***************************************************************** 07/22/07 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 15.170 ***************************************************************** RADBULL IS PRODUCED BY THE ABALONE ALLIANCE CLEARINGHOUSE ***************************************************************** Send News Stories to news@energy-net.org with title on subject line and first line of body NUCLEAR POLICY 1 US: deseretnews.com: Utahns back alternative fuels 2 US: newsobserver.com: Major holes found in renewable energy bill 3 Seacoastonline.com: Becoming energy independent 4 AFP: US reaping whirlwind of resurgent Russia - 5 Indiatimes: A step towards ending nuclear isolation 6 inhua: China to increase subsidy for war, nuclear veterans 7 Reuters: Russian environmentalists attacked, one killed NUCLEAR REACTORS 8 [NYTr] The Earthquake that Screamed "No Nukes!" 9 US: [progchat_action] Atomic Blowback 10 [progchat_action] Kashiwazaki & the Future of Nuclear Power 11 The New Face of Nuclear Power (Same as the Old) 12 Quakes, Fires and Leaks at the World's Largest Nuke - Rattling the R 13 AFP: Official inspection begins at Japan's quake-hit nuclear plant - 14 AU ABC: Govt climate change initiatives a 'PR exercise' - 15 US: Columbia Daily Tribune: Ameren shows interest in adding second r 16 The Hindu: Sinha opposes nuclear deal 17 The Hindu: Scientists hail nuclear deal 18 The Hindu: Nuclear talks satisfactory 19 The Hindu: Stand after studying details - CPI(M) 20 Daily Yomiuri: N-plant shows scars of quake 21 US: St. Louis Post-Dispatch: Ameren says Callaway the site if it bui 22 Daily Yomiuri: Govt OK's IAEA check of quake-hit nuclear plant 23 Daily Yomiuri:: NUCLEAR POWER ON SHAKY GROUND / No price too high to 24 Times of India: There's Nothing To Fear- 25 TheStar.com: Nuclear power plant keeps neighbours in dark 26 TheStar.com: Lack of ideas at the top over energy 27 US: North County Time: Edison: We're ready for quake at San Onofre 28 Calgary Sun: Nuclear plant plans still in works 29 US: newsobserver.com: Few nuclear negatives 30 DW: Vattenfall Idles a Second German Nuclear Plant | Germany | 31 Border Mail: Greenpeace hits buddies club 32 Border Mail: Clean energy is ready now 33 The Hindu: Nuclear talks satisfactory - DAE 34 US: Tennessean: Following energy rules may cost TVA - 35 US: Rutland Herald: Vt. Yankee employee fails drug test 36 US: Salt Lake Tribune: Don't go nuclear 37 US: Salt Lake Tribune: Nuclear not clean 38 US: Salt Lake Tribune: Nuclear no alternative 39 US: Salt Lake Tribune: The nuclear option: Nuclear power no panacea 40 Daily Herald: Early test says thorium still poisoning suburb 41 FT.com: Energy Utilities Mining - Tepco counts cost of earthquake 42 Guardian Unlimited: IAEA Sought for Japan Nuke Inspection 43 AFP: Sarkozy wants all-French energy giant: report - 44 UPI: Inspection requested for nuke plant 45 US: Wisconsin State Journal: Nuclear power deserves chance 46 Guardian Unlimited: N. Korea Wants Reactors for Nukes 47 US: MHNN: Reps want NRC to return Indian Point penalty money to loca 48 AFP: Tokyo Electric to suffer massive costs following quake - 49 Edmonton Journal: Nuclear power only one option 50 The Telegraph: Behind nuke deal, a spymaster tale 51 Reuters: Quake-hit Japan region calls for IAEA inspectors 52 US: Sarasota Herald Tribune: Not-so-clean nuclear energy NUCLEAR SECURITY 53 US: LA Daily News: Monitors being tested at L.A. ports 54 US: UPI: Bombs biggest terrorist threat NUCLEAR SAFETY 55 Daily Yomiuri: Damaged firefighting pipe kept plant workers at bay NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE 56 Las Vegas SUN: Clinton wants Senate hearing for Yucca Mt. alternativ 57 de.indymedia.org: Truckloads of Gorleben seismic data destroyed 58 The Hindu: India insisted on refuel for reactors lifetime 59 US: ScrippsNews: Uranium mines in the West slowly creaking back to l 60 Las Vegas SUN: Clinton ups the ante on Yucca Mountain 61 US: CST: Who will survive the uranium boom? 62 ReviewJournal.com: Yucca water dispute brews 63 Border Mail: PM: No nuke waste here 64 US: NEWS.com.au: Uranium conference draws heavies | 65 US: Carlsbad Current-Argus: WIPP: Option for Greater than Class C wa 66 Salt Lake Tribune: Clinton urges alternatives to nuke dump 67 US: Edmonton Journal : Contamination shuts down Cameco plant in Onta 68 US: Buffalo News: Radioactive debris to be removed from road PEACE US DEPT. OF ENERGY 69 SF New Mexican: DOE considers N.M. for nuclear waste disposal 70 Tri-City Herald: DOE might bury more radioactive waste at Hanford 71 Recordnet.com: Potentially explosive situation develops 72 LA Daily News: Santa Susana cleanup halted 73 Knoxville News Sentinel: Sick and still looking for answers 74 Knoxville News Sentinel: Mystery lingers following arrest 75 Knoxville News Sentinel: Some feel excluded from claim meeting ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** FULL NEWS STORIES ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** 1 deseretnews.com: Utahns back alternative fuels Saturday, July 21, 2007 Polled residents want to fight global warming Copyright 2007 Deseret Morning News By Joe Bauman Deseret Morning News By enormous margins, Utahns want alternative fuels developed in a fight against global warming. Their support even extends to the construction of nuclear power plants. Soaring concentrations of carbon dioxide, methane and other gases are caused by power plant emissions, vehicle exhaust and the destruction of forests that otherwise would convert carbon dioxide to oxygen. Mankind's carbon footprint stretches from airliners streaking contrails across the sky to pig farms wafting up methane. According to the U.S. Department of Energy, carbon dioxide in the atmosphere amounted to 280 parts per million in pre-industrial times. Now the gas is at about 375 ppm, up by a third. The dramatically higher CO2 concentration is suspected of locking in more of the sun's warmth, causing a gradual worldwide heating. When glaciers melt, polar bears drown and deserts grow, demands for action reach a crescendo. A minority opinion is that humans are not the main reason for global warming or they are, indeed, blameless. This argument attributes climate change to long-term natural cycles. Lawmakers' concerns But according to Utah's state energy adviser, Dianne Nielson, regardless of the cause, people can be part of the solution. During a meeting of the Legislature's Public Utilities and Technology Interim Committee this week, Rep. Michael E. Noel, R-Kanab, asked Nielson what is meant by greenhouse gases. Methane and other gases, called carbon-dioxide equivalents, she replied. In coal-fired power plants, she added, a principal emission is carbon dioxide. This colorless and odorless gas resists attempts to capture it in large-scale generating plants. Methods to reduce emissions range from using alternative fuels to pumping carbon dioxide underground to placing such a high "carbon tax" on fossil fuels that people are forced to use alternatives such as wind-driven generators and nuclear power. Noel asked her if one has to "buy into the theory" that global warming is human-caused to support an agenda to limit emissions. "I don't think that's necessarily true," Nielson replied. "We need to be in the process of controlling these emissions" to effect climate change. Reducing greenhouse gases "will make a difference in terms of climate change," she said. Nielson added that developing diverse energy sources also will help industry and allow Utah to "be able to continue to be a part of the economy in the West.... If we are to compete, this is an important issue to deal with." One alternative that has been gaining ground rapidly is the use of fuels made from biological material, as opposed to fossil fuels. Ethanol and other fuel made from organic material are already in use. During the interim committee meeting, Rep. Steve Mascaro, R-West Jordan, asked Nielson if agricultural bio-mass fuel production is part of the energy-diversity discussion. "It is," she said, "and it has been in terms of generation of fuels from corn, which is a significant component of the ethanol production." Also, she said, animal waste could be used to generate fuel. She said the waste component may be more useful in this state because of the great number of livestock here. What Utahns think Utahns overwhelmingly agree with Nielson about the importance of developing new fuel sources, according to a Deseret Morning News-KSL TV survey, carried out by Dan Jones & Associates June 26 to 28. With 410 people interviewed statewide, the poll has a possible error rate of plus or minus 5 percent. Asked whether they thought it's a good idea to make major changes in sources, such as switching to renewable energy, 46 percent said it was definitely good and 39 percent said it was probably good, for a combined total of 85 percent positive. "Probably bad" was the answer of 4 percent, and "definitely bad" accounted for 2 percent, meaning 6 percent were opposed. (Three percent said it "depends," and 6 percent did not know.) To say there's a groundswell of enthusiasm for non-traditional energy is an understatement. Responses were not exclusive, with residents expressing approval or disapproval of six energy sources. Those surveyed were asked if they favor government investment and incentives to encourage development of various ways to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases. Listed in order of their popularity with Utahns, these are: ? The greatest support goes to energy efficiency and conservation, with 94 percent of those surveyed saying they would definitely or probably support this option. Those opposed amount to only 3 percent, with the remaining 3 percent uncertain. ? Solar power seems like a solid investment to 92 percent, with most (64 percent of the total) saying they definitely support developments in this field and 28 percent agreeing that government probably should support it. Opposed were 4 percent. ? Wind power incentives are favored by 90 percent, with 7 percent opposed. ? Geothermal power, using the heat inside Earth to generate power, gained the support of 80 percent: 45 percent definitely supporting providing incentives to improve this option, 35 percent saying they probably would. Those opposed to government investment in geothermal energy were 4 percent. ? Support of ethanol and biofuels to power vehicles was approved by 74 percent, but in this case those saying they "probably support" it outnumber the "definitely support." The breakdown is 35 percent think the government definitely should help the budding industry, 39 percent "probably," with 8 percent probably opposed and 8 percent definitely opposed. ? Nuclear power has the least support, but here too the number of people favoring it outnumber those against by a hefty majority. Altogether, 63 percent of Utahns polled like the idea of government investment and incentives for nuclear power while 29 percent oppose it. In this category, too, those saying "definitely" were outnumbered by those giving "probably" answers, 30 percent to 33 percent. Finally, Utahns were grilled on their support for the call by Gov. Jon M. Huntsman Jr. to search for alternative fuels and/or energy technology, although the state is a major coal producer. Sixty percent said they strongly agree with Huntsman; adding the 30 percent who somewhat agree, the positive reaction is 90 percent. Those disagreeing were 6 percent, evenly split between "somewhat" and "strongly opposed." E-mail: bau@desnews.com 2007 Deseret News Publishing Company ***************************************************************** 2 newsobserver.com: Major holes found in renewable energy bill Saturday, July 21, 2007 Lawmakers try to salvage an alternative energy proposal that was years in the making John Murawski, Staff Writer Environmentalist groups have pushed for years for a state policy that requires utilities to develop renewable energy and efficiency programs. But many of those groups are fighting a bill in the General Assembly that includes their long-sought goal. The legislation requires that 12.5 percent of the electricity sold by utilities such as Progress Energy and Duke Energy come from renewable sources and efficiency programs. The measure overwhelmingly passed in the state Senate, but it has bogged down in the House. As opposition increases, state lawmakers spent Thursday and Friday scrambling to salvage the bill. Among the concerns: * Alternative fuels could pollute more than coal-burning power plants. * There could be an increase in hog waste lagoons, because the bill encourages utilities to buy electricity generated from methane gas in the lagoons. * Electric utilities could skimp on efficiency programs and renewables and build large power plants instead. None of these consequences are spelled out in the bill, but they have emerged as issues in recent weeks as lawmakers and activists parsed the proposal. The House Energy and Energy Efficiency Committee is set to vote on the proposal Monday. "Do we want to pursue an energy strategy that's dirtier than coal?" asked Rep. Pricey Harrison, a Guilford County Democrat who leads the committee. "This is incredibly complex, and I don't think any one of us understands all the implications of this bill." Lobbyists, lawyers and legislative staff spent six months crafting the bill in the Senate. It started as a renewables and efficiency proposal and grew into a comprehensive energy policy. Scores of participants attended the negotiations, but only five major environmental organizations did. The legislation that emerged from the talks included sweeteners for many interest groups. The environmentalists won concessions: They were able to raise the minimum requirement from renewables and efficiency from 10 percent to 12.5 percent. And utilities agreed to drop opposition to linking their power grids to industrial-scale solar power units. But some say the utilities won the biggest prize: a provision to pass some of the costs of new power plants to customers years before the plants are built. The state's two Fortune 500 utilities are among the proposal's biggest backers. They say this provision will lower financing costs and save customers money. Opposition grew significantly this month as the bill started being reviewed by the House energy committee. A dozen environmental groups got involved for the first time, and they didn't like what they saw. Groups such as the Sierra Club that considered the bill flawed all along continued seeking an opening to make revisions. Still, several environmental groups that negotiated the bill stand by it. They say the benefits far outweigh the disadvantages, and that the bill's drawbacks are overblown. The bill contains a new state tax credit for energy efficient homes and a renewable tax break for nonprofit groups, said Ivan Urlaub, executive director of N.C. Sustainable Energy Association. "We've got buy-in from every major stakeholder except for this number of environmental organizations," Urlaub said. "We see an insane amount of opportunity to rapidly move our utilities toward good climate-change solutions. This is just a first step to wean ourselves off our total dependence on coal and nuclear." Less than 2 percent of the state's electricity comes from renewables and efficiency programs. The proposal would raise the minimum to 12.5 percent for Raleigh-based Progress and Charlotte-based Duke by 2021, and to 10 percent for municipal utilities and electric cooperatives by 2018. Next page > Staff writer John Murawski can be reached at 829-8932 or john.murawski@newsobserver.com. Likely changes: UTILITIES WOULDN'T BE ALLOWED TO BUILD nuclear or coal plants unless they can prove that renewable resources and conservation programs can't meet energy needs. newsobserver.com ***************************************************************** 3 Seacoastonline.com: Becoming energy independent By Elizabeth Kenny ekenny@seacoastonline.com July 21, 2007 6:00 AM PORTSMOUTH Check the news and you can easily find where each presidential candidate stands on the war in Iraq, the economy and health care. Less publicized but still issues for all candidates are energy independence and the use of nuclear power. On Tuesday, Sen. Hillary Clinton will attend Seacoast Media Group's second candidate forum, where she is expected to discuss energy and the environment. Top Republican and Democratic candidates all say the country must become energy-independent; however, they have different ideas concerning the path toward that goal. Hillary Clinton The New York senator has introduced legislation that would create a Strategic Energy Fund, which would give $50 billion for research and deployment of clean energy to help America become energy independent. Clinton would prefer using renewables and other energy sources. Kathleen Strand, the senator's communication director in New Hampshire, said, "Sen. Clinton has real concerns about nuclear energy. It's costly, poses significant health and safety risks, and produces long-lived waste that we have yet to determine how to safely dispose of. In addition, Sen. Clinton has concerns about the security of nuclear energy plants in a world with suicidal terrorists." Rudy Giuliani The former New York mayor has said that America needs new oil refineries, nuclear reactors, transmission lines and renewable energy facilities in order to reduce America's dependence on other countries. He has questioned why America has not built a new nuclear plant in 30 years. "Nuclear energy is dangerous, but so is every form of energy. Any one of them can have an accident. So you have to be careful, you have to have very strict safety procedures. You have to have very strict safety regiments and so far for nuclear they've worked. The same thing is going to be true for all oil, same thing for coal." John McCain The Arizona senator says use of nuclear power is a must due to the threat of global warming and the need to limit carbon emissions. McCain calls nuclear power safe and green, and points to the fact that it has been used on Navy ships for the past 60 years. "I strongly believe nuclear energy can and should play an even greater role, not because I have some inordinate love affair with splitting the atom, but for the very simple reason that we must support sustainable, zero-emission alternatives such as nuclear if we are serious about addressing the problem of global warming." Barack Obama Obama calls America's dependence on oil the country's Achilles heel. The Illinois senator has introduced multiple bills to help the country become independent, including one that would help auto makers afford the cost of retirees' health care in an effort to increase the number of production of fuel-efficient hybrid vehicles. "I believe that a responsible energy policy must keep all possible energy sources on the table, whether it's wind, solar, hydropower or nuclear. Nuclear power represents more than 70 percent of our non-carbon generated electricity. "However, I will only support increased investment into nuclear power if the federal government first address three issues: the public's right-to-know about potential leaks from power plants; the security of spent nuclear fuel; and the storage of nuclear waste." Bill Richardson Richardson, New Mexico's governor, served as the secretary of the Department of Energy from 1998 to 2002. He has since called for what he calls an "aggressive" new national renewable portfolio standard of 30 percent by 2020. Richardson said he would also like to see America begin talking with the international community to create and support worldwide limits on the pollution that causes global warming. "While nuclear power produces no carbon emissions, it is not without its environmental problems. Building new plants or expanding existing facilities cannot occur until a solution has been found for the safe storage and disposal of nuclear waste. In the meantime, we should end subsidies for nuclear energy and instead invest in renewable energies such as solar, wind and biomass to address our energy needs." Mitt Romney Romney is calling for an "energy revolution," with the mission to find and create new sources of clean energy. The former Massachusetts governor suggests licensing America's technology to other nations while employing it at home. "We must finally take the necessary steps to actually produce as much energy as we use. This may take 20 years or more. ... Energy independence will also mean pursuing our ample domestic sources of energy: more drilling offshore and in Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, nuclear power, renewable sources like ethanol, biodiesel, solar, wind, and full exploitation of coal solid and liquid." Copyright 2007 Seacoast Media Group. The Seacoast Media Group ***************************************************************** 4 AFP: US reaping whirlwind of resurgent Russia - by Jitendra Joshi Sun Jul 22, 5:51 PM ET WASHINGTON (AFP) - Barely three weeks have passed since the United States and Russia angled to patch up their differences at a "lobster summit" and already new strains have exploded into the open. Since the meeting between presidents George W. Bush and Vladimir Putin, Russia has suspended a treaty limiting conventional forces in Europe while it is now locked in a diplomatic standoff with staunch US ally Britain. And Moscow has issued a veiled threat to deploy rockets on the European Union's border in response to US missile defense plans, throwing oil on the fire of the biggest escalation in tensions since the Cold War. For all the bonhomie he likes to project into his encounters with Putin, Bush stands accused of missing serial opportunities for better relations by unnecessarily antagonizing Russia. "The Bush administration could have pursued quite similar policies yet not ended up with so much friction had its diplomacy been more tactful," Georgetown University professor of international relations Charles Kupchan said. "The Russians in many respects feel slighted, as if they have been ignored by the United States," said Kupchan, who headed national security affairs for Europe in Bill Clinton's White House. Putin was brushed aside when he rallied to the US cause after the September 11 attacks of 2001, pundits say. Weeks after those strikes, Bush announced that the United States was abandoning the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty. The US withdrawal from the ABM pact, a cornerstone of attempts to prevent the Cold War from turning hot, allowed Bush to press ahead with his anti-missile defense scheme -- a decision that is now coming home to roost. "It's been a propaganda windfall for Putin," commented F. Stephen Larrabee, a Russia expert at the RAND Corp. security consultancy. "The administration totally mishandled missile defense from the beginning and now they've backed themselves into a corner," he said. On Thursday, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice weighed in on an acrimonious dispute between Russia and Britain over the murder of an ex-KGB agent in London that last week saw tit-for-tat expulsions of diplomats. Rice demanded that Russia honor Britain's request to extradite the chief suspect over the radioactive poisoning of Alexander Litvinenko, but insisted that the West did not now face a new Cold War with Moscow. "Russia is not the Soviet Union," she told Britain's Sky News television, as Moscow has promised cooperation on North Korea and there is some common ground on Iran's nuclear ambitions and even missile defense. But there are also "some very, very deep troubles," Rice said, detailing setbacks to democracy in Russia and concerns that Putin's government is using its vast energy resources "somehow as a political tool." Some of those troubles were brushed over when Bush hosted Putin, in early July, to a summit heavy on seafood and symbolism at his parents' summer retreat at Kennebunkport in Maine. "Relations have been on a downward trajectory for at least a year and the summit simply didn't do anything about it," Larrabee said. Flushed with cash from booming oil prices, Putin's government is seen as reasserting a muscular foreign policy after the ignominies of Russia's economic collapse in the 1990s. Unable to put up much resistance to NATO's eastwards expansion, Russia is now full of sound and fury over what it sees as Western incursions into its own backyard in places such as Georgia and Ukraine. On hot-button issues like prospective independence for the Serbian province of Kosovo, Putin has stood firm against a US administration that looks enfeebled diplomatically as it battles to hold the line in Iraq. "The most delicate issues on the table now are Kosovo and Iran, where Russian intransigence could be quite consequential," Kupchan said. A potential successor to Putin in elections next March, first deputy prime minister Sergei Ivanov, accuses the United States of building a "new Berlin wall" with its planned missile defenses in Poland and the Czech Republic. "The Russian electoral calendar is playing a big role. Ivanov is a moderate nationalist very much in Putin's own mould. Both are appealing to Russian nationalism by standing tough against the West," Larrabee said. Copyright 2007 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The ***************************************************************** 5 Indiatimes: A step towards ending nuclear isolation 23 Jul, 2007, 0255 hrs IST, TNN A Week of hard negotiations appears to have finally culminated in Indian and US negotiators finalising the text of the 123 agreement. Although details are not available we understand that the negotiators have been able to settle the two contentious issues. The US has agreed to India reprocessing US-origin spent fuel in a facility under IAEA safeguards. The text also reportedly uses forward-looking language in relation to Indias access to enrichment technologies. This means India would not have to renegotiate the deal in order to access such technologies. Though there was no prohibition under the Hyde Act, the US in pursuit of its non-proliferation agenda, allows reprocessing and enrichment only for close allies such as Japan. Extending this to India honours the PMs assurance to Parliament on access to the full nuclear cycle. The other deal-breaker related to the US terminating nuclear co-operation in the event of a Indian nuclear test. The compromise solution is that the US would have to ensure supplies from a third country. As we have argued, testing is a low probability event. Indias priority is not to make bigger bombs, but rapid economic growth to take advantage of globalisation. The agreement would have to be approved by the Indian Cabinet and the US political leadership. Subsequently the US Congress gets to vote on the deal. India would also have to reach agreements with the IAEA and the nuclear suppliers group, though this should not be difficult with US support. The move is sure to face frenzied opposition at home, particularly from the Left. Since the Left is opposed to better ties with the US its preferred policy option is for India to join the Hugo Chavez-led global resistance to imperialism nothing much can be done except to face them down. A positive outcome would mean the ending of the regime of in place since 1974, which has denied India access to uranium ore and technology and has kept nuclear-fired capacity at 3,000 MW. Canada and Australia, major producers of uranium, will only supply to India once the 123 agreement, along with deals with the IAEA and the NSG, is in place. Recognition of India as a nation with advanced nuclear technology would mark a natural progression for globalising India. Copyright 2007 Times Internet Limited. All rights reserved. For ***************************************************************** 6 inhua: China to increase subsidy for war, nuclear veterans Updated: 2007-07-22 20:41 BEIJING -- China is to increase subsidy for retired servicemen who were recruited after November 1954 and had fought battles and those who participated nuclear tests beginning in August, according to a decision by the Communist Party of China (CPC) Central Committee and the State Council. Beginning from August 1, allowances will be offered to veterans who joined the service after November 1, 1954 and had fought battles," says the decision. The policy concerning allowances for veterans who had participated in nuclear tests shall be perfected, the decision says. Policies regarding the provision of medical services and housing for veterans shall also be perfected and more faithfully implemented, the decision says. Since the country's reform and opening-up in late 1970s, the Chinese government has increased allowance for armymen who became handicapped in service for 14 times. Allowance for revolutionary martyears' family members and veterans of the Red Army (the predecessor of the PLA) living rural areas have been raised for 17 times. The move is an important measure on the part of the Party to follow the "people-first" governance concept, apply the scientific concept of development and build a harmonious society, the decision says. The PLA shall mark the 80th anniversary of its founding on August 1, the Army Day. ***************************************************************** 7 Reuters: Russian environmentalists attacked, one killed Sat Jul 21 12:06:52 2007 MOSCOW, July 21 (Reuters) - A Russian environmentalist was beaten to death and seven others wounded on Saturday when a group armed with iron bars and baseball bats attacked their camp near a nuclear waste processing plant in Siberia. Russian media reported up to 15 people shouting fascist slogans attacked the environmentalists, who were living in the camp to protest against nuclear processing in the city of Angarsk near Lake Baikal, 5,000 km (3,125 miles) east of Moscow. "One of the injured died in intensive care as a result of the attack," Ekho Moskvy radio station quoted one of the environmental activists, Olga Kozlova, as saying. Another resident of the camp, Marina Popova, said the attackers shouted slogans against anti-fascists. "From that we can conclude they were Nazis or skinheads", she told the Vesti-24 television channel, blood seeping through a bandage wrapped around her head. Environmentalists have not previously been the target of violent attacks in Russia, where skinhead gangs have assaulted and killed people from ethnic and religious minority groups in the past. Itar-Tass news agency said the man killed on Saturday was a 20-year-old from the far eastern port city of Nakhodka. Thirteen attackers had been identified and four had already been arrested, said Interior Ministry spokesman Valery Gribakin. "Those arrested denied any involvement with any extremist youth group," Gribakin was quoted by Ekho Moskvy as saying. ***************************************************************** 8 [NYTr] The Earthquake that Screamed "No Nukes!" Date: Sat, 21 Jul 2007 03:02:27 -0500 (CDT) Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit sent by Ed Pearl Counterpunch, July 20, 2007 http://www.counterpunch.org/wasserman07202007.html Lies and Leaks: The Earthquake That Screamed "No Nukes!" By HARVEY WASSERMAN The massive earthquake that shook Japan this week nearly killed millions in a nuclear apocalypse. It also produced one of the most terrifying sentences ever buried in a newspaper. As reported deep in the New York Times, the Tokyo Electric Company has admitted that "the force of the shaking caused by the earthquake had exceeded the design limits of the reactors, suggesting that the plant's builders had underestimated the strength of possible earthquakes in the region." There are 55 reactors in Japan. Virtually all of them are on or near major earthquake faults. Kashiwazaki alone hosts seven, four of which were forced into the dangerous SCRAM mode to narrowly avoid meltdowns. At least 50 separate serious problems have been so far identified, including fire and the spillage of barrels filled with radioactive wastes. There are four active reactors in California on or near major earthquake faults, as are the two at Indian Point north of New York City. On January 31, 1986, an earthquake struck the Perry reactor east of Cleveland, knocking out roads and bridges, as well as pipes within the plant, which (thankfully) was