***************************************************************** 07/24/07 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 15.172 ***************************************************************** 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 UPI: Hill: N.Korea disarmament feasible 2 UPI: Hill: No relations with nuclear N.Korea 3 Indiatimes: Tougher job than 123 deal awaits PM 4 The Hindu: U.S. knew India had no flexibility NUCLEAR REACTORS 5 The Hindu: 123 fulfils Prime Minister’s assurances 6 The Hindu: Government begins selling nuclear deal 7 Daily Yomiuri: Amari: Fault check near N-plant inadequate 8 Daily Yomiuri: Waves in pool over 1 meter high 9 Bangkok Post: N-option needs careful thought 10 Whitecourt Star: Residents to hold nuclear power information meeting 11 Platts: Westinghouse, Shaw Group sign deal on four nuke plants in Ch 12 RIA Novosti: Neo-Nazis behind attack on nuclear protestors in Siberi 13 RIA Novosti: Quake hits Japanese nuclear plant: a Russian view 14 US: POAC: Pump problems keep Oyster Creek at reduced output 15 US: Gristmill: Alternatives to nuclear power | 16 US: Platts: DOE takes another step in the next generation nuclear pl 17 Platts: EIB to provide loans for new nuclear plant construction 18 Platts: Tepco requests METI delaying two nuclear maintenance in Jul- 19 Border Mail: Hot rock energy better than more nuke plants 20 US: JOURNAL NEWS: Nuclear regulators want updated inventory of urani 21 US: APP.COM: Nuclear power plant in service after shutdown | 22 US: APP.COM: Hearing focuses on nuclear power plant | 23 US: News Journal: NRC clears way for Hope Creek increase 24 Guardian Unlimited: Fire at Japanese nuclear power plant 25 AFP: Energy industry gears up for 'nuclear renaissance' - 26 US: Salt Lake Tribune: Nuclear irony 27 IAEA: Nuclear Power As An Engine for Development 28 Reuters: IAEA to send team to quake-hit nuclear plant 29 Reuters: Japan quake sends tremors across nuclear industry 30 Reuters: Westinghouse seals mega China nuclear deal 31 IPS: Nuke Deal: Breakthrough or Bad Bargain? - 32 Hemscott: Japan underestimated fault line at nuclear plant - ministe 33 Council on Foreign Relations: Japan Quake Tests Nuclear Nerves - 34 Greenpeace UK: Kashiwazaki nuclear plant - report from the scene | 35 Sydney Morning Herald: Nuclear option is cleaner: ANSTO chief 36 WNN: Next Generation Nuclear Plant revived 37 IAEA: IAEA Invited to Send Expert Team to Japan 38 ENS: Japan, UN, to Probe Earthquake Damage at Nuclear Power Plant 39 US: Pittsburgh Tribune-Review: Westinghouse nuclear power program ge 40 asahi.com: EDITORIAL: Fire at nuclear plants - 41 asahi.com: Radioactive water flowed via cables - 42 asahi.com: Niigata puts quake damage at 1.5 trillion yen and countin 43 MSN: New panel to investigate Japan's quake-hit nuclear plant; repor NUCLEAR SECURITY 44 US: NRC: Nuclear Regulatory Commission Votes to Reconsider Limited 45 US: Bulletin Online: Nuclear terrorism: The new day after 46 US: WIRED: "Obsolete" Nuke Gear: Still Nasty NUCLEAR SAFETY 47 US: The Hawk Eye: Loebsack pushes for faster response 48 Daily Commercial News: Contractors face risks from unexploded muniti 49 US: Bradenton.com: Suit against Lockheed Martin filed NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE 50 Daily Yomiuri: Akita village hopes to be radioactive waste site 51 Las Vegas SUN: Editorial: Nuclear wasted 52 ReviewJournal.com: Railroad cost estimates for Yucca top $3 billion 53 US: Daily News Journal: Meeting to discuss radioactive dumping 54 US: NRC: Notice of Intent to Prepare a Generic Environmental Impact 55 Industrial Market Trends: Nuclear Waste in Nevada to Wait 56 US: KFDA: Two clean rooms set up for underground physics 57 Las Vegas Now: Newest Fight Over Yucca Mountain Concerns Water PEACE US DEPT. OF ENERGY 58 DOE: DOE Seeks Industry Participation for Engineering Services to 59 DOE: North American Energy Ministers Take Further Action on 60 Tri-City Herald: Ex-PNNL analyst may drop lawsuit against Richland l 61 Knoxville News Sentinel: Y-12 modernization report due out nearly a 62 Federal Times: Energy office reinvents itself 63 Oak Ridger: Hoag named Y-12 Site Office senior project director - 64 NAS: Project: Prospective Benefits of DOE's Energy Efficiency and Fo 65 NAS: Project: Technical Assessment of Environmental Programs at the 66 NAS: Project: Development and Implementation of a Cleanup Technology 67 NewsChannel6: Idaho Cleanup Project Holds Safety Rodeo to Celebrate ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** FULL NEWS STORIES ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** 1 UPI: Hill: N.Korea disarmament feasible United Press International - NewsTrack - Top News - Published: July 24, 2007 at 7:36 AM WASHINGTON, July 24 (UPI) -- The United States still hopes to complete the next step in North Korea's denuclearization by year-end, although there is no such six-party deadline. The six nations, which met in Beijing last week after a four-month recess, failed to come up with a timetable for North Korea to disclose all its nuclear holdings including weapons and fissile materials and permanently disable its nuclear reactor complex. This phase, coming after North Korea shut down its Yongbyon reactor, is the next step in its nuclear disarmament in exchange for economic aid agreed in February by the United States, Russia, China, Japan and the two Koreas. Speaking in Washington, chief U.S. negotiator Christopher Hill said the year-end target is still feasible, the Voice of America reported Tuesday. Hills said representatives from the six countries will meet in September for an early ministerial-level six-party conference on the disarmament steps, the report said. © Copyright 2007 United Press International. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be reproduced, redistributed, or manipulated in any form. ***************************************************************** 2 UPI: Hill: No relations with nuclear N.Korea United Press International - NewsTrack - Top News - Published: July 24, 2007 at 8:15 AM WASHINGTON, July 24 (UPI) -- The chief U.S. negotiator at the six-party talks on North Korea's nuclear program said there cannot be normalization of relations without denuclearization. Christopher Hill, who returned to Washington after talks in Beijing with his counterparts from Russia, China, Japan and the two Koreas, was asked about possibility of normalizing U.S.-North Korea relations, the Voice of America reported Tuesday. "Any effort to normalize our relationship really hits a brick wall over denuclearization. That is, we cannot, will not have a normal relationship with a nuclear North Korea. But if they fulfill their promise to give up these programs, a lot of things indeed become very possible," Hill said. Hill also said any discussion of North Korea's request for a light-water nuclear power plant must await the full implementation of the six-party accords. North Korea reportedly has asked for the plant as compensation for shutting down its Yongbyon reactor and agreeing to proceed with the next phase of its denuclearization that will include declaring all its nuclear holdings including weapons and fissile materials and permanently disabling its nuclear reactor complex. © Copyright 2007 United Press International. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 3 Indiatimes: Tougher job than 123 deal awaits PM 25 Jul, 2007, 0350 hrs IST, TNN NEW DELHI : As part of his efforts to ensure consensus for the Indo-US civilian nuclear deal, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh will chair a meeting of the Cabinet Committee on Parliamentary Affairs (CCPA) on Wednesday where he will explain details of the 123 agreement and sound out MPs from allied parties. He will also meet CPM leaders Prakash Karat and Sitaram Yechury later in the day for the same purpose. National security advisor M K Narayanan, who led the delegation for the final negotiations on the 123 agreement, will brief ministers in CCPA on the agreement that has been negotiated with the US and explain what the 123 agreement means for India. Allies and opposition parties will be focusing on reprocessing rights of spent fuel and on India’s independence to test nuclear weapons. The prime minister will have to convince the parties that the 123 agreement is in line with the assurances he gave Parliament in August last year. The Left, which has opposed the deal from the beginning, has this time taken a wait-and-watch policy. The meeting with the prime minister on Wednesday will be crucial in determining the Left’s stand. The Left is concerned that India appears to have been granted only partial reprocessing rights. Sources said that there is also no clarity on whether India will continue to maintain a unilateral moratorium on nuclear testing. But the Left is unlikely to go beyond a token protest given CPM’s stand that withdrawing support at this juncture would be politically counter-productive. Concerns over reprocessing rights and nuclear testing have risen as India and the US have found it tough to negotiate these two provisions in the 123 Agreement. According to the draft 123 Agreement, the US has basically agreed to grant rights to India to reprocess spent fuel in a dedicated national facility under the International Atomic Energy Agency safeguards, but intricate details will be worked out at a later stage. India and the US will start negotiations after India puts in a request for reprocessing of spent fuel. Even though the US has agreed to allow reprocessing of spent fuel, it has refused to give reprocessing technology to India. US laws ban export of reprocessing technology as it can be used for military purposes, but the US has made exemptions for Japan, Euratom and Switzerland. Indian negotiators were pushing for the same exemption but failed to persuade US negotiators. The 123 agreement doesn’t ban India from getting reprocessing technology from other countries, but if the Nuclear Supplier Group adopts the 123 agreement as the basis for changing its guidelines then India will not have access to reprocessing technology from any country. This would mean that India will be unable to buy components for its dedicated national facility for reprocessing fuel. In the draft, the US has also kept the right to return clause in case India carries out a nuclear test. This gives the US the right to demand US equipment and fuel back from India, but paradoxically the US has given an assurance that it would maintain continuous operation of US supplied reactors. And at the same time, the agreement also provides assurances for fuel supplies for the lifetime of each of the 14 reactors. This is an assurance that was given in the March 2006 separation plan but the US was hedging on this requirement. The 123 also includes a specific provision that says that the aim of the agreement is not to deter India’s strategic programme. Copyright © 2007 Times Internet Limited. All rights reserved. For ***************************************************************** 4 The Hindu: U.S. knew India had no flexibility Wednesday, Jul 25, 2007 Siddharth Varadarajan NEW DELHI: India and the United States were able to finalise the text of their nuclear cooperation agreement — also known as the 123 agreement — largely because Washington understood that the Indian side had no more flexibility and shifted gear to accommodate India’s concerns, senior Indian officials told The Hindu. The officials said the fact that the United Progressive Alliance Government had no more room for manoeuvre was underlined by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh in his meeting with President George W. Bush at Heiligendamm and Under Secretary Nicholas Burns in Delhi last month. “The law of unintended consequences also operated,” said an official, with the strong opposition inside India serving to corroborate the Prime Minister’s assertion. With the U.S. being told that India had “nothing more to give,” a deal was reached because “politically, the will to do it was very strong, from the very top,” the official said. The U.S. had a strong economic incentive to complete the deal, given the billions of dollars India was likely to spend on new energy projects in the years ahead, the officials said. “Clearly, the U.S. is calculating that the higher the technology involved, the greater will be the share for American companies.” But the officials concede, strategic considerations were not far behind. “If they hadn’t agreed, then the deal would have collapsed and for another 20 years no one in India would be able to do anything with them,” said one official. “For a range of issues on which you now do business… in the Asia-Pacific, for example, they would have to count you on the other side.” Belying media reports of dramatic swings during the five days of negotiations, the senior officials say the outstanding issues were resolved sequentially one by one. “When we went in, all the major issues were wide open and we weren’t sure there would be a deal”, said an official. But by the end of the first day of the marathon negotiating session, the fuel supply assurances issue was resolved. The second day produced an agreement on the question of reprocessing, the third on the termination and ‘right of return’ clauses and the fourth on fallback safeguards. The fifth day, say the officials, was used to produce and vet a consolidated text of the complete draft 123 agreement. Copyright © 2007, The Hindu. Republication or redissemination ***************************************************************** 5 The Hindu: 123 fulfils Prime Minister’s assurances Tuesday, Jul 24, 2007 Siddharth Varadarajan Fuel supplies, reprocessing right, fallback safeguards and ‘right of return’ clauses all resolved New Delhi: The draft nuclear cooperation agreement negotiated last week by India and the United States fulfils all the assurances Prime Minister Manmohan Singh gave Parliament in August 2006, senior officials told The Hindu on Monda y. The agreement — also known as the ‘123 agreement’ — grants India “prior consent” to reprocess spent fuel produced by U.S.