy Department took possession of the site in
2001 after the mine's last owner, Atlas Minerals Corp. of Denver,
declared bankruptcy.

It has been estimated that it would cost $407 million to $472
million to move the pile, currently secured by a temporary cap.

"There's overwhelming scientific evidence that this site is unstable
and that the contamination already migrating under the river toward
the town of Moab could, with one major flood event, be dumped into
the Colorado," Matheson said. "That disaster would put the health
and safety of 25 million downstream users at risk."

Although environmental groups also have urged the Energy Department
to move the uranium pile as soon as possible to guard against
potential contamination of the river, the Southern Nevada Water
Authority says there is no immediate threat to Southern Nevada's
drinking supply.

The defense bill awaits Senate action. Steve Kanigher can be reached
at 259-4075 or at steve@lasvegassun.com.

All contents Š 1996 - 2007 Las Vegas Sun, Inc.
*****************************************************************
 49 Gallup Independent: Shirley tours toxic site; Soil being replaced

May 21, 2007:

Harry Allen, the on-site coordinator for the Environmental
Protection Agency, shows Navajo Nation President Joe Shirley Jr. how
a device can measure radiation in the soil at the Red Water Pond
Road community. [Photo by Brian Leddy/Independent]

By Natasha Kaye Johnson
Diné Bureau

Four-year-old Drew Nez plays in the dirt in the Red Water Pond Road
community during a media event on Friday. Navajo Nation President
Joe Shirley visited the area to view the cleanup efforts and talk to
residents at the site where soil contamination occurred from nearby
uranium mines operated by the Uranium Nuclear Corporation. [Photo by
Brian Leddy/Independent]

CHURCH ROCK ? Twenty-seven years ago, the dam in Church Rock burst,
spilling more than 1,100 tons of radioactive mill waste and 90
million gallons of contaminated liquid into the ground.

It was the worst uranium accident in U.S. history.

The Nez, Nakai, and Hoods are just a few of the families whose homes
rest between two rolling mountains of dirt contaminated with
uranium, not far from where the spill occurred.

More than 50 families live in the Red Water Pond area and on
Pipeline Canyon Road, with 20 of the families living only a
half-mile from the abandoned United Nuclear Corporation Church Rock
Mine, where piles of radioactive dirt remain. Thirty other families
live just 1.5 miles from the abandoned Kerr-McGee Church Rock Mine
and the UNC Uranium Mill Tailings Facility.

Many of the families have been living in the area for generations,
long before uranium mining began in the late 1960's. No one,
including government agencies or uranium mining companies, ever told
the families about the toxic and radioactive conditions in the area.

Nearly six weeks ago, families were notified that they had to
temporarily be removed from their homes after a clean-up was
initiated by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the Navajo
Nation Environmental Protection Agency. Five Navajo families were
placed in local hotels in Gallup so that polluted dirt could be
removed from around, and even inside their homes. Some homes' entire
floors, including concrete, had to be completely removed. In some
cases, the home was found to have been built with dirt used from the
mines.

Phase I of the project started in the first week of April. The
anticipated cost of the first phase is about $2.1 million, which
will go towards removing over 5,000 cubic feet of contaminated dirt
that surrounds the homes.

By next week, Harry Allen, on-scene coordinator, U.S. EPA Region 9
San Francisco office, said that new dirt will be brought in from
Gallup to replace the removed dirt. The polluted dirt will be
temporarily placed at the mine and will be stored in plastic until
it can be transported to a radioactive landfill in Utah.

Public Meeting
Friday afternoon, nearly 30 local residents attended a public
meeting about Phase I, hoping to hear from leaders and officials in
attendance that the placed they called home would soon be restored
to livable conditions. They were hoping to hear that soon, it would
be okay for their children to play in the arroyos and rolling hills
and that they could all breathe in the air without fear it could
lead to something terrible.

They did not hear any such promises or get any assurance that things
would be restored back to balance immediately, but were told that it
was diligently being worked and asked to have continued patience.

There were mixed feelings about the project. Some were glad about
the clean-up, while others said it should have never been initiated.
Others expressed that they wanted quicker results, and brought up
other concerns.