not operating at the time. The governor of Ohio, then Richard Celeste, sued to keep Perry shut, but lost in federal court. The fault that hit Perry is an off-shoot of the powerful New Madrid line that runs through the Mississippi River Valley, threatening numerous reactors. The Beyond Nuclear Project reports that in August, 2004, a quake hit the Dresden reactor in Illinois, resulting in a leak of radioactive tritium. Nevada's Yucca Mountain, slated as the nation's high-level radioactive waste dump, has a visible fault line running through it. More than 400 atomic reactors are on-line worldwide. How many are vulnerable to seismic shocks we can only shudder to guess. But one-eighth of them sit in one of the world's richest, most technologically advanced, most densely populated industrial nations, which has now admitted its reactor designs cannot match the power an earthquake that has just happened. In whatever language it's said, that translates into the unmistakable warning that the world's atomic reactors constitute a multiple, ticking seismic time bomb. Talk of building more can only be classified as suicidal irresponsibility. Tokyo Electric's behavior since the quake defines the industry's credibility. For three consecutive days (with more undoubtedly to come) the utility has been forced to issue public apologies for erroneous statements about the severity of the damage done to the reactors, the size and lethality of radioactive spills into the air and water, the on-going danger to the public, and much more. Once again, the only thing reactor owners can be trusted to do is to lie. Prior to the March 28, 1979 disaster at Three Mile Island, the industry for years assured the public that the kind of accident that did happen was "impossible." Then the utility repeatedly assured the public there had been no melt-down of fuel and no danger of further catastrophe. Nine years later a robotic camera showed that nearly all the fuel had melted, and that avoiding a full-blown catastrophe was little short of a miracle. The industry continues to say no one was killed at TMI. But it does not know how much radiation was released, where it went or who it might have harmed. Since 1979 its allies in the courts have denied 2400 central Pennsylvania families the right to test their belief that they and their loved ones have been killed and maimed en masse. Prior to its April 26, 1986, explosion, Soviet Life Magazine ran a major feature extolling the virtually "accident-proof design" of Chernobyl Unit Four. Then the former Soviet Union of Mikhail Gorbachev kept secret the gargantuan radiation releases that have killed thousands and yielded a horrific plague of cancers, leukemia, birth defects and more throughout the region, and among the more than 800,000 drafted "jumpers" who were forced to run through the plant to clean it up. Since the terror attacks of September 11, 2001, the industry has claimed its reactors can withstand the effects of a jet crash, and are immune to sabotage. The claims are as patently absurd as the lies about TMI and Chernobyl. So, too, the endless, dogged assurances from Japan that no earthquake could do to Kashiwazaki what has just happened. Yet today and into the future, expensive ads will flood the US and global airwaves, full of nonsense about the "need" for new nukes. There is only one thing we know for certain about this advertising: it is a lie. Atomic reactors contribute to global warming rather than abating it. In construction, in the mining, milling and enriching of the fuel, in on-going "normal" releases of heat and radioactivity, in dismantling and decommissioning, in managing radioactive wastes, in future terror attacks, in proliferation of nuke weapons, and much much more, atomic energy is an unmitigated eco-disaster. To this list we must now add additional tangible evidence that reactors allegedly built to withstand "worst case" earthquakes in fact cannot. And when they go down, the investment is lost, and power shortages arise (as is now happening in Japan) that are filled by the burning of fossil fuels. It costs up to ten times as much to produce energy from a nuke as to save it with efficiency. Advances in wind, solar and other green "Solartopian" technologies mean atomic energy simply cannot compete without massive subsidies, loan guarantees and government insurance to protect it from catastrophes to come. This latest "impossible" earthquake has not merely shattered the alleged safeguards of Japan's reactor fleet. It has blown apart---yet again---any possible argument for building more reactors anywhere on this beleaguered Earth. [Harvey Wasserman helped co-ordinate media for the Clamshell Alliance, 1976-8. He was arrested at Diablo Canyon in 1984 and at Seabrook in 1989. He is author of "Solartopia: Our Green-Powered Earth, A.D. 2030," He can be reached at: Windhw@aol.com] * ================================================================ .NY Transfer News Collective * A Service of Blythe Systems . Since 1985 - Information for the Rest of Us . .339 Lafayette St., New York, NY 10012 http://www.blythe.org .List Archives: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/pipermail/nytr/ .Subscribe: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/mailman/listinfo/nytr ================================================================ ***************************************************************** 9 [progchat_action] Atomic Blowback Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2007 00:52:38 -0500 (CDT) CounterPunch -Weekend Edition July 21 / 22, 2007 The New Face of Nuclear Power (Same as the Old) Atomic Blowback By Ralph Nader Here they go again. After thirty years without a firm order, the atomic power companies are pushing their radioactive, costly technology for a comeback on the backs of you the taxpayers. The old argument in the Seventies was that nuclear powered electricity would reduce our dependence on foreign oil. With only three percent of our electricity coming from burning petroleum, the pro-nuke lobby is now jumping on the global warming bandwagon. Uranium, they argue, does not release greenhouse gases like coal or oil. What nuclear lobbies ignore is all the coal and oil that needs to be burned to enrich uranium, to transport radioactive wastes with protective highway and rail convoys and provide security since they would be a priority target for sabotage. Apart from that, let's start with the technological insanity of the nuclear fuel cycle-from uranium mines and their deadly tailings, to the refining and fabrication into fuel rods, to the multi-shielded dome-like nuclear plant, to the necessity for perfect operation of the facility, to the still unresolved problems of the location and containment of hot radioactive wastes and contaminated material for the next 200,000 years! All this for one objective-to boil water into steam. A pretty complex chain of events in order to boil water. There are far better, cheaper ways to meet the electricity needs of today's generation without burdening future generations for centuries with the deadly waste products. Back in the Seventies, before the public rose up and said no to nuclear power, helped by Wall Street's reluctance to finance these trouble-prone plants, the Atomic Energy Commission projected the construction of 1000 atomic power plants in the U.S. by the year 2000. There are today 103 plants. Placing the predicted 100 plants up and down the California coastline would have been an act of peerless recklessness, especially given the earthquake faults. Just this week, a magnitude 6.8 earthquake struck Kashiwazaki, Japan and disabled a gigantic nuclear power plant which the New York Times reported, "raised new concerns about the safety of the nation's accident-plagued nuclear industry." It turns out that this plant, owned by Tokyo Electric Power, may be sitting directly above an earthquake fault line. Each day, reports show damage greater than believed the day before, including radiation leaks, damage to exhaust ducts, burst pipes and other "malfunctions" beyond the fires. Several hundred barrels of radioactive waste were toppled. The problem with nuclear power is that it gets one bite of the apple. Just one major meltdown could provoke a demand to close the industry down by overwhelming adverse public outrage. You see, way back in the Fifties and Sixties, the Atomic Energy Commission, a booster-regulatory agency for atomic power plants, estimated that an "area the size of Pennsylvania" would be contaminated in such a disaster. Remember, Chernobyl in Ukraine is still surrounded by vacant towns and villages following the 1986 tragedy. Radioactivity found its way as far as sheep in England, nuts grown in Turkey and elsewhere. Do you know any other industry producing electricity that has to have specific evacuation plans for miles around it, is inherently a national security risk, cannot be privately insured without Congress mandating severe limited liability in case of massive casualties and requires massive taxpayer subsidies? A most concise, authoritative case against the electric atom was recently released titled "Why a Future for the Nuclear Industry is Risky" by a group of environmental health and social investment groups. (See www.cleanenergy.org) In the introduction to the report, the case against nuclear energy was summarized this way: "Wind power and other renewable technologies, combined with energy efficiency, conservation and cogeneration can be much more cost effective and can be deployed much sooner than new nuclear power plants." Yes indeed, efficiency or conservation, with a national mission, can cut in half the waste of energy, using currently available technology and know-how, before the first privately capitalized nuclear plant opens. One scientist once described the primary output of electric generating plants as "heating the heavens." If this insensitive industry cannot be revived by Uncle Sam's tax treasury, Wall Street certainly has given no indication that private investment would take on the risk. Investment money is pouring presently into wind power, solar and other renewables and this is just the early springtime for these benign sources of energy. The International Energy Agency sees a 25% cost reduction for wind power and a 50% cost reduction for solar photovoltaics from 2001 to 2020. Without Wall Street's private capital and with rising construction and operating costs in other countries, the prospect for nuclear power being competitive, even deducting decommissioning costs, and the many millennia of waste storage costs, is not there. Add a major accident and you'll see, in addition to casualties and contaminated land and property, every private investor running for cover while the bill is passed on to taxpayers. Here is a suggestion to put the industry's propaganda to rest. Will any high nuclear industry executive debate physicist Amory Lovins at the National Press Club filled with electric company leaders? If so, please visit http://www.rmi.org and contact Mr. Lovins. Ralph Nader is the author of The Seventeen Traditions http://www.counterpunch.org/nader07212007.html This email was cleaned by emailStripper, available for free from http://www.papercut.biz/emailStripper.htm ***************************************************************** 10 [progchat_action] Kashiwazaki & the Future of Nuclear Power Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2007 01:06:14 -0500 (CDT) Hello friends, I hope this finds all well. This went out tonight as part of a general post to our local update list, but it is a global, not a local, issue, so I'm sending it out more widely. I'd welcome your responses, citations of other articles, besides the ones I included, that you'd seen, etc. Any and all thoughts are most welcome. Peace, Mark Haim THE JAPANESE EARTHQUAKE AND THE FUTURE OF NUCLEAR POWER: As most of you know, there was a major earthquake in Japan earlier this week and it damaged Kashiwazaki, the world's largest nuclear power plant, the site of seven very large reactors (8,212 megawatts, providing the power for 16 million Japanese). As yet undetermined amounts of radiation escaped into the air and water. Radioactive waste barrels were overturned and in many cases spilled their contents. There were extensive damages to the plant. All seven reactors were shut down, and it appears that this major component of Japan's electric supply may be off-line for a year or longer, at a huge economic cost. And it could have been much, much worse. That's one of the big problems with nuclear power. Given that each large reactor the size of Missouri's Callaway plant has within its core the radiological equivalent of 1,000 Hiroshima bombs, everything has to go right each and every time. Over and over, however, accidents that we were told couldn't happen, do happen. The Japanese were told Kashiwazaki was designed to withstand earthquakes, but it wasn't. Three Mile Island, Chernobyl and dozens of other accidents were, we were told, inconceivable. The industry promises us safety and clean energy, but power from nukes is neither. More than 60 years into the atomic age, we have still to permanently isolate the first drop of nuclear waste. The plants themselves and--once they start moving them--the waste shipments are inviting terror targets. So, not only is nuclear power more costly than efficiency and renewables--the sustainable alternatives--and not only are nukes not the answer to global warming, but, as Kashiwazaki makes clear, nuclear power is a brittle technology. Due to the radiation, repairs that would be quick and simple in a conventional plant, can often take months or years in a nuke. If an unexpected flaw is discovered in one plant, all similar plants may need to be shut down. And imagine what will happen the first time a plane is flown into a reactor releasing a large portion of its deadly radioactive inventory. Millions of people will demand that nearby plants be shut down, leaving the grid desperately short of power, especially if new nuclear plants are built and our dependence is increased. If we're concerned about global climate change wish to see a sustainable energy economy, we must bypass this costly dead-end technology. There are abundant opportunities to move forward today by investing in efficiency improvements, wind power and other renewables. If working for these goals interests you, we'd like to invite you to work with Missourians for Safe Energy. MSE will have it's next meeting at 7 p.m., Thursday, August 9 at the Peace Nook. All are invited to attend. If you'd like to learn more about the Kashiwazaki accident and its implications, please check out: Harvey Wasserman's article "The Earthquake that Screamed 'No Nukes!!'" at: www.freepress.org/columns/display/7/2007/1570 The Nuclear Information & Resource Services' "Report on Earthquake Damage to Japans Kashiwazaki-Kariwa Nuclear Power Facility" at: http://nirs.org/international/asia/reportonearthquakedamage71907.pdf Ralph Nader's article "No Future for Nuclear Power" at: http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/07/21/2673/ New York Times "Japan Nuclear-Site Damage Worse Than Reported" at: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/19/world/asia/19japan.html New York Times "Nuclear Plant Logs 3rd Radiation Leak" at: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/20/world/asia/20leak.html?_r=1&oref=slogin Mid-Missouri Peaceworks 804-C E. Broadway Columbia, MO 65201 573-875-0539 E-mail: mail@midmopeaceworks.org Web site: www.midmopeaceworks.org Check out our News Blog http://www.midmopeaceworks.org/articles.php "Here in America we are descended in blood and in spirit from revolutionists and rebels - men and women who dare to dissent from accepted doctrine. As their heirs, may we never confuse honest dissent with disloyal subversion." -- Dwight David Eisenhower ***************************************************************** 11 The New Face of Nuclear Power (Same as the Old) Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2007 17:59:33 -0500 (CDT) July 21 / 22, 2007 CounterPunch Weekend Edition www.counterpunch.org The New Face of Nuclear Power (Same as the Old) Atomic Blowback By RALPH NADER Here they go again. After thirty years without a firm order, the atomic power companies are pushing their radioactive, costly technology for a comeback on the backs of you the taxpayers. The old argument in the Seventies was that nuclear powered electricity would reduce our dependence on foreign oil. With only three percent of our electricity coming from burning petroleum, the pro-nuke lobby is now jumping on the global warming bandwagon. Uranium, they argue, does not release greenhouse gases like coal or oil. What nuclear lobbies ignore is all the coal and oil that needs to be burned to enrich uranium, to transport radioactive wastes with protective highway and rail convoys and provide security since they would be a priority target for sabotage. Apart from that, let's start with the technological insanity of the nuclear fuel cycle-from uranium mines and their deadly tailings, to the refining and fabrication into fuel rods, to the multi-shielded dome-like nuclear plant, to the necessity for perfect operation of the facility, to the still unresolved problems of the location and containment of hot radioactive wastes and contaminated material for the next 200,000 years! All this for one objective-to boil water into steam. A pretty complex chain of events in order to boil water. There are far better, cheaper ways to meet the electricity needs of today's generation without burdening future generations for centuries with the deadly waste products. Back in the Seventies, before the public rose up and said no to nuclear power, helped by Wall Street's reluctance to finance these trouble-prone plants, the Atomic Energy Commission projected the construction of 1000 atomic power plants in the U.S. by the year 2000. There are today 103 plants. Placing the predicted 100 plants up and down the California coastline would have been an act of peerless recklessness, especially given the earthquake faults. Just this week, a magnitude 6.8 earthquake struck Kashiwazaki, Japan and disabled a gigantic nuclear power plant which the New York Times reported, "raised new concerns about the safety of the nation's accident-plagued nuclear industry." It turns out that this plant, owned by Tokyo Electric Power, may be sitting directly above an earthquake fault line. Each day, reports show damage greater than believed the day before, including radiation leaks, damage to exhaust ducts, burst pipes and other "malfunctions" beyond the fires. Several hundred barrels of radioactive waste were toppled. The problem with nuclear power is that it gets one bite of the apple. Just one major meltdown could provoke a demand to close the industry down by overwhelming adverse public outrage. You see, way back in the Fifties and Sixties, the Atomic Energy Commission, a booster-regulatory agency for atomic power plants, estimated that an "area the size of Pennsylvania" would be contaminated in such a disaster. Remember, Chernobyl in Ukraine is still surrounded by vacant towns and villages following the 1986 tragedy. Radioactivity found its way as far as sheep in England, nuts grown in Turkey and elsewhere. Do you know any other industry producing electricity that has to have specific evacuation plans for miles around it, is inherently a national security risk, cannot be privately insured without Congress mandating severe limited liability in case of massive casualties and requires massive taxpayer subsidies? A most concise, authoritative case against the electric atom was recently released titled "Why a Future for the Nuclear Industry is Risky" by a group of environmental health and social investment groups. (See www.cleanenergy.org) In the introduction to the report, the case against nuclear energy was summarized this way: "Wind power and other renewable technologies, combined with energy efficiency, conservation and cogeneration can be much more cost effective and can be deployed much sooner than new nuclear power plants." Yes indeed, efficiency or conservation, with a national mission, can cut in half the waste of energy, using currently available technology and know-how, before the first privately capitalized nuclear plant opens. One scientist once described the primary output of electric generating plants as "heating the heavens." If this insensitive industry cannot be revived by Uncle Sam's tax treasury, Wall Street certainly has given no indication that private investment would take on the risk. Investment money is pouring presently into wind power, solar and other renewables and this is just the early springtime for these benign sources of energy. The International Energy Agency sees a 25% cost reduction for wind power and a 50% cost reduction for solar photovoltaics from 2001 to 2020. Without Wall Street's private capital and with rising construction and operating costs in other countries, the prospect for nuclear power being competitive, even deducting decommissioning costs, and the many millennia of waste storage costs, is not there. Add a major accident and you'll see, in addition to casualties and contaminated land and property, every private investor running for cover while the bill is passed on to taxpayers. Here is a suggestion to put the industry's propaganda to rest. Will any high nuclear industry executive debate physicist Amory Lovins at the National Press Club filled with electric company leaders? If so, please visit http://www.rmi.org and contact Mr. Lovins. ======= http://www.counterpunch.org/nader07212007.html ======= ***************************************************************** 12 Quakes, Fires and Leaks at the World's Largest Nuke - Rattling the Reactor Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2007 18:06:37 -0500 (CDT) July 19, 2007 CounterPunch www.counterpunch.org Quakes, Fires and Leaks at the World's Largest Nuke Rattling the Reactor By RUSSELL HOFFMAN On July 15th, 2007, a 6.8 magnitude earthquake killed 9 people and damaged the Kashiwazaki nuclear power generating station, the world's largest nuke facility. No one knows when the facility will reopen. More than a dozen separate leaks of radioactive materials have been reported, some going offsite via air and water. Approximately four hundred drums of so-called "low-level" radioactive waste toppled over (of more than 22,000 such drums located at the site). At least 40 of the toppled drums lost their covers when they fell over. Plant officials are now claiming the earthquake was larger than any they had planned for at the facility. Previous earthquakes produced wildly differing Richter Scale values, when measured at different spots at one Japanese nuke facility. So who knows what the reactors might have really experienced, or what they can really withstand? Four reactors were operating at the facility at the time of the quake. All four automatically SCRAMed when the jarring started. A "SCRAM" of a reactor is a violent, sudden, dangerous stoppage which causes enormous wear and tear (and sometimes causes leaks). The other three reactors at the facility were already shut down "voluntarily, for inspection" when the quake hit. Lucky, that. The facility produced about 7% of Japan's electricity, so undoubtedly the Japanese power companies will cause energy shortages and blackouts while the reactors remain closed, so that the Japanese people are fooled into thinking they MUST have MORE NUKES! Indeed, many more nukes are planned in Japan, as well as in America and elsewhere. And not one is truly "earthquake-proof," and most have never been given a reality check. Kashiwazaki's 8,212 megawatts of total generating capacity is enough for about 16 million homes in Japan (or for about half that many homes in America). So, just when hospitals, pumping stations, and individuals desperately needed power to recover from the earthquake, NONE was being delivered by the facility. Reports now say over 50 separate problems occurred at the facility because of the earthquake, including burst pipes and cobalt-60 and chromium-51 being released in gaseous form, but not including delayed reporting (which aggravated and endangered citizens). Several hundred gallons of radioactive liquid spilled into the Sea of Japan. The highest reported volume leaked was about 600 gallons. But early, widespread reports assured the public there were NO radioactive leaks. Early reports of no leakage were wrong and, as usual, have been replaced with reports of "minimal leakage" with "no danger to the public." In America, the Curie quantity (or, just as useful, the Becquerels) released is almost NEVER given to the public after an accident. However, reportedly "90,000 Becquerels of radioactivity" were released, so evidently the Japanese have a leg up on us for honest nuclear accident reporting in THAT department. (A Becquerel is one radioactive decay per second.) But the Becquerels alone is still not enough -- people also need to know the actual isotopes that were released (for example: strontium-90, iodine-131, cesium-137, etc.), since only then does one begin to have the ability to express, in concrete terms (i.e., numerically), the true danger from any specific accident. The number of gallons of diluted liquid, at some unspecified level of radioactivity, of some unspecified isotope of some unspecified element, tells you almost nothing. A fire at the facility kept local firefighters busy for several hours, as it spewed thick, terrifying black smoke into the air. But the real danger from a nuclear reactor accident -- radioactive poison -- is INVISIBLE. In some news reports, the fire was blamed for causing the leak (before it became "leaks"). If this is true in some way, it would be cause for concern in itself, since the fire was apparently in the switchyard, at the tail end of the operation, generally not considered part of the nuclear side of the plant. The feared tsunami never came. Nuclear power plants worldwide are NOT protected against reasonably foreseeable tsunami wave heights. The Japanese should be especially able to realize the insidious nature of radioactive poisons, since the effects of DNA damage from Hiroshima and Nagasaki still continue to this day, and could be carefully measured. But of course, the power companies don't want you to think about this, and government also won't fund proper research, probably in part due to pressure from American corporate and government interests. All those "special interests" don't want Hiroshima and Nagasaki to be properly studied, because of the effect such studies would have on the debate about the dangers of "Low Level Radiation." Many pro-nukers STILL CONTEND that "LLR" might be healthy -- like a vitamin or nutrient! (Similarly, the DNA damage in plants, animals, or humans in the area around Chernobyl is seldom carefully investigated.) Japan dodged a bullet THIS TIME, but disaster awaits those who do not learn from history. Japan can SURELY get along fine without nuclear power -- don't believe any other story! Modern technology CAN solve virtually ALL of humanity's environmental problems, but it requires reason and balance. Not all technology is good. There is no minimum threshold -- all ionizing radiation exposure carries with it some risk of cancer, leukemia, heart problems, genetic damage and other "health effects." The local mayor in Japan has forbidden any immediate restart of any of the Kashiwazaki reactors (in America, he would probably not be allowed to do that). May they NEVER open! -- Russell D. Hoffman, a computer programmer in Carlsbad, California, has written extensively about nuclear power. His essays have been translated into several different languages and published in more than a dozen countries. He can be reached at: rhoffman@animatedsoftware.com ======= http://www.counterpunch.org/hoffman07192007.html ======= ***************************************************************** 13 AFP: Official inspection begins at Japan's quake-hit nuclear plant - Sunday July 22, 05:26 AM TOKYO (AFP) - Japanese officials Saturday inspected a nuclear plant that leaked small amounts of radioactive material after a major earthquake. Meanwhile, about 100 people were forced to leave an evacuation centre where they were housed after quake damage was uncovered. Local government officials from Niigata prefecture and Kashiwazaki city, along with other experts, began a joint inspection of the Kashiwazaki-Kariwa plant, the world's largest nuclear power plant. Fires broke out at the plant after the massive 6.8 Richter-scale quake Monday, which also caused minor radioactive leaks. The plant has been shut since the quake and Tokyo Electric Power Co., the operator, has faced a storm of criticism for initially under-reporting leaks. "This incident has caused fears among area residents. We hope to confirm the validity of (reports of) what happened and the current status as well as the leaked radiation data," said Tsuyoshi Ohkawa, nuclear safety officer at the Niigata prefecture government. The powerful quake struck just nine kilometres (five miles) from the plant, which automatically shut down. The quake killed 10 people, injured more than 1,000 and destroyed hundreds of buildings. Some 3,100 people left their houses and were staying at 66 shelters, which are mostly school gymnasiums or other public buildings. But about 100 of them Saturday had to leave one shelter, an elementary school gymnasium, due to fears its floor might collapse as a result of quake damage. Meanwhile, the controversy over the power plant has taken on an international dimension with Mohamed ElBaradei, the head of the UN nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), calling for transparency. But Japan has declined an IAEA offer to inspect the power plant, Kyodo News said, citing unnamed sources. Japan could, however, seek IAEA's inspection in the future, Kyodo said. The earthquake has also caused leading automakers to curtail production after damage to a key supplier of car parts. Leading automaker Toyota Motor will continue to suspend production at its domestic plants on Monday due to parts shortages, Kyodo said. Toyota officials could not be reached for immediate comment. Other Japanese car makers have already decided to halt production temporarily. Copyright 2007 Yahoo!7 Pty Limited. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 14 AU ABC: Govt climate change initiatives a 'PR exercise' - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation) Updated July 22, 2007 06:44:00 Greenpeace says the Federal Government is reluctant to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. (File photo) (Getty Images: Ian Waldie) Greenpeace says the Federal Government's global initiative on forests and climate change is a public relations exercise. Australia is hosting a three-day international meeting to discuss the impact of deforestation in the Asian region on global greenhouse gas emissions. The government has put $200 million towards protecting forests from illegal logging. But Greenpeace's Stephen Campbell says the Government should invest in renewable energy at home to cut greenhouse gasses rather than investing offshore. "We're concerned that the primary function of the meetings seems to be to divert away from Australia's reluctance to tackle climate change by reducing GHG [greenhouse gas] emissions in Australia, by switching the focus to forests in developing countries," he said. Tags: environment, climate-change, government-and-politics, federal-government, australia ***************************************************************** 15 Columbia Daily Tribune: Ameren shows interest in adding second reactor Published Sunday, July 22, 2007 FULTON (AP) - If Ameren Corp. decides to build a new reactor, it would erect it on a site adjacent to its Callaway nuclear plant southeast of Fulton, the company said. The St. Louis-based utility in April announced a deal with UniStar Nuclear of Annapolis, Md., to prepare a license application for a nuclear plant. But it didnt specify a site for the new 1,600-megawatt reactor. In a letter sent June 1 to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Tim Herrmann, the utilitys vice president of nuclear engineering, said Ameren had chosen the Callaway site, but it still hasnt decided whether to build another plant. Ameren didnt specify where a new plant would be located in relation to the existing unit at Fulton. The company owns 7,200 acres at the site, and 6,300 acres are administered by the Missouri Department of Conservation. "Our position remains that none of this really represents a decision to build," spokeswoman Susan Gallagher told the St. Louis Post-Dispatch on Friday. A decision on the need for a new base-load power plant, which is a coal- or nuclear-fueled plant that remains on all the time, is still years away, Ameren said. But the utility began the process of planning because its considering a nuclear plant, which requires a lengthy regulatory process to be eligible for special federal tax incentives under the 2005 federal Energy Policy Act. The license application is expected to be filed with federal regulators next summer. Ameren is taking other steps to prepare for the possible new plant. The company said it has a contract with Frances Areva ANP for reservations for 44 alloy-steel forgings for a reactor pressure vessel and four steam generators. Japan Steel Works, which produces the extra-large forgings used for reactor pressure vessels has a multi-year backlog, said Mitch Singer, a spokesman for the Nuclear Energy Institute, an industry trade group. That means companies planning to build new plants have to line up for the components while license applications are being prepared and reviewed. Although no company has committed to building a new nuclear plant, the NRC expects to receive applications for at least 28 new reactors, including a second unit at Callaway, in the next two years, according to the agencys Web site. Copyright 2007 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material Copyright 2007 The Columbia Daily Tribune. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 16 The Hindu: Sinha opposes nuclear deal Monday, Jul 23, 2007 Bangalore: The former External Affairs Minister and BJP leader Yashwant Sinha on Sunday opposed the proposed nuclear deal between India and the United States. Speaking at the inaugural session of the party State executive meeting in Bangalore, Mr. Sinha remarked that with this accord, the U.S. would control Indias nuclear production and usage. The weapons which we had created under A.B. Vajpayees leadership are being handed over to the U.S., he said and noted that senior scientists were opposed to the proposed nuclear deal. Act against terrorism Expressing concern over the fact that a peaceful city like Bangalore, known for its excellence in IT and other knowledge-related fields, is becoming an international terrorist centre, Mr. Sinha, who is also in charge of the partys Karnataka affairs, urged Karnataka Deputy Chief Minister B.S. Yediyurappa to take stern action to nip terrorism in the bud. The BJP leader reminded the Centre that it was its responsibility to handle terrorism. Though the State Government had a role in initiating action against such activities, it was the Centre which should curb terrorism, he argued. He alleged that the UPA Government at the Centre had a soft attitude towards international terrorism because of an appease-all policy. Mr. Sinha expressed shock over Prime Minister Manmohan Singhs statement that Pakistan was also a victim of international terrorism alongside India. How can a hunter become the target? he asked. The impact of this Presidential poll will be felt in the 2009 Parliamentary election and the Congress will have reason to regret, BJP leader M. Venkaiah Naidu remarked while addressing the party State executive. Though the BJP lost the Presidential poll, it was actually a moral victory for the party, he said as the BJP had put the Congress in the dock. Ridiculing the UNPA for abstaining from voting in the Presidential poll, Mr. Naidu urged them to do a soul-searching on whether their action was logical. They should explain to people whether it was proper to abstain from voting in the Presidential poll, he said. Copyright 2007, The Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the ***************************************************************** 17 The Hindu: Scientists hail nuclear deal Monday, Jul 23, 2007 Mumbai: Hailing the forward movement in the just concluded Indo-U.S. nuclear talks in Washington, top scientists here on Sunday cautioned the Government against any dilution of the original July 18, 2005 joint statement on full civil nuclear cooperation between the countries. With U.S. and Indian negotiators reaching an understanding on a pact that will operationalise the landmark deal by overcoming contentious issues like reprocessing and fuel supply, the scientists said this was a welcome step as it would end Indias decades-old nuclear isolation. M.R. Srinivasan, member of the Atomic Energy Commission and former chairman of the body, said, This will end Indias nuclear isolation which was always due to U.S. policy. However, some experts pointed out that it was still not clear whether the latest understanding between the sides will free India, facing technology denial for over three decades, to shop around for civil nuclear technology and fuel. The former Bhabha Atomic Research Centre director, A.N. Prasad, said: It isnt very clear whether the deal will be for full civilian nuclear cooperation as envisaged in the 2005 statement. Though the 30-page document on the 123 Agreement drafted by the negotiators has to get approval from the Indian and U.S. Governments, the scientists were sure the move would enable New Delhi to openly negotiate with the world nuclear business community and boost power generation capacity by getting access to nuclear components. Top Nuclear Power Corporation officials, who did not wish to be named, hailed the breakthrough and said there was a recognition that India had to go through the reprocessing mode for energy production. Though fuel reprocessing was a little expensive, it gave 30 times more energy than conventional nuclear plants, they said. Mr. Srinivasan said the draft 123 agreement had to be approved by both Governments and parallel steps also had to be taken by India to start negotiations with the International Atomic Energy Agency and the 45-member Nuclear Suppliers Group. Once the agreement was approved, French and American nuclear businesses, which had been holding talks with the Nuclear Power Corporation, could go ahead with the selection of sites for power plants and other modalities, he said. All these things will begin rolling once the 123 Agreements draft, which has to be first reviewed by AEC, goes to the Prime Minister and gets final approval from the Union Cabinet, Mr. Srinivasan said. Asked whether the technology denial regime will continue, except for nuclear plants and uranium fuel, even after the 123 Agreement, he said: It is difficult to speculate on the time period for lifting of the embargo on all kinds of technology for India. But at least the nuclear isolation, which India had been facing not because of Indias policy but due to American policy, will come to an end. I am sure normal process will start in getting access to dual-purpose technologies. Mr. Prasad, considered the father of Indias reprocessing technology, said the country always had the right to reprocess its spent fuel as the reprocessing plant was set up in 1965, much before the countrys first civilian nuclear plant came up at Tarapur with U.S. assistance. However, the hype created in the whole deal about fuel reprocessing, testing and uranium supply helped the U.S. to raise its pitch on these issues, Mr. Prasad, a former special IAEA inspector, said. According to the U.S. Atomic Energy Act, countries which do not have reprocessing technology should not be encouraged to reprocess. But India, having acquired the technology in the 1960s, could not have been brought under this ambit. PTI Copyright 2007, The Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the ***************************************************************** 18 The Hindu: Nuclear talks satisfactory Monday, Jul 23, 2007 CHENNAI: The top brass of the Department of Atomic Energy are satisfied with the outcome of last weeks negotiations in Washington between India and the United States on the India-U.S. nuclear cooperation agreement. A top DAE official said he was satisfied with the result of the negotiations and happy with the outcome. Asked whether there was a breakthrough in the negotiations as reported in the newspapers, he said: We have reached an agreement. It has to go to the respective governments. It has to go through a formal process. I think it is satisfactory. The details can be released after it is seen by the Government. Reprocessing spent fuel On whether the U.S. had only partly conceded Indias demand that it should be allowed to reprocess spent fuel from the reactors to be imported, the official said: The question is both the sides will try to extract the maximum. But it is okay. Will India set up a separate, dedicated facility to reprocess the spent fuel from the reactors that it will import? That is what has been said [agreed upon earlier], he said. It can be seen by the Government and a decision taken whether it is acceptable or not acceptable. Nuclear tests Asked whether the agreement recognised Indias right to conduct nuclear tests in future, he said: You should look at the language and let us not speculate. On whether it guaranteed nuclear fuel supply for the lifetime of the reactors to be imported, he said: There is a provision for everything. At some stage, it [the agreement] will be made public. Right now, it is not proper for me to say anything. The official was asked whether India got all the three things it wanted: the right to reprocess the spent fuel from the reactors to be imported; an assurance of lifetime fuel supplies; and Indias right to conduct a nuclear test in future. His answer was: It is satisfactory. Will the agreement protect Indias three-stage indigenous nuclear power programme? The response was: I have spent a whole lifetime building the programme ... Our programme will continue as it is. Copyright 2007, The Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the ***************************************************************** 19 The Hindu: Stand after studying details - CPI(M) Monday, Jul 23, 2007 NEW DELHI: The CPI(M) on Sunday said it would formulate its stand on the outcome of the nuclear talks between India and the U.S. after studying the details. In a statement, the partys Polit Bureau said the civil nuclear cooperation with the U.S. could be based only on the assurances given by the Prime Minister in the August 17, 2006 statement in Parliament and by not accepting those provisions of the Hyde Act, which were contrary to Indias interest. CPI national secretary D. Raja said the Government would have to come to Parliament with details. Copyright 2007, The Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the ***************************************************************** 20 Daily Yomiuri: N-plant shows scars of quake Ground at Tokyo Electric Power Co.'s Kashiwazaki-Kariwa nuclear power plant damaged by the Niigata Prefecture Chuetsu Offshore Earthquake, is shown in a picture taken Saturday. The inside of the complex of the Kashiwazaki-Kariwa nuclear power plant shows the damage inflicted by the Niigata Prefecture Chuetsu Offshore Earthquake, with the ground caved in places and the walls scorched around an electric transformer at one of the reactors. Even officials at the plant are having difficulty coming to terms with the damage. On Saturday, Tokyo Electric Power Co. opened the plant to the media for the first time since the quake hit last Monday. An oily smell filled the air near the transformer for the No. 3 reactor. Oil that is supposed to be sealed inside the transformer has been draining out of it since its insulation came off with the quake. Walls were charred from the fire. Fire hoses that employees at the plant apparently used to put out the fire were left scattered near a fire hydrant dozens of meters from the walls. Roads and gravel paths were rippled, undulating like the sea. Unlike the buildings housing the reactors, which stand on firm ground, the transformer is on relatively soft ground, which sank in the temblor. The depression, which a TEPCO employee measured in front of reporters, was 50 centimeters long. Other places in the complex also showed damage. Soil beside a diesel tank near the plant's No. 1 reactor sank as much as 1.6 meters, damaging pipes that distribute water for firefighting. Work to replace the pipes was under way. "One problem was that electric transformers and other facilities weren't made as quake-resistant as the reactor buildings, which are designed to withstand strong quakes," the plant's senior official said. "We need to discuss how best we can learn lessons from this quake when designing future facilities." However, further unexpected scenes were witnessed inside the reactor buildings, which were built on top of solid bedrock and supposedly more able to withstand tremors. Water containing a small amount of a radioactive substance was discovered at the plant's No. 6 reactor building. The building's third floor and the deck floor between the third and fourth floors, which houses equipment to control the reactor and other devices, was designated as a noncontrolled area, meaning radioactive substances are not supposed to be handled there. After the quake, however, about 1.5 liters of the tainted water was sprinkled on the floors of the noncontrolled area. The plant official said the water probably dripped from ducts and electric cables hanging from the ceiling, after first spilling over from a spent fuel pool to the fourth floor. As this was an unexpected leak, a TEPCO official conducted a reinspection. A bucket and paper towels were placed on a pink sheet spread on the floor in case radioactive water drips from the ceiling again--an oddly low-tech image compared with such a state-of-the-art facility. ) The Daily Yomiuri, The Yomiuri Shimbun ***************************************************************** 21 St. Louis Post-Dispatch: Ameren says Callaway the site if it builds 2nd nuclear plant By Jeffrey Tomich ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH 07/21/2007 Ameren Corp. says a site adjacent to its Callaway nuclear plant southeast of Fulton, Mo., would be the location for a new, 1,600-megawatt reactor if it decides to build one. The St. Louis-based utility in April announced a deal with UniStar Nuclear of Annapolis, Md., to prepare a license application for a nuclear plant that will be filed with federal regulators next summer. But it didn't specify a site. Ameren said in a June 1 letter to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission from Tim Herrmann, the utility's vice president of nuclear engineering, that it had selected the Callaway site, but it hadn't made a decision whether to build another plant. "Our position remains that none of this really represents a decision to build," spokeswoman Susan Gallagher said in an interview on Friday. A decision on the need for a new base load power plant a coal- or nuclear-fueled plant that's always on is still years away, Ameren says. Because it's considering a nuclear plant, it must begin the lengthy regulatory process to be eligible for special federal tax incentives under the 2005 federal Energy Policy Act. Ameren is quietly taking other steps to prepare, too. In a subsequent letter to the NRC, the company said it has a contract with France's Areva ANP for reservations for 44 alloy-steel forgings for a reactor pressure vessel and four steam generators. Only one company, Japan Steel Works, produces the ultra-large forgings used for reactor pressure vessels, and there's a multi-year backlog, according to Mitch Singer, a spokesman for the Nuclear Energy Institute, an industry trade group. So companies must get in line for the components while license applications are being prepared and reviewed. How Ameren meets rising demand for electricity will depend on several factors, especially changes in environmental regulations. The utility industry is watching the ongoing debate over the need to regulate emissions of carbon dioxide, a heat-trapping gas emitted by coal-fired power plants. While no U.S. company has formally sought approval for a new nuclear plant, many have expressed an intent to do so. Over the next two years, the NRC expects applications for at least 28 new reactors, including a second unit at Callaway, according to the agency's website. Ameren didn't specify where a new nuclear plant would be located relative to the existing unit. The company owns 7,200 acres at the site, and 6,300 acres are administered by the Missouri Department of Conservation. jtomich@post-dispatch.com | 314-340-8320 ***************************************************************** 22 Daily Yomiuri: Govt OK's IAEA check of quake-hit nuclear plant The government formally decided Sunday that it would accept the International Atomic Energy Agency's offer to send an inspection team to the Kashiwazaki-Kariwa nuclear power station, hit by a powerful earthquake on July 16 in Niigata Prefecture, a government source said the same day. The Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency of the Economy, Trade and Industry Ministry will convey the government decision to the Vienna-based U.N. agency Monday. Tetsuya Terasawa, director of the public relations department at the Tokyo Electric Power Co.'s Kashiwazaki-Kariwa plant, said during a press conference Sunday, "If there is an offer to conduct an inspection of our plant [from the IAEA], we'll respond [to it], with the hope the team can grasp the present state of affairs," making clear the plant's willingness to accept such an offer. It will be the first time the government has accepted an IAEA offer to inspect a nuclear facility in connection with a nuclear-related incident since a criticality incident that occurred at a JCO Co. nuclear fuel-processing plant in Tokaimura, Ibaraki Prefecture, in September 1999. The government has decided to accept the IAEA offer, as a senior official of the NISA put it, "Because there have apparently been false news reports overseas, which describe the problems at the [Kashiwazaki-Kariwa] plant as being as serious as the Chernobyl disaster [that occurred in 1986 in Ukraine]." On Wednesday, IAEA Director General Mohamed ElBaradei urged the government to conduct a full and transparent assessment of damage to the plant and added that his agency "would be ready to join Japan through an international team in reviewing the accident and learning the necessary lessons." NISA will ask the IAEA to conduct the inspection at the facility in question at the earliest possible time. NISA also plans to make public the result of the government's inspection on damage to nuclear facilities wrought by the latest earthquake at a meeting of officials representing nuclear-related organizations of the IAEA-member countries and territories, to be held in September in Vienna. In addition, NISA is coordinating ideas to hold a symposium, jointly with IAEA, concerning damage caused to the Kashiwazaki-Kariwa nuclear power station by the Niigata Prefecture Chuetsu Offshore Earthquake. With regards to the IAEA inspection of the Kashiwazaki-Kariwa nuclear plant, Niigata Gov. Hirohiko Izumida on Sunday sent a petition to the central government to accept the inspection offer. ) The Yomiuri Shimbun. ***************************************************************** 23 Daily Yomiuri:: NUCLEAR POWER ON SHAKY GROUND / No price too high to pay for safe nuclear plants This is the second installment of a three-part series examining how earthquake-prone Japan can coexist with nuclear power plants, a concern that has surfaced in the wake of the July 16 earthquake in the Chuetsu region of Niigata Prefecture--the first temblor anywhere in which a fault line ran beneath a nuclear power plant. Following last Monday's earthquake, the asphalt-paved grounds of Tokyo Electric Power Co.'s Kashiwazaki-Kariwa nuclear power plant in Niigata Prefecture bulge and sag, blocking people's path. Immediately after the Niigata Prefecture Chuetsu Offshore Earthquake occurred, Shizuo Suda, deputy manager of the fire prevention division at Kashiwazaki Fire Department, entered the plant to inspect an electric transformer that had caught fire. After observing the scene, Suda became very concerned about the possibility of a secondary disaster occurring. He had never imagined that an earthquake would bring about such terrible destruction, and he thought to himself that if oil leaked from an underground pipe and ignited, there would be no remedying the situation. Suda's report to the Kashiwazaki municipal government indicating the seriousness of the situation at the plant prompted the municipal government to issue an emergency order to TEPCO instructing it to shut down the plant. Yumio Ishii, president of the Japan Society of Civil Engineers, said Friday: "I strongly feel we were lucky the disaster wasn't worse than it was. The quake-resistance standards for nuclear power plants definitely need to be reviewed." The late Nobu Kitamura, a prominent geologist and professor emeritus at Tohoku University, conducted research into faults across the country in the 1960s and '70s. He once described the Japanese archipelago, which is situated in a seismogenic zone, as follows: "If I throw a stone from here to there, countless faults lie underground in the space between. That's where Japan is located." Last Monday's quake, in which fault lines directly underneath the nuclear power plant shifted, showed Kitamura's description was no exaggeration. Japan is the only country located on four plates edging toward each other and many fault zones. Among 31 nations and regions that have nuclear power plants, Japan is the most at risk of being hit by earthquakes. Japan introduced nuclear power technology from Europe and the United States 50 years ago. The history of Japan's nuclear power industry has been a struggle against earthquakes. Inside a nuclear reactor, control rods designed to serve as brakes move between nuclear fuel rods that are assembled precisely spaced apart. If the spacing changes even slightly due to an earthquake, the control rods will cease to function as brakes. Japan Atomic Power Co.'s Tokai nuclear power station in Tokaimura, Ibaraki Prefecture, is the nation's first commercial nuclear power plant. A graphite reactor, imported from Britain, a nation that not face the threat of serious earthquakes, was used for the power plant. At the time of introducing the reactor, questions regarding its quake-resistance capabilities were voiced by many experts, forcing the company to make changes in the construction plan, including improvements to the graphite layers surrounding the fuel rods. The technology for light water reactors, which was used in many plants later, was imported from the United States, which has seismogenic zones on its Pacific Coast. Although those reactors were designed for optimum quake resistance, the United States is blessed with many choices for locating its nuclear plants, so it does not have to worry so much about making its nuclear plants capable of withstanding very strong quakes. Japan, however, had to develop the strictest quake-resistant standards for its nuclear power plants. But the tremors of the Niigata Prefecture Chuetsu Offshore Earthquake exceeded those standards. Seismic research has advanced significantly in the past half century. But it was only after the Great Hanshin Earthquake in 1995 that active faults in various regions earned serious attention. Also, it was not until the 1980s that understanding of the process of liquefaction began to deepen. Seismology is still developing, and quake-resistance standards for nuclear power plants always need to be reviewed. It is said that the cost of building one nuclear power plant in Japan is 300 billion yen--the highest in the world--as expenses for quake-resistance measures are high. In the electric power industry, many are reluctant to adopt strict antiseismic measures, saying costs will skyrocket if standards are made rigorous. Mitsumasa Hirano, chief secretary of the Japan Nuclear Energy Safety Organization said, "People have become to understand the uncertainty of seismology, and the social perception toward risk has changed since the Great Hanshin Earthquake." Electric power companies have been making efforts to balance cost and safety in setting quake-resistance standards for nuclear power plants, but it is not acceptable to delay the implementation of antiseismic measures simply because doing so will be expensive. The Yomiuri Shimbun. ***************************************************************** 24 Times of India: There's Nothing To Fear- Updated: 22 Jul 2007, 2341hrs IST | Powered by Indiatimes The Indian and US delegations have finalised the draft 123 agreement on civil nuclear cooperation. This has been referred to the respective governments for review. The two delegations decided to treat the matter on a low key; therefore, there was no joint press conference. It is expected that the draft would come up before the Cabinet Committee on National Security for approval in India and it would go up to the president in the US. It has taken just two years and two days from July 18, 2005 - the date of the joint statement of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and President George W Bush on enhancement of Indo-US cooperation, including civil nuclear cooperation, at the White House - to finalise the draft. This is the fastest negotiation on such civil nuclear cooperation. Unlike other countries with which similar agreements were signed, an India-specific legislation was required to be enacted by the two Houses of US Congress to permit this cooperation, since India is not a member of the Non-Proliferation Treaty and yet is a state with nuclear weapons. The speed in India's case was due to the initiative of President Bush and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and their keenness to complete the process during their term in office. Although there is an agreed draft, the debate on the agreement is not expected to come to a close. While the exact wording of the different clauses has not yet been made public, there is bound to be speculation on the concessions and accommodations made by either side. Such give-and-take is to be expected in a democracy. A theoretician on bargains once defined as the best bargain one in which both sides nurse dissatisfaction to some extent but still prefer the outcome to the alternative of not having it. It is too early to say whether the present agreement will fall in that category. Those who are opposed to this agreement have threatened to abrogate it in the event of a change in government during the next elections. A sovereign nation has the right to overturn decisions of earlier governments. The US scrapped the anti-ballistic missile treaty after 30 years. President Vladimir Putin is disengaging himself from the Conventional Forces in Europe (CFE) treaty after 16 years. Consider India's history. Those who threatened to expose secret clauses in the Indo-Soviet Treaty and Shimla agreement had to accept, after they came to power, that there were no such clauses and our non-alignment was ‘genuine enough'. So, there is every possibility that those who oppose the 123 agreement today may not find anything objectionable in it when they occupy office. The crucial issue is satisfying the scientific community. Right through the negotiating process, the Department of Atomic Energy was represented at the additional secretary level and during the final stages by the chairman. There is nothing to indicate that the concerns of DAE were not fully addressed. Public reports speak of US conceding two key demands of DAE in the final stages of the negotiations - reprocessing and assurance of fuel in case India were to conduct a test. President John F Kennedy said that a country should never fear to negotiate, nor should it negotiate out of fear. Many in India feared that negotiating with the US would trap India into some unwanted commitment. Others tended to assume that the country was negotiating out of fear of alienating or antagonising US. In 60 years of independent India, there has been no instance of its having succumbed to the pressures of another nation. This is not to say that such fears should not be expressed in internal debate. Such debates come handy in scoring debating points in external negotiations. However, there must be a realistic and balanced assessment of our negotiating strategy and such debating points should not be carried too far. There can be no denying that some US legislators and officials make provocative and threatening statements on their expectations from India in exchange for what they consider as a generous concession extended to India by way of the nuclear deal. The impact of these announcements in terms of policymaking is limited. India should learn how to respond to them through appropriate channels. Too much attention was paid to pronouncements by US think tank experts during the debate in the US Congress, only to find that US administration took them all in its stride. In a sense the 123 agreement marks a new beginning in the relationship between India and US. Neither US nor India has experience in dealing with strategic partners. US has dealt with allies who have depended on it for their security. Indo-US negotiations are an example of how difficult it is to strike a bargain between two strategic partners. As the two nations enter into the agreement and start implementing it, the true nature of partnership will be put to test. Despite difficulties, both sides have a basic mutuality of interest to make it work. The US, with no experience in dealing with partners, will not be very easy to deal with. But in a balance-of-power world it is up to India to engage US in a partnership and shape it to accept the new situation. The wider the range of our engagements with other major powers, the greater will be our ability to engage US. The writer is a security affairs analyst. Copyright 2007 Times Internet Limited. All rights reserved. For ***************************************************************** 25 TheStar.com: Nuclear power plant keeps neighbours in dark Toronto Star LETTER TO THE EDITOR Jul 21, 2007 04:30 AM OPG rapped for month-old breach in reactor duct July 19 The Pickering nuclear power plant scares me. I have spent most of my life living in the shadows of both the Pickering and Darlington plants and I am deeply disturbed by the fact that they have neglected to repair a hole in one of their containment systems for more than a month. I think this blatant neglect and ignorance is jeopardizing the safety of our entire region. With this disregard for an integral safety system, it's only a matter of time before there's an accident. It's only a matter of time before people are hurt or killed. Why hasn't OPG sent out newsletters to the nearby residents? Why hasn't it told us about the repairs and about the faulty safety systems? Why does it persist in keeping us in the dark? Perhaps what is most terrifying of all is the closed nature of the industry. If something happens, we are the ones who will be directly affected. We are the ones who will get sick and die. Is it so much to ask that those of us who live in the shadow of this nuclear monolith be kept safe and informed? If this is the case at Pickering, I wonder what the human cost of our constant hunger for electricity will be. Perhaps that is something for Dalton McGuinty to consider before this election. Heather Sonser, Ajax, Ont. Copyright Toronto Star 1996-2007 | ***************************************************************** 26 TheStar.com: Lack of ideas at the top over energy Toronto Star Jul 21, 2007 04:30 AM Cameron Smith If there's one thing that stands out about the Ontario Power Authority (OPA), it's stagnant thinking in upper management. It had to be pushed and harried into accepting standard offer contracts, which make modest renewable energy projects feasible. It still hasn't thrown its sizable weight fully behind demand reduction. A long time passed before it finally acknowledged