-supplied equipment and fuel, a key requirement for the Indian side, though the specific arrangements will be worked out subsequently within a finite time period. The agreement reiterates the fuel-supply assurances provided in the March 2006 separation plan and commits the U.S. to the “continuous operation” of any reactor it sells to India. Officials also say the irksome issue of fallback safeguards and the ‘right of return’ — as mandated by the U.S. Atomic Energy Act — of American-supplied material in the event of cessation of cooperation have also been satisfactorily resolved. Moreover, 123 includes a specific clause that the purpose of the agreement is not to hinder anything India does with its strategic programme or to affect unsafeguarded or military nuclear facilities. The draft 123 agreement is final and its text is now frozen, say officials, though it still needs to be formally approved by both Governments. Once Parliament reconvenes for the monsoon session, the Government is likely to make the text available to the House. According to the officials, any reprocessing of U.S.-origin spent fuel will be done in a dedicated national facility under International Atomic Energy Agency safeguards. Though India has been granted prior consent, the specific arrangements have not been spelt out and would require further consultations. The draft 123 states that within six months of an Indian request to operationalise the right to reprocess, the U.S. must begin consultations and an agreement on arrangements must be concluded within one year. The parameters for these arrangements relate exclusively to IAEA requirements for storage of spent fuel, safeguards, and physical protection. This linkage has been explicitly spelt out and there is no room for ambiguity, say the officials. “There will be no repeat of the Tarapur experience,” said an official. India was free to reprocess the spent fuel there but the U.S. never agreed to make a joint determination with India that reprocessing was “safeguardable.” “Now there is prior consent and a reference to the parameters under which it will be done,” said an official, adding that Department of Atomic Energy experts considered the language watertight. In the event of the cessation of cooperation by the U.S. presumably in response to an Indian nuclear test, the draft agreement still gives Washington the right to demand the return of equipment, material and fuel it has supplied. However, the exercise of this right has been qualified by a U.S. commitment to ensure the continuous operation of reactors supplied by it and will leave India free to arrange appropriate fuel supplies from other sources. On fallback safeguards, another key demand of the U.S. side, the 123 agreement says that in the event that the “IAEA determines that safeguards are no longer being applied” on U.S.-supplied material, India and the U.S. must consult with each other and agree on an appropriate verification mechanism. The officials say they are confident the circumstances would never arise under which the IAEA could make such a determination. The officials also denied reports that there was anything in the 123 agreement which would require India to open up its enrichment facility at Rattehalli for IAEA safeguards. The one issue on which the U.S. side would not budge, citing legal and policy restraints, was the inclusion of reprocessing and enrichment technology and components. The 123 agreement states that fuel cycle-related equipment can only be transferred pursuant to an amendment to the agreement. Though India is not interested in importing fuel cycle technology, it would like to source components for its safeguarded reprocessing activities. However, the officials are confident that the Nuclear Suppliers Group will not place a bar on the sale of these items to India when it changes its guidelines. In terms of sequencing, the officials said the next step was the negotiation of India-specific safeguards with the IAEA and then the NSG agreeing to change its guidelines. The U.S. and India hope to conclude these steps by October, paving the way for an ‘up-down’ vote by the U.S. Congress later this year. Copyright © 2007, The Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the ***************************************************************** 6 The Hindu: Government begins selling nuclear deal Tuesday, Jul 24, 2007 Prime Minister speaks to Sonia Gandhi, Yechury Government ready for a debate on the deal in Parliament NEW DELHI: The Cabinet Committee on Political Affairs (CCPA) is scheduled to meet on July 25 to examine the details of the nuclear agreement reached between Indian and American negotiators last week in Washington. The leader of the Indian delegation, National Security Adviser M.K. Narayanan, returns to the capital late Monday night and will be available to brief the CCPA on what has been accomplished in Washington. Besides the five designated members of the Cabinet Committee on Security — the Prime Minister, External Affairs Minister, Home Minister, Finance Minister and Defence Minister — the CCPA includes four major political faces of the coalition Government — Human Resource Development Minister Arjun Singh, Agriculture Minister Sharad Pawar, Railway Minister Lalu Prasad and Road Transport Minister T.R. Baalu. First step A CCPA endorsement is deemed the first step towards grafting as large as possible political and parliamentary support. On Monday morning, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh began the process of crafting a political consensus on the agreement. According to sources in the Prime Minister’s Office, Dr. Singh briefed Congress president and United Progressive Alliance chairperson, Sonia Gandhi, on the deal. Briefs Mishra Dr. Singh also communicated the broad outlines of the “breakthrough” to Brajesh Mishra, former National Security Adviser, who continues to advise the former Prime Minister, Atal Bihari Vajpayee, on security matters. Mr. Mishra’s views are respected and valued by the Manmohan Singh establishment. The Prime Minister also briefed Sitaram Yechury, a senior CPI(M) leader. The Left parties have been most sceptical of the proposed nuclear deal. Meanwhile, the Foreign Secretary, Shivshankar Menon, began an intensive exercise to brief and explain informally the nuances of the Washington agreement to senior journalists. According to PMO sources, the Prime Minister proposes to make a suo motu statement in both Houses of Parliament in the monsoon session. According to these sources, the Government is prepared to have a debate on the deal in Parliamen t as it feels the Washington agreement has addressed most of the concerns voiced by the critics. Copyright © 2007, The Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the ***************************************************************** 7 Daily Yomiuri: Amari: Fault check near N-plant inadequate The government did not sufficiently inspect the faults in the seabed near Kashiwazaki-Kariwa nuclear power plant, where the Niigata Prefecture Chuetsu Offshore Earthquake's focus was located, at the time the plant was built, Economy, Trade and Industry Minister Akira Amari admitted Tuesday. "Asked whether [the government] took insufficient measures, I can't help but say yes," Amari said at a press conference after a Cabinet meeting Tuesday, answering questions over whether Tokyo Electric Power Co. investigated the faults thoroughly enough and whether the government took necessary measures in response to research conducted when the power plant was built. According to an analysis by the National Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster Prevention and other entities that was conducted after experts complained TEPCO's inspection had been inadequate, the fault lines may extend beneath the power plant. Amari said the government would set up an independent committee to undertake a comprehensive study of possible antiseismic measures for nuclear power plants at the time of an earthquake. Tokyo Univ. Prof. Haruki Madarame is expected to chair the committee. The committee will review incidents that occurred due to the recent earthquake--including the fire that broke out in a transformer, damage to firefighting facilities and a radiation leak--so that other nuclear power plants can learn from the results. The committee also will study measures the companies that operate nuclear power plants and the government should take to reinforce the earthquake resistance of nuclear power plants and other measures against earthquakes. === 'Please use less electricity' With operations suspended at the Kashiwazaki-Kariwa nuclear power plant, TEPCO has announced it will ask about 800 companies to cut their use of electricity even further than the firms promised in contracts on energy conservation during power shortages. TEPCO made this request to JFE Steel Corp. on Monday and Showa Denko K.K. on Tuesday. The power company will ask about 800 firms to conserve a total of more than 1.08 million kilowatts of electricity. With the plant out of action, the Kanto region and some other areas provided with electricity by TEPCO may face power shortages in mid-summer, when the demand for electricity peaks. TEPCO is prepared to provide 62.14 million kilowatts of electricity this summer, over 1 million kilowatts more than the highest electricity demand expected in an ordinary summer of average temperature--61.1 million kilowatts. However, it is urgent to take additional measures as the highest electricity demand is expected to increase up to 64 million kilowatts if the temperature rises due to the La Nina weather pattern, which is said to cause heat waves and other climatic aberrations. JFE Steel showed willingness to accept TEPCO's request when the power company's officials visited the steel firm. === Niigata gov. presses Abe for help Niigata Gov. Hirohiko Izumida on Tuesday met with Prime Minister Shinzo Abe at the Prime Minister's Office and reported on damage from the earthquake. Izumida told Abe: "Some victims are still struggling with double and triple loans incurred after the Chuetsu Earthquake [in 2004]. We want some encouraging news from the government." Abe told Izumida he would consider offering financial assistance to help people recover from the disaster. Izumida's requests included financial aid from the central government toward the planned prefectural reconstruction fund. He also said the earthquake should be designated as a "serious disaster" as soon as possible to enable the state to provide additional subsidies for reconstruction. The Daily Yomiuri, The Yomiuri Shimbun © The Yomiuri Shimbun. ***************************************************************** 8 Daily Yomiuri: Waves in pool over 1 meter high Waves over 1 meter high were created in a fuel storage pool at the No. 3 reactor of the Kashiwazaki-Kariwa nuclear power plant of the Tokyo Electric Power Co., after the Niigata Prefecture Chuetsu Offshore Earthquake hit the plant on July 16, according to images taken by a security camera. TEPCO on Tuesday unveiled a series of images taken by its security camera situated at the fuel storage pool in the plant's No. 3 reactor in Niigata Prefecture. The camera captured still images every six seconds. According to the images, white bubbles were produced in the center of the pool due to the earthquake's strong pitching movement. The bubbles eventually grew into waves over 1 meter high and overflowed onto the poolside. The water surface is usually 40 centimeters below the top edge of the pool. However, the waves overflowed by surpassing a metal rail that is nearly 1-meter high and surrounds the pool. Even more than 30 minutes after the earthquake hit, the waves had not subsided, as the images showed small waves still developing on the surface of the water. As part of preparations for a plutonium-thermal power generation program, a mixed oxide form of plutonium and uranium is kept inside the storage pool of the plant's No. 3 reactor. Therefore, a surveillance camera was installed for security only at this reactor among the plant's seven reactors. === Structural faults led to water leak Meanwhile, the nuclear power plant has a structural problem in the reactor building that led to a radioactive water leak following last week's earthquake, the Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency has said. Yasuhisa