"Our main concern is long-term protection," said Teddy Nez, resident
and spokesperson for the community on uranium issues.

Nez said he would like to see entities like the Indian Health
Service and the Navajo Nation Division of Health working together to
conduct a comprehensive health study in the area. No health studies
have ever been conducted in the area, despite its long history of
uranium mining and its high rate of various cancers.

Navajo Nation President Joe Shirley, Jr. attended the meeting and
heard the plights of concerned citizens.

Monitoring
In 2003, radiation monitoring done by the Church Rock Uranium
Monitoring Project and the Navajo Nation Environmental Protection
Agency, among a number of state and federal agencies, proved what
the people had feared for years. There was radiation, and it was
made clear it was beyond dangerous.

In 2003 data was collected and given to United Nuclear Corporation
that proved that radiation levels around waste piles of the homes
were more than 20 times higher than normal. But they disregarded the
numbers.

"The company said 'we don't know of any off site contamination',"
said Chris Shuey, with the Southwest Research and Information
Center, based out of Albuquerque. "They were acting like we were all
stupid. It took a threat of a legal action."

Conaminated
Allen collected soil samples last fall and winter, and as did other
entities from previous years, who determined once again that the
area was highly contaminated.

"All of this confirms what we found three years ago," said Shuey.

"It's not been safe to live in these areas for a long time," said
Allen.

Dan Mere, chief of Response, Planning, and Assessment Branch,
Superfund Division with the U.S. EPA Region 9 San Francisco office,
explained to community members in attendance the priorities of the
EPA when cleaning sites includes three principles. The first, he
said, is to protect human health, which means removing families if
necessary. The second is to make every effort to enforcement the
entities responsible.

"We try and find who's responsible and compel them to take
responsibility for what they've done," he said. "People and agencies
responsible for contamination should be responsible for clean-up."

The third principle, he said, is to address the worst contamination
first.

"We know that's there's been a long history of this mining and has
had a devastating impact," said Mere. "On behalf of the
Environmental Protection Agency, we're sorry for that impact and we
want do everything we can to address it." 

Monday
May 21, 2007

All contents property of the Gallup Independent.
questions or comments to gallpind@cia-g.com


*****************************************************************
 50 The Buffalo News: West Valley nuclear footprint reduced

 Buffalo.com Updated: 05/22/07 7:54 AM

 WEST VALLEY  Contractors Monday whittled away at the footprint of
the 41-year-old West Valley nuclear waste site, demolishing one of
its oldest buildings, while government agencies responsible for
mapping the closure plans looked forward to continuing core team
discussions in June to negotiate who will pay for and oversee
cleanup of the most contaminated portions of the site.

The president of West Valley Nuclear Fuel Service Corp., retired
Adm. Al Konetzni, said Mondays demolition of the Main 1 Warehouse
and the planned removal next week of five more maintenance
structures makes him feel good because it reduces public risk and
advances the way ahead.

Konetzni said he felt very good because both New York senators,
Hillary Rodham Clinton and Charles E. Schumer, as well as
Congressman John R. Randy Kuhl Jr., R-Hammondsport, seem to be
very much on board with this view of the future.

He added that West Valley Nuclear Service Corp.s work gained some
momentum in recent months after the agencies began meeting as a core
team to determine the final cleanup parameters.

Konetzni, whose contract extension runs out June 30 and whose
company is in the running for a new three-year cleanup contract from
the U.S. Department of Energy, referred to the DOEs goal of
bringing many of the less-contaminated portions of the former
nuclear fuels reprocessing center into an interim end state
requiring less maintenance and oversight.

State and federal authorities in the meantime have to find a
solution to more complicated issues of how to deal with more highly
radioactive items on the site.

Some of the 308 workers still at the project are busy packaging what
remains of the 20,000 concrete-filled steel drums that contain
hardened slurry created during the vitrification of high-level
radioactive waste.

According to Konetzni, about 5,000 of the drums have been shipped by
truck or rail and 8,000 more are packaged and waiting for rail
shipment.

A final environmental impact statement, begun more than 10 years
ago, must be completed and other decisions remain for funding and
responsibility for overseeing the state and federal burial grounds,
along with 275 canisters of highly radioactive waste that are stored
on the site.