that electricity from biomass was an important alternative. There's little indication that it has been looking ahead to peak oil and gas and planning new ways of accommodating energy demands. Most important, it hasn't strayed much from the 100-year-old template for generating electricity, which is designed around massive generating stations and extremely long and wasteful transmission lines. It's not as if Ontario has the luxury of time to sort out the future. Not only are peak oil and gas imminent but, as noted last week, global warming may proceed faster than anticipated. A new study from a team headed by James Hansen, head of NASA's climate agency, has concluded that ice fields at both poles may disintegrate very quickly in an unexpected, non-linear way. The result would be less heat reflected from the Earth by snow and ice, more heat absorbed by newly-exposed land and sea water, and a substantial rise in sea levels during this century. None of this was predicted in reports from the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change published in the spring. The Hansen study is at pubs.giss.nasa.gov. Go to the list of publications and choose "Climate change and trace gases." In Europe, there's a deep sense of urgency. A report for the German federal environment ministry argues that Europe, North Africa, the Middle East, and Iceland should be linked in a vast spider-web grid, the core of which would be thousands of electricity generators based on renewable energy. It would be a decentralized system, exactly the opposite of what the OPA is planning for Ontario which, if it continues to have its way, will mean relying heavily on nuclear power. As the German report points out, going nuclear is a high-risk strategy because, among other things, reliance on large central generating units makes the system vulnerable – Ontario is seeing it yet again as two reactors at the Pickering station remain shut for repairs to backup electrical systems. It has cost the province 1,000 megawatts of generating capacity. Balancing the electricity grid is always a problem. With the spider-web approach, multiple generating units can be balanced against each other, instead of having to balance everything against huge generating stations. If a small spider-web unit goes down – even if several go down – it doesn't create a crisis. The report, called "Trans-Mediterranean Interconnection for Concentrating Solar Power," is at dlr.de/tt/trans-csp. Another report, coming from Britain and the Centre for Alternative Technology, argues that all of Britain's electricity needs can be met without using fossil fuels or nuclear power by 2027. Britain's situation is different from Canada's – tidal power can play a greater role, and distances are minimal, for instance – but the important message for us in the report is the innovative thinking and the keen awareness of fast-approaching global shifts that will change everything. Innovation and awareness are what seem to be lacking at the OPA. Perhaps what the OPA needs is a new generation of leadership. Cameron Smith can be reached at camsmith@kingston.net. Copyright Toronto Star 1996-2007 | ***************************************************************** 27 North County Time: Edison: We're ready for quake at San Onofre Last modified Friday, July 20, 2007 11:59 PM PDT JAMIE SCOTT LYTLE North County Times File Photo By: Staff and wire reports - SAN ONOFRE ---- Officials at the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station say they are confident their plant could withstand an earthquake like the one that shook Japan on Monday, though at least one anti-nuclear activist expressed doubts. Ray Waldo, vice president of nuclear generation for Southern California Edison, which owns 75 percent of San Onofre, said earlier this week that he literally and figuratively stands by his plant. "I can see one of the reactor buildings from my office window," Waldo said. "If anyone were worried about it, it would have to be me." Waldo said he gets his confidence from his familiarity with San Onofre's design. The plant's twin nuclear reactors, which began generating electricity in 1982 and 1983, were designed with earthquakes in mind. Experts estimate that San Onofre is designed to resist the forces of a magnitude 7.0 quake, while existing Japanese nuclear plants are designed to withstand a 6.5 magnitude quake, although that standard was increased last year. Magnitude 7 is a major earthquake, capable of widespread, heavy damage. Monday's quake is now reported to have registered at magnitude 6.8. Waldo said that every aspect of the San Onofre plant, from the steel straps that hold its nuclear fuel rods together to tensioned steel cables that reinforce its two distinctive concrete containment domes, are designed to resist the shaking caused by an earthquake. "Everything is built beefier here because of the risk we have with earthquakes," Waldo said. Monday's earthquake caused Japan's Kashiwazaki-Kariwa nuclear plant, billed by its owner, Tokyo Electric, as the largest in the world in terms of power production, to slosh an estimated 315 gallons of radioactive water from a holding tank. That water was later flushed out to sea. Later in the week it became clear that the quake caused 63 different problems at the plant, including a second leak near an exhaust vent. Both leaks were termed minor by Tokyo Electric. The quake also charred an electrical transformer and toppled an estimated 400 barrels of atomic waste. As is the case in California, Japan requires that all of its reactors be designed with earthquakes in mind. On Friday, though regulators were acknowledging they need to take a fresh look at the rules. San Onofre has its own set of rules and a written emergency response plan designed to minimize public injury if an earthquake or other problem releases radiation into the environment. The plant's emergency planning zone encompasses a swath of land located within 10 miles and includes San Clemente and parts of Camp Pendleton. Plans are also in place to shelter or evacuate parts of coastal North County if a plume of airborne radioactive smoke or dust drifted south. Japanese nuclear power plants have performed quite well in previous earthquakes, even the one damaged in Monday's quake. The Kashiwazaki-Kariwa plant experienced a magnitude 6.8 quake in October 2004 without incident, though an aftershock two weeks later caused the automatic shutdown of one of its reactors. In August 2005, three reactors at the Onagawa plant in northeastern Japan shut down automatically during a 7.2 earthquake. While Edison officials showed confidence in San Onofre's ability to weather earthquakes, some worried that the plant has strayed from its original design in one important way ---- spent fuel pools filled with deadly nuclear waste are too crowded. Rochelle Becker, an anti-nuclear activist with the Alliance for Nuclear Responsibility, said Tuesday that she is concerned about how spent nuclear fuel is stored at San Onofre. Each of the plant's two operating reactors has an adjacent building where Edison stores about 1,000 spent fuel assemblies. The fuel is stored in underground pools more than 45 feet deep. Each 14-foot-long assembly contains numerous hollow metal rods filled with decayed uranium. The rods are highly radioactive and are so hot when they leave the plant's reactors that they must be kept under refrigerated water for seven to 10 years before they can be removed and put in heavily shielded, long-term storage canisters. Becker noted that San Onofre's original design called for the pools to hold only half the spent fuel they now hold. To fit more material in a fixed space the fuel assemblies, which are each 14 feet long, were moved closer together. "If what's in those pools starts swaying back and forth, like you would see in an earthquake, you can have that material go critical because they've got it packed in there tighter than it should be," Becker said. In response, Waldo said the scenario Becker envisions could never happen. He said that when Edison began moving its fuel assemblies closer together, it installed new racks designed to keep them from ever touching, even if the plant sees a massive earthquake. "You would have to have an earthquake that bounced the fuel 40 feet into the air in order for it to be a problem," Waldo said. "And we do not think that can happen." San Diego Gas & Electric Co., which supplies energy throughout San Diego County, owns about 20 percent of San Onofre. The Associated Press contributed to this report. Previous Story: Marine escapes prison sentence in Iraqi's death Next Story: Sunrise Powerlink benefit estimate is lowered George wrote on Jul 21, 2007 7:00 AM: " Great, instead of facts we consumers get blasted with bravado from a utility making serious money from nukes. No one can predict the magnitude of quakes or the amount of destruction they will inflict. What is predictable is the sheer panic and terror that San Clemente, San Juan and Oceanside will endure when the sirens scream from San Onofre...And the jampacked I-5 prevents any escape. Save the hype, give us a safe escape when the dome walls crumble. " webmaster@nctimes.com 1997-2007 North County Times ? Lee Enterprises editor@nctimes.com ***************************************************************** 28 Calgary Sun: Nuclear plant plans still in works Sat, July 21, 2007 UPDATED: 2007-07-21 01:39:11 MST Energy Alberta Corp.'s application to safety commission to be revamped over summer By DINA O'MEARA, CP The head of Energy Alberta Corp., an upstart western company pushing nuclear power in the Prairies, isn't taking the summer off, as planned. Instead, Wayne Henuset is revamping a site application to the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission from his office in the suburbs of southeast Calgary. The affable former oil-and-gas entrepreneur had, with partner Hank Swartout, bandied a date in mid-June to the media for setting the regulatory ball rolling on their $6.2-billion nuclear power plant project. Passionate about the controversial project, they even flew out Alberta town council members to New Brunswick to tour a similar facility and see for themselves the benefits of having a nuclear power plant on site. But the application for a licence to prepare a site was sent back within two weeks, with the commission diplomatically calling the application a draft. It's requesting a number of items be more detailed, particularly where the proposed generation plant would be built. "The biggest hurdle is they're wanting us to commit to a location," Henuset said of the $600,000 application that named two likely towns, Whitecourt and Peace River, for the plants. Energy Alberta's ambitious plan is to build two 1,100-megawatt nuclear powered generation plants in northwestern Alberta -- the first in the province. The two-year-old company partnered with Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd., the federal Crown corporation and makers of Candu reactors, to provide the science and expertise. It also lined up a bank for financing and started collecting potential clients. Henuset touts the benefits of nuclear power as a low greenhouse gas emitter, an about-face for a former oil patch player who is seen as a cowboy by eastern investors -- even though he reserves the boots for town hall meetings in Alberta. Another benefit is that once the plants are up and running -- eight to 10 years from now -- they'll provide a stable supply to the electricity grid, consumers and investors, he said. This spring, Energy Alberta took to the road to garner political and public support for their bid, first targeting the power and steam needs of Alberta's oil sands. That tactic was abandoned as unrealistic, and Energy Alberta Corp. focused instead on providing power to the grid. Any doubts Whitecourt Mayor Trevor Thain had about the technology and its benefits faded during his tour of Point Lepreau, New Brunswick's nuclear plant, and meeting with city councillors in Saint John. Copyright 2006, Canoe Inc. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 29 newsobserver.com: Few nuclear negatives Saturday, July 21, 2007 I hope other citizens of the Old North State are as tired of N.C. WARN's regurgitated old chestnuts as I am. Apparently based on junk science, N.C. WARN continues its campaign against what is probably the cleanest and safest power technology available. Unlike coal, nuclear contributes zero greenhouse gases, no sulfur (or any other important) emissions and (surprise -- something you won't hear from N.C. WARN) less radiation! Yes, you read correctly. Coal plants can actually emit higher levels of radiation into our environment than nuclear plants due to trace radioactivity found in coal that goes unchecked and unregulated along with the other much-maligned contaminants. As for the costs, by letting every "anti-nuke" such as N.C. WARN monopolize regulatory proceedings, costs escalate and nothing gets accomplished. We all need to ask why in the world can France be 80 percent nuclear, totally safe and free of foreign energy dependency, and we can't? Next time you hear from an N.C. WARN representative, ask him! Tom Evans Pittsboro Copyright 2007, The News & Observer Publishing Company ***************************************************************** 30 DW: Vattenfall Idles a Second German Nuclear Plant | Germany | Deutsche Welle | 21.07.2007 German government inspector want to take a closer look at the Brunsbüttel plant Swedish-owned electricity company Vattenfall idled a second nuclear power plant in Germany on Saturday at government orders amid an ongoing row about nuclear power. The plant at Brunsbüttel, west of Hamburg, had been in a "standby" state since the middle of this month for a change of oil at its transformer, but must now be powered down so government inspectors can take a closer look. Inspectors for the state of Schleswig-Holstein said on Saturday they would check reports that a sub-standard type of fastening had been used to bolt a gantry to a wall near the reactor. Vattenfall's Krümmel plant east of the city has been offline for repairs since its transformer oil caught fire on June 28 and sub-standard fastenings were subsequently found there too. Vattenfall has taken a lashing from the media and is at odds with the inspectorate. The Swedish company insists are no grave safety risks at the two plants, which both failed on June 28 because of non-nuclear defects. During the week, Vattenfall sacked senior executives at its German unit for not being frank enough to the media. Speeding up the plans? Bildunterschrift: Fire fighters extinguished a fire at the Krümmel nuclear power plant last monthSocial Democrats in Chancellor Angela Merkel's ruling coalition have called for a speeding up of plans to close down all 17 nuclear power stations in Germany by 2021, with older plants scrapped sooner. By contrast, centre-right leaders called for a modest extension past 2021 to curb carbon-dioxide emissions. That was topped on Saturday by Günther Beckstein, the Christian Social Union's choice as next premier of Bavaria state, who said the legislation must be changed to allow nuclear power for several more decades. Media attacks Staff at German nuclear power stations feel under siege from the media and public opinion, according to the chief executive of the Swedish utility, Lars Goran Josefsson. "Our staff aren't frightened of nuclear energy, but they are sometimes frightened of the outside world," Josefsson said in an interview released on Saturday by the German weekly Der Spiegel. "A lot of them think, 'Our enemies are out there and will distort whatever we say.'" He insisted that both plants in Schleswig-Holstein state were "absolutely safe." All of Germany's 17 reactors must shut down by 2021 under German legislation, but Vattenfall has sought a change in scheduling that would allow Brunsbüttel to run longer if another reactor is mothballed earlier. "I see no reason to withdraw that application," said the Swede. The state of Schleswig-Holstein's regulatory department meanwhile rejected allegations by pro-business politicians that it, not Vattenfall, had delayed for five days disclosures about the June 28 incidents. A spokesman said it had taken experts several days to analyze reports and the findings had always been made public instantly after that. DW-WORLD * Energy Giant's Europe Chief Quits After Nuclear Scandal Amid growing criticism of the company's handling of fires at two German nuclear plants, Vattenfall Europe's CEO resigned Wednesday. Government leaders meanwhile mulled the future of atomic energy. (18.07.2007) * "This Is the Acid Test for Climate and Energy Policy" German Environment Minister Sigmar Gabriel spoke to DW-TV about the environmental successes of Germany's EU and G8 presidencies, the need for a new Kyoto Protocol and problems at German nuclear power plants. (17.07.2007) * Vattenfall Sacks German Nuclear Energy Head After Problems The head of Vattenfall Europe's nuclear energy division was fired Monday following a string of problems in two of the company's German nuclear energy plants. (16.07.2007) 1. 2007 Deutsche Welle ***************************************************************** 31 Border Mail: Greenpeace hits buddies club Sat, 21st July, 2007 THE Federal Government cannot be trusted over its involvement with a “buddies club” of nuclear countries, Greenpeace says. Chief executive of Greenpeace Australia Steve Shallhorn said GNEP was a “buddies club of nuclear countries that all seem to be able to trust each other to promote nuclear power globally”. If Australia followed through with the decision to join GNEP, the country’s uranium supplies would be leased, rather than sold to other nations, he said. This meant signing up to the GNEP alliance would expose Australia to the threat of becoming a dumping ground for the world’s nuclear waste, he said. 2007 The Border Morning Mail Pty Ltd. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 32 Border Mail: Clean energy is ready now 21/07/2007 By HOWARD JONES • Mark Diesendorf arrives in Albury last night. Picture: SIMON GROVES TALK of building nuclear power stations in Australia or using the country to store nuclear waste horrifies Mark Diesendorf. The Sydney scientist and author was in Albury last night for a private dinner function of the De Kerilleau Society. His visit came four months after the society hosted Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation head Ian Smith, a leading proponent of nuclear power. Dr Diesendorf researches and teaches sustainable development and greenhouse response strategies at the University of NSW. His new book, Greenhouse Solutions with Sustainable Energy, is sponsored by Friends of the Earth. Dr Diesendorf said that deep cuts in greenhouse gas emissions were needed urgently before 2020. He said the Howard Government was promoting nuclear power to divert attention from clean energy technologies that were ready now. These were efficient energy use, solar hot water, solar space heating, wind power and bio-energy from crop residues, organic wastes and landfills. “The present generation of nuclear power stations is the same dangerous and expensive technology that Australians have been rejecting for decades,’’ he said. “Only nowadays, there are even greater risks of proliferation of nuclear weapons and terrorism and there is still no long-term nuclear waste dump anywhere in the world.” The new generation of nuclear power stations that might be slightly safer and cheaper, would take at least 15 to 20 years to mass-produce. He fears the Government is trying to delay efficient and renewable energy until so-called “clean coal’’ and nuclear power might become available. 2007 The Border Morning Mail Pty Ltd. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 33 The Hindu: Nuclear talks satisfactory - DAE Monday, Jul 23, 2007 CHENNAI: The top brass of the Department of Atomic Energy are satisfied with the outcome of last weeks negotiations in Washington between India and the United States on the India-U.S. nuclear cooperation agreement. A top DAE official said he was satisfied with the result of the negotiations and happy with the outcome. Asked whether there was a breakthrough in the negotiations as reported in the newspapers, he said: We have reached an agreement. It has to go to the respective governments. It has to go through a formal process. I think it is satisfactory. The details can be released after it is seen by the Government. Reprocessing spent fuel On whether the U.S. had only partly conceded Indias demand that it should be allowed to reprocess spent fuel from the reactors to be imported, the official said: The question is both the sides will try to extract the maximum. But it is okay. Will India set up a separate, dedicated facility to reprocess the spent fuel from the reactors that it will import? That is what has been said [agreed upon earlier], he said. It can be seen by the Government and a decision taken whether it is acceptable or not acceptable. Nuclear tests Asked whether the agreement recognised Indias right to conduct nuclear tests in future, he said: You should look at the language and let us not speculate. On whether it guaranteed nuclear fuel supply for the lifetime of the reactors to be imported, he said: There is a provision for everything. At some stage, it [the agreement] will be made public. Right now, it is not proper for me to say anything. The official was asked whether India got all the three things it wanted: the right to reprocess the spent fuel from the reactors to be imported, an assurance of lifetime fuel supplies, and Indias r ight to conduct a nuclear test in future. His answer was: It is satisfactory. Will the agreement protect Indias three-stage indigenous nuclear power programme? The response was: I have spent a whole lifetime building the programme ... Our programme will continue as it is. Copyright 2007, The Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the ***************************************************************** 34 Tennessean: Following energy rules may cost TVA - Nashville, Tennessee - Sunday, 07/22/07 - Tennessean.com Alexander says paying fine would save money By ANNE PAINE Staff Writer The Tennessee Valley Authority, which provides the state's electricity through distributors such as Nashville Electric Service, has claimed that compliance with alternative energy requirements proposed in Congress would be too costly. Ratepayers would save money if TVA paid the penalty estimated at $410 million a year by 2020 rather than meet a goal of finding 15 percent new energy sources, said U.S. Sen Lamar Alexander, R-Tenn. "Tennessee is already on the honor roll of states producing carbon-free electricity," Alexander said. "We're 16th." That's due to nuclear power and hydropower dams, he said, which don't produce carbon that adds to global warming. While about 64 percent of TVA's energy comes from coal, 29 percent is from nuclear and 6 percent from hydropower. An assortment, including natural gas, provides the rest. The EPA ranks TVA as the country's fourth-largest emitter of carbon dioxide. The agency's alternative green energy program of which a wind farm on Buffalo Mountain in East Tennessee is a large part provides less than one half of 1 percent, and customers have to pay extra to support it. Senator touts biomass Alexander said that converting biomass woody materials and switchgrass is a more promising alternative to reduce the need to build more coal-based power plants. Gil Melear-Hough with Southern Alliance for Clean Energy counters that wind is already a workable solution, while biomass offers future potential. Alexander does agree with Melear-Hough on at least one point, saying: "The place where TVA and other utilities could make the most strides would be in conservation and efficiency." "Tennesseans have among the lowest residential electricity rates in the country, but we use more electricity per household than any other state in the nation," he said. "TVA needs to create incentives for households to use less electricity." Copyright 2007, tennessean.com. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 35 Rutland Herald: Vt. Yankee employee fails drug test July 21, 2007 By Susan Smallheer Herald Staff BRATTLEBORO A licensed control room operator at the Vermont Yankee nuclear plant was fired this week after he tested positive for marijuana. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission said that the operator was given a random drug test on Sunday and when the results came back on Wednesday, the operator was immediately fired. NRC spokesman Neil Sheehan said the testing was part of Entergy Nuclear's "fitness for duty" testing program and he declined to say the level of the marijuana in the person's bloodstream. Sheehan said that as soon as a worker tests positive for drugs, it must act and notify the NRC. "We will be following up and making a determination on whether enforcement action is necessary," Sheehan said. Entergy Nuclear spokesman Robert Williams said that a review of that person's work history is underway. Entergy spokesman Larry Smith said that he didn't know how high the former employee tested, saying that it was a personnel matter. He also refused to say how long the person was employed at the plant, and exactly where he or she worked. He said that it was a random drug test, which is accomplished by giving a blood sample. He said that alcohol levels are tested by urinanalysis. "I was tested just last week," Smith said, noting that the random testing was conducted by a special program at Entergy Nuclear, and that employees on average are tested twice a year. He said that there is also "for cause" testing, that would be triggered if an employee suspected another employee of impaired behavior. Smith said he believed that this wasn't the first time that an employee was fired for testing positive for drug use. He said that licensed control room operators work in both the reactor in Vernon, and also the plant's training facility in Brattleboro, located at Entergy Nuclear Vermont Yankee's corporate headquarters. "We take this seriously," said Entergy spokesman Robert Williams. He said the fitness-for-duty program is designed to protect the public health and safety, and he said that the testing proved "that it works." He said that the company has an employee assistance program with counseling and referral services. "We are committed to safety and a review of the employee's previous work is under way," he said. 2007 Rutland Herald ***************************************************************** 36 Salt Lake Tribune: Don't go nuclear Public Forum Letter Article Last Updated: 07/20/2007 10:43:09 PM MDT Your recent series on nuclear power states that it emits "no greenhouse gasses." This is not true if you factor in significant carbon emissions from uranium mining and processing, plant construction and waste disposal. The hundreds of new reactors proposed and their waste facilities will cost hundreds of billons of dollars. Private investors will not take the risks associated with nukes, so the taxpayer will pay, leaving little for development of alternative energy. This means that nuclear power is not the "in addition to" choice the series describes. It's an "either/or" choice. Building hundreds of new reactors will require a suspension of civil liberties to bypass the local opposition that is bound to surface. Governance of nuclear power is inherently authoritarian, as opposed to alternatives like solar and wind that are inherently decentralized and democratic. It will take many years to build those plants - too late to make a difference in global warming. Alternative energy sources can be ramped up sooner. You cannot separate nuclear weapons proliferation from nuclear power generation, the source of weapons-grade materials. A world with more nuclear power is a world awash in nuclear weapons. Chip Ward Torrey ***************************************************************** 37 Salt Lake Tribune: Nuclear not clean Public Forum Letter Article Last Updated: 07/20/2007 10:43:10 PM MDT How ironic that two days after an article appeared on the merits of nuclear power (Tribune, July 15) an earthquake in Japan (July 17) unleashed radioactive water, and the air around the Milford Flats fire registered high levels of radioactivity. Nuclear power is never going to be the answer to our power needs. Aside from the occasional dangerous leaks, there is the eternal problem of spent fuel rods. There is no place to store them. The hope of sustainable energy becomes a moot point when you consider the dangerous waste that is generated by nuclear power. With huge amounts of toxic nuclear waste, no one can honestly call nuclear power either clean or environmentally friendly. I urge Utahns to fight any attempts to build nuclear power plants in Utah, but we must realize that our Legislature really doesn't care what the majority of citizens want. Some nuclear power lobby will pay for the legislators to tour a nuclear power plant, then contribute to their campaigns. Before we know it, in spite of our objections, we will have "clean" nuclear power plants popping up all over the state. Candace Jacobson Provo ***************************************************************** 38 Salt Lake Tribune: Nuclear no alternative Public Forum Letter Article Last Updated: 07/21/2007 10:09:01 AM MDT By now most people know about the end of cheap oil. The Hirsch Report for the Department of Energy confirms that the world is - yes, really - running out of usable oil. Now, should nuclear power be considered as an alternative? Anyone who thinks so should consider the amount of oil to be burned for mining the uranium. They should think about the radiation and its potential uses by potential enemies. And they should think about another concept, peak uranium, that is, running out of uranium. As it turns out, total known uranium ores of good quality are only sufficient to supply three years worth of total world energy needs. On the other hand, will we run out of sunshine, wind, waves, geothermal heat? We are living in a time that is right at the peak of energy abundance, and it deludes us into thinking that we can continue living this way. No. It's time to rely on energy sources that won't leave us desperate and militant and worried for our children's future. Kevin Shumway Salt Lake City ***************************************************************** 39 Salt Lake Tribune: The nuclear option: Nuclear power no panacea for reducing global warming Tribune Editorial Article Last Updated: 07/21/2007 10:09:01 AM MDT Is the expansion of the nuclear power industry, which produces no greenhouse gases, a big part of the solution to the global warming problem, as the Bush administration and some state officials claim? Or does it amount to trading one evil for an even greater evil? Those are urgent questions. A state legislative panel is drafting legislation to make it easier for nuclear power plants to be built in Utah, which has no commercial reactors. And the federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission expects to receive up to 30 applications for new reactors in the United States by 2010, as the domestic industry appears poised for a comeback. In the United States, 104 nuclear reactors at 65 power plants in 31 states produce more than 19 percent of our electricity. It's an important part of our nation's energy portfolio. But when it comes to solving environmental problems and filling our long-term energy needs, nuclear power is no panacea. There hasn't been a permit issued to build a new nuclear power plant in the United States for more than two decades, and for good reasons. Nuclear power is too expensive for consumers and too slow off the mark to have an immediate impact on global warming. It costs about $2 billion and takes more than a decade to bring a new plant online. Also, there are serious security concerns, post 9/11. Terrorists paint bull's-eyes on nuclear reactors. Fuel could fall into the wrong hands. And, after more than 20 years of trying, the government has yet to build a permanent storage facility for the radioactive waste generated by power plants. Tons of spent but still-lethal fuel are stored at power plants while plans