Komoda, director general of the Economy, Trade and Industry Ministry agency, said at the plant Monday: "There are many things to be improved, such as the fire control system and the system for sharing information when a radioactive substance has been leaked. ) The Daily Yomiuri, The Yomiuri Shimbun © The Yomiuri Shimbun. ***************************************************************** 9 Bangkok Post: N-option needs careful thought Wednesday July 25, 2007 EDITORIAL The earthquake that struck central Japan on Monday, July 16, may have also struck a blow to plans to ramp up construction of nuclear power plants worldwide. At the very least, it should have driven home the message that any plant to be constructed near a fault line must be built to withstand the strongest tremors. After the 6.8 quake on July 16, there were initial reports that only a transformer had been damaged at the Kashiwazaki-Kariwa nuclear plant in Niigata prefecture, with no release of radioactive materials to the environment. But as time went on, the reports grew more serious. It is now known that almost 400 gallons of highly toxic waste spilled into the Japanese Sea, a major fishing area, and that a ''small amount'' of Cobalt 60 and other cancer-causing radioactive contaminants escaped into the air. It has since been disclosed that this plant and others nearby built by the same company were constructed to withstand only a 6.5 earthquake, which is a bit perplexing, given Japan's history of violent earthquakes. At this time it appears that the release of the radioactive materials, while alarming, does not pose a threat to humans. It must be pointed out that several other nuclear reactors in the area suffered no damage, and also that on the whole the nuclear power industry, which includes around 440 generators worldwide, has proven remarkably accident-free, notwithstanding Three Mile Island, Chernobyl and a not-so-small list of lesser incidents. However, the potential scale of the damage from an accident of Chernobyl proportions or greater makes it imperative that safety requirements err on the side of caution, particularly in earthquake-prone areas. The whole of Japan, of course, is such an area. There are 55 reactors in Japan, and almost all of them are on or near major fault lines. Some, but obviously not all, are built to withstand an 8.5 earthquake, which is considered the maximum magnitude which might be encountered. There are, of course, rare earthquakes on record which have been more powerful. In the US, there are nuclear power plants in California located on or near known faults, and also in the mid-West region. It has been pointed out that the proposed repository for nuclear waste material at Yucca Mountain in Nevada lies on a fault line. The nuclear reactor being constructed near the Iranian city of Bushehr is near an active fault. Probably no one knows for sure how many existing nuclear plants are on or nearby known fault lines. What's more, new fault lines are being discovered all the time. In fact, an analysis of the seismic data from the July 16 quake shows that the Kashiwazaki-Kariwa plant, previously thought to be near a fault, is apparently directly on top of an extension of the fault. Because of widespread public fears for the safety of nuclear power, it was not long ago an industry that seemed to have little future almost anywhere outside of Japan and France. Under the rationale that nuclear reactors don't produce greenhouse gases, a number of countries, including the US, China, Russia and England, are now planning to embark on an unprecedented and tremendously expensive building spree to make nuclear plants account for a large percentage of their energy production. Thailand's Energy Planning and Policy Office also has plans to build a nuclear reactor in the coming years. Nuclear power does have some significant advantages: it is a virtually inexhaustible power source, it emits no carbon dioxide and, for countries like Japan without hydrocarbon reserves, it offers an alternative to importing fuels at ever-increasing prices. But in deciding on what energy policy course to take, we should not forget the risk of accidents due to natural forces, which, besides earthquakes, includes an increased risk of catastrophic flooding in some areas due to climate change. And this must be considered alongside other risks such as terrorism, equipment malfunction and human error, and the seemingly insurmountable problem of safely storing large amounts of radioactive waste materials that will be highly dangerous for several hundred thousand years. ***************************************************************** 10 Whitecourt Star: Residents to hold nuclear power information meeting Whitecourt, AB July 25, 2007 A pubic information session will be held at Blue Ridge Community Hall on Aug. 1 for those residents who want to learn more about nuclear power. Chandra Lye Star staff Wednesday July 25, 2007 Presentations will be given by a nuclear physicist and a spokesperson from the Pembina Institution. The night begins at 7 p.m. and has been organized by a group of Fort Assiniboine residents who presented their concerns before Woodlands County Council last week. Council heard from the delegation last Tuesday they were concerned about the letter of support issued to nuclear power plant developer, Energy Alberta Corporation (EAC). Bernhard Krohn, who was one of the presenters to council, said that his concern was about the democratic process. "It’s about basic democracy. It’s about the fact that we feel that council has initiated a process without doing their process." "What we are facing is that council has done a process – they have written a letter," he said. He told council that the letter was an invitation for the development, but was upset that they had not followed proper procedure to obtain residents’ approval. "We only want to have answers and we want to see due process done." The letter presented to council was signed by 55 residents and asked several questions of council members regarding their research and information on the project. "Everything we do in life has risks and opportunities," Krohn explained. "I would like to be informed about the risks and the opportunities." He added the meetings held so far, including the Fort Assiniboine assembly did not fully disclose the issues surrounding nuclear power. Krohn said he had submitted a letter to council expressing his concern before they wrote their support letter on July 4. "I would like to hear voices which walk me through and which inform me about the risks associated with this development, so that I can make an informed decision." He told council that he was not opposing the project, " but I believe that the people of this county have the right to hear all these opinions." "Putting a nuclear power plant in your area is a very important decision," resident and former councillor member Richard Tipton said. "There were two information meetings provided by the company itself and you are always going to have a skewed view of it," he said, "because when you have information meetings they are always pro, so if you’re going to have information you should have pros and cons on both sides." Tipton also expressed concerns about a possible conflict of interest for those on council when councillors disclosed their trip to New Brunswick two months ago had been fully paid for by Energy Alberta. "It becomes a love-in," he said during the meeting. "It’s just like giving a person a gift," he later told reporters, "There is a serious issue and you think ‘well, should I vote for them or should I not?’" But Tipton said that it was a risk in every industry; "It happens to everybody." "Personally I would have rather seen council make a motion to use our taxpayer’s money to provide their own trip." Rennie refuted Tipton’s comments. "I don’t think it matters who paid for it," he told the Star. "It is not going to influence my opinion." He added that the details had been disclosed before and after the trip. "We were clear about the facts of how we went, who took us, what we saw while we were there. Now that’s not news to me to be bringing it up three months later." "If they think that the company got any special treatment, that’s just absolutely not the case." During the delegation Woodlands councillors expressed concern that the letter may have been misinterpreted and explained that they had only meant to express an interest in being part of the process of developing a plant in the area. However, Krohn asked them to withdraw the letter and discourse with residents before preparing a new one. "If council has a point of discrepancy between what they meant to say and what they have written, and that’s what I heard in the meeting, then I would have a follow up request that they sit down and revise their statements to what they meant to say," Krohn said. Woodland’s County Mayor Jim Rennie said it was unlikely that council would make any changes to their letter of support because the application has been submitted. He said his understanding was that the residents were not against nuclear power in the area but they were concerned with the fast-pace of the process. "They just felt that this process had started in the last couple weeks and had went from not existing a few weeks ago to being totally at the point we are now." When asked if he or other concillors had spoken with anyone not affiliated with EA Rennie told the Star that they had only spoken to representatives from New Brunswick Nuclear Power and Atomic Energy of Canada Limited (AECL). He said that he has also had meetings with two residents, as of last week, who expressed concerns with the development, but he said the role of the council was clear. "I think it is important for people out there to remember that all we do is represent the majority." Publisher: Pamela Allain Proprietor and published by Bowes Publishers Limited at 4732 - 50 Avenue, Whitecourt, Alberta, Canada T7S 1N7 © 2007 Whitecourt Star ***************************************************************** 11 Platts: Westinghouse, Shaw Group sign deal on four nuke plants in China 2007-07-24 Washington (Platts)--24Jul2007 Westinghouse Electric and its consortium partner The Shaw Group on Tuesday signed multi-billion-dollar contracts to provide four AP1000 nuclear power plants in China, Westinghouse said. "The definitive contracts signed today will result in the first-ever deployment of advanced US nuclear power technology in China," said Westinghouse President and CEO Steve Tritch. The contracts followed years of negotiating and bidding by Westinghouse, Shaw and government officials, Westinghouse said. Terms of the contracts were not disclosed. They are with State Nuclear Power Technology, Sanmen Nuclear Power, Shandong Nuclear Power and China National Technical Import & Export. The four plants are to be constructed in pairs at Sanmen and Haiyang sites in China. Construction is expected to begin in 2009, with the first plant becoming operational in late 2013. The remaining three plants are expected to begin operating in 2014 and 2015. For more news, request a free trial to Platts Electric Power Daily at http://www.platts.com/Request%20More%20Information/index.xml?src=story or subscribe now at http://www.platts.com/infostore/product_info.php?cPath=2_31&products_id=47 Copyright © 2007 - Platts, All Rights Reserved ***************************************************************** 12 RIA Novosti: Neo-Nazis behind attack on nuclear protestors in Siberia -police 11:21 | 24/ 07/ 2007 IRKUTSK, July 24 (RIA Novosti) - Police said Tuesday an attack on an environmental camp in southeast Siberia, which left one person dead and seven injured, was carried out by members of a local neo-Nazi group. Yet another suspect in the attack was detained Tuesday. Police said Monday they detained 20 suspects. Prosecutors have issued eight arrest warrants, and another five are pending. Police said earlier they are investigating the incident as "intentional grievous bodily harm resulting in death." On Saturday, attackers wearing face masks and wielding baseball bats and metal rods raided a camp of environmental activists in the city of Angarsk, near Lake Baikal, who were there protesting nuclear waste processing at a Siberian chemical plant. Police said the suspects were young people under 22, primarily students and unemployed. There were 21 environmentalists in the camp. Environmentalists have previously protested against the state-owned Angarsk Electrolysis Chemical Plant, which processes uranium for the nuclear industry. RIA Novosti ***************************************************************** 13 RIA Novosti: Quake hits Japanese nuclear plant: a Russian view Opinion & analysis - 13:54 | 24/ 07/ 2007 MOSCOW. (RIA Novosti commentator Tatyana Sinitsyna) - An earthquake hit the city of Kashiwazaki in Honshu last week, causing an estimated $33.3 billion worth of damage. The Kashiwazaki-Kariwa nuclear plant, one of Japan's largest, was in the earthquake zone. Radioactive substance leakage is reported. Japanese authorities and public are attacking the Tokyo Electric Power Company after it refused to give information on the danger. The alarm was sounded at the other