Also to be determined is a method for stopping a plume of
strontium-90-contaminate d water leaking beneath the Process
Building.

Some of those problems were outlined Monday night by the citizen
advisory group, the West Valley Citizen Task Force, for Judith Enck,
the state Secretary of the Environment who was took part in a phone
conference meeting that also saw input from officials at the New
York State Energy Research and Development Authority, DOE and the
Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Enck told task force members that she and Gov. Eliot L. Spitzer want
suggestions on how to move the cleanup process forward.

Copyright 1999 - 2007 - The Buffalo News copyright-protected
*****************************************************************
 51 Hanford News: Toxic-pits cleanup dropped: Air Force's plan to seal sites at old
McClellan base stirs outcry over safety.

This story was published Monday, May 21st, 2007

By Chris Bowman, Sacramento Bee Staff Writer

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.

McClellan Park currently has 170 business tenants with about 13,000
employees.

The Air Force concedes the capped dumps would limit the number and
placement of buildings and require ongoing monitoring and
maintenance "forever."

The military would be at least partly responsible for those
long-term costs and would pick up the full tab on testing and
cleaning groundwater through its existing network of monitoring
wells and pump-and-treat systems, according to the Air Force Real
Property Agency, which is charged with the cleanup.

The plan calls for capping nine of the waste trenches, and taking
stockpiled contaminated soil and lead-tainted dirt from a small-arms
firing range on base and dumping the debris into the excavated site
where the leaking barrels were found. That site, known as CS-10,
would become a landfill entombed in special leak-resistant material
with plumbing to capture any leakage.

The remedy would have the Air Force paying an estimated $39 million
over 30 years. That compares with costs up to $500 million for
shipping the wastes and contaminated soil to special landfills for
hazardous and radioactive materials, according to the Air Force.
Exhuming the old dumps could bring more unwanted discoveries that
would vastly increase restoration costs, as the Air Force learned in
2000.

In an exploratory dig west of the runways, cleanup crews unearthed
three vials containing plutonium-239, a synthetic element used to
make nuclear weapons.

Officials learned that the chemical came from the McClellan Central
Laboratory, a secret operation on base dating back to the 1940s. The
lab analyzed air samples from the fallout of nuclear weapons tests
in communist countries to ensure compliance with international
treaties.

Air Force cleanup crews later unearthed from the pit 43 drums with
varying levels of radioactivity: One drum contained the same
plutonium isotope, 15 contained americium-241, 27 contained
cesium-137 and 53 contained radium-226, once used in paint to
illuminate gun sights and cockpit gauges, according to the health
department's review.

"It appears that the burial of radioactive waste at McClellan
occurred contrary to written Air Force policy and was not
specifically authorized under (Atomic Energy Commission) licenses,"
said Hook, the state health official.

"This leads to greater uncertainty about the radioactive materials
that may be buried in the other disposal pits."


&copy 2007 Tri-City Herald. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 52 Financial Express: Recycle nuclear fuel, says Kakodkar

ECONOMY BUREAU

Posted online: Wednesday, May 23, 2007 at 0331 hours IST
 
KOLKATA, MAY 22:  India is consistent on its stand of recycling
nuclear fuel and hopes that the US would soon agree with its view to
conclude negotiations on the Indo-US nuclear deal, according to Dr
Anil Kakodkar, chairman of the Atomic Energy Commission and
secretary to the department of atomic energy.

Our stand has been clear from the beginning. Nuclear fuel needs to
be processed and processed in a manner, which is environmentally
safe and sustainable. India has adopted recycling option as it cuts
down nuclear wastes and generates 60 to 80 times more energy," Dr
Kakodkar said.

He said recycling is important for long-term waste disposal.

"We would want the US to allow us to recycle," Dr Kakodkar said.

Dr Kakodkar said "it has been a deal between the two sovereign
countries and all the nodal agencies of the two countries involved
in the deal are working on it. Our policy on the 123 agreement (read
nuclear deal) has been very consistent."

Dr Kakodkar was in the city to receive the Raja Ram Mohan Puraskar
given by the Ram Mohan Mission. He told reporters that India is
moving aggressively to locate new uranium reserves and expects to
increase its uranium reserves a few folds in the next 2-3 years. New
technology for mining uranium has already been adopted.