for a permanent repository hang in limbo. And Utah officials are fighting an attempt by private industry to build a temporary waste storage facility on the Skull Valley Goshute reservation 45 miles southwest of Salt Lake City. Plus, the mining and processing of uranium for nuclear fuel harms the environment. Even as the government spends many millions of dollars to clean up waste from the last uranium mining boom in Utah, the long-dormant industry is on the cusp of another, just as the world's known uranium deposits dwindle toward zero. But the No. 1 reason for removing nuclear power from the global warming equation: A major accident at a nuclear power plant could kill thousands of people and render tens of thousands of acres uninhabitable. The industry has a spotty safety record. About 30 reactors have been shut down for at least a year for safety repairs since the 1980s. And while the near meltdown at Three Mile Island in Pennsylvania in 1979 stands out, there have been other close calls. In the final analysis, it's better for the state and federal governments to put our energy eggs in the clean and green renewable energy basket. Solar, wind and geothermal power have tremendous potential, and none of the risks of nuclear power. In the final analysis, it's better for the state and federal governments to put our energy eggs in the clean and green renewable energy basket. ***************************************************************** 40 Daily Herald: Early test says thorium still poisoning suburb Initial EPA tests say levels are unsafe By Rupa Shenoy rshenoy@dailyherald.com Posted Saturday, July 21, 2007 A slow, steady rhythm of high-pitched beeps fills Sandy Riess West Chicago basement Friday morning as a technician swings a Geiger counter over the walls and floor. Suddenly, as the instrument hovers over a circular sewer lid in the floor, the well-spaced chirps take on a fast-paced intensity, nearly becoming a single tone. Technician Steve Shafer, of the Illinois Emergency Management Agencys Division of Nuclear Safety, pries the lid loose with a screw, revealing a 3-foot-deep hole with a dirt bottom and brick-lined sides. Federal Environmental Protection Agency health physicist Gene Jablonowski crouches close with a space age-looking device. It says its thorium, he says. Jablonowski immediately said the $20,000 instruments findings are unconfirmed, since its a prototype that wasnt calibrated. Still, the device showed levels that were significantly elevated over EPA standards, Riess said. If correct, the findings will be the first evidence to validate new suspicions that the cancer-causing radioactive element thorium could remain on some residential properties in West Chicago. By Friday afternoon, Riess said she was considering moving out of her house. I am terrified, she said. I cant even breathe right now. Well-chewed dog toys rested on the floor a few feet away from the sewer lid. They had belonged to Riess two Saint Bernards, Oscar and Siren, ages 10 and 11, who played often in the basement until recently, when they died of bone cancer within a week of each another. Riess property is one of 117 that may have been insufficiently cleaned of thorium in the 1980s by the company Kerr-McGee, which inadvertently distributed the substance throughout West Chicago over several decades. Remaining trace amounts of the substance may not have been found in a second, more stringent 1990s cleanup, EPA officials first acknowledged in May. The agency has known of that possibility since 2002 but it was just a possibility until the unconfirmed readings taken Friday at Riess home. Technicians took samples from the sewer hole that, after testing, will show whether the preliminary readings were correct. Riess said her homes previous owners, like many other residents, didnt let the EPA test the basement during the 1990s clean up. Those people who didnt get their basements tested, whats in there? she asked. EPA spokesman Mick Hans said that numbers on how many basements had been tested wasnt available. Everybody that gave us permission had their basements tested, he said. We tested lots and lots and lots of basements. At an intergovernmental meeting later in the day, EPA project manager Rebecca Frey said that, after meeting twice with West Chicago officials on the issues, her agency was finalizing letters to residents to better inform them. The EPA is working with the city to develop a consistent, objective, and uniform approach to identifying which properties may need additional testing for thorium contamination, Frey said. ***************************************************************** 41 FT.com: Energy Utilities Mining - Tepco counts cost of earthquake By David Pilling in Tokyo Published: July 22 2007 20:04 | Last updated: July 22 2007 20:04 Tokyo Electric Power, Japan’s biggest utility, has started counting the cost of the Niigata earthquake, which last week brought the Kashiwazaki-Kariwa nuclear power plant, the biggest in the world, to a complete shutdown. The company yesterday said it expected to come out with estimates of the cost by the end of the month. An official would not comment on calculations from the Nikkei newspaper suggesting continued closure of the plant could cost Tepco Y200bn ($1.6bn), halving its projected pre-tax profits for the current fiscal year. Nomura last week estimated a similar collapse in revenue based on a five-month stoppage at Kashiwazaki, though some commentators say it could be longer before the plant reopens. The company’s share price fell 13 per cent last week and Credit Suisse lowered its 12-month share price forecast from Y4,300 to Y3,500, slightly above Friday’s close. Tepco will have to foot the bill both for finding alternative electricity supplies as well as for fortifying the Kashiwazaki plant to regulators’ satisfaction after a radioactive leak. The plant’s seven reactors account for nearly half of Tepco’s total nuclear output. Nuclear power accounts for about one-third of Japan’s total electricity needs. Tepco has been told Kashiwazaki cannot reopen until the plant – which was last week revealed to have been built on an active fault line – is strengthened to withstand stronger earthquakes. The company said it would be able to secure enough power for the peak summer period so long as temperatures are in line with expectations. Tsunehisa Katsumata, Tepco’s president, said the company would raise output at other plants. It is also expected to step up use of liquefied natural gas. Without such measures, Tepco’s capacity would fall to 58.01m kilowatts, well short of the 61.1m kW needed in the peak summer months. But a heat wave could push demand up to 64m kW, experts say, potentially forcing Tepco to cut supplies to some of its largest customers. In 2003, when the company closed down all 17 of its nuclear reactors after falsifying data, it appealed to customers to turn down their air-conditioners and take other energy-saving measures. The latest crisis is the result of admissions last week that the Kashiwazaki plant was not built to sustain earthquakes of anywhere near the intensity of the 6.8 quake that struck Niigata on Monday. Although reactors shut down automatically after the tremor, Tepco sparked alarm by admitting that radioactive-contaminated water had spilt into the sea. The company’s preparedness also came under criticism after it took nearly two hours to extinguish a fire that broke out near one of the reactors. The economy and trade ministry, which regulates the industry, has ordered all 11 power companies to improve fire-fighting measures at plants, following revelations that none were properly equipped to deal with blazes. The Japanese government has promised to carry out a full investigation into Kashiwazaki and the safety of Japan’s 55 nuclear power stations in general. However, at the weekend, the government turned down an offer from the Vienna-based International Atomic Energy Agency to help in the inspection process. Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2007 ***************************************************************** 42 Guardian Unlimited: IAEA Sought for Japan Nuke Inspection Sunday July 22, 2007 4:31 PM By CARL FREIRE Associated Press Writer TOKYO (AP) - U.N. nuclear experts should be invited to inspect a Japanese nuclear power station damaged in this week's earthquake to help restore public confidence, a top local official said Sunday. The Kashiwazaki-Kariwa plant - the world's largest in terms of capacity - announced a barrage of leaks and malfunctions last week after Monday's magnitude 6.8 temblor, which killed 10 people and injured more than 1,000 in northwestern Japan. Plant operator Tokyo Electric Power Co., or TEPCO, and nuclear regulators have said that the amounts of radioactivity leaked were extremely low and posed no threat to the environment or residents. But the damage has raised concerns about the plant's safety, prompting the government to order it shuttered indefinitely until its safety can be confirmed. In a letter addressed to Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, Trade Minister Akira Amari and four other senior officials, Governor Hirohiko Iizumida of Niigata prefecture (state) - the site of the Kashiwazaki Kariwa power plant - said while the plant's problems and leaks have not resulted in bodily harm, they are creating ``great unease'' among locals. ``Furthermore, images of the accident have been broadcast everywhere around the world and are creating misunderstandings,'' Izumida said in the letter, a copy of which was seen by The Associated Press. ``It is making this country's citizens uneasy, too, and may lead to harmful rumors about the prefecture's tourism and agriculture industries,'' he said. To counteract this and ensure that accurate information gets out, the letter concluded, the government should ask the International Atomic Energy Agency to inspect the plant ``as quickly as possible.'' Earlier this week, IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradei said that a thorough review of the plant's problems was key and offered to have his Vienna-based agency pull together global experts to do so. Japan told the agency Friday that it was passing for now on the offer. Monday's earthquake resulted in a raft of malfunctions, damage and mistakes at the plant, including a fire that charred an electrical transformer, planks that toppled into a pool of spent nuclear fuel and 400 barrels of atomic waste that were knocked over. The problems - exacerbated by TEPCO's delays in notifying the public - were capped by news that radioactive water had sloshed out of a tank and was flushed out to sea, and that radioactive material was vented into the air in two separate instances. Officials at the Kashiwazaki plant have acknowledged they had not foreseen such a powerful quake hitting the facility and have repeatedly underreported its impact after it hit. Guardian Unlimited Guardian News and Media Limited 2007 ***************************************************************** 43 AFP: Sarkozy wants all-French energy giant: report - Sat Jul 21, 3:40 PM ET BERLIN (AFP) - French President Nicolas Sarkozy wants to kick Germany out of a Franco-German nuclear engineering joint venture to create an all-French energy giant, a German magazine reported Saturday. Sarkozy wants to buy Siemens AG's 34 percent stake in Areva NP, a joint venture set up in 2001 with French nuclear group Areva, Wirtschaftswoche said in an article to appear on Monday, citing company sources. The German group's stake in Areva NP is valued at about one billion euros (1.3 billion dollars), the magazine said. Areva owns the remaining two-thirds. Sarzkoy then wants to combine the state-owned Areva with French energy company Alstom as well as engineering giant Bouygues to create an all-French group constructing nuclear and fossil fuel power stations, the magazine said. Siemens is not expected to give up the stake without a fight, however, and chief executive Peter Loescher hopes to have the support of German Chancellor Angela Merkel in countering Sarkozy's plan, Wirtschaftswoche said. Copyright 2007 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The ***************************************************************** 44 UPI: Inspection requested for nuke plant United Press International - NewsTrack - Top News - Published: July 22, 2007 at 11:36 AM TOKYO, July 22 (UPI) -- A Japanese nuclear power plant affected by a powerful earthquake should undergo immediate international inspection, officials said Sunday. Officials in Niigata prefecture want Japan's government to sanction an inspection by the International Atomic Energy Agency, Kyodo news service reported. Problems at the plant reported worldwide are "damaging the prefecture's tourism, agriculture and fisheries industries due to harmful rumors," said the prefecture's petition to federal officials and executives at the Kashiwazaki-Kariwa nuclear plant, owned by Tokyo Electric Power Co. The regional request came after federal officials rejected the IAEA's offer to inspect the plant. Tokyo Electric Power has said Monday's 6.8 magnitude quake caused leakage of low-level radioactive material. Del.icio.us | Digg it | RSS Copyright 2007 United Press International, Inc. All Rights Reserved. United Press International, UPI, the UPI logo, and other trademarks and service marks, are registered or unregistered trademarks of United Press International, Inc. in the United States and in other countries. ***************************************************************** 45 Wisconsin State Journal: Nuclear power deserves chance The Point Beach Nuclear Power Plant in southeast Wisconsin. FRI., JUL 20, 2007 - 6:54 PM A Wisconsin State Journal editorial As Wisconsin looks for ways to meet its growing demand for cleaner energy, the state can no longer afford to rule out the construction of nuclear power plants. That's why the state should lift its 23-year-old moratorium on new nuclear plants. The Assembly has placed the nuclear plant ban in play by including in its version of the state budget a provision lifting the moratorium. The budget is the wrong place for such a policy matter. The legislative committee assigned to produce a final budget plan to submit to Gov. Jim Doyle should remove the nuclear power provision for later consideration in a separate bill. But the Assembly's action should be considered a signal that it's time for Wisconsin to get rid of the moratorium. Nuclear power already supplies about 20 percent of Wisconsin's electricity from three reactors, all in the east-central part of the state. But after those reactors were built, the Legislature imposed extra barriers on nuclear plants. The chief barrier prohibits approval of another nuclear power plant until there is a facility with the capacity to store spent nuclear fuel from all nuclear plants in the state. (Spent fuel from Wisconsin's existing reactors is in temporary storage on site, the common, federally-regulated practice in the industry.) The law is, in effect, a moratorium. Until recently the moratorium was of little concern because no nuclear power plants were being proposed anywhere in the United States. But with growing concern about global warming, more confidence in nuclear safety and more favorable cost comparisons, interest in new nuclear power plants is growing. Earlier this year, the Tennessee Valley Authority responded to the changed nuclear outlook by restarting a nuclear reactor in Alabama, 22 years after it was shut down. President Bush said last month that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission is likely to review applications for about 30 nuclear plants in coming years, with the first construction possible as soon as 2010. In light of the renewed interest in nuclear power, Wisconsin's moratorium is an albatross limiting the state's options. Conservation is important to the state, but it is not a sufficient solution. Coal-fired power plants have been the cheapest option. But they are a chief contributor to global warming and to mercury pollution that fouls the state's lakes and compels the state to issue warnings about eating fish. Natural gas, wind, hydropower and biomass all have limits to the role they can play. Nuclear energy offers the important advantage of being free of most air pollution, including greenhouse gases and mercury. And nuclear fuel is cheap. Nuclear power has disadvantages, too, including the high cost of plant construction and questions about the long-term storage of nuclear waste. Nonetheless, if Wisconsin continues to rule out nuclear plant construction, the state will condemn itself to limited energy options. The moratorium should be lifted. Copyright 2005 Wisconsin State Journal editor, smilfred@madison.com ***************************************************************** 46 Guardian Unlimited: N. Korea Wants Reactors for Nukes Saturday July 21, 2007 5:46 AM By JAE-SOON CHANG Associated Press Writer BEIJING (AP) - North Korea's nuclear envoy demanded Saturday that his country be given power-generating reactors as a reward for eventually dismantling its own atomic programs. The demand presents a future hurdle at talks aimed at ridding Pyongyang of its ability to make nuclear bombs. ``In order to ultimately dismantle (the nuclear programs), light-water reactors should be given'' to the North, Kim Kye Gwan told reporters before leaving Beijing, referring to a type of nuclear reactor that cannot be easily used to make bombs. Six-nation talks on the North's nuclear weapons programs ended Friday without setting any target date to disable Pyongyang's nuclear facilities - on the way to their eventual dismantlement - following the shutdown of its sole operating reactor a week ago. The North had been promised two light-water reactors for power under a 1994 disarmament deal with the U.S. But that agreement fell apart in 2002 when Washington accused Pyongyang of embarking on a secret uranium enrichment program, sparking the latest standoff. The U.S. and the other countries in the arms talks - China, Japan, Russia and South Korea - have agreed to discuss providing the North with light-water reactors at an appropriate time. Washington has insisted that would only be after Pyongyang has rejoined the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty that it quit in early 2003. The North's Kim still praised the outcome of latest arms talks, but said time had not been sufficient to set a new deadline for the next step in Pyongyang's disarmament process. Instead, working groups will meet by the end of August to discuss technical details of future disarmament. ``In order to set a deadline, we have to clearly define the obligations of each side and sequence corresponding actions,'' Kim said. ``Time was not enough and preparations were not enough this time.'' ``The talks went well, the discussions went well and I think the outcome is good,'' he said, adding that the North pledged to ``sincerely implement'' previous agreements from the negotiations. However, the longtime North Korean nuclear negotiator leveled harsh words at Japan, which has refused to contribute aid for disarmament to the communist nation until it addresses abductions of Japanese citizens - an issue Pyongyang has claimed it has already resolved. ``Japan is creating a crisis of infringing upon our national sovereignty,'' said Kim, who met with his Japanese counterpart Kenichiro Sasae in a one-on-one session amid the latest arms talks. ``If Japan takes one more step further, I warned that will be a disaster.'' Guardian Unlimited Guardian News and Media Limited 2007 ***************************************************************** 47 MHNN: Reps want NRC to return Indian Point penalty money to local governments July 21-22, 2007 Copyright 2007 Mid-Hudson News Network, a division of Statewide Hall and Lowey (file) White Plains – Congressional representatives Nita Lowey (D-Westchester/Rockland), and John Hall (D-Hudson Valley), were joined by Westchester County Executive Andrew Spano, and County Department of Emergency Services Commissioner Tony Sutton Friday in highlighting what they say are continued safety and structural failings at the Indian Point Nuclear Facility. “I believe that Indian Point represents an unacceptable threat to our region and should be shut down,” Lowey said. If Entergy cannot get a simple siren system to work, it raises obvious questions about the overall safety at the facility. As their inaction on installing the siren system continues to put our community at risk, it makes sense that the fines for these penalties be used to help protect our communities.” Lowey and Hall also announced legislation that would require the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to distribute funds collected as fines for safety violations to counties surrounding nuclear facilities, which are charged with maintaining radiological emergency plans. Currently, all fines paid to the NRC, as with any federal agency, are deposited directly into the U.S. Treasury. Senator Clinton is introducing companion legislation in the Senate. Hall called it common sense. “Counties are spending many, many hundreds of thousands of dollars on personnel, and time, and machinery and communications equipment, trying to be ready for a possible emergency at the plant. So, if there’s a fine, it would only seem fair that that should go to reduce the local taxes to the people who are paying for it.” “It is only fair that any future fines levied against Entergy be directed to the counties who expend far more in emergency planning than they receive” said County Executive Spano. “Westchester, for example, has received $412,500 each year for the past ten years, while spending roughly ten times that amount since September 11th. To put this in perspective, the $130,000 fine previously levied, and given to the government is miniscule in terms of importance to the federal treasury, while to Westchester, it would have been used to relieve some of the burden Indian Point places on our taxpayers.” Riverkeeper applauded introduction of the legislation. “Given the continuing problems with Indian Point’s beleaguered new siren system, radioactive leaks, and unplanned shutdowns, it is only fair that safety violation fines be directed to the communities that bear the burden of Indian Point’s failings”, said Riverkeeper’s Policy Director, Lisa Rainwater. HEAR today's news on MidHudsonRadio.com, the Hudson Valley's only Internet radio news report. ***************************************************************** 48 AFP: Tokyo Electric to suffer massive costs following quake - Sun Jul 22, 5:51 AM ET TOKYO (AFP) - Tokyo Electric Power Co. (TEPCO) is likely to suffer extra costs of at least 1.7 billion dollars after its nuclear power plant was damaged by an earthquake last week, a media report said Sunday. "It is extremely difficult" for TEPCO to resume operations at the plant by March next year as it will take time to have its quake-resistance capabilities reinforced, the Nikkei newspaper said. Japanese authorities have ordered TEPCO to suspend operations indefinitely at the Kashiwazaki-Kariwa plant, the world's largest nuclear power facility, which was hit by the 6.8 Richter-scale quake on July 16. Fires broke out at the plant after the powerful quake, which also caused minor radioactive leaks, leading to strong criticism of TEPCO for initially under-reporting the problems. If it is unable to resume operations by March, the quake-related cost will be at least 200 billion yen (1.7 billion dollars), wiping out half of the pretax profit it forecast, the business daily said. TEPCO will be forced to compensate clients for electric power expected to have been supplied from the plant, which accounts for 47 percent of TEPCO's entire nuclear energy generation, Nikkei said. Higher crude oil prices have also pressured the firm, the Nikkei said, adding that if the price remains at 65 dollars per barrel, it would slash TEPCO's profit by 60 billion yen for the fiscal year to March 2008. The powerful quake struck just nine kilometres (five miles) from the plant, which automatically shut down. The quake killed 10 people, injured more than 1,000 and destroyed hundreds of buildings. The earthquake has also caused leading automakers, including Toyota Motor Corp., to curtail production after damage to a key supplier of car parts. Copyright 2007 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 49 Edmonton Journal: Nuclear power only one option canada.com The Edmonton Journal Published: Saturday, July 21 Two local governments raised eyebrows this week by writing letters of support for a proposed nuclear power plant in their backyards. Eager to land jobs, both Peace River and Woodlands County, which includes the town of Whitecourt, said that after just a few months of research and a couple of community meetings they are convinced the 2,200-megawatt reactors belong in their communities. "Council has taken the time to study and evaluate all aspects of the proposed development," Woodlands County Mayor Jim Rennie said in his letter. The idea of nuclear energy is new to Alberta and should be one of the options on the table. But the debate over its merits and drawbacks has only just begun. It is hard to believe that anyone knows enough after just a few months of sales pitches to positively say that nuclear energy is a good fit for Alberta. Concerned area residents are right to question whether their local officials really have all the facts they need -- particularly those from independent experts who will talk frankly about the risks and benefits of nuclear power. These local politicians need to remember that their decision will affect all Albertans, not just those who vote them into office. The chance of an environmental catastrophe may be small, but its impact on the province could be huge. As for the waste, there is currently no long-term plan in Canada to store nuclear waste. There is certainly no safe storage facility in the province. Surprisingly, the provincial government's role in deciding where a nuclear power plant will go is relatively small thanks to our privatized energy regime. Alberta Energy says it will consult with Albertans and make sure their concerns are voiced, but ultimately it is the Ottawa-based Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission that will decide whether to issue a licence Nuclear power requires major capital investment and a 10-year lead time. Wouldn't it be smarter in Alberta, with its rich with coal reserves, to pursue coal gasification, as Saskatchewan is doing? SaskPower, that province's government-owned utility, is debating whether to proceed with a $2-billion clean coal plant that will emit virtually no greenhouse gas emissions. That plant would sell the carbon dioxide generated by the coal-fired power plant to oil companies to pump it underground to get out the last barrels of oil. There are still many questions about carbon capture and storage technology and Saskatchewan may be in a better position to try such a venture, given that the province's energy supply is overseen by a Crown corporation. But isn't that what the ingenuity of Albertans is supposed to accomplish? © The Edmonton Journal 2007 ***************************************************************** 50 The Telegraph: Behind nuke deal, a spymaster tale Calcutta : Frontpage K.P. NAYAR Washington, July 22: In the end, it was a case of spy vs. spy. If M.K. Narayanan, with his 37 years of intelligence work for the Indian government and a further 15 years of advisory role on clandestine activity since his retirement had not met Robert Gates at the Pentagon on July 16, the 123 Agreement to operationalise the Indo-US nuclear deal may have spilled over into another round of negotiations, maybe next month in New Delhi. Gates, now America?s defence secretary, and Narayanan, now national security adviser, have had parallel lives in the shadowy intelligence worlds of their respective countries. Gates is the only career officer in the history of the Central Intelligence Agency to have risen from an entry-level operative to CIA director. But the two men also had a 17 year-old matter to settle between them. So they were looking forward to last week?s meeting to smooth things over and take matters, which were beyond the nuclear deal, forward. Few people now remember that when Gates arrived in New Delhi in May 1990 from Islamabad as America?s ?policeman? to stop what Washington thought was an imminent nuclear war in South Asia, Narayanan was right at the top of the Indian intelligence set up. He had been chief of the Intelligence Bureau (IB) from 1987 to 1990, then headed the Joint Intelligence Committee and again became IB chief in 1991 till his retirement in 1992. India held the 1990 Gates mission to South Asia and Washington?s subsequent claim that it averted a nuclear holocaust as a result of that mission in utter contempt then and continues to do so till this day. But neither America?s intelligence community nor its strategic community has been able to live down the reality that India and Pakistan have managed their nuclear balance between them and on their own. So on Monday, Narayanan appropriately went to the strategic community in Washington within 40 minutes of his arrival here for his first interaction with them since becoming national security adviser three years ago. For two full hours, he gave them his assessment of the security dimensions in India?s neighbourhood and listened to their response that obviously included the nuclear-armed status on India and Pakistan. Then he went to see Gates. There was no rancour. At that meeting, according to multiple accounts, the two men built a bond that is only shared by men and women from the cloak and dagger world of spymasters. Bygones were bygones. Gates was instrumental in arranging the crucial meeting between US vice president Dick Cheney and Narayanan on Thursday, which sent an unmistakable political signal to the American officials connected with the nuclear deal that their mandate was to finalise the 123 Agreement, not to block it further. Cheney and Gates go back a long time. At the time of his 1990 mission to Islamabad and New Delhi, Gates was deputy national security adviser in father Bush?s White House and Cheney was doing Gates? current job. Gates briefed Cheney soon after he had met Narayanan, giving the vice president a comprehensive account of Narayanan?s presentation at the Pentagon meeting. Obviously, the defence secretary had been impressed and the account by Gates made Cheney curious enough to want to know more. So, when Cheney met the Indian national security adviser, he quickly gave the green signal for the nuclear deal and proceeded to carve up the world between India and the US in his pet neo-conservative fantasy. India was primarily interested in getting the 123 Agreement past the roadblocks which have held it up for more than a year. But Cheney was interested in what India and the US could do together in Asia with other democracies, such as Japan and Australia and in the volatile areas of the world?s energy supplies along with ?good Muslims? who are in his pocket. Naturally, that excludes the Iranians. Narayanan, it was obvious to the Americans, brought with him the authority of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, but always understated it, according to US sources. They said the deference shown by foreign secretary Shiv Shankar Menon to his counterpart in the department of atomic energy, Anil Kakodkar, Menon?s senior by many years, also showed that the Indian team had come with the authority and the willingness to bring the talks to a successful conclusion. That made it incumbent on the US to rise to occasion. And in the end they did. Copyright 2006 The Telegraph. All rights reserved. Disclaimer ***************************************************************** 51 Reuters: Quake-hit Japan region calls for IAEA inspectors 22 Jul 2007 12:13:39 GMT TOKYO, July 22 (Reuters) - Japanese regional authorities have called for United Nations inspectors to look into the radiation leaks at the world's largest nuclear plant, caused by a powerful earthquake this week, media reports said on Sunday. The request from Niigata prefecture, home to the Kashiwazaki-Kariwa nuclear plant that was closed indefinitely