end of the world, in the headquarters of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) in Vienna. Dr. Mohamed El Baradei, its Director General, says he hopes TEPCO will not withhold any facts from investigation. Professor Alexei Lopanchuk, an expert on nuclear plants' environmental effects at the Russian Federal Atomic Energy Agency, commented on the situation for RIA Novosti: "I saw a burning transformer on the television. It was no shock to a specialist-a tank transformer can catch fire with the slightest spark. Every project envisages safety measures. Transformers are set apart from each other, so fire cannot spread to cause a leak. Radioactive water could have leaked from the reactor containment sump-but I don't think it could get out of the circuit and pollute the environment, whatever the press might be saying. As for polluted sea, I think that's a paranoid allegation." The expert dismisses speculation that seismic danger was underestimated when the plant site was chosen: "The Japanese are top-notch professionals, and exacting and pragmatic to the utmost degree in choosing plant sites. It was a mere accident, I think." The Kashiwazaki drama makes us wonder whether Russian nuclear plants are immune to natural disasters. They face very little risk from earthquakes on the seismically docile East European Plain. Nonetheless safety measures have been steadily tightened since 2000, when Russia placed a new emphasis on atomic energy. A national wide blue print for updating and enhancing safety procedures has been adopted. All present-day projects are designed to withstand earthquakes with a minimum magnitude of 7 on the Richter scale. Russian specialists proceed from the same stringent safety standards when they build plants abroad. "We design nuclear plants taking account for everything nature can throw at us-tornados, glaze frost, blizzards, torrential rain, earthquakes, tsunamis, landslides and mud volcano eruptions. We also consider every possible man- made risk-for instance, air routes and railroads in the vicinity of plants," Lopanchuk said. Russian-designed projects have proved reliable in the past. The premises and infrastructure of the Kudankulam plant in India stood unscathed in the Sumatran tsunami of 2004. The Armenian plant withstood the force 9 during the 1988 quake, which wiped the town of Spitak off the face of the earth though the plant was designed to withstand a force no greater than 5. Designed and built by Soviet specialists, the Kozlodui plant in Bulgaria survived a sequence of quakes with the epicenter in neighboring Romania. Now, Russia is designing a new Bulgarian nuclear project in Belena, also within the Vrancea seismic zone. The alarmed Japanese public insists on shutting down not only Kashiwazaki, but also Shizuoka and another 15 nuclear power plants out of a total of 55. But this could be expensive. It takes at least a year to cool a reactor in a process that occasionally costs more than plant construction. Furthermore, with no resources comparable to nuclear energy, a shut down may plunge Japan into an energy crisis. "I don't know how accidents are generally estimated. I, for my part, am no alarmist. Japan is accustomed to quakes, and is very serious about them. The damaged units will be re-commissioned after thorough investigation, I am sure," said Professor Lopanchuk. The opinions expressed in this article are the author's and do not necessarily represent those of RIA Novosti. RIA Novosti ***************************************************************** 14 POAC: Pump problems keep Oyster Creek at reduced output Press of Atlantic City Published: Tuesday, July 24, 2007 LACEY TOWNSHIP - The Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station’s recently installed replacement pump needs a replacement. The pump is experiencing excessive vibrations during testing, and the plant will continue to operate at 70 percent power until the problem is remedied, said Nuclear Regulatory Commission spokesman Neil Sheehan on Tuesday. An electrical fault in the motor of one of the plant’s three feedwater pumps triggered an automatic shutdown on the morning of July 17. The pump was replaced and service at the plant was resumed at 6:56 p.m. Sunday, although energy output was reduced to 70 percent. “If the pump’s vibrating excessively it’s not able to operate in the manner it should,” Sheehan said. “Unless they can feed more water into the reactor they can’t turn the turbine at the same speed and generate enough energy.” The problem with the pump is not dangerous, he added. Oyster Creek spokeswoman Leslie Cifelli confirmed the pump’s vibration problems Monday, but said she could not offer a timeline for replacement or repair. In other plant news, a public hearing on emergency evacuation plans for Oyster Creek will be held tonight in Room 119 of the Ocean County Administration Building on Hooper Avenue in Toms River. At 6 p.m., the state Department of Environmental Protection and the New Jersey State Police will discuss their contingency plans during a public information session. A public hearing will follow at 7 p.m. Representatives from a coalition of groups opposed to the relicensing of Oyster Creek are expected to attend. - Heather Pharo, Press Staff Writer - See Wednesday’s edition of The Press for complete coverage. To e-mail Heather Pharo at The Press:HPharo@pressofac.com All News Archives Businesses Classifieds Jobs Cars Homes Shopping Bars & Clubs Restaurants Events Boats Help pressofatlanticcity.com: Contact Us | Terms of Service / Privacy Policy | Advertising | Site Map | About Us | Syndication | Story Archive | Newsletters The Press of Atlantic City: Subscribe | Subscriber Services | Online Photo Store | Careers at The Press | Parade Magazine © Copyright 1970- The Press of Atlantic City ***************************************************************** 15 Gristmill: Alternatives to nuclear power | Posted by David Roberts at 4:05 PM on 23 Jul 2007 In an unsigned editorial, the L.A. Times makes the case against nuclear power. IMHO, the strongest stuff comes at the bottom: The accelerating threat of global warming requires innovation and may demand risk-taking, but there are better options than nuclear power. A combination of energy-efficiency measures, renewable power like wind and solar, and decentralized power generators are already producing more energy worldwide than nuclear power plants. Their use is expanding more quickly, and the decentralized approach they represent is more attractive on several levels. The much hyped (though largely imaginary) "renaissance" of nuclear power relies on popular opinion that there are no alternatives other than coal. That's not true. That's where nuclear's opponents should be concentrating their rhetorical firepower. Wind Farms I live near one of the largest Wind Farms in California. It is located on the Tehachapi mountains. The farm has the capability of generating a lot of electricity, something like 3,000 MW a year but current it isn't being used to its full capacity. First there is a total of 1400 MW generating capacity that isn't hooked into the grid. Southern California Edison is getting approval for the last 4 segments of a 7 segment transmissions system. Secondly, most of the windmills sit idle and braked due to a federal policy that any damage on the windmill requires it to be shut down until fixed. The company running the farms only schedules maintenance every 6 months. So if the windmill is damaged the day after its scheduled maintenance it sits for 6 months. And this is because the electricity doesn't go anywhere for the lack of transmission lines. It makes me wonder how many other projects languish like this because of poor planning, community protests and politics. "Not In My BackYard" (NIMBY) probably kills more projects than anything else. Grist: Environmental News and Commentary ©2007. Grist Magazine, Inc. All rights reserved. Gloom and doom with ***************************************************************** 16 Platts: DOE takes another step in the next generation nuclear plant 2007-07-24 London (Platts)--24Jul2007 DOE is taking another step in the next generation nuclear plant, or NGNP, project by seeking expressions of interest from industry teams willing to work on the conceptual design of the plant. The NGNP is a research and development project to construct by 2021 a prototype plant at DOE's Idaho National Laboratory that can both generate electricity and produce hydrogen. DOE said in a July 23 announcement that the expressions of interest, which are due by August 20, will build on the pre-conceptual design work developed by three separate design teams, led by Westinghouse, Areva and General Atomics under a total of $8 million awarded in September 2006. The next stage, the conceptual design work, will support the selection of design and operational requirements. DOE said the expressions of interest "will be used to identify a qualified pool of candidates to provide future engineering and design services." For more news, request a free trial to Platts Nucleonics Week at http://www.platts.com/Request%20More%20Information/index.xml?story or subscribe now at http://www.platts.com/infostore/product_info.php?cPath=22_41&products_id=67 Copyright © 2007 - Platts, All Rights Reserved ***************************************************************** 17 Platts: EIB to provide loans for new nuclear plant construction 2007-07-24 London (Platts)--24Jul2007 The European Investment Bank will provide loans for new nuclear plant construction, after a review of bank lending policy, the bank said in a July 19 briefing note published on its web site July 23. Conditions for obtaining EIB loans for nuclear projects include that the project is notified to the European Commission under the Euratom Treaty and that the EC issue a favorable opinion on the project. The EIB said that issues including the future costs of radioactive waste disposal and nuclear decommissioning "will constitute an integral part of the bank's own assessment of the proposed investment." The EIB noted that a number of new nuclear plants are under consideration in various EU states, but said that only one has been formally notified to the EC and that no request for EIB funding has been made. That plant was the Belene nuclear plant in Bulgaria. For more news, request a free trial to Platts Nucleonics Week at http://www.platts.com/Request%20More%20Information/index.xml?story or subscribe now at http://www.platts.com/infostore/product_info.php?cPath=22_41&products_id=67 Copyright © 2007 - Platts, All Rights Reserved ***************************************************************** 18 Platts: Tepco requests METI delaying two nuclear maintenance in Jul-Aug 2007-07-24 Tokyo (Platts)--24Jul2007 Tokyo Electric Power Co. has requested the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry consider delaying its two scheduled maintenance programs at its Fukushima-1 nuclear power plant in northeastern Japan after the shutdown of its largest nuclear power plant July 16 following a major earthquake, a company official said Tuesday. In addition to Tepco's initial request to delay its scheduled extra safety check at the 0.78 GW No. 3 nuclear reactor from the end of July, the largest Japanese utility also asked METI consider delaying its scheduled maintenance of the 1.10 GW No.6 nuclear reactor from early August at the plant, the official said. Tepco's extra safety check at the No. 3 unit was imposed by the ministry in April following a series of undisclosed problems at various nuclear plants. The utility was also scheduled to start the maintenance program at the No.6 reactor in early August for two-to-three months, the official said. While METI has still to agree, Tepco has made clear its preference to start the maintenance programs after September amid its electricity supply concerns after it shut the 8.21 GW Kashiwazaki-Kariwa nuclear power plant in northwestern Japan following the major earthquake, the official added. Japan's summer power demand normally peaks between July and September. Without permission to postpone, Tepco will be obliged to start the scheduled maintenance programs at the height of the season although its nuclear generation capacity has been more than halved, falling to 6.44 GW from just seven units compared with normal nuclear capacity of 17.31 GW from 17 units across Japan. The drop in nuclear power generation has forced Japan's biggest utility to boost its thermal power generation using feedstocks such as direct-burning crudes, low sulfur waxy residue, low sulfur fuel oil, LNG and coal. Tepco is in the process of calculating a definitive revised estimate of fuel demand and costs as a result of nuclear outage, which it will announce July 31 when it presents its results for the April-June period. --Takeo Kumagai, takeo_kumagai@platts.com For more news, request a free trial to Platts Power in Asia at http://www.platts.com/Request%20More%20Information/index.xml?story or subscribe now at http://www.platts.com/infostore/product_info.php?cPath=2_31&products_id=54 Copyright © 2007 - Platts, All Rights Reserved ***************************************************************** 19 Border Mail: Hot rock energy better than more nuke plants Tue, 24th July, 2007 YOUR readers will have appreciated that the federal election due later this year could provide a turning point in the energy program of the nation. Your readers will have to decide what path Australia should follow. Prime Minister John Howard and the Liberal Party have made it clear they believe Australia’s priority should be for a nuclear program and the building of at least five reactors. Last week the Prime Minister proposed we should also consider a nuclear enrichment facility as well as the storing of low-grade nuclear waste. It occurs to me, and others, that perhaps the better alternative would be using geothermal power, but at present it is not well understood. This source of energy lies in the great heat in deep hot rocks beneath the Earth’s surface and this occurs in every state, including Tasmania and is known as “Green Energy”. There are three stages in this process: the discovery of the hot rocks; the circulation of water through them, and; the use of the recovered hot water to generate the electricity. At present there is one such station being built, in South Australia at Innamincka, and it will produce the test values at the end of the year. Dr Prame Chopra, at the ANU has said that the long reach base at Charleville in south-west Queensland could supply all of Australia for at least 8000 years. I suggest to your readers that this is a far safer way forward for Australia, than backwards into the dangers of a nuclear-powered world. — BILL YATES, Old Tallangatta © 2007 The Border Morning Mail Pty Ltd. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 20 JOURNAL NEWS: Nuclear regulators want updated inventory of uranium 235 at Indian Point Tuesday, July 24, 2007 By GREG CLARY BUCHANAN - Federal nuclear regulators are requiring Indian Point officials to open a nearly 20-year-old storage container for radioactive parts to verify that a tiny quantity of uranium 235 is accounted for properly. The unstable form of uranium can and has been used to make atomic bombs, though Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Indian Point officials said the amounts in question at the nuclear plant are many thousands of times too small to make a bomb. Still, the NRC wants to make sure it knows the exact locations and quantities of all the radioactive material under its control. "We're especially concerned about any material that's in a spent fuel pool," NRC spokesman Neil Sheehan said. "This material needs to be tightly controlled." The NRC has not cited Indian Point on this issue and Sheehan said the agency would wait until the container is opened next month before deciding on possible enforcement. "These containers are supposed to be opened on an annual basis, unless they have a tamper-resistant seal," Sheehan said. "We wouldn't be looking at this if this weren't part of the regulation. They should have done a better job of maintaining records of what they had in the pool." Jim Steets, a spokesman for Entergy Nuclear Northeast, which owns Indian Point, said there are eight used detectors, in 2- to 3-foot sections, located in a bolted container in the spent fuel pool of Indian Point 3. The rods are part of old mechanisms used by the previous owners to check the power levels of the nuclear reactor. Steets said the 32 parts contain 8/10,000s of a gram of uranium 235 each. Combined, they make .025 percent of a gram. According to the Web site "The Nuclear Weapon Archive," (nuclearweaponarchive.org), the atomic bomb dropped at Hiroshima on Aug. 8, 1945, and known as "Little Boy," used 700 grams of uranium 235 in nuclear fission, to create an explosion equivalent to 15,000 tons of TNT dynamite. Since the storage container predated the company and was bolted shut, company officials believed it didn't need to be opened as part of their annual inspection of the pool, Steets said. NRC records indicate that the container was filled in 1988-89. Steets said company officials only recently learned that the NRC expected containers such as this one to be inspected because though the container is bolted, it is not completely tamper-resistant. Because of the small amount of uranium 235 and the complex process of opening the container, the company opted to check the contents during its annual inspection next month. NRC officials approved that schedule, Sheehan said, because of the danger of working in the spent fuel pool and the need for proper equipment and expertise, which agency officials said sometimes takes time to bring in to the plant. With the heightened level of public interest in Indian Point since workers there discovered radioactive tritium and strontium 90 leaks, NRC officials have been notifying local and federal elected representatives of all developments at the nuclear plant. Rep. Nita Lowey, D-Harrison, has been trying to get the plant closed down for years and is fighting its relicensing application. She said the latest development is a result of poor management of the plant. "At a time when intelligence indicates security risks are at critical high, we can't afford to have loosey-goosey security measures at nuclear power plants located in the most densely populated areas of the country," Lowey said. "The incompetence at Indian Point imperils an entire region and absolutely requires that the plant be shut down." Reach Greg Clary at 914-696-8566 or gclary@lohud.com. Copyright © 2007 The Journal News, a Gannett Co. Inc. newspaper serving Westchester, Rockland and Putnam Counties in New York. ***************************************************************** 21 APP.COM: Nuclear power plant in service after shutdown | Asbury Park Press Online Tuesday, July 24, 2007 Motor failure causes 6-day outage BY NICK CLUNN STAFF WRITER Post Comment LACEY — The Oyster Creek nuclear power plant was back in service Monday following an unexpected six-day outage that began when a motor failed on a key pump. The plant's single reactor restarted about 7 p.m. Sunday after technicians replaced the motor on one of three feed-water pumps and performed other tasks that can only be completed when the plant is shut down, according to plant operator AmerGen Energy Co. Those side jobs were completed to ensure reliability through the rest of the summer, an AmerGen news release stated. The motor failure July 17 caused Feed-water Pump C to stop working and the plant to shut itself down after safety systems detected a low-water level in the reactor. Running reactors need a certain amount of water to keep them at safe temperatures. Radioactive tritium was released in the form of steam during the shutdown, but AmerGen and federal safety regulators said the amount vented through a stack was harmless and equaled about half the dose given off in one year by a home smoke detector. Monitored releases of tritium, a normal byproduct of commercial nuclear power, are allowed at reactors in doses that do not endanger the public. While the plant is running, steam is directed toward turbines, which spin to turn generators that create electricity. But that sequence does happen when the reactor is down, according to AmerGen. Still, steam in the reactor needs to be released. Power customers do not experience outages when Oyster Creek is down because New Jersey is tied to a regional electrical grid that is fed by other plants. Oyster Creek's last sudden shutdown — known as a "scram" in industry parlance — happened in June 2005, when a plant computer detected a drop in power flowing into the plant. Incoming electricity is needed to run critical safety systems. Nick Clunn: (732) 643-4072 or nclunn@app.com Copyright © 2007 Asbury Park Press. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 22 APP.COM: Hearing focuses on nuclear power plant | Asbury Park Press Online Tuesday, July 24, 2007 ABOUT EVACUATION PLAN Posted by the Asbury Park Press on 07/24/07 Post Comment TOMS RIVER: The state Department of Environmental Protection and the State Police will hold a public hearing today on the nuclear emergency evacuation plan for the area surrounding the Oyster Creek nuclear generating station. This annual hearing will take place in Room 119 of the Ocean County Administration Building, 101 Hooper Ave. in Toms River. An information session will be held at 6 p.m., and the hearing will start at 7 p.m. Staff Report Copyright © 2007 Asbury Park Press. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 23 News Journal: NRC clears way for Hope Creek increase Wilmington, Del. delawareonline Panel finds nuclear plant's power boost would have little environmental impact By JEFF MONTGOMERY, The News Journal Posted Tuesday, July 24, 2007 Plans for an 18.4 percent power increase at the Hope Creek nuclear reactor along the Delaware River in New Jersey will have no significant environmental impact, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission concluded in a report released Monday. PSEG Nuclear LLC estimated that the project -- which would increase reactor temperatures and pressure -- would boost the plant's electrical output from 1,139 megawatts to about 1,300 megawatts. Although the changes could have some limited consequences, including slight increases in radioactive gas releases and salt particle emissions from plant cooling towers, all are within limits considered acceptable by federal regulators, according to the report. The NRC's finding means that PSEG Nuclear can proceed with its permit request without launching a long and potentially costly environmental impact study. "It's a done deal. I don't see any way of stopping it," said Norm Cohen, who directs the watchdog group Unplug Salem. Regulatory commission officials have approved more than 100 requests for increases, termed "uprates," around the nation, with another 27 expected during the next five years that would produce the equivalent of twice the electricity generated by the coal-burning Indian River power plant near Millsboro. Salem Units 1 and 2, which stand near Hope Creek, already have undergone the process. Unplug Salem and other local and national citizen and environmental groups have questioned the Hope Creek plans, saying the NRC should take more time to study stresses encountered after uprates at other pressurized water reactors with operating characteristics similar to Hope Creek's. NRC officials plan to take comments on the report for 30 days, addressed to: Chief, Rules and Directives Branch, Office of Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Mail Stop T-6D59, Washington, DC 20555-0001. Written comments also may be delivered to 11545 Rockville Pike, Room T-6D59, Rockville, MD 20852 from 7:30 a.m. to 4:15 p.m. on federal workdays. Although PSEG Nuclear has not released cost estimates for the uprate, the project will require replacement of steam turbines, pumps, generators and other equipment. PSEG's Salem/Hope Creek complex, which stands about 15 miles south of the Delaware Memorial Bridge, ranks as the nation's second-largest nuclear generating complex, and is also among those with the greatest potential for deaths and casualties in the event of a catastrophic accident, according to agency records. Contact Jeff Montgomery at 678-4277 or jmontgomery@delawareonline.com. ***************************************************************** 24 Guardian Unlimited: Fire at Japanese nuclear power plant Haroon Siddique and agencies Tuesday July 24, 2007 A small fire broke out today at a partly constructed nuclear power station in northern Japan, the third blaze at the plant this month. It comes a week after an earthquake caused a radioactive spillage at another atomic plant. The operator, Hokkaido Electric Power (Hepco), said there was no danger of a radiation leak and there were no injuries during the incident at the Tomari plant. Two other reactors at Tomari were operating normally, it said. The Kyodo news agency said investigators found damage to electrical wiring and suspected foul play, but the operator was unavailable to comment. The fire came eight days after an earthquake caused radiation leaks at the Kashiwazaki-Kariwa plant - which generates the most electricity of nuclear power stations worldwide. International inspectors were due to visit the Kashiwazaki plant in the aftermath of the quake, in which 400 drums of low-level radioactive waste fell over, with about 40 losing their lids and spilling their contents. The spillage was one of more than 50 malfunctions at the plant in the immediate aftermath of the quake. The operator, Tokyo Electric Power (Tepco), was criticised for failing to deal with the blaze and for initially under-reporting the scale of the radioactive leaks. The Kashiwazaki plant has been closed indefinitely and Japan's 54 other nuclear power stations have been ordered to carry out emergency safety checks. The Tomari plant has had problems before. In 2003, Hepco temporarily shut a reactor there after a leak in a coolant tank. And in 1995, four workers were badly burned when a radioactive waste tank caught fire. Hepco said no radiation had leaked outside the compound in any of the cases. Useful links Japan Today Asahi.com Far Eastern Economic Review Fuji News Network Japan Times Kyodo News Guardian Unlimited © Guardian News and Media Limited 2007 ***************************************************************** 25 AFP: Energy industry gears up for 'nuclear renaissance' - by Jacques Lemieux Tue Jul 24, 8:20 AM ET MCCLEAN LAKE, Canada (AFP) - Twenty years after the Chernobyl disaster poisoned the world's taste for reactors, a French firm is sniffing out fresh uranium supplies in Canada. And the race for nuclear power is back on. After the deadly Chernobyl reactor explosion in Ukraine in 1986 and a lesser scare at the Three Mile Island in Pennsylvania that rattled the United States in 1979, "people were wondering whether nuclear power even had a future," said Yves Dufour, one of the directors of Areva, the world's leading civilian nuclear power provider. "For 20 years, we've been crossing a desert," the industry's very own "nuclear winter," said Dufour. The Three Mile Island meltdown apparently harmed no one but shook public confidence in nuclear plants. The fallout from Chernobyl, however, spread widely and affected an estimated five million people. But now a breath of optimism is warming the sector up, just as it did during the petrol crisis of 1973. Areva, based in France -- which alone among western countries continued to build nuclear power plants after these scares -- is angling for new uranium supplies for its reactors. Such prospecting declined sharply in the dark days after Chernobyl. "The nuclear renaissance has become a fact -- it's a certainty," Areva's spokesman Charles Hufnagel told AFP during a tour of this uranium mine that the company is exploiting in the western Canadian province of Saskatchewan. There are 438 nuclear reactors in 30 countries which provide 16 percent of the world's electricity, according to the latest industry figures. Most of them were built from the 1960s to early 1980s, and are getting old. Replacing them could answer concerns about the harmful global warming caused by the carbon dioxide (CO2) released by burning fossil fuels. "Global warming fears, rising fossil fuel prices and surging power demand in the Far East are fueling a new wave of nuclear plant construction," according to a report by the Canadian bank CIBC World Markets. Hufnagel meanwhile insists economic factors are behind the decisions of countries such as Finland, Britain, Canada and the United States to re-launch nuclear power projects. The aim is "not only to produce electricity that is cheap but above all at a stable price in the long term," he said. "No country has yet decided to re-launch a nuclear program just to fight against CO2." "The nuclear renaissance is also a thing of the south, with big countries that also wish to be the leaders of their region," he added, citing the notable examples of China, Brazil and South Africa. Some 150 new reactors are expected to be built in the next two or three decades, many of them in China, with the number of active plants set to double by 2070. A scramble has begun to start bagging uranium to feed them. Current uranium production -- after the post-Chernobyl decline in investment in the sector -- can only feed 60 of the existing reactors' capacity. Much of the rest comes from stockpiles dating back to the petrol crisis and recycled nuclear material from ex-Soviet warheads, Dufour said. These uranium sources however will soon be exhausted. Mining analyst John Redstone of Montreal-based investment broker Desjardins Securities, says uranium supply falls some 1,000 tonnes short of the current world demand of 66,800. This is pushing up the price of uranium to new highs, topping 130 dollars per pound compared to less than seven dollars in 2001, he said. Producers are responding by stepping up their capacity, said Dufour, as well as scouring the planet for new sources of the crucial mineral. "The difficulty for production will be the next three years." The opening of new mines in Canada starting in 2009 would boost supplies and lessen the strain. But at today's consumption rate, the proven and probable global reserves of 4.74 million tonnes could feed existing reactors for only 65 years, according to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). Those reserves are found mostly in Australia, Kazakhstan, Canada, the United States and South Africa. Another 10 million tonnes of uranium that are believed to exist would push the deadline into the next century. "But we have to go find these 10 million tonnes," said Dufour. Copyright © 2007 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 26 Salt Lake Tribune: Nuclear irony Public Forum Letter Article Last Updated: 07/23/2007 07:19:36 PM MDT There was an unintended, but nicely ironic, juxtaposition of two stories in the July 19 Tribune. The first story, on Page A3, described how much worse the radiation leak from the earthquake-damaged nuclear power plant in Kashawazaki, Japan, was than first thought, with the amount of radioactive water leaking into the Sea of Japan 50 percent greater than first announced. The second story, unfortunately buried in Section B where fewer readers would be likely to see it, notified us that a Utah legislative panel has directed its staff of lawyers "to begin drafting legislation to make it easier for nuclear power to be developed in Utah." Wow, that is good news: nuclear power plants right over one of the worst earthquake faults in America. Good thinking! So, when the Big One hits, not only will we risk losing our sources of energy, but we could also face nasty radioactive contamination as well. I guess now that we've just about managed to prevent spent nuclear fuel from outside the state from being stored here, some of our lawmakers want us to start producing our own. Keller Higbee Salt Lake City ***************************************************************** 27 IAEA: Nuclear Power As An Engine for Development IAEA Chief Addresses Nuclear Power´s Outlook in Talks in Thailand and Malaysia Staff Report 23 July 2007 IAEA Director General Dr. ElBaradei meets with Prime Minister General Surayud Chulanont. Nuclear power as an engine for development was the subject of a keynote address given by IAEA Director General Mohamed ElBaradei to the 6th Congress on Science and Technology for Development on 16 July in Bangkok, Thailand. About 1 000 local and international scientists and members of the diplomatic community took part in the congress, which was sponsored by the Ministry of Science and Technology. Thailand´s Prime Minister, General Surayud Chulanon, officially opened the congress. In his keynote, Dr. ElBaradei explained the reasons for the renewed interest in nuclear power, including energy diversity and energy security, carbon emissions and environmental concerns, and the strong performance record of nuclear power. He discussed actions that the IAEA and others were taking to address the risks associated with safety, security, waste and non-proliferation. The speech covered issues related to ensuring the necessary infrastructure - from industrial infrastructure, such as manufacturing facilities, to the legal and regulatory framework, the institutional measures to ensure safety and security, and the necessary human and finance resources. During his trip in Thailand, Dr. ElBaradei had an audience with His Majesty King Bhumibol Adulyadej and held meetings with the Prime Minister, General Surayud Chulanont, the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Nitya Pibulsonggram, and the Minister of Science and Technology, Yongyuth Yuthavong. In addition to the ongoing issue of the DPRK, the talks focused on nuclear power as part of the country´s energy mix. Nobel Lecture in Malaysia IAEA Director General, Dr. ElBaradei, gave a Nobel Laureate Public Lecture hosted by the Academy of Sciences Malaysia on 18 July 2007 on the subject of Nuclear Power: Looking to the Future. The Lecture was held at the Kuala Lumpur Convention Centre with the participation of local and international scientists, postgraduate students and members of the diplomatic community. In his lecture, Dr. ElBaradei spoke about the demand for energy in developing countries, a number of which were giving renewed consideration to nuclear power. He covered a number of emerging issues related to nuclear power, including environmental concerns, waste, non-proliferation, infrastructure needs and public perception. During his trip to Kuala Lumpur, Dr. ElBaradei also held meetings with the Deputy Prime Minister, Dato´ Seri Najib Tun Abdul Razak, the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Dato´ Seri Syed Hamid Syed Jaafar Albar, and the Deputy Minister of Science, Technology and Innovation, Dato´ Kong Cho Hahad. The talks focused on issues related to the DPRK and Iran, Malaysia´s energy mix and the project to build a nuclear monitoring laboratory, which is scheduled to be operational in three years´ time. Dr. ElBaradei also held a press conference and had a one-on-one interview with Radio Television Malaysia. Copyright ©, International Atomic Energy Agency, P.O. Box 100, Wagramer Strasse 5, A-1400 Vienna, Austria Telephone (+431) 2600-0; Facsimilie (+431) 2600-7; E-mail: ***************************************************************** 28 Reuters: IAEA to send team to quake-hit nuclear plant Tue Jul 24, 2007 9:11AM EDT VIENNA (Reuters) - The U.N. nuclear watchdog will send a team of experts to Japan in the coming weeks to check the world's biggest nuclear power plant after a powerful earthquake last week caused radiation leaks, the agency said on Tuesday. Tokyo Electric Power Co.'s Kashiwazaki-Kariwa nuclear power plant leaked water containing radioactive materials from a reactor after a 6.8 magnitude quake struck northwest Japan on Monday last week. The leaks rekindled fears about the safety of Japan's nuclear industry. "This invitation is important for identifying lessons learned that might have implications for the international nuclear safety regime," the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) said in a statement. Initially, Japan had told the IAEA it did not need help, but on Monday it said it would allow inspectors into the quake-hit plant after coming under pressure from local authorities. The plant was shut down automatically in the quake and will remain closed indefinitely for safety checks. Japan has ordered other nuclear plant operators to make strict safety checks. The exact timing of the joint Japanese-IAEA examination will be decided in consultation with the Japanese authorities, the IAEA said, stopping short of giving any dates. The Nikkei business daily reported that four IAEA inspectors would visit the site as soon as early August. Nuclear energy supplies around one-third of the country's electricity needs in Japan, which now has 55 nuclear reactors. © Reuters 2007. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 29 Reuters: Japan quake sends tremors across nuclear industry Tue Jul 24, 2007 10:58AM EDT By Barbara Lewis and Peter Dinkloh LONDON/FRANKFURT (Reuters) - A Japanese earthquake that forced the closure of the world's biggest nuclear plant has highlighted the energy source's dangers, just when support had been growing. Worries about security of energy supply and the urgency of fighting climate change had helped to overcome years of opposition to nuclear power after the 1986 Chernobyl disaster. Generating nuclear power does not produce any of the carbon emissions blamed for warming the planet. But even for those swayed by environmental considerations, there are obstacles and, for the doubters, Japan's troubles have added to their unease. "It's bound to have an effect. Chernobyl had a huge effect. These things are all factors into the equation. The question is about the balance? Will the public disquiet counteract the huge push by the industry?" asked Frank Barnaby, a consultant at the Oxford Research Group, who argues nuclear power is not worth the risk. A powerful earthquake on July 16 caused radiation leaks, forcing Tokyo Electric Power Co. (9501.T: Quote, Profile, Research) (TEPCO) to shut its Kashiwazaki-Kariwa plant in the northwest of the country. The Nuclear Energy Agency (NEA), advisory board to the OECD, said the biggest impact would be higher safety standards. "The real impact will be that, logically, people designing new nuclear power plants will pay even more attention to the criteria for seismic events," said Luis Echavarri, the NEA's director, speaking by telephone from Paris. Other difficulties varied from country to country. In Europe, public opinion was the dominant factor, although to an extent it had been won over, Echavarri said. "Nuclear energy is much more popular than a few years ago because of climate change and security of supply, but still in some countries, it's politically difficult." BRITAIN, U.S. LOOK TO NEW GENERATION In Britain, the government has called for a new generation of nuclear power plants as part of efforts to cut carbon dioxide emissions to 20 percent below 1990 levels by 2020. Although public opposition has been relatively muted, the government has been forced to review its nuclear energy policy by a court challenge from environmental group Greenpeace. At the same time, it is becoming harder to maintain Britain's ageing fleet. British Energy (BGY.L: Quote, Profile, Research), which hopes to play a big part in building any new nuclear