 Š 2007: Indian Express Newspapers (Mumbai) Ltd. All rights reserved
*****************************************************************
 53 UPI: Russian expert: Uranium market volatile

United Press International - NewsTrack - Business - 

Published: May 21, 2007 at 10:30 PM

MOSCOW, May 21 (UPI) -- Raw uranium, which has skyrocketed in price,
may continue its dramatic increase in value, a top Russian nuclear
expert said Monday.

"The price of raw uranium has grown 15 times in the past years, from
$20 to $300 per kilo. I think it may still grow by another order of
magnitude," Yevgeny Velikhov, head of the Russian nuclear Kurchatov
Institute, told a RIA Novosti news conference.

The institute is Russia's leading nuclear-energy research and
development institution.

Uranium is used as fuel in nuclear power plants to produce
electricity and heat. It is also used in nuclear weapons.

"The global energy market is very turbulent," Velikhov said. "The
uranium price can hit any mark at a time of crisis."

He cited growing nuclear energy activity around the world amid
shrinking reserves, widely seen as harbingers of a global uranium
deficit by mid-century, the news agency said.

Russia has repeatedly called for the deregulation of the
international nuclear fuel market. It has also discouraged countries
from acquiring nuclear technologies that might lead to nuclear
weapons, the news agency said.

Š Copyright 2007 United Press International, Inc. All Rights
Reserved.
*****************************************************************
 54 Bradford Publishing: Buildings come down at West Valley

Wednesday 23 May, 2007        Home > Times Herald > HOME > News
 
By RICK MILLER, Olean Times Herald 05/22/2007

 A container with six drums of concrete containing low-level
radioactive waste is lowered into a rail car at the West Valley
Demonstration project Monday. The waste will be taken to a U.S.
Energy Department nuclear test site in Nevada. Photo by Rick Miller 

WEST VALLEY - West Valley Demonstration Project officials said
Monday progress is being made on cleanup at the contaminated former
nuclear fuel reprocessing center.


West Valley Nuclear Services Company President Al Konetzni told
reporters at the U.S. Department of Energy's cleanup site in the
town of Ashford that buildings are being removed and waste is being
shipped.


Mr. Konetzni and Craig Rieman, deputy site director for the
Department of Energy, spoke in front of a warehouse that was being
demolished for removal to a licensed landfill near Rochester. It had
been decontaminated prior to the demolition.

Mr. Konetzni, a former vice admiral in the Navy, said federal and
state officials are embracing what he called "the way ahead," which
he said will result removing "most, if not all, of the contamination
from the site."


Officials are also drawing up plans to halt an underground plume of
radioactive material that leaked from the process building and is
headed for Cattaraugus Creek that empties into Lake Erie, a source
of drinking water for millions.


Mr. Konetzni said the plans now call for the eventual demolition and
removal of the main process building, where 275 stainless steel
containers encase highly radioactive glass logs measuring 10 feet
high and 2 feet in diameter. As recently as last year, plans called
for demolishing the building and cementing it in place.


Current plans for four carbon steel underground storage tanks that
still contain some liquid radioactive waste and sludge are to let
them dry out so they can't leak and leave them where they are
subject to review every five years. The tanks, which are highly
radioactive on their interior walls, will not be grouted or cemented
in place, at least for now. "Empty tanks can't leak," Mr. Konetzni
said.


He also said officials expect the last of more than 18,000 drums of
low-level radioactive waste - mostly concrete and made with water
distilled from the radioactive liquid that was left in the
underground tanks - should be removed from the site by the end of
the summer.


The drums are currently store in the drum cell facility. They are
packaged in heavy-duty bags and loaded onto railroad cars to be
taken to a Department of Energy nuclear test facility in Nevada.
Thirty bags, each containing six drums, are loaded onto each rail
car.


Mr. Konetzni said rail shipment is much more cost-effective. Nine
hundred drums can be shipped at a time as compared to 36 drums on a
truck. "It's far more efficient and safer" to ship by rail, he added.


"We want to restore this site in as pristine a manner as we can,"
Mr. Konetzni said.