after Monday's 6.8 magnitude quake, follows reports that Japan had turned down offers for help from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). Niigata prefecture submitted the petition calling for an inspection by the U.N. nuclear watchdog to Prime Minister Shinzo Abe and other senior ministers, as well as the plant operated by Tokyo Electric Power Co. (TEPCO), Kyodo news agency said. The Japanese government told the IAEA it had decided not to seek an inspection for the time being, but that it may do so in the future, reports said on Saturday. "Problems (at the plant following the quake) have been reported worldwide, causing public concern and damaging the prefecture's tourism, agriculture and fisheries industries due to harmful rumours," Kyodo quoted the petition as saying. "Appropriate information needs to be disseminated." Authorities closed down the TEPCO <9501.T> nuclear power station after the quake triggered radiation leaks, which the company said were within safety regulations and posed no threat to the environment. The quake killed 10 people, injured more than 1,000 and flattened hundreds of houses. The leaks have renewed fears about the safety of the nuclear industry, which supplies about one third of Japan's power but has suffered from years of accident cover-ups and fudged safety records. TEPCO has acknowledged that the tremor was stronger than the plant, whose first reactor came on stream more than 20 years ago, had been designed to withstand. ***************************************************************** 52 Sarasota Herald Tribune: Not-so-clean nuclear energy HeraldTribune.com Damage at Japanese plant should give Florida pause The next time proponents tout today's nuclear power as clean and safe, someone should counter with a one-word response: Japan. That is where an earthquake last week knocked 300-plus gallons of radioactive water into the sea. As of Friday, damage to the Kashiwazaki-Kariya nuclear power plant was still being assessed. Among the problems reported so far, according to The Associated Press: malfunctioning pumps in the water intake screening at two reactors; loss in water-tight seal of the reactor core cooling system; cracks in an embankment of the water intake facility; and ground liquefaction under portions of the plant. Let's all hope these issues -- potentially affecting critical portions of the world's largest nuclear power plant -- prove minor. But let's also mind the fact that the facility was damaged despite being engineered to withstand a quake. Such episodes must be heeded in Florida, where Gov. Charlie Crist has stepped up advocacy of alternative energy, including nuclear, to reduce emissions that contribute to global warming. Crist considers nuclear power clean and safe, saying, "It's been a long time since Three Mile Island." New technologies In some respects, Crist is right: The industry has evolved since the 1979 meltdown of a nuclear reactor in Pennsylvania. The episode rocked the industry, although disaster was averted. Despite the risk inherent in nuclear material, and many close calls, deaths involving nuclear energy plants have been rare. And they'll get rarer as next-generation reactors are developed, experts say. New technologies are expected to minimize radioactive waste and prevent the possibility of out-of-control chain reactions and other hazards. These upcoming reactor designs -- not the kind now used in the United States or at the quake-damaged Japanese plant -- are also said to simplify operations and reduce costs. But whether they will live up to their hype remains to be seen. Despite the promise, there is a key problem with Crist's embrace of nuclear power: It is not clear that Florida would get the best available technology. The most theoretically safe and appealing reactor designs -- so-called "Generation 4" -- could be decades away from deployment. "Generation 3-plus" -- considered safer and more efficient than what is now generally used -- is on the cusp of deployment, but will Florida's power providers choose it? Crist's problematic push Because climate change and fossil-fuel pollution are significant threats to water-bound Florida, Crist is right to demand energy reforms. We applaud the governor's calls for deeper conservation efforts and his initiatives to develop underutilized wind and solar power. But his less publicized push toward nukes remains problematic. Despite its relatively safe record using an older technology, the industry continues to produce radioactive waste without a long-term storage solution. And, if a dreaded accident does occur, the potential for catastrophic damage is real. If futuristic reactor design can truly solve those problems, Crist should insist on it. But if his intent is to allow more of yesterday's inadequate technology, Floridians should put a halt to that notion. The environmental woes from oil, gas and coal are costly enough. Don't compound them with radioactive risk. Last modified: July 22. 2007 12:00AM The next time proponents tout today's nuclear power as clean and safe, someone should counter with a one-word response: Japan. That is where an earthquake last week knocked 300-plus gallons of . . . HeraldTribune.com | About Us | Advertise With Us | Jobs With Us | Serving the Herald-Tribune newspaper and SNN Channel 6 Sarasota ***************************************************************** 53 LA Daily News: Monitors being tested at L.A. ports Chertoff tours local facilities, defends his terror budget BY TROY ANDERSON, Staff Writer Article Last Updated: 07/20/2007 11:54:37 PM PDT Even as experts warn that the United States' risk of a terrorist attack is rising, Department of Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff on Friday said port security has been boosted and he is proposing dedicated federal funding to allow local police departments to beef up counter-terrorism squads. Chertoff, who toured the the Los Angeles port area and spoke at the University of Southern California, said his plan to pay the salaries of counter-terrorism officers would allow the Los Angeles Police Department and other agencies to hire more. "For international terrorism, the federal government has the major tools and responsibility to detect terrorism. But when you talk about homegrown terrorism ... we are not going to uncover that in all likelihood with spies and satellites," he said. "That is going to be uncovered by police who are trained to look for certain things and then go and disrupt something before it happens." Chertoff also defended the federal government's decision this week to reduce anti-terrorism funding for the Los Angeles-Long Beach region, saying the nation has spent more than $13 billion on homeland security since the 2001 terrorist attacks. Chertoff said the proposed 10 percent cut from last year's funding levels was necessary because of demands from communities across the country. "There's only one pie, and the way we've decided to slice the pie is to put most of the money where most of the risk is," Chertoff said during comments in the Port of Los Angeles. "But I've got to balance and look at the big picture. Los Angeles gets the second-most amount of money to New York, but it's also right that San Diego, Las Vegas, and dare I say, Oklahoma City, gets a reasonable amount of money commensurate to risk." Chertoff also said radiation monitors are now used at six overseas ports and more than 90 percent of cargo coming into the Los Angeles-Long Beach ports is now scanned for radioactive materials. Together, the ports handle nearly 45 percent of the nation's imports, with a total annual value approaching $275 billion. Chertoff viewed new radiation portal monitors placed at marine terminals to detect radioactive materials used to make "dirty bombs." Currently, more than 85 stationary radiation monitors are positioned at marine terminals across the ports, with 24 more such devices attached to trucks, said Aileen Suliveras, assistant port director for U.S. Customs and Border Protection. The new detection device, which scans containers as they're hauled out of marine terminals on trucks, is being tested at SSA Terminal on Pier A. If the new device is successful, authorities hope to have them at seaports and land border crossings across the nation in coming months as funding becomes available. Staff Writer Kristopher Hanson contributed to this report. troy.anderson@dailynews.com (213) 974-8985 Copyright 2007 Los Angeles Newspaper Group ***************************************************************** 54 UPI: Bombs biggest terrorist threat United Press International - NewsTrack - Top News - Published: July 22, 2007 at 3:34 PM WASHINGTON, July 22 (UPI) -- Terrorists' ability to penetrate defenses and cause mass casualties is the biggest threat to the U.S. homeland, the director of national intelligence says. Another threat that would have a long-lasting effect would be an attack impacting the U.S. political hierarchy, infrastructure or economy, Adm. Mike McConnell said Sunday on NBC's "Meet The Press." A new national intelligence estimate report last week said al-Qaida has protected or re-enforced elements of its attack capabilities, including a series of safe-havens in tribal areas of Pakistan. "As a result, we judge that the United States currently is in a heightened threat environment," the report said. McConnell said terrorists have not achieved a nuclear threat, based on current intelligence. "The intent is either chemical, biological, nuclear radiological, or even nuclear to include a nuclear yield," he said. "I would add what we see currently is primarily a focus on explosives ... put together with commercially available material." Suicide bombings are unlikely in the United States because the country and its allies "have gone through over the past five years have been significant in establishing barriers," McConnell said. "So the terrorists perceive us as a much more difficult target." Copyright 2007 United Press International, Inc. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 55 Daily Yomiuri: Damaged firefighting pipe kept plant workers at bay Workers at Niigata Prefecture's Kashiwazaki-Kariwa nuclear power station were unable to immediately extinguish a power transformer fire triggered by Monday's powerful earthquake because of a damaged pipe in the fire-extinguishing system, according to the plant's director. Director Akio Takahashi on Friday used a press conference at the plant in Kariwamura to explain for the first time since the earthquake what happened at the plant after the temblor struck. He also apologized for not having been forthcoming with information earlier. Takahashi told reporters that four plant workers attempted to use the fire-extinguishing system to tend to the fire in the No. 3 reactor. However, damage to a pipe resulted in the water hose only being able to spray water about a meter, as opposed to the normal dozens of meters. Worrying for their own safety, the workers reportedly escaped to a building about 30 meters away from the fire. "We could do nothing but watch the fire from behind the building," one of the workers said. Meanwhile, Takahashi said he was told of the fire immediately after the earthquake, and arrived at the nuclear plant at about 11 a.m. However, he said he did not move to dispatch the facility's firefighters because he thought management would have already done so. Takahashi said the earthquake had knocked out a hotline to the local fire station, and admitted there were problems in its primary firefighting system and cooperation between related organizations. In the five days following the quake, during which the plant did not offer residents sufficient information, Takahashi said he and his workers had tried to assess the situation while placing worker safety as the highest priority. He also said they planned to announce daily the results of checkups of the nuclear plant, which has been shut down since the quake. Radioactive air and water were emitted from the plant's reactors following the earthquake because vibrations were stronger than had been anticipated. Regarding this, Takahashi said the emissions would not affect the environment as they were within safety regulations. He also apologized, saying, "I'm deeply sorry for causing so much worry for residents and others." Takahashi said he did not think they would be able to resume the plant's operation this summer. "We can't discuss resuming operations at this stage," he said. He suggested they would consider it only after taking into account the results of studies, including a seabed study of the fault line. Moving devices cause fire Tokyo Electric Power Co., meanwhile, said the earthquake had lifted the base of the transformer responsible for the fire 25 centimeters. Outside the reactor, a power cable subsided 15 to 25 centimeters. This resulted in the two becoming separated by 50 centimeters, possibly leading to the fire, TEPCO said. The company is still investigating the incident. As for the No. 6 reactor, from which radioactive water leaked into the sea, the company said it failed to report the incident to the government immediately because they had trouble analyzing the radioactivity. The Yomiuri Shimbun. ***************************************************************** 56 Las Vegas SUN: Clinton wants Senate hearing for Yucca Mt. alternatives July 20, 2007 By SCOTT SONNER Associated Press Writer RENO, Nev. (AP) - Repeating her vow to kill Yucca Mountain if elected president, Sen. Hillary Clinton called Friday for an immediate halt to the federal licensing process and for Senate hearings to consider alternatives to the proposed nuclear waste repository in southern Nevada. "It is past time to start exploring alternatives to Yucca Mountain," the Democratic presidential hopeful from New York told reporters during a teleconference. "Once again the Bush administration is ignoring science and pushing forward recklessly with this license application without having protective standards in place," Clinton said. Clinton, a member of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, said she will ask the panel's chairman, California Democrat Barbara Boxer, to schedule the hearing. The committee has jurisdiction over the Environmental Protection Agency, which is setting radiation standards for the project, and the Nuclear Regulatory Agency, which will decide whether to approve the Energy Department's application for a license to operate the waste dump 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas. "I have not been persuaded that it is a suitable location for long-term storage. There are too many unanswered questions about both the geology of the site and the integrity of the science done to support the decision to store waste there," Clinton said. Originally scheduled to open in 1998, the dump has been set back repeatedly by lawsuits, money shortfalls and scientific controversies. The DOE's current best-case opening date for the dump, which would hold 77,000 tons of waste, is 2017, though the Energy Department has said 2021 is more likely. The senator said she agrees the nation must devise a "safe, secure, long-term waste storage solution." "As president, I will work with the scientific community to address this problem and come up with alternative solutions. But for now, what we need to do is turn our attention to laying the groundwork for making a better, smarter decision," she said. Clinton said she long has opposed the project and has been working with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., to make sure it is not built. "As president, I will not go forward with Yucca Mountain. My administration will not proceed with Yucca Mountain," she said. "I'm not going to be president for 18 months. If we don't try to slow it down now, it may become a fait accompli." In addition to the geology of the site, Clinton said she has concerns about transporting waste across the country to Nevada and the "potential threat of terrorism." She said a Senate hearing would focus on public health and safety and make sure the Energy Department halts any further progress on the proposed project until EPA formally adopts rules for radiation standards at the site. "EPA has promised to put out a final rule by the end of 2006, but they still have not done so," Clinton said. "In the meantime, the Department of Energy is continuing to develop a license application. ... that would move forward on Yucca Mountain and intends to do so within the next year," she said. She said the EPA and DOE have been unaccountable to Congress about the project. They have "not had to answer questions up until now because the Republican Congress has not been willing to ask the hard questions," she said. "We are going to ask the hard questions." Energy Department officials did not immediately return a telephone message left at their Las Vegas office seeking comment Friday evening. All contents copyright 2005 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 57 de.indymedia.org: Truckloads of Gorleben seismic data destroyed Diet Simon 22.07.2007 07:30 Themen: Atom Anti-nuclear activists fighting waste dumping in north Germany claim to have information from inside the industry that “truckloads” of safety-relevant information have been destroyed. The group opposes the ‘interim’ storage of highly radioactive waste in a light-construction hall and the later ‘final’ storage in a specially dug salt mine next door at the village of Gorleben, between Hanover and Hamburg. The media spokesman of the Bürgerinitiative Umweltschutz Lüchow Dannenberg (BI), Francis Althoff, writes in a release that they’ve had information leaked to them “that safety-relevant measurement data on the expansion of the nuclear waste repository planned in Gorleben was taken away by the truckload and destroyed”. Some of it hadn’t even been processed, he writes. "According to the source in the atomic industry, many original measurement data and documents on the Gorleben underground were destroyed, all that appears to be left are unprovable final reports,” Althoff writes. “After this latest scandal Gorleben is finished once and for all. This makes it impossible for the operators to provide even the hint of a provable security certification for final storage in Gorleben.” Althoff explains the background as follows: For many years the formerly federal government owned Hanover based firm Prakla-Seismos was responsible for seismological measurements of the Gorleben salt dome. For years Prakla-Seismos carried out high-frequency electromagnetic measurements of drilling holes for the forerunner of the present Federal Agency for Radiation Protection (BfS) and continued doing this when the BfS was formed. After Prakla-Seismos was sold and disbanded, the sources said ‘truckloads full’ of the measurement data were taken away and destroyed. Although it was asked, the BfS, which had ordered it, apparently didn’t want to keep the important material. “For a licence procedure for Gorleben these seismic data are extremely relevant to any safety certification,” writes Althoff. “The summaries that are all that’s left now are unusable because they’re no longer verifiable. "There’s apparently no end to the sloppiness in the nuclear field, not even in an authority whose name says it’s supposed to protect us from radiation.” In a letter to the agency and the federal environment ministry the Gorleben opponents have demanded access to the documentation that remains. "For decades geologists have warned against operating Gorleben as a final repository. In this connection we’re asking ourselves why masses of data were destroyed. “Gorleben has to be given up immediately and no more money must be invested in this chaos.” (Francis Althoff can be contacted at landline #49 5843 986789, mobile #49 170 9394684,  presse@bi-luechow-dannenberg.de, the group office at büro@bi-luechow-dannenberg.de.) The police-state methods needed to transport waste to Gorleben have been captured on a DVD available at  http://www.cinerebelde.org/site.php3?id_rubrique=171&lang=en. The Gorleben disclosures came as the Swedish-owned electricity company, Vattenfall, idled a second nuclear power plant in Germany on government orders amid an ongoing row about nuclear power. The plant at Brunsbüttel, west of Hamburg, had been in a "standby" state since the middle of this month for a change of oil at its transformer, but must now be powered down so government inspectors can take a closer look. Inspectors say they will check reports that a sub-standard type of fastening was used to bolt a gantry to a wall near the reactor. Vattenfall's Krümmel plant east of the city has been offline for repairs since its transformer oil caught fire on June 28 and sub-standard fastenings were subsequently found there, too. The German environment protection group Deutsche Umwelthilfe (DUH) has claimed that the Brunsbüttel nuke at the North Sea mouth of the Elbe River “is recognisably worse prepared for critical mishap situations than the one in Forsmark”. Forsmark, 140 kms from Stockholm, nearly went into meltdown in July 2006 because of an electric power failure. Vattenfall has taken a lashing from the media and is at odds with the inspectorate. The Swedish company insists are no grave safety risks at the two plants, which both failed on June 28 because of non-nuclear defects. During the week, Vattenfall sacked senior executives at its German unit for not being frank enough to the media. Social Democrats in Chancellor Angela Merkel's coalition government have called for a speeding up of plans to close down all 17 nuclear power stations in Germany by 2021, with older plants scrapped sooner. By contrast, centre-right leaders called for a modest extension past 2021 to curb carbon-dioxide emissions. That was topped on Saturday by Günther Beckstein, the Christian Social Union's choice as next premier of Bavaria state, who said the legislation must be changed to allow nuclear power for several more decades. Meanwhile a leading British think tank, the Oxford Research Group, says in a study that a worldwide nuclear renaissance is beyond the capacity of the nuclear industry to deliver and would stretch to breaking point the capacity of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to monitor and safeguard civil nuclear power. The ORG is an independent non-governmental organisation and registered charity, which works together with others to promote a more sustainable approach to security for the UK and the world. In the report “Too Hot to Handle? The Future of Civil Nuclear Power”, the authors Frank Barnaby and James Kemp analyse how many nuclear plants would need to be built to significantly reduce global CO2 emissions, and the security consequences of that. Apart from the inability to deliver, they argue that a nuclear renaissance would increase the risk of nuclear terrorism. The briefing paper is one of a series of reports and factsheets published as part of ORG's Secure energy project:  http://www.oxfordresearchgroup.org.uk/work/global_security/energy.ph p ***************************************************************** 58 The Hindu: India insisted on refuel for reactors lifetime Monday, Jul 23, 2007 CHENNAI: The fundamental issue during the protracted negotiations between India and the United States on the nuclear cooperation agreement was Indias insistence on a U.S. guarantee that India will receive fuel supplies for the lifetime of reactors that it plans to import under the agreement. Sources said India took a very uncompromising position on this. According to the March 2, 2006 Separation Plan, the U.S. assured India that it would support an Indian effort to develop a strategic reserve of nuclear fuel to guard against any disruption of supply over the lifetime of Indias reactors. If, despite these arrangements, a disruption of fuel supplies to India occurred, the United States and India would jointly convene a group of friendly supplier countries to include countries such as Russia, France and the United Kingdom to pursue measures that would restore fuel supply to India. The Hyde Act Despite this assurance in the Separation Plan, the Hyde Act of the U.S. threatened to cut off nuclear fuel supplies to India and take back the nuclear reactors equipment supplied to India if New Delhi were to conduct a nuclear test. The U.S. also threatened that it would not allow other countries to supply nuclear fuel to India. Informed sources said these threats were the real issue and India made it clear during the negotiations that the U.S. linking fuel supplies to a nuclear test was not acceptable to it. Giving in to these threats amounted to India jumping into a deep well, blind-folded, the informed official said. When we will be spending billions of rupees in building these mega, imported reactors, the U.S. threat that it will cut off the nuclear fuel supply and take back the reactors equipment if India were to conduct a nuclear test was very, very difficult to accept. He stressed that fuel supply guarantee was a very vital issue. And rightly so. The fuel supply should continue for the lifetime of the reactors to be imported. Past experience What was at the back of Indias mind when it was unrelenting on this issue was the Tarapur experience. General Electric of the U.S. built two Light Water Reactors at Tarapur in Maharashtra, both of which began generating electricity from 1969. The U.S. had agreed to supply fuel for both the reactors for 30 years. However, when India conducted a peaceful nuclear experiment (PNE) at Pokhran in 1974, the U.S. stopped the supply of enriched uranium fuel for the two reactors. India had to run from pillar to post to get enriched uranium from other countries such as France, Russia and China. The official said: Anybody will appreciate that India will not take the risk of spending billions of rupees in importing reactors when there is no guarantee of fuel supply for the lifetime of the imported reactors. So we took a very clear position. The U.S. insistence that India should not conduct a nuclear test was more of a sentimental issue for India, he said. After India conducted five nuclear tests at Pokhran in May 1998, the then Prime Minister, A.B. Vajpayee, declared a voluntary moratorium on nuclear tests. The Joint Statement by Prime Minister Manmohan and U.S. President George W. Bush in July, 2005 also said Indias voluntary moratorium on nuclear tests would continue. The official said: When India is saying that it will not conduct any nuclear tests, the U.S. insistence that India cannot conduct any more nuclear tests amounted to ordering India that it shall not conduct any tests at all. Besides, there was the question of what India would do if China or Pakistan were to conduct a nuclear test. Dedicated facility There was nothing new about Indias offer to build a separate, dedicated facility for reprocessing the spent fuel from the reactors that India would import. This was a via media that India offered when the U.S. insisted that India could not reprocess the spent fuel from the reactors to be imported. India had mastered the technology of reprocessing. It had 40 years of experience in reprocessing the spent fuel from its reactors and it had reprocessing facilities at Trombay, Tarapur and Kalpakkam. Indias offer of a new, separate, dedicated facility for reprocessing the spent fuel from the reactors to be imported will be an answer to non-proliferation lobbies in the U.S. who alleged that India would use reprocess the spent fuel to make nuclear weapons. For, the dedicated facility would come under the International Atomic Energy Agencys safeguards, the official pointed out. Copyright 2007, The Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the ***************************************************************** 59 ScrippsNews: Uranium mines in the West slowly creaking back to life By GREG LAVINE Salt Lake Tribune Saturday, July 21, 2007 Jerry Cowan speeds his golf cart down through the pitch-black recesses of Utah's first working uranium mine since the last boom rocked southern Utah in the 1980s. The cart's rapid descent -- heading 600 feet below the surface -- is reminiscent of the falling uranium prices of the 1980s. That particular fall left the region's uranium industry in shambles. Deeper and deeper below the tiny town of La Sal rest tons of unprocessed uranium ore, now too valuable for companies to pass up any longer, said Harold Roberts of Canadian-based Denison Mines Corp., which reopened the Pandora Mine within the last year. Soon, beams from a few headlamps dance in the darkness ahead. Miners drill into solid rock, emitting sounds that may herald a new Utah uranium boom, one that may be sustained if the world embraces nuclear power as a way to fight global warming. This latest trend is tied to skyrocketing uranium prices -- about $140 a pound, up from about $10 in 2000. The increase is largely due to supply-and-demand issues for an expensive-to-process mineral available only in limited regions worldwide. For a time, Russia was dismantling nuclear bombs, reprocessing the high-grade uranium for weapons into low-grade uranium for power plants, which may have helped drive down costs, said Ken Krahulec, metals geologist for the Utah Geological Survey. Also affecting recent supplies: One of the biggest mines in Canada, the world's leading supplier of uranium, is closed due to flooding. Another factor adding to this record pricing is that a group of private investors is buying uranium and betting prices rise even higher, he said. Plans for China and India to ramp up their nuclear capacity may also be playing into the recent price hike. "They're going nuclear big-time," said Peter Farmer, president of Denison Mines. All of these factors could simply be a prelude to a major resurgence for nuclear power. Global warming has forced a renewed debate about how to provide large supplies of electricity in a different way. Unlike traditional coal-burning plants, nuclear plants emit no greenhouse gases. These gases build in the atmosphere acting to trap heat, which contributes to the planet's warming. Some hope these arguments will boost nuclear's share of the future energy mix. For now, mines across the Intermountain West are slowly creaking back to life. Pandora is one of two operational uranium mines in the state, said Susan White, mining-program coordinator for the Utah Department of Natural Resources' Division of Oil, Gas and Mining. A total of 15 mines have approval to begin operations, while another 10 exploration permits have been granted. The United States ranked 10th in uranium-ore output at 1,692 tons, while Canada led the world with 9,862 tons, according to 2006 figures from the World Nuclear Organization. If a nuclear renaissance takes hold, places like the Pandora Mine could be active for years to come. The mine now runs one shift a day with its 14 employees, Roberts said. As they hire more miners, the company hopes to build up to a second shift. HEAL Utah, a nonprofit group that monitors nuclear issues, does not welcome the revival of mining and milling operations in Utah. Taxpayers were left to foot the bill from the previous uranium booms, which included cleaning up dozens of abandoned mine sites. The milling process also leaves polluted tailings that must be dealt with, said Vanessa Pierce, head of HEAL Utah. The latest cleanup efforts involve almost $100 million from the Department of Energy to remove uranium tailings near Moab. "We're going to see history repeat itself," she said of cleanup costs. (Reach Greg Lavine at glavine(at)sltrib.com. For more stories, visit scrippsnews.com.) All materials copyright 2006-7 Scripps Media Center and Scripps ***************************************************************** 60 Las Vegas SUN: Clinton ups the ante on Yucca Mountain July 21, 2007 Senator calls for congressional hearings to expose problems By Michael J. Mishak and Lisa Mascaro Las Vegas Sun After more than a week of watching her Democratic rivals capture local headlines with their Nevada visits, Sen. Hillary Clinton launched a haymaker from 2,500 miles away Friday, seizing ownership of Nevada's signature issue: Yucca Mountain. In a late afternoon conference call from Washington, a well-prepped Clinton called for congressional hearings on Yucca Mountain, the proposed repository