plants, had to shut down its Hunterston and Hinkley Point nuclear stations for lengthy repairs and has said they are unlikely to return to full power. Like Britain, the United States, the world's biggest energy user, is also thought to be well on the way to seeking new nuclear plants and applications for licenses are expected to be submitted later this year. Regardless of TEPCO's difficulties, U.S. analysts said the fundamental reasons for looking to nuclear remained in place. There could be an impact on public confidence, they said, but the time needed to process plans could be a bigger hurdle. "These plants are so far away from being built. Who knows what factors could affect policy-makers between now and then?" Denise Furey of Fitch Ratings, said. AGAINST Sweden and Germany are among the nations that have decided to phase out nuclear power. Both have experienced problems with Swedish firm Vattenfall's (VATN.UL: Quote, Profile, Research) nuclear facilities. In Sweden a reactor at the Forsmark plant suffered an emergency shutdown in July last year. It was rated two on the International Nuclear Event Scale (INES), compared with seven for the Chernobyl disaster, the world's worst nuclear accident. Vattenfall's German unit Vattenfall Europe (VTTG.DE: Quote, Profile, Research) is also under scrutiny following two emergency shutdowns and the German government has threatened to withdraw operating licenses for the plants involved. The incidents have been especially sensitive in a country where nuclear plants have met massive popular resistance, leading the previous government to agree to the closure of all of Germany's reactors by the mid-2020s. Those most favorable to nuclear power include Finland and France and both are building new plants. In France nuclear power provides around 80 percent of the nation's electricity needs and generally has public acceptance because it means cheaper power. But even France has its nuclear detractors. After last week's earthquake in Japan, the nation's anti-nuclear association Sortir du Nucleaire said 42 of France's 58 nuclear power reactors might not be able to cope should a similar incident occur in France. Most analysts say, however, that is extremely unlikely. (Additional reporting by Simon Johnson in Stockholm, Daniel Fineren and Peter Harrison in London, Bernie Woodall in Los Angeles, Scott DiSavino in New York, Muriel Boselli in Paris) ***************************************************************** 30 Reuters: Westinghouse seals mega China nuclear deal Tue Jul 24, 2007 6:53AM EDT By Chen Aizhu and Jim Bai BEIJING, July 24 (Reuters) - U.S.-based Westinghouse Electric signed on Tuesday a multi-billion-dollar deal with Chinese partners to build four nuclear reactors in eastern China, finalising a pact agreed between Beijing and Washington seven months ago. The contract, estimated in the past at close to $8 billion, is expected to warm relations between the world's top energy users amid recent disputes over issues from the yuan currency and China's bloated trade surplus. "The definitive contracts signed today will result in the first-ever deployment of advanced U.S. nuclear power technology in China," Westinghouse President and CEO Steve Tritch said at the signing ceremony at Beijing's Great Hall of the People. Construction will begin in 2009, with the first plant slated for operation in 2013 and the remaining three coming on line in the next two years, Westinghouse said in a statement. It did not give specific financial terms but said the deal would create some 5,000 jobs in at least 20 states in the United States. Westinghouse, owned by Japan's Toshiba Corp. (6502.T: Quote, Profile, Research), will build four 1.1-gigawatt reactors using its advanced AP1000 design, a technology the Pittsburgh-based company said is the basis for nearly half of the world's operating nuclear plants. The deal will reaffirm China -- now a laggard in the nuclear sector -- at the forefront of a global trend towards increased use of atomic power, touted by many nations as the cleanest and cheapest solution to the world's strained energy industry. But fears about nuclear safety have resurfaced after an earthquake hit Japan last week, causing leaks of water with low-level radiation from the world's largest nuclear power plant. POLITICAL ELEMENTS China, determined to boost nuclear fuel to power its booming economy, has delicately balanced competing offers from the United States, France and Russia to sell technology into its expanding market. Shortly after picking Westinghouse last December as winner for the four plants, Beijing quietly awarded French state-run Areva (CEPFi.PA: Quote, Profile, Research) another two reactors in southern China in a preliminary deal worth about $5 billion. China was also in talks with Russia for possible participation in expanding a nuclear power plant in eastern Jiangsu province, built by Atomstroiexport and started up earlier this year, official media reported. "Big deals like nuclear plants have more political elements than economic," said a senior Chinese industry official. Westinghouse and its engineering partner Shaw Group Inc. (SGR.N: Quote, Profile, Research) will build two reactors in Haiyang city of Shandong province and another two in Zhejiang province's Sanmen city. China Power Investment Corp. (CPIC), parent of Hong Kong-listed China Power International Development Ltd. (2380.HK: Quote, Profile, Research), will be the lead investor for the Shandong plant, and China National Nuclear Corp. (CNNC) the main investor in Zhejiang. China, the world's second-largest energy consumer, plans to spend some $50 billion adding around 30 reactors by 2020, raising its installed nuclear capacity to 40 GW, nearly enough to power Spain. That would be around 4 percent of the country's power capacity, compared with just over 2 percent at present, but still far behind the three-quarters in France and one quarter in Japan. China currently has only 10 working reactors, which generated a total of 26.53 billion kilowatt hours of electricity in the first half of 2007, or 3.7 percent more than a year ago, official output data showed. The country relies on coal for over 80 percent of its electricity. ((Editing by Ramthan Hussain; aizhu.chen@reuters.com; Reuters Messaging: aizhu.chen.reuters.com@reuters.net; +8610 6598 1211) Keywords: CHINA WESTINGHOUSE/NUCLEAR (C) Reuters 2007. All rights reserved. Republication or redistribution ofReuters content, including by caching, framing or similar means, is expresslyprohibited without the prior written consent of Reuters. Reuters and the Reuterssphere logo are registered trademarks and trademarks of the Reuters group ofcompanies around the world.nSP68175O/CNPOWER ***************************************************************** 31 IPS: Nuke Deal: Breakthrough or Bad Bargain? - by Praful Bidwai July 24, 2007 NEW DELHI - After tortuous negotiations spread over four days in Washington, the United States and India have reported "substantial progress" on a bilateral agreement on civilian nuclear cooperation, but said they would now "refer the issue to our governments for final review." However, the deal, also known as the "123 agreement" because it will amend Section 123 of the U.S. Atomic Energy Act, is unlikely to find broad consensual acceptance either in India or the U.S. So wary are the two governments about announcing a breakthrough that they have given no details of the agreement's contents, and in particular about its acceptance of India's right to reprocess fuel burned in imported reactors and continuity of fuel supplies from the U.S. in case India conducts a nuclear test. The agreement is soon to be placed before India's Cabinet Committee on Security. It is due to be put up before the U.S. Congress for an "up-and-down" or yes-or-no vote without amendments. Under Indian law, it need not be ratified by parliament. The deal became possible only with intervention by U.S. Vice President Dick Cheney and talks between the national security advisers of the two countries, as well as high-powered delegations of diplomats and technical experts. Looming large over the talks was the presence of India's Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) chairman Anil Kakodkar. Although Kakodkar did not participate in the negotiations, he was continually consulted to ensure that his concerns about the deal are met. Kakodkar is known to be less than happy with the deal, and has orchestrated opposition to it through his former colleagues. According to media reports, the 30-page-long agreement, reached after 300 working hours of talks, only "partly" concedes India's right to reprocess spent fuel to be used in its fast breeder reactor program. India has all along insisted on such a full-fledged "right" – strongly contested by nonproliferation advocates in the U.S. Indian negotiators are believed to have offered to build a dedicated reprocessing facility for imported fuel and to place it under safeguards (inspections) of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). This proposal is proving controversial in India, but the U.S. seems to have accepted it. It is not known if this carries any conditions. On the second contentious issue, that of guarantees of U.S. nuclear supplies if India conducts a nuclear explosion, it has been agreed that the U.S. can demand a return of equipment and material exported to India. But this has reportedly been hedged in with clauses that call for a presidential review of the circumstances in which India conducts a test, as well as technical conditions calculated to prevent a sudden and complete suspension of nuclear cooperation. Both the U.S. Atomic Energy Act and a special legislation passed last December by the U.S. Congress, called the Henry J. Hyde U.S.-India Peaceful Atomic Energy Cooperation Act 2006, mandate a cessation of nuclear cooperation in case India conducts a test. Under the new agreement, such cessation will not be sudden. "The Indian side obviously did some tough bargaining," says Achin Vanaik, a political scientist and independent nuclear analyst. "The critical question now is how the two main lobbies opposed to the deal react. There is, first, the nuclear scientists' lobby which is allergic to any external inspections. There is also the hawkish political right, led by the Bharatiya Janata Party [BJP], which wrongly holds that the deal will cap India's nuclear weapons capability." Some nuclear scientists, such as A.N. Prasad, former director of the Bhabha Atomic Research Center, and A. Gopalakrishnan, former chairman of the Atomic Energy Regulatory Board, have attacked the proposal to create a dedicated reprocessing facility on the ground that its operations will be controlled by foreign agencies and that it will raise the processing costs. Yet others, including two former AEC chairmen, have demanded amendments to the Hyde Act. However, the U.S. insists that the 123 agreement cannot substantially differ from the Hyde Act. "It is not clear if the nuclear scientists' lobby can be brought around to supporting the agreement in its present form," argues M.V. Ramana, a researcher with the Center for Interdisciplinary Studies in Environment and Development, Bangalore. "If a majority of its constituents remain hostile to the agreement, political opposition to it will grow." Adds Ramana: "Many of the arguments of this lobby are self-serving and reflect xenophobia and a reluctance to accept any kind of scrutiny, including IAEA inspections. However, there is some validity in the argument that a dedicated reprocessing facility will raise costs. But that is something India can live with. The trouble is that this lobby wants to have its cake and eat it too: it wants India to be treated on a par with the nuclear weapons-states recognized by the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty of 1970, although India is not a party to it." BJP leaders have already declared that they oppose the Hyde Act and the 123 agreement in its present form. Observers close to India's leftist parties believe that they are unlikely to support the agreement, and will want to hold down Prime Minister Manmohan Singh to various commitments he made in parliament. As for the U.S., nonproliferation experts and political leaders, especially from the Democratic Party, oppose any deal that exempts India from U.S. laws and effectively legitimizes its nuclear arsenal while diluting the global norm against the spread of nuclear weapons. Says Daryl G. Kimball, executive director of the Arms Control Association, if the U.S. agrees to allow India to reprocess imported spent fuel, "it would still be next to impossible to ensure that U.S. technology and material would not be used directly or indirectly to support or facilitate India's unsafeguarded weapons-related plutonium reprocessing activities. … [A reprocessing facility] would further free up India's limited fuel supplies for weapons purposes." Kimball argues that this would be the fourth major departure from the U.S. laws and policies. The first happened in July 2005 when the Bush administration agreed to drop its long-standing policy of restricting nuclear cooperation with states that have nuclear weapons, or have tested them, and refuse to allow full-scope IAEA safeguards. The second departure took place when the Bush administration gave up its demand that India suspend production of fissile material for weapons purposes. The third happened in March 2006 when the U.S. urged India to include in its list of 'civil' nuclear facilities slated to be put under safeguards reactors falling in its fast breeder program; "but again, India refused and the U.S. side went along." Unless the 123 agreement is rejected by the Indian cabinet, or fails to win congressional ratification, which seems highly unlikely, the arms controllers would have to take their battle to other forums that must approve the deal before it gets come into effect: the 45-member Nuclear Suppliers' Group and the IAEA. (Inter Press Service) Praful Bidwai is a New Delhi-based political analyst and peace activist, a columnist with twenty-five Indian newspapers and co-author (with Achin Vanaik) of New Nukes: India, Pakistan and Global Nuclear Disarmament. He shared the International Peace Bureau's Sean MacBride International Peace Prize for 2000 with Vanaik. Antiwar.com ***************************************************************** 32 Hemscott: Japan underestimated fault line at nuclear plant - minister TOKYO (Thomson Financial) - Japan's industry minister admitted Tuesday the government had underestimated the possible risks of building the nation's biggest nuclear power plant near a seismic fault line. A deadly earthquake measuring 6.8 on the Richter scale on July 16 caused a small amount of radiation to leak from the Kashiwazaki-Kariwa plant northwest of Tokyo, fuelling public concerns. The earthquake struck off the coast just nine kilometres (five miles) from the power plant. 