Core teams of officials from the U.S. Department of Energy and New
York State Energy Research and Development Authority (NYSERDA) have
been meeting for the past six months to find areas of agreement on
the cleanup, Mr. Konetzni explained.


Last year, the state filed suit in U.S. District Court in Buffalo to
force the U.S. Department of Energy to fully clean up the site,
which from 1966 to 1972 operated as the country's first commercial
spent nuclear fuel reprocessing facility. In 1980, Congress passed
the West Valley Demonstration Project bill authorizing the
federal/state cleanup.


Mr. Rieman said no final decisions have been made on whether to
remove the underground tanks, which once held more than 600,000
gallons of highly radioactive liquid wastes.


"They haven't decided anything yet," he added. "They are looking at
different options. Nothing has been ruled in or out" regarding the
tanks.


Currently, Mr. Konetzni said, "Drying them is the right thing to
do." The decision on what to do with the tanks has been deferred for
two decades, he said. "To me, it's a no-brainer. You've got to get
going."


Even if the underground tanks were to be unearthed and dismantled,
the steel would have to be safely stored on-site until a federal
repository, likely Yucca Mountain in Nevada, is available. The 275
radioactive glass logs also will be removed when the federal
repository opens.

ŠBradford Publishing 2007

Copyright Š 1995 - 2007 Townnews.com All Rights Reserved.
*****************************************************************
 55 AFP: US to power up global interest in nuclear energy - (GNEP)

Tue May 22, 12:48 AM

WASHINGTON (AFP) - The United States sought to boost nuclear power
in the global energy mix Monday, by hosting China, France, Japan and
Russia at the first meeting of the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership.

President George W. Bush has pledged 250 million dollars for 2007 to
promote nuclear energy as an alternative to carbon-burning
electrical plants, which emit so-called greenhouse gases that
scientists have blamed for climate change.

But another key goal is controlling distribution of nuclear power
technology and materials to prevent proliferation of nuclear weapons.

"An important objective for our meeting today will be to lay out the
next steps of the partnership," US Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman
said as he opened the GNEP meeting.

Along with China, France, Japan and Russia, observers from the
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and British government
officials sat in on the meeting Monday.

Australia is also understood to be potentially interested in joining
the GNEP club.

"Many countries have expressed interest in joining GNEP, and we need
to discuss how to achieve the major objectives and work with new
countries," said Bodman, a former professor of chemical engineering.

The US advanced the idea behind GNEP in March, during a meeting of
the Group of Eight (G8) industrialized nations in Moscow.

The US wants GNEP to organize countries that have secure, advanced
nuclear capabilities to provide fuel to other nations who agree to
use nuclear energy just for power generation under the aegis of IAEA.

In exchange, the fuel purchasers would renounce plans to enrich and
recycle fuel.

France has 58 nuclear reactors providing about 78 percent of the
country's electricity output and has given its support in principle
to the American initative.

"France understands the aspirations of states that want to tap the
benefits of nuclear energy," said Alain Bugat, the general
administrator of the French atomic energy agency (CEA).

"We're happy that initiatives have been launched in response to such
aspirations," he said.

"The implementation of this initative enhances the cumulative effect
of the other initiatives and mechanisms in this field," said Nikolay
Spasskiy, a deputy director of Russia's atomic energy agency.

Russia has launched a separate international program to address
nuclear energy issues.

GNEP members agreed to meet again in September on the sidelines of
the IAEA general assembly in Vienna.

Bodman called Monday's meeting a "general discussion" and
"productive."

The United States has not built a nuclear energy plant since the
Three Mile Island accident in Pennsylvania in 1979. There are 100
nuclear power plants in operation across America producing about 20
percent of US power.

Copyright Š 2007 Yahoo! Canada Co. All Rights Reserved.  Privacy
*****************************************************************
 56 DOE: Statement from Energy Secretary Samuel W. Bodman on the 
Introduction of Legislation to Expand the SPR

May 21, 2007

"I commend Senator Thad Cochran and Congressmen Ralph Hall, Joe
Barton, Nick Lampson, and Chip Pickering for introducing legislation
today to increase the capacity of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve to
1.5 billion barrels.  This will further protect America against
severe disruptions to our oil supply by increasing the Reserve over
the next 20 years to hold over three months of net import
protection.  Expanding the Strategic Petroleum Reserve will ensure
adequate supplies of fuel to citizens across the country in case of
supply disruption."