for the nation's nuclear waste about 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas. In particular, she wants the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, on which she serves, to pressure the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to adopt clear radiation standards that would ensure public health and safety. She also called on the Department of Energy to halt the project's application until the EPA takes action. "There has been a great deal of confusion and stonewalling by the administration to finding appropriate, scientifically based information," Clinton said. "We need to get this information on the record and do everything we can to lay the groundwork to make it clear that we will not proceed with Yucca Mountain." If elected president, Clinton said , she would "not go forward" with the project. In a past interview with the Sun, Clinton said she would refuse to fund Yucca Mountain. The issue, more than any other, has become the litmus test for presidential candidates as they campaign in Nevada, now set to vote right after first-in-the-nation Iowa and just before New Hampshire on the 2008 nomination calendar. The entire Democratic field of candidates opposes the Yucca project. Sen. Chris Dodd's statement last week is typical. Speaking to a small crowd gathered for the opening of his Las Vegas campaign headquarters, Dodd, unprompted, said he was opposed to the project. "I don't think that's a safe repository," he said, adding that dry cask technology - which makes plants' on-site storage of nuclear waste safer - had settled the storage question for the moment. Clinton's announcement, marked by the strongest language yet of any candidate, was an attempt to position her as the leader on the issue, willing to tackle it on the national stage in congressional hearings. "They've been unaccountable and haven't had to answer questions until now because the Republican Congress wasn't willing to ask the hard questions," Clinton said of the EPA, which has failed to establish a new standard for radiation exposure after its former rule was thrown out by the federal courts in 2004. "We're going to ask the hard questions and get to the bottom of this process." From the outset, Clinton's Nevada campaign, chaired by Clark County Commission Chairman Rory Reid, has sought to define her as the candidate most attuned to the state's concerns. "I've been saying for months that Hillary Clinton has a more comprehensive understanding of the issues that confront Nevadans than any other presidential candidate," said Reid, the son of Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. "This is evidence that she's willing to do more than talk about it." Clinton's efforts to investigate the Yucca Mountain project come as the Energy Department is under tremendous pressure to meet a June 2008 deadline to submit the site's license application for the project to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Democrats and Republicans alike have made clear they will have little tolerance if the department again blows this deadline, as it did years ago. Yucca Mountain's opening is 20 years behind schedule, and some think any delay at this juncture could doom the project as the pro-nuclear Bush administration comes to an end. By calling for hearings, Clinton is jumping into a debate that has been under way in Washington and Nevada about why the EPA has been unable to meet a 2006 deadline for releasing new radiation standards - the level of cancer-causing toxins that can be released from the site. The previous standards were thrown out as too weak after a legal challenge by Nevada. Nevada is poised to again attack the standards if they are not satisfactory. Shedding light on the delay could give opponents greater ammunition to block the Yucca Mountain project. Robert Loux, director of the state agency fighting Yucca Mountain, said the hearings will put the EPA on the hot seat. "It's important to know what the hold up is, why they haven't released it," he said. "Is this political or are there scientific issues?" Energy spokesman Allen Benson said the senator's actions will not delay the department's work toward meeting the June deadline. "We have a mission under the law and we're fulfilling that mission," he said. Clinton's announcement also dovetailed with in-state developments. On Friday, the state engineer reinstated a cease-and-desist order to stop the Energy Department from using any more ground water for bore hole drilling at Yucca. State Engineer Tracy Taylor said earlier that he thought the department deliberately violated terms agreed to in 2003 on using ground water from two wells, but had agreed, with Gov. Jim Gibbons' approval, to extend the drilling activity for 30 days. Sun reporter Mary Manning contributed to this report. Michael J. Mishak can be reached at 259-2347 or at michael.mishak@lasvegassun.com. Lisa Mascaro can be reached at (202) 662-7436 or at lisa.mascaro@lasvegassun.com. All contents copyright 2005 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 61 CST: Who will survive the uranium boom? Jackson, Wyoming - Sunday, July 22, 2007 By Dustin Bleizeffer Star-Tribune staff writer Sunday, July 22, 2007 [oas:casperstartribune.net/news/business:Middle1] More than 300 operators rushed into the Powder River Basin when coal-bed methane gas exploded onto the commercial scene, and about five years later fewer than a third remained. Companies consolidate their properties, plays mature from a state of fevered speculation to solid, paced industries. Now it's uranium's turn, and the field is full of speculation. "There's a lot of nonsense going on about deposits," said David Miller, president and COO of Starthmore Minerals. Miller said of the several hundred uranium companies on the Toronto Stock Exchange today, only a handful will likely ever actually produce even a pound of yellowcake. But many will make money on speculation. Driving speculation is uranium's phenomenal rise from the dead. Just four years ago, uranium (U308) was $7 per pound. Now at $130 per pound, the rush is on. Others in the industry report that the Canadian exchange has had a bad reputation for being soft on proven reserves. And there exists a lot of speculative information out there from the last rush on uranium in the 1980s when much exploration work was done, but not proven before the price fell. The effort left reams of log data to gather dust for the next 20-plus years. Now, new companies crop up every day. Uranium old-timers say you've got to do your homework if you're going to invest or get involved in the industry. Donna Wichers of Energy Metals Corp. in Casper said the Canadian exchange has improved its methods. "In the past two years, they have become more stringent," said Wichers. "They require a 43101 resource report, and you have to show you have the resource you say you do." As uranium production comes online in Wyoming over the next few years, expect to hear a lot of new names. Folks in the industry say some will stay, and many will go. "My guess is 90 percent (of uranium companies) will be trainwrecks," said Miller. "You've got to do your due diligence." Energy reporter Dustin Bleizeffer can be reached at (307) 577-6069 or dustin.bleizeffer@casperstartribune.net. Copyright 2007 by the Casper Star-Tribune published by Lee ***************************************************************** 62 ReviewJournal.com: Yucca water dispute brews Jul. 21, 2007 Feds reject Nevada's demand to stop use for drilling work By KEITH ROGERS REVIEW-JOURNAL YUCCA MOUNTAIN ENERGY CHIEF QUITS POST WASHINGTON -- A top Energy Department manager for Yucca Mountain is leaving the Nevada nuclear waste repository project, federal officials confirmed Friday. Paul Golan, the No. 2 leader as principal deputy director, will depart at the end of the month for a DOE position in Palo Alto, Calif., as federal site manager of the Stanford Linear Accelerator Center. Golan's departure was made known this week within the Energy Department and to state and industry officials and other Yucca stakeholders. DOE spokesman Allen Benson said Golan "wanted a new opportunity and a new challenge. A lot of it was a personal decision, his wife is from California." Golan could not be reached for comment Friday. A spokesman for Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., questioned the impact of Golan's departure at a time the Energy Department is seeking to advance the repository. A career manager, Golan held several DOE nuclear and environmental cleanup posts before he was appointed to the Yucca project in April 2005, shortly after the program was rocked by allegations that quality assurance documents may have been doctored. Golan served for a year as acting director, during which he helped develop DOE's response to the allegations. He also oversaw a reorganization that increased the role of Sandia National Laboratories in repository science, and was involved in development of plans for a multipurpose waste canisters. STEVE TETREAULT, STEPHENS WASHINGTON BUREAU Sen. Hillary Clinton Presidential candidate calls for hearings on nuclear storage project The federal government on Friday rejected a demand by the state engineer to stop using Nevada's water for drilling operations at the planned Yucca Mountain nuclear waste site, setting the stage for a showdown in court next week. The state engineer's office immediately responded to the Department of Justice's rejection letter at the close of business by reinstating the cease-and-desist order against the Department of Energy that State Engineer Tracy Taylor signed June 1. The order had been put on hold since June 12. Marta Adams, Nevada's senior deputy attorney general who has been handling the Yucca water case, welcomed the imminent legal battle. "That means they'll take us to court, and that's good," she said from Carson City. "It's good because DOE acted outside our agreement and we believe the court is going to see it that way." Allen Benson, an Energy Department spokesman for the Yucca Mountain Project, wouldn't comment on whether his agency would continue to use the state's water for drilling at the site, 100 miles northwest of Las Vegas. The issue, he said, is a matter of litigation. "The department has issued the response to the state's letter and the next move is up to the state," Benson said. The rejection letter Friday to Nevada Deputy Attorney General Michael Wolz from Keith E. Saxe, assistant chief of the Justice Department's Natural Resources Section, asserts that the DOE's effort to use the water to drill bore holes for collecting geologic samples is the desire of Congress and the state engineer's limitations on use of the water "are unacceptable." "The state engineer's time-limited agreement would provide insufficient water to properly complete the drilling program and would impose other limits and conditions on DOE's ability to implement congressional mandates," Saxe wrote. He said the state engineer's "demand is especially odious because it includes a threat to impose penalties and injunctive relief." Adams, on the other hand, said the federal government's argument that DOE "is required to conduct the drilling program is disingenuous." Accepting the state engineer's terms would have allowed the drilling project to continue for another 30 days, enough time for DOE to finish the last 44 of some 80 bore holes needed to geologic samples and seismic data for a license application. After that, no water could be used for drilling because it is not in the state's interest. Failing to abide by the terms would mean DOE could face penalties of up to $10,000 per day per violation under a state law that doesn't take effect, however, until January 2009. Bob Loux, executive director of Nevada's Nuclear Projects Agency and a longtime critic of the Yucca Mountain Project, said it stands to reason by Friday's development that "either DOE has already collected all the data they need or they wanted to get in court so they could collect data in the future." Meanwhile in a teleconference call from her campaign in Iowa, Democratic presidential hopeful Hillary Clinton called for congressional hearings to air concerns for the project going forward without a radiation safety standard from the Environmental Protection Agency. She said she will use her position as a New York senator on the Environment and Public Works Committee to slow the project down and put the Department of Energy's license application on hold until she is conceivably elected president. At that point, she said, "As president, I will not go forward with Yucca Mountain. My administration will not proceed with Yucca Mountain. "I will try to do what I can in the next 18 months as senator. If we don't try to slow it down now ... it could become fait accompli," Clinton said. A two-tiered standard covering periods of 10,000 and 1 million years has been proposed but not finalized by the EPA. Department of Energy scientists have continued to prepare licensing documents for submitting to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission including designs for surface facilities to age, or cool, spent nuclear fuel assemblies and a repository to hold 77,000 tons of highly radioactive waste. In 2002, Clinton voted against designating Yucca Mountain as the nation's site for highly radioactive waste. Nevertheless, John Hambrick, chairman of the Clark County Republican Party, described Clinton as "a Hillary come lately" in the Yucca Mountain debate. Hambrick said, however, "I'm very pleased that she is agreeing with the positions of (Rep.) Jon Porter, Senator (John) Ensign and Senator (Harry) Reid. I'm very glad she's on board with the Nevada delegation." Reid, D-Nev., the Senate majority leader, and Ensign, R-Nev., have been steadfast in their opposition to the Yucca Mountain Project. Also on Friday, Ward Sproat, the nation's civilian radioactive waste chief, was in Las Vegas to meet with representatives of affected governments including the group's newest member, Joe Kennedy, chairman of the Timbisha Shoshone tribe and a critic of the nuclear waste repository. Sproat said after the meeting that "this point of the project is very intense." He said he expects the massive license application and supporting documents to be "in my hands to sign in March or early April." His goal is to submit the application to the NRC no later than June 30 next year. Elsewhere, former Sen. Richard Bryan on Friday called for a meeting between Gov. Jim Gibbons and Nevada's federal lawmakers to show that state leaders are not going soft in their opposition to Yucca Mountain. In the wake of this week's controversies, "I have gotten calls asking 'Has the state of Nevada softened its position?" Bryan said. Bryan said the governor's decision to allow the Energy Department to continue pumping water at the nuclear site, along with a questionable appointment to the state's Yucca advisory board, "has raised a number of eyebrows as to what the state's policy is." "The congressional delegation is on the front lines on this," Bryan said. "I just think it would be important for them to meet and to come out united, to make sure the state's position is reaffirmed." Bryan is chairman of the state's Commission on Nuclear Projects, which was a focus of one of the governor's actions. The members of the seven-person advisory panel historically have reflected the state's staunch opposition to Yucca Mountain. But Gibbons raised a furor when he replaced vice chairman Michon Mackedon of Reno with Joni Eastley, a Nye County commissioner who is not an ardent foe of the project. Eastley's appointment was withdrawn. Spokeswoman Melissa Subbotin also said Gibbons is consulting with Nye County residents over a substitute for Eastley. He said he wants a resident of the Yucca site county on the panel. Stephens Washington Bureau chief Steve Tetreault and Review-Journal writer Paul Harasim contributed to this story. Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal, 1997 - 2007 Stephens Media, LLC Privacy Statement ***************************************************************** 63 Border Mail: PM: No nuke waste here Sat, 21st July, 2007 PRIME Minister John Howard has ruled out Australia becoming a radioactive waste dump if it joins a US-led nuclear energy club of nations which could enable it to enrich uranium. Green groups say Australia would be obliged to accept the waste if it became a member of the proposed Global Nuclear Energy Partnership. The Federal Government said it was taking part in negotiations about the initiative at the invitation of the US but might not join. The strategy of US President George Bush seeks to develop a global consensus on expanding the use of nuclear energy to meet electricity demand while promoting non-proliferation. It involves the US and the other main nuclear-fuel cycle countries — Russia, France, China and Japan — and proposes leasing the fuel to other countries and taking back the spent fuel for repro-cessing and disposal. Whether Australia joined or not, Mr Howard said, it would not take the nuclear waste of other countries. “We’ve made that clear, we’re not taking other people’s waste,” Mr Howard told ABC Radio. The Liberal Party’s federal council in June supported storing nuclear waste in Australia in a vote that is not binding on the Coalition Government. Foreign Minister Alexander Downer said it made sense for Australia as the world’s second-biggest exporter of uranium to be involved in the US-led negotiations. “Why wouldn’t we, in the interest of safety, in the interest of clean energy and the interest of our continuing uranium exports, want to talk to the world’s largest economy and the world’s most powerful country about nuclear safeguards and technical co-operation?” Mr Downer said. Earlier yesterday, the Foreign Minister said whether Australia joined the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership depended on how it was developed by the US. “For example, they wish to limit the number of countries in the world that can enrich uranium to a small list of countries that currently do enrich uranium,” Mr Downer told ABC Radio. “Australia would, under the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership as it currently stands, at least the draft of it currently stands, not be able to enrich uranium.” 2007 The Border Morning Mail Pty Ltd. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 64 NEWS.com.au: Uranium conference draws heavies | By Nigel Wilson July 23, 2007 12:00am THE battleground for the political debate on Australia's nuclear future will move to Fremantle this week with the annual Australian Uranium Conference. More than 400 delegates are expected to attend the conference to discuss the mining and development of uranium projects in Australia and overseas. But the public focus will be on the politicians with federal Resources Minister Ian Macfarlane, Opposition resources spokesman Chris Evans and federal Greens leader Bob Brown deeming the event important enough to make the trip across the Nullarbor. It's expected Mr Macfarlane's speech will focus on the huge growth in world demand for Australian uranium. He will also talk about the responsibility Australia has, given it has the lion's share of world reserves, to provide uranium to many countries choosing to use nuclear energy. He is expected to acknowledge that demand for uranium is high either because countries have limited energy reserves of their own or because they see nuclear energy as way to substantially cut their greenhouse gas emissions without sharply curtailing the energy needed to power their economies. "There is strong demand for Australian uranium given the world's appetite for energy," Mr Macfarlane said yesterday. "In 2006-07, Australia exported 9535 tonnes of uranium valued at a record $658 million, but there is plenty of opportunity to export more and for Australia to benefit from the recent rally in uranium prices. "The fact is that if Australia does not export uranium, the world economy will not simply limit its demand for energy -- countries will instead use old energy technologies that emit high C02, or they will obtain uranium from countries with less stringent nuclear safeguards than Australia. "While the Australian uranium industry is growing and we are seeing a record level in exploration for the mineral in Australia, there are still some areas where we could be doing better. "No new mines have been approved since last century, and while we have seen changes in some states' policies on uranium exploration and mining, both Queensland and WA state that governments continue to approach this opportunity by refusing point blank to even consider it. "When the federal ALP overturned its ban on no new uranium mines at its federal conference in April, it essentially has made no difference to Australia's ability to export uranium since WA and Queensland still say no. Without these states lifting their ban, the change in ALP policy, which took a quarter of a century to happen, is meaningless." Senator Evans will argue that the debate has changed, now that federal Labor has revoked its three mines uranium policy. It is now about nuclear power for domestic use rather than exploiting uranium for export. Delegates are also expected to hear from Canadian analyst Jim Mustard of Haywood Securities that Australia's uranium exploration companies tend to lag their peers in nations such as Canada, the US and African countries such as Namibia and Niger -- all of which have a regulatory environment in which new mines can be developed mainly because local interest is still focused on domestic production, not on the global nuclear power market. Copyright 2007 News Limited. All times AEST (GMT +10). ***************************************************************** 65 Carlsbad Current-Argus: WIPP: Option for Greater than Class C waste From the Current-Argus Article Launched: 07/21/2007 09:30:24 PM MDT CARLSBAD ? The Waste Isolation Pilot Plant is being considered as one possible option for the disposal of Greater than Class C low-level radioactive waste. A scoping meeting seeking public input on the possibility will take place on Aug. 13 in Carlsbad. According to a press release from the Department of Energy, the DOE is evaluating disposal options for Greater than Class C low-level radioactive waste generated from the decommissioning of nuclear power plants, medical activities and nuclear research. DOE, according to the press release, plans to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement, which will evaluate how and where to safely dispose of the particular type of waste that is currently stored at commercial nuclear power plants and other generator sites across the country. The DOE's notice includes a list of the preliminary disposal options for analysis in the EIS, describes the inventory of waste to be analyzed, identifies dates and locations of public meetings, and invites public comments on the proposed scope of the impact statement. According to the DOE, Greater than Class C waste is generated from activities conducted by Nuclear Regulatory Commission licensees and stored at sites where it is generated throughout the United States. DOE estimates the total stored and projected quantity nationwide of the type of waste to be 2,600 cubic meters. The category is grouped into three general waste types: activated metals, which come from the maintenance and decommissioning of nuclear power plants; radioactive sealed sources that are no longer used, including irradiation of food and medical purposes; and miscellaneous waste, such as contaminated equipment from industrial research and development. The DOE also intends to include in the EIS evaluation certain waste that is generated from DOE activities, which may not have an identified disposal path, and has characteristics similar to Greater than Class C waste. This DOE waste is estimated to be 3,000 cubic meters. The EIS will evaluate a range of disposal methods and locations that include geologic disposal at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant and the proposed Yucca Mountain Repository; enhanced near-surface disposal at the Hanford Site, Idaho National Laboratory, Los Alamos National Laboratory, Nevada Test Site, Oak Ridge Reservation, Savannah River Site, Waste Isolation Pilot Plant vicinity, or a generic commercial location; and intermediate depth borehole disposal at the same locations. The EIS will consider these alternatives individually and in combination. DOE invites public review and comment on the proposed scope of the EIS and other information presented in the Notice of Intent during a 60-day comment period, which begins on Monday. Comments are due by Sept. 21. All comments received during the public scoping period will be considered in preparing the environmental impact statement. The DOE will ultimately submit a report to Congress and await Congressional Action before making a decision. The Carlsbad scoping meeting will be the first of nine meetings held across the country. A meeting will take place in Los Alamos the following day. For more information visit: http://www.gtcceis.anl.gov. Copyright © 2005 Carlsbad Current Argus, a MediaNews Group ***************************************************************** 66 Salt Lake Tribune: Clinton urges alternatives to nuke dump The presidential hopeful calls for licencing halt, Senate hearings on public health, safety By Scott Sonner The Associated Press Article Last Updated: 07/22/2007 01:55:31 AM MDT RENO, Nev. - Repeating her vow to kill Yucca Mountain if elected president, Sen. Hillary Clinton called Friday for an immediate halt to the federal licensing process and for Senate hearings to consider alternatives to the proposed nuclear waste repository in southern Nevada. ''It is past time to start exploring alternatives to Yucca Mountain,'' the Democratic presidential hopeful from New York told reporters during a teleconference. ''Once again the Bush administration is ignoring science and pushing forward recklessly with this license application without having protective standards in place,'' Clinton said. Clinton, a member of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, said she will ask the panel's chairman, California Democrat Barbara Boxer, to schedule the hearing. The committee has jurisdiction over the Environmental Protection Agency, which is setting radiation standards for the project, and the Nuclear Regulatory Agency, which will decide whether to approve the Energy Department's application for a license to operate the waste dump 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas. ''I have not been persuaded that it is a suitable location for long-term storage. There are too many unanswered questions about both the geology of the site and the integrity of the science done to support the decision to store waste there,'' Clinton said. Originally scheduled to open in 1998, the dump has been set back repeatedly by lawsuits, money shortfalls and scientific controversies. The DOE's current best-case opening date for the dump, which would hold 77,000 tons of waste, is 2017, though the Energy Department has said 2021 is more likely. The senator said she agrees the nation must devise a ''safe, secure, long-term waste storage solution.'' ''As president, I will work with the scientific community to address this problem and come up with alternative solutions. But for now, what we need to do is turn our attention to laying the groundwork for making a better, smarter decision,'' she said. Clinton said she long has opposed the project and has been working with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., to make sure it is not built. ''As president, I will not go forward with Yucca Mountain. My administration will not proceed with Yucca Mountain,'' she said. ''I'm not going to be president for 18 months. If we don't try to slow it down now, it may become a fait accompli.'' In addition to the geology of the site, Clinton said she has concerns about transporting waste across the country to Nevada and the ''potential threat of terrorism.'' She said a Senate hearing would focus on public health and safety and make sure the Energy Department halts any further progress on the proposed project until EPA formally adopts rules for radiation standards at the site. ''EPA has promised to put out a final rule by the end of 2006, but they still have not done so,'' Clinton said. ''In the meantime, the Department of Energy is continuing to develop a license application. . . . that would move forward on Yucca Mountain and intends to do so within the next year,'' she said. She said the EPA and DOE have been unaccountable to Congress about the project. They have ''not had to answer questions up until now because the Republican Congress has not been willing to ask the hard questions,'' she said. Energy Department officials did not immediately return a telephone message left at their Las Vegas office seeking comment Friday evening. ***************************************************************** 67 Edmonton Journal : Contamination shuts down Cameco plant in Ontario canada.com where perspectives connect Bloomberg News Published: Saturday, July 21 Cameco Corp., the world's largest uranium producer, said it will halt output of uranium hexafluoride at its Port Hope, Ont., plant for at least two months after discovering contaminated soil at the site. Uranium and production-related chemicals were found in soil beneath a conversion plant during work on a construction project, Saskatchewan-based Cameco said Friday in a statement. None of the 420 employees at the plant will be laid off during the shutdown, Cameco said. "Cameco is assessing the impact of this situation on its production forecasts and will provide a revised forecast in its second-quarter report," the company said in the statement. "The company plans to meet scheduled deliveries for the remainder of the year based on existing inventory." The production of uranium hexafluoride is one of the first steps toward the transformation of uranium into nuclear fuel. Shares of Cameco fell 43 cents Cdn, or 0.9 per cent, to $49.32 on the Toronto Stock Exchange before trading was halted. The stock has risen 14 per cent in the past year. © The Edmonton Journal 2007 ***************************************************************** 68 Buffalo News: Radioactive debris to be removed from road Updated: 07/21/07 6:28 AM NIAGARA FALLS The design contractor for the reconstruction of Lewiston Road has hired a Maryland company to come up with plans for removing radioactive material from the road bed. Niagara County Environmental Health Director James J. Devald said Science Applications International Corp. of St. John, Md., was chosen by Wendel Duchscherer, the local engineering firm. City Engineer Robert Curtis said the construction company that wins the repaving contract will have to remove the radioactive sludge at the same time. He said the job, extending from Ontario Avenue to the north city line, wont be done until 2008, and bids wont be taken until December at the earliest. The radioactive material is believed to be phosphorus slag that fell out of trucks decades ago as it was hauled from a Niagara Falls chemical plant to the Lake Ontario Ordnance Works storage site in Lewiston and Porter. Copyright 1999 - 2007 - The Buffalo News copyright-protected ***************************************************************** 69 SF New Mexican: DOE considers N.M. for nuclear waste disposal By ASSOCIATED PRESS July 21, 2007 ALBUQUERQUE — New Mexico is on the short list of sites to dispose of dismantled nuclear reactor parts and other moderately radioactive waste, the U.S. Department of Energy said. Current regulations make the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant near Carlsbad and the yet-to-be-built Yucca Mountain site in Nevada the leading candidates for the job. They are the only ones where waste could be buried deep underground to keep it isolated for more than 500 years, the Albuquerque Journal reported Saturday in a copyright story. The Energy Department will launch an environmental study Monday of options to deal with the waste. The program would plug a hole in the complex web of federal regulations governing how various radioactive waste should be handled. Other options the