"In his State of the Union Address earlier this year, President Bush
called on Congress to double the Reserve's current capacity.  I urge
Congress to pass this legislation quickly to further bolster our
nation's energy security."

Media contact(s):
Megan Barnett, (202) 586-4940 

  
 U.S. Department of Energy | 1000 Independence Ave., SW | 
Washington, DC 20585 1-800-dial-DOE | f/202-586-4403

*****************************************************************
 57 Hanford News: Hanford safety expo starts today

This story was published Tuesday, May 22nd, 2007

By the Herald staff

Hanford's popular Health and Safety Expo will be from 7 a.m. to 7 
p.m. today and Wednesday at TRAC off Road 68 in Pasco.

Last year, the free expo drew 47,000 people, ranging from Hanford 
workers to school groups. The event showcases safety innovations 
developed at the Hanford nuclear reservation and information 
about safety and health at work and home.

More than 150 booths are planned this year. Demonstrations will be
presented throughout the event on yoga, stretching in the work
place, using exercise balls and karate. A bicycle rodeo will be held
both days at 4:30 p.m.

A vehicle crash demonstration showing a re-enactment of an accident
caused by a suspected drunken driver will be at 10 a.m., 2 p.m. and
5:30 p.m. each day.

Law enforcement agencies, Mel's Inter City Collision, the Franklin
County coroner and Columbia Memorial Funeral Chapel will participate
in the drama, which includes a demonstration of the jaws-of-life to
rescue accident victims.

Law enforcement officers also will be demonstrating the work of
police dogs and providing information on driving safety and bicycle
safety.

The Eastern Washington Chapter of the Academy of Hazardous Materials
Managers will be collecting used cell phones that are in good
working order to donate to charities in the Mid-Columbia.

The chief supporters of the event are the Department of Energy,
Fluor Hanford, Washington Closure Hanford, Pacific Northwest
National Laboratory and AdvanceMed Hanford.

There is no charge for parking, and food will be sold.

&copy 2007 Tri-City Herald. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 58 Recordnet.com: Livermore Lab plans annual burn

Tuesday May 22, 2007 -

By The Record

TRACY - Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory could begin an annual
controlled burn as early as next Tuesday at its high-explosives test
range southwest of Tracy, known as Site 300.

The burn schedule is dependent on appropriate weather conditions,
which meteorologists confirm the day of the burn, according to the
lab. Site 300 neighbors listed in the controlled burn plan will be
notified when a burn is to occur.

Controlled burn plan documents are available at the Tracy Public
Library, at 20 E. Eaton Ave., or online at www-envirinfo.llnl.gov/.

For more information, call Scott Wilson in the lab's public affairs
office at (925) 423-3125.

Reader Reaction These discussions and our forums are not moderated.
We rely on users to police themselves, and flag inappropriate
comments and behavior. You need not be registered to report abuse.
In accordance with our Terms of Service, we reserve the right to
remove any post at any time for any reason, and will restrict access
of registered users who repeatedly violate our terms. Click here if
you wish to report inappropriate comments or behavior.

Copyright Š 1998 - 2007 ONI Stockton, Inc., All Rights Reserved. 

For more info contact webmaster@recordnet.com
*****************************************************************
 59 KnoxNews: Regulators, DOE dispute OR cleanup deadlines

By FRANK MUNGER, munger@knews.com
May 22, 2007

OAK RIDGE - The U.S. Department of Energy is now in a "formal 
dispute" with environmental regulators, ratcheting up their 
ongoing disagreement over cleanup deadlines in Oak Ridge.

DOE has said there isn't enough money in this year's and next 
year's budgets to meet some previously agreed-upon milestones, 
and the three parties - DOE, the Tennessee Department of 
Environment and Conservation, and the U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency - met earlier this month in Chattanooga to 
discuss the situation.

No agreement was reached, but a DOE spokesman said Monday that a
resolution to their differences could be close.