agency will study include shallow burial at Los Alamos National Laboratory, DOE project chief Christine Gelles said Friday. Sen. Jeff Bingaman quickly disagreed with the possibility of expanding WIPP’s mission to handle the new type of waste. Part of the deal when the New Mexico Democrat helped draft the law in the early 1990s that allowed WIPP to open was a sharp restriction on the types of waste that would be allowed there. “I do not support opening up this agreement to broaden the types of waste that can be disposed of at WIPP,” Bingaman said. The state Environment Department’s response also was lukewarm. “Any proposal to widen the scope of WIPP or to dispose of additional waste at LANL will require a thorough analysis to make sure the plans protect New Mexicans,” said Jon Goldstein, the department’s director of water and waste management. Currently, low-level waste can be dumped in shallow landfills, but high-level waste, like used nuclear reactor fuel, is in storage awaiting the eventual opening of the long-stalled Yucca Mountain project — a deep mine, like WIPP, dug into a mountain. A third class, plutonium-contaminated “transuranic” waste from nuclear weapons work, is being sent to WIPP. That leaves a bunch of waste too radioactive to meet the basic “low-level” shallow burial criteria but not hot enough for Yucca Mountain and not legal at WIPP because it doesn’t meet the criteria set up when WIPP was opened. Under federal regulations, the primary option is deep burial. Dean Hancock, head of the Nuclear Waste Safety Project at the Southwest Research and Information Center in Albuquerque, said he and other activists prefer “hardened on-site storage.” That would keep the waste where it is or at a few central sites near the nuclear reactors where the waste was generated. Privacy Policy / Terms of Use | 2007, Santa Fe New Mexican, all ***************************************************************** 70 Tri-City Herald: DOE might bury more radioactive waste at Hanford Published Saturday, July 21st, 2007 ANNETTE CARY HERALD STAFF WRITER The Department of Energy is considering burying some additional commercial and other nonweapons radioactive waste at Hanford. DOE announced Friday it plans an environmental impact study to look at what to do with certain waste now stored where it was generated and waste the government expects to be produced by 2035. Hanford is one of about 10 sites DOE is considering for disposal of the waste. The low-level radioactive waste is left from decommissioning nuclear power plants, nuclear research and commercial activities such as radiological medicine applications and food irradiation. It totals about 7,280 cubic yards. That's a relatively small amount by Hanford standards, where the Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility was built to hold 12 million cubic yards of Hanford cleanup waste. But the additional waste could require special disposal methods. It's classified as "greater than Class C low-level waste," which means it has the highest concentration of radionuclides of the four classes of low-level radioactive waste. Among its contents are activated metals from the maintenance and decommissioning of nuclear power plants and radioactive sealed sources once used for food irradiation or medical purposes. If Hanford is picked as the disposal site, waste would be buried in either a borehole or nearer the ground's surface. A borehole would be drilled deep into the ground and then filled with waste up to 99 feet from the ground's surface. Remaining space would then be filled with clean soil. Alternately, waste could be disposed of nearer to the ground's surface in engineered trenches or vaults. They would offer better containment than a lined landfill such as the Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility and include added features such as barriers, deeper depth or increased waste packaging. The 7,280 cubic yards of waste includes 3,900 cubic meters of radioactive government waste generated from nondefense activities. That is unlike the Hanford waste that was produced by the production of plutonium for nuclear weapons. The nondefense waste also could include some transuranic waste similar to the low-level waste. At Hanford, transuranic waste typically is contaminated with plutonium, but transuranic waste can include any manmade isotope heavier than uranium. Most defense transuranic waste is buried at a national geological repository in New Mexico, but that site does not accept nonweapons waste. DOE also is looking at whether the waste could be buried at federal sites in Idaho, New Mexico, Nevada, Tennessee or South Carolina or at an unspecified commercial location. Sending the waste to DOE national repositories, either the Waste Isolation Plant in New Mexico or Yucca Mountain in Nevada, also will be considered, along with any required legal or regulatory changes. DOE could choose a combination of the sites to dispose of the waste. Voters in Washington made clear in 2004 that they did not want more radioactive waste sent to Washington. Voters in every county but Benton and Franklin approved Initiative 297, which was intended to bar more radioactive waste from being sent to Hanford until waste already there is cleaned up. However, that initiative remains tied up in the courts and has not been implemented. DOE plans a meeting Aug. 28 in Pasco on the environmental study, but no location or time has been announced. A notice for the study will be published Monday in the Federal Register. © 2007 Tri-City Herald, Associated Press & Other Wire Services ***************************************************************** 71 Recordnet.com: Potentially explosive situation develops July 21, 2007 6:00 AM Lawrence Livermore Lab officials have reapplied for permits to dramatically increase open-air explosives testing at Site 300 near Tracy. These tests could contain large quantities of radioactive and toxic materials, some of which lab officials acknowledge would be aerosolized and released into the air and water in surrounding areas. According to the permit application submitted on April 4, they would like to increase annual explosives limit eightfold, from 1,000 to 8,000 pounds, and its daily limit more than threefold, from 100 to 350 pounds. This application would enable them to explode up to 4,500 pounds of depleted uranium in open-air tests per year with no control technology. Lab officials confidently state this would have no significant impact on the environment, residents or endangered species monitored on the site. Airborne radioactive emissions have the potential to pose a very serious health threat in the form of cancer, suppressed immunity, heart disease, birth defects and a whole range of other ailments. The sad thing about health impacts from radiation is you never can directly prove an illness was caused by exposure. For information, call the San Joaquin Air Quality Control District at (925) 443-7148. Loulena Miles Livermore He's a man you can trust I read with amusement a letter to The Record that was critical of John Garamendi after he'd been elected lieutenant governor of California in November. The writer said Garamendi has lived with a silver spoon in his mouth since he was in the Peace Corps. I responded that I've known Garamendi since we were on the University of California, Berkeley, wrestling team in 1964 and always have known him to be intelligent, honest and hard-working. On June 22, the same Record letter writer said Garamendi has accomplished little as a state assemblyman, state senator, deputy secretary of the interior and insurance commissioner. He further said Garamendi's main accomplishment as lieutenant governor was giving names to the whales that wandered up the Sacramento River. I wondered if the writer was paying attention to Garamendi's record. As insurance commissioner, he made certain insurance companies pay legitimate claims they were trying to avoid after the Oakland hills fire and the Loma Prieta earthquake. It was Garamendi who enforced the voter-approved initiative to lower auto insurance rates and base rates on driving records instead of where drivers live. Because of his ethical standards, Garamendi refused to take money from the insurance industry to avoid a conflict of interest. In 1982, the Sacramento Bee commended Garamendi when he was the youngest-ever state Senate majority leader, saying he spent more time in his office working on state business than any other state legislator. I've known Garamendi for 43 years, and if he does decide to run for governor of California, I'll support him. Anyone who looks at his record without bias would support him, too. James G. Barker Stockton Copyright 1998 - 2007 ONI Stockton, Inc., All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 72 LA Daily News: Santa Susana cleanup halted DOE will do ordered environmental study BY KERRY CAVANAUGH, Staff Writer Article Last Updated: 07/20/2007 05:43:45 PM PDT The U.S. Department of Energy said Thursday that it will stop its controversial cleanup at the Santa Susana Field Lab and conduct a long-awaited comprehensive environmental review of the former nuclear research site. The decision to abide by a recent court order means the department has stopped demolition of the last two buildings at the site for at least two years while the agency prepares an environmental impact statement. A federal court judge in May said the department's cleanup plan for the site broke the law, and he ordered the agency to complete a detailed analysis of contamination at the site and how it will be removed. Longtime lab watchdogs lauded the department's decision to comply with the judge's ruling. "We have been asking for an (environmental impact statement) for quite a while, and also a site characterization so we get an accurate picture of where the contamination is," state Sen. Sheila Kuehl, D-Los Angeles, said Thursday. "I find it amusing when they send out a press release saying, `We're going to obey the court's order."' Though complying with the judge's order, the agency would not rule out the possibility of an appeal. DOE officials said the environmental study will take at least two years and cost at least $2 million. That timing is important, some activists said, because of concerns that the Energy Department would rush the cleanup and decommission the site before the end of the Bush administration, which had reversed previous cleanup agreements for the site. "The wrecking ball was a few feet away," said Dan Hirsch with the Committee to Bridge the Gap. His group sued the DOE over the cleanup plan. "Now the fundamental question is whether the EIS will be honest or will it be a justification of what they have already decided to do on the site, which is walk away from the contamination," he said. The DOE said it will study contamination on the 290-acre section of the lab called Area IV. From the 1950s through 1988, the Energy Department conducted nuclear research at the Energy Technology and Engineering Center there. The center was the site of 10 nuclear reactors, one of which had a partial meltdown, and an open-air pit where workers burned radioactive and chemical waste. The site has radioactive and toxic contamination in the groundwater and soil, and the study will look at the different options and costs for removing the contamination. Neighbors of the field lab have been wary of the cleanup because the DOE has authority to oversee its own decontamination at the site. In 2002, the agency reversed its long-standing commitment to follow the strictest standards and announced it would adopt the less stringent of two cleanup plans. At the time, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency warned that the site would not be safe for anything more than limited camping or picnicking. Environmental groups and residents sued the DOE to force a more thorough site review, especially because the hilltop land - between Simi Valley and Chatsworth - could someday be the site of residential development. "The public is entitled to a full cleanup of that site," said Joel Reynolds, an attorney with the Natural Resources Defense Council, which sued the DOE over the site. "The extent of the contamination is so enormous - and the challenge is so difficult to clean it up to a level that will ensure public health - that it can't be done without a full analysis of the range of alternatives and the potential impacts," Reynolds said. The Boeing Co. owns the field lab and has leased the Energy Technology Engineering Center to the DOE. Boeing said it will stop work on the center, except for maintenance, monitoring and soil and groundwater surveys required by state agencies. "Boeing is committed to appropriate cleanup standards at the Santa Susana Field Lab," Boeing spokeswoman Blythe Jameson said. "This is part of the process for determining the standard." The DOE will begin the study in the fall. kerry.cavanaugh@dailynews.com (213) 978-0390 Copyright 2007 Los Angeles Newspaper Group ***************************************************************** 73 Knoxville News Sentinel: Sick and still looking for answers Ex-nuclear workers face difficult bureaucratic fight to collect from federal fund By Frank Munger (Contact) Sunday, July 22, 2007 Clay Owen Lillie Allred looks at old family pictures at home with her husband, Woody. Allred, who worked on the World War II Manhattan Project in Oak Ridge, has battled cancer of three different types for the past 11 years. “It is really, really taxing on you,” she said of her five-year effort to collect money from the federal fund for sick nuclear workers. Clay Owen Lillie Allred rests her hands while looking through memorabilia from her days working on the Manhattan Project in Oak Ridge. Submitted Lillie Mae Hickman (now Allred) smiles on Aug. 22, 1945, with J.C. Averback, who nominated her for the Miss Atomic Bomb pageant. Lillie Allred developed cancer decades after working on the World War II Manhattan Project. Michael Patrick Janet Michel sits before the boxes of evidence she has collected in her fight to collect claims from the sick nuclear workers compensation program. Michel only worked at the K-25 uranium-enrichment plant for a few years but is convinced the exposure there to heavy metals and toxins contributed to her autoimmune illness. Michael Patrick Janet Michel shows photos from her whitewater kayaking days. She says that after working as a pollution-prevention specialist at the K- 25 plant, “I was so sick I could hardly take a shower.” Saul Young Sylvia Dodson shows a photo of her father, J.O. Dodson, who worked at K-25 for many years. He was given the cap she holds in her left hand after putting it back on a leaking cylinder of uranium hexafluoride during an accident. Sylvia Dodson says the accident contributed to his cancer, which killed J.O. Dodson two years after he retired. She wears rubber gloves while holding the objects out of fear of contamination. J.O. Dodson, middle, poses for a photograph with co-workers and one of the cylinders he worked on. J. Miles Cary Jim O’Kain looks through paperwork relating to his radiation-dose history. O’Kain developed Hodgkins disease after working for years in electrical design at the Y-12 nuclear weapons plant and the K-25 uranium- enrichment site. Related video and links Lillie Allred, 82, talks about her time as a World War II-era nuclear worker and her difficulties in the ensuing years. Find out more about the workers’ compensation pro. By the numbers 147,785 Total Part B and Part E claims nationwide 23,349 Total Part B and Part E claims in Tennessee 14,206 Individual Oak Ridge workers with cases $2.8 billion Money paid so far to workers nationwide $628.7 million Money paid so far to Oak Ridge workers Source: U.S. Department of Labor Dealing with cancer was difficult enough. Dealing with the government was almost more than 82-year-old Lillie Allred could stand. “I was in a low state. It is really, really taxing on you,” she said of her five-year effort to collect money from the federal fund for sick nuclear workers. Allred, who is from the Kodak area, finally got a $150,000 check last year, but she’s still having trouble getting medical benefits that are supposed to accompany the program. Like many of the thousands of claimants, she felt at times like she was being punished, not rewarded, for her service to the country. During the World War II Manhattan Project, Allred — then Lillie Mae Hickman, a gorgeous young woman who competed in the Miss Atomic Bomb pageant — worked in Oak Ridge. She scraped uranium residues from process plates at the Y-12 plant, which enriched uranium for the A-bomb dropped on Hiroshima. She did her part to produce the bomb and help win the war, but she unwittingly exposed herself to toxic and radioactive hazards without protection. “The only thing they furnished was the uniform — no goggles, no gloves, no measuring stick (for radiation),” Allred said. That work may have taken its toll decades later. In 1996, she underwent surgery and therapies for breast cancer. She recovered, only to face subsequent trials with liver cancer and cancer of the bone. She endured more rounds of chemotherapy than she can remember, reaching double-digits long ago. The cancer kept returning, and it’s there again now. She lost her hair and she lost her beautiful smile, thanks to the chemicals that knocked her body for a loop and loosened her teeth. But she never lost her spirit. In that sense, she’s luckier than some. Congress passed the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act in 2000. It was supposed to help people made sick by workplace exposures during the production of nuclear weapons and related activities. The program went into effect the next year, and it’s been drenched in controversy ever since. The initial emphasis was on workers with radiation-induced cancers and those suffering respiratory illnesses from exposure to beryllium — a toxic metal used in weapons production. That’s Part B of the program. The compensation program was revised in 2004 to include Part E, which was intended to help people with all sorts of illnesses (not just cancer) tied to all sorts of toxic exposures (not just radiation). The Department of Labor, which runs the national program, said there have been some significant accomplishments. Michael Biddle, a federal spokesman, said program officials expect to have the backlog of old cases worked off by the end of the year and improve the Part E process for impairment-based payments for living workers. “We continue to seek ways to further improve the claim process,” Biddle said. As of July 16, more than $2.8 billion had been provided to 31,700 workers or their families, according to Labor statistics. In addition, the compensation program paid more than $156 million for medical expenses. The payout for Oak Ridge-related claims alone has exceeded $630 million. Those numbers are staggering, but so are the complaints. For all the workers who’ve cashed checks, there are more who think they are due. For many families, the money came too late to help those who needed it most. Sylvia Dodson’s father was a hero. On Oct. 1, 1975, J.O. Dodson heard an explosion outside his office at the K-25 uranium-enrichment plant. He ran outside and saw a cylinder of uranium hexafluoride spilling its guts. Without a mask, gloves or any protection, he helped get the cap back on the cylinder. He suffered chemical burns and inhaled vapors of the toxic compound, but he kept the situation from worsening and perhaps spared other workers. At his retirement party in 1986, the plate from that cylinder was presented to Mr. Dodson as a going-away gift. He died a couple of years later. Cancer had spread throughout his body. Sylvia Dodson, who lives in Knoxville, now keeps the metal plate up in her attic. It’s not a sweet memory. She thinks that accident and other exposures during his work career caused her father’s premature death. Dodson never worked in Oak Ridge, but she said she is a victim of contamination her father brought home from work on a regular basis. The social worker suffers from debilitating illnesses, including Lupus and lung problems she blames on cross-contamination. “There would be white particles on his clothing,” Dodson said. “It smelled like rust. It smelled toxic, if you can imagine that.” Jean Dodson, J.O. Dodson’s widow, was among the first to collect under the program, receiving her $150,000 check in December 2001. She died two weeks later, and Sylvia Dodson said her mother’s many expenses at the time “took it all.” Sylvia Dodson is outraged that a change in Part E criteria prevents her from collecting as a surviving child because she was older than 18 at the time of her father’s death in 1988. Her efforts, she said, were sabotaged by errors and lack of interest. Her claims official had an incorrect Social Security number for her father, the wrong date of his death and listed him as a widower who’d been married to someone else. “I will never feel DOL looked at our claim with an open mind,” she said. Jim O’Kain has been free of cancer since 1994, and that affects everything. “If I were still suffering from cancer, I would have an altogether different outlook,” he said. “I would feel cheated. I would be raising more of a ruckus.” His claim for compensation under the sick nuclear workers program was denied, and he’s OK with that. At 71, he still gets to play golf a couple of times a week and spend time with his 10 grandchildren and 11 great-grandkids at his home in Powell. O’Kain worked at Oak Ridge for nearly 40 years, splitting his time between the Y-12 nuclear weapons plant and the K-25 uranium-enrichment plant. Shortly before he retired, O’Kain developed Hodgkins disease — a form of cancer that attacks the lymph nodes. The majority of his Oak Ridge career was spent in offices working on electrical designs and engineering, but he made plenty of trips through the nuclear process buildings — exposing himself to chemical and radioactive toxins. “I worked all over those plants,” he said. “I was close to all sorts of materials.” Because of the way the compensation program is structured, O’Kain’s work at K-25 qualified him to be part of a Special Exposure Cohort. That means he would have automatically collected $150,000 if he had developed one of 22 types of cancer on the qualifying list. Hodgkins disease wasn’t one of those 22. Therefore, he had to go through what’s called “dose reconstruction,” which determines whether his radiation dose was sufficient to have caused his cancer. To receive compensation, it must be as likely as not — or a 50 percent probable causation. O’Kain’s case was rated at 38.82 percent, and he said he didn’t have any evidence to challenge the findings. “I’m no medical doctor,” he said. “I thought they were going to be honest and fair about it. They sent me the paperwork to try to reconstruct the exposure I’d had over the years. For the particular cancer I had, it didn’t work. So I just accepted that.” Mary Ruth Evans of Kingston remembers the day her husband came home wearing a new pair of steel-toed shoes. “He said, ‘I got exposed today, and they took my shoes away.’ ” It was one of several times she recalled him talking about the hazards of working at the Oak Ridge plants, where he was an engineering draftsman. Eddie Evans was diagnosed with brain cancer in 1992, and he died a few months later, at age 62. But his widow said he was sick long before that. “It started in his lungs, and he was seeing the doctors all the time. They kept doing biopsies and seeing nothing. Then they found the brain cancer.” In her mind, there was no question that the workplace killed her husband, but that wasn’t easy to prove when she filed for compensation. The Department of Labor referred her claim to the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, or NIOSH, for dose reconstruction. It took nearly four years before she won her case, and Evans said she still hasn’t collected the full amount. “It was just aggravation,” she said. The 71-year-old woman said a claims representative at one point accused her of lying when she said she didn’t have a lawyer. “What happened was they got me mixed up with another Mary Evans who filed (a claim) with a lawyer,” she said. “They treated me like you-know-what. They sent all my papers and records and everything to that lawyer.” By the time her case had run its course, Evans said she had dealt with six different claims reps. “They were about as useless as could be because they didn’t give you no encouragement,” she said. “I tell you, NIOSH is nothing but a rip-off. Those people were trying to keep a job. They just drug the whole thing out.” Sometimes Janet Michel has to look at old photo albums to remember the vibrant, active woman she once was: whitewater kayaker, camper, mountain biker, skier. But all that changed, Michel said, after she went to work at the K-25 plant as a pollution-prevention specialist in the early 1990s. “My life came crashing down around my ears. I started getting sick in 1994,” the 55-year-old Knoxville resident said. “I was so sick I could hardly take a shower.” Michel only worked at K-25 a few years, but she’s convinced the exposure to heavy metals and toxins — nickel, mercury, thalium, gadolinium — contributed to her auto-immune illnesses, including scleroderma. One of her first offices at K-25, she said, was a cubbyhole in a part of an old building that had been a machine shop. “It was never meant to be office space. There was nickel dust everywhere,” she said. Michel has spent years researching her case, trying to learn what caused her sickness, and working as an advocate for other sick workers. When her health allowed, she traveled to Washington to lobby for the initial legislation that created the compensation program. Now she’s trying to collect. She filed her claim a couple of years ago after Part E was enacted, although it was months before she got an active response. She submitted more than 1,000 pages of documents and medical records to support her case. Michel isn’t optimistic, based on her experience with the program and the initial handling of her case. The claims examiner gave her a “pep talk,” Michel said, but he acknowledged he hadn’t yet read her case file. And getting help from the program’s ombudsman has turned into a three-month game of phone tag, she said. “I still have not talked to a real person yet,” she said. Senior writer Frank Munger may be reached at 865-342-6329. 2007, Knoxville News Sentinel Co. ***************************************************************** 74 Knoxville News Sentinel: Mystery lingers following arrest DOE hails case as security victory but won't say how items were removed By Frank Munger (Contact) Saturday, July 21, 2007 OAK RIDGE — The Department of Energy said Thursday that the arrest of Roy Lynn Oakley was evidence that the security systems in place at the Oak Ridge nuclear facilities work. But the DOE had little to say on how those systems work. “I can’t get into any details,” federal spokesman John Shewairy said Friday. “We’re not going to sit here and tell you every thing that entailed.” Oakley, a former maintenance worker, was charged Thursday with stealing pieces of classified equipment from the former K-25 uranium-enrichment plant and attempting to sell the materials to the French government. “In this case, our layered approach successfully identified the individual in question, and because of the close coordination between the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Department of Energy’s Office of Counterintelligence, the FBI successfully interrupted the accused individual’s apparent intentions,” DOE Manager Gerald Boyd said in a carefully crafted statement. The arrest, which attracted national news attention, raised plenty of unanswered questions: n How did Oakley remove the materials from the site? n Did the materials set off alarms at the exit portals, which reportedly have X-ray machines and other monitors set up to detect metallic, radioactive or otherwise-suspicious objects? n Did security officers intentionally allow the laborer to take the equipment home with him so they could track his intentions? Shewairy said the security system at the site has many layers; some that are visible to people, others that are not. “That system worked as it’s designed,” he said. Oakley’s attorney, Herbert S. Moncier, characterized the material taken by Oakley as inches-long broken pieces of metal rods or tubing that the worker had been assigned to break up and throw away. The material included sections of “barrier,” a highly complex filtering system used in the uranium enrichment process. Oakley also is charged with taking associated hardware used for uranium enrichment. The federal indictment said Oakley, who worked for Bechtel Jacobs Co., DOE’s cleanup manager, stole the equipment between Oct. 17, 2006, and Jan. 26, 2007. Those dates would indicate the stolen materials likely came from the historic K-25 building — a mile-long, U-shaped structure that has been the focus of dismantlement efforts at the site during the past couple of years. K-25 was the original gaseous diffusion facility built during World War II, housing miles of equipment that could enrich uranium for atomic bombs. It produced all of the highly enriched uranium used in the nation’s Cold War nuclear arsenal. When Bechtel Jacobs began the massive dismantlement of K-25 in 2005, the federal contractor installed new fences and monitoring units to enhance security and speed the flow of cleanup workers reporting to the site on a daily basis. About 800 workers are currently assigned to the dismantlement project. The portal system involves a five-stage security check, Bechtel Jacobs said at the time. Each worker entering the high-security zone has to pass his or her badge though an electronic reader and then pass through a turnstile. After that, employees remove their badges and metal items and pass hand-carried items — such as lunchboxes — through an X-ray machine. Then they walk through a metal detector. After that, they pass through a special nuclear materials detector. If there are no disruptions, they are allowed to enter or exit the work area. Dennis Hill, a spokesman at Bechtel Jacobs, said tests indicated that most workers could pass through the security portal in two to four minutes. Senior writer Frank Munger may be reached at 865-342-6329. 2007, Knoxville News Sentinel Co. ***************************************************************** 75 Knoxville News Sentinel: Some feel excluded from claim meeting By Frank Munger (Contact) Sunday, July 22, 2007 OAK RIDGE — The Department of Labor is holding a “town hall” meeting Wednesday to discuss the compensation program for sick nuclear workers, but the federal agency only invited those people _already approved for payments. That didn’t sit well with some workers or their families who’ve had their claims rejected or are still waiting to hear. “I’m furious,” said Janet Michel, who has a claim pending and who works with a group — Citizens for a Healthy Environment — pushing for program improvements. Michael Biddle, a spokesman at agency headquarters in Washington, D.C., said the purpose of the meeting was twofold: to educate claimants on additional benefits that may be available to them and to get feedback on the processing of claims. Biddle said it was a very “targeted approach” designed to “elicit information from approved claimants” on specific parts of the program. However, he said no one would be turned away from the meeting, which begins at 7 p.m. Wednesday at the American Museum of Science and Energy, 300 South Tulane Ave. The meeting will be devoted to specific topics, but there will personnel on hand in the lobby to discuss other concerns regarding claims, Biddle said. In addition to the town hall meeting, the Labor Department has scheduled smaller “roundtable” focus groups for Thursday at the museum. For more information, contact the Oak Ridge Resource Center at 865-481-0411. 2007, Knoxville News Sentinel Co. ***************************************************************** NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 this material is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. For more information go to: *****************************************************************