"I think all parties were definitely looking at the situation from
the same perspective," DOE public affairs chief John Shewairy said
of the meeting. "I think we can get this back on track."

State officials previously said they were not willing to budge on
the cleanup milestones for 2007 and 2008 and indicated that DOE
could face fines and penalties. They refused to accept budget
shortfalls as a reason for deferring cleanup commitments.

However, John Owsley, the state's environmental oversight chief in
Oak Ridge, said Monday that the state and EPA have agreed to
renegotiate some of those near-term deadlines to "encourage" DOE to
commit to more cleanup milestones in 2009.

The biggest concern is getting the Oak Ridge cleanup work completed
by 2016, the long-term deadline established under an accelerated
plan signed in 2002, Owsley said.

"We'll hold DOE to the accelerated cleanup plan," he said.

The state has not changed its position regarding the level of
cleanup or the overall goals of the program, but there is a
willingness to discuss deadlines for the next three years to end the
impasse, Owsley said.

DOE doesn't have enough money in this year's budget to meet all of
its cleanup commitments, and there's also a reported shortfall in
the proposed budget for 2008.

Apparently because of the budget situation, DOE has refused to agree
to a list of enforceable milestones for 2009.

A "dispute resolution committee" was convened May 8 in Chattanooga
to try to work things out. Attending were: Steve McCracken, DOE's
environmental cleanup chief in Oak Ridge; Franklin Hill, acting
director of the Superfund Division at EPA's Region 4 office in
Atlanta; and Charles Head, senior director of land programs for the
Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation.

With no decision reached, a formal dispute was declared. That means
a senior executive committee of the three parties would meet,
including Gerald Boyd, DOE's Oak Ridge manager; Jim Fyke, the
commissioner of TDEC; and James Palmer, the regional administrator
of EPA.

"We are prepared to work with them on the (near-term) schedule,
provided they continue to plan for a 2016 completion date," Owsley
said.

Shewairy said the dispute does not mean DOE is wavering on its
promise to clean up the pollution created during the Cold War
nuclear operations in Oak Ridge.

The only change is that some timelines might need to be adjusted to
meet demands on the federal budget, he said.

"We will finish the cleanup," Shewairy said. "I can say that without
hesitation."

Senior writer Frank Munger may be reached at 865-342-6329.

 Copyright 2007, Knoxville News Sentinel Co.
*****************************************************************
 60 KFDA: Pantex Guards Tested by Strike

NewsChannel 10 / Amarillo, TX: newschannel10.com - 

05.18.07

"The Pantex Guard's Union is like a family if someone gets a bad
need, someone will step in and fill the area of need," says Brumley.


Five weeks without a paycheck is starting to test some Pantex guards
on strike. NewsChannel 10's Marissa Bagg explains how one Amarillo
family is making ends meet while standing their ground.

Supporting a family without a steady income is posing quite a
challenge for those on the picket lines. Most people we spoke with
are having to find work elsewhere for the time being.

Construction work is what Tony Brumley is turning to, to provide for
his family.

"To keep the money coming in. It's always hard not to have your
normal paycheck," says Brumley.

In return his family gives him support.

"I like coming out and having fun, holding the signs," says Calob,
Brumley's son.

"At times it's stressful, but we just pray and god is getting us
through it, everything is there when we need it," says Cindy,
Brumley's wife.

Tony says they are cutting back to try and cut costs, but it's
gotten to the point where Cindy is also looking for work.

"I babysit, I've started cleaning a couple's home from church and
they're paying me hourly to do that, we're just playing it day by
day," says Cindy.

Tony find comfort knowing that is the going gets rough, he can turn
to the picket line for help.

"The Pantex Guard's Union is like a family if someone gets a bad
need, someone will step in and fill the area of need," says Brumley. 

The PGU has rejected two offers from Pantex. To which the company
says they are disappointed. There is no set date as to when contract
negotiations will resume.

 All content Š Copyright 2000 - 2007 WorldNow and KFDA. All Rights
Reserved.
    
*****************************************************************

NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 this 
material is distributed without profit or payment to those who 
have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for 
non-profit research and educational purposes only. For more 
information go to: 
<http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml> 
    
*****************************************************************