'In the way we dealt with it (the fault line) in the ocean area, we have to agree that the government's action was inadequate,' Minister of Economy, Trade and Industry Akira Amari told reporters. Before building the plant in the 1970s, operator Tokyo Electric Power Co submitted a pre-construction report, in which the firm allegedly underestimated the earthquake risks linked with the fault line in the area. The government approved the company's assessment. Amari said his ministry would toughen its earthquake preparedness standards when reviewing construction plans for future nuclear plants. The earthquake killed 11 people and injured more than 1,000. afp/zr zr/zr COPYRIGHT Copyright AFX News Limited 2007. All rights reserved. The copying, ***************************************************************** 33 Council on Foreign Relations: Japan Quake Tests Nuclear Nerves - July 24, 2007 Prepared by: Toni Johnson UN inspectors plan to examine the Japanese nuclear power plant after an earthquake wrought radiation leaks (AP Photo/Japan Coast Guard, HO). Japanese officials agreed to work with UN inspectors after a powerful earthquake shut down the country’s largest nuclear plant (Reuters) and raised fresh concerns about its ). The earthquake caused radioactive spills and other problems reportedly compounded by employee error. “All fifty-five (Japanese nuclear plants) have this kind of vulnerability,” a Kobe University seismologist told USA Today. The incident follows last year’s order from a judge to shut down Japan’s second-largest plant because it was not earthquake ready. A series of other high-profile nuclear accidents (BBC), including in 1999 and 2004 (CNN), create a growing quandary for Japan—the world’s third-largest consumer of nuclear power behind the United States and France. Environmental advocates were quick to assert that the latest incident means nuclear power is unsafe (IPS). Japan is not the only country in the world that has built nuclear power plants on or near fault lines. The Philippine government pays $155,000 a day in interest on a nuclear facility never put into operation because it was built near major fault lines (AFP). Energy-starved Armenia continues to run its Metsamor nuclear plant despite a nearby fault line and the safety concerns of European Union and U.S. officials. A 1988 quake in the region killed twenty-five thousand people. In the United States, two watchdog groups want to close a Michigan nuclear plant, which they believe fails to adhere to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s earthquake safety regulations for waste handling (AP). Concerns about earthquakes also threaten U.S. plans to build a nuclear ) in Nevada’s Yucca Mountain. After the devastating quake in the city of Bam in late 2003, Iranian democracy activist Haydar Akbari questioned the sensibility of building a nuclear power plant in Iran’s city of Bushehr, which was ) in 1877, 1911, and 1962. A UPI article says a nuclear accident in Iran could prove devastating to the Gulf region and the world’s oil markets. Iranian officials and the German company that designed the plant—which the United States opposes over weapons-development fears—say it can resist up to a 7.2 magnitude earthquake. Nuclear power safety has come a long way since the 1986 Chernobyl accident, experts say. In fact, plants in many countries have withstood significant earthquakes. The World Nuclear Association estimates 20 percent of the more than four hundred nuclear reactors worldwide operate in areas of significant seismic activity. Currently, seventy new power reactors are in the planning stages of construction, primarily in Asian countries with fast-growing economies and rapidly rising electricity demand. Another 150 have been proposed—some because greenhouse-gas constraints on coal power have renewed interest in nuclear power in Europe and North America. It is not clear how many of these planned sites are located near fault lines. Weigh in on this issue by emailing CFR.org. Hot Topics from GlobalSecurity.org ***************************************************************** 34 Greenpeace UK: Kashiwazaki nuclear plant - report from the scene | End the nuclear age: Demand a nuclear-free future for Britain » * Kashiwazaki nuclear plant - report from the scene * Japan's nuclear leak: earthquakes, fire and fault lines * The Convenient Solution - what you can do * Brown lets the nuclear cat out of the bag * Too hot to handle: the future of civil nuclear power Posted by bex on 24 July 2007. After the conflicting reports about last week's earthquake in Japan, a Greenpeace team of nuclear and radiation experts headed over to Japan to check radiation levels on the ground. Happily, most places the team checked around the plant didn't show signs of increased radioactivity, but they had a couple of bizarre moments along the way. Their diaries are on our international site. ***************************************************************** 35 Sydney Morning Herald: Nuclear option is cleaner: ANSTO chief www.smh.com.au July 25, 2007 THE waste generated by nuclear power stations is tiny compared with that of coal-fired power stations and should not be considered an obstacle to the development of a domestic nuclear power industry, the head of the nuclear technology body says. Ian Smith, executive director of the Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation, released figures yesterday showing while a nuclear power plant produced about 315 cubic metres of waste over its life, a coal fired power station produced 3.3 million cubic metres. He said in a briefing in Canberra that the waste from coal stations was potentially more toxic than that produced by nuclear stations. He cited the case of France where between 70 and 80 per cent of power comes from nuclear. Over 25 years the stations had not produced enough waste to fill one Olympic-sized swimming pool, he said. Stephanie Peatling Copyright © 2007. The Sydney Morning Herald. ***************************************************************** 36 WNN: Next Generation Nuclear Plant revived 24 July 2007 The USA's long-running program to build an advanced hydrogen-producing nuclear reactor system has sprung back into life with a request for expressions of interest. Artist's impression of NGNP (Image: Idaho National Laboratory) The US Department of Energy has issued a "request for expressions of interest from prospective industry teams" that want to provide design services for developing the Next Generation Nuclear Plant (NGNP). NGNP is envisaged as a high-temperature gas-cooled reactor system coupled to a neighbouring hydrogen production facitility. It could also produce electricity and supply process heat. It supports President George Bush's Advanced Energy Initiative, which seeks to enable nuclear energy to replace fossil fuels in the transport and petrochemicals industries. The program has suffered in recent years from unfavourable budgeting and had been effectively sidelined by the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership (GNEP), which sees Advanced Recycling Reactors (cooled by molten salt and fuelled by mixed oxides and actinides) as part of a closed nuclear fuel cycle. However, in June the Appropriations Committee of the House of Representatives decided that GNEP was too far-sighted and ambitious and the DoE should complete the advanced reactor programs it has already started. Accordingly, it amended FY2007 funding to award GNEP $285 million less than requested and $233 million more to other nuclear programs - including NGNP. Responses to the DoE's call must be submitted by 20 August and would be used to identify a 'pool of candidates' to provide future engineering and design services. The DoE said that the recent announcement builds on the $8 million-worth of pre-conceptual design contracts awarded to Areva, General Atomics and Westinghouse in 2006. The three companies would be expected to contact the DoE. Westinghouse is part of a coalition of companies supporting the Pebble Bed Modular Reactor (PBMR) for the NGNP project. It is joined by South Africa's PBMR Pty and Institute of Nuclear and New Energy Technology (INET), China's Tsinghua University, the Shaw Group, Sargent and Lundy. Meanwhile, General Atomics is putting forward its GT-MHR concept, an annular core high-temperature gas-cooled reactor it says is suitable for hydrogren production, while Areva has the similar Antares design. Further information US Department of Energy Global Nuclear Energy Partnership Areva General Atomics Westinghouse WNN: ***************************************************************** 37 IAEA: IAEA Invited to Send Expert Team to Japan Press Release 2007/14 24 July 2007 | IAEA Director General Mohamed ElBaradei welcomes an invitation by the Japanese Government to send specialists to jointly examine the current condition of the Kashiwazaki-Kariwa Nuclear Power Plant. The IAEA intends to send a team of IAEA and international experts in the coming weeks. The exact timing will be decided in consultation with the Japanese authorities. Dr. ElBaradei said this invitation is important for identifying lessons learned that might have implications for the international nuclear safety regime. Press Contacts Press Office Division of Public Information [43-1] 2600-21276 Melissa Fleming Spokesperson Division of Public Information [43-1] 2600-21275 [43] 699-165-21275 (mobile) About the IAEA The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) serves as the world's foremost intergovernmental forum for scientific and technical co-operation in the peaceful use of nuclear technology. Established as an autonomous organization under the United Nations (UN) in 1957, the IAEA carries out programmes to maximize the useful contribution of nuclear technology to society while verifying its peaceful use. NOTE TO EDITORS: For additional information visit the Press Section of the IAEA's website (http://www.iaea.org/Resources/Journalists/), or call the IAEA's Division of Public Information at (431) 2600-21270. Copyright ©, International Atomic Energy Agency, P.O. Box 100, Wagramer Strasse 5, A-1400 Vienna, Austria Telephone (+431) 2600-0; Facsimilie (+431) 2600-7; E-mail: Disclaimer ***************************************************************** 38 ENS: Japan, UN, to Probe Earthquake Damage at Nuclear Power Plant Environment News Service (ENS) TOKYO, Japan Japan will establish an independent committee to investigate leaks of radioactive water, flooding, fire and electrical problems at the world's largest nuclear power plant that was damaged by a strong earthquake July 16, the government said today. The Tokyo Electic Power Company's Kashiwazaki-Kariwa nuclear power plant in Niigata prefecture was shut down after the 6.8 magnitude quake caused a leak of low-level radioactive water. Tokyo Electic Power Company's Kashiwazaki-Kariwa nuclear power plant (Photo courtesy TEPCO) Today, three of the plant's seven units are operating and one is starting up, the company said. Minister of Economy, Trade and Industry Akira Amari said only that the panel will begin its investigations as soon as possible. The panel is likely to submit its report to the UN's International Atomic Energy Agency, IAEA, at its annual conference in Vienna in September. Japan now says it will allow IAEA investigators to inspect the nuclear plant, after an offer of assistance last week from IAEA head Dr. Mohamed ElBaradei. The government of Shinzo Abe had rejected help from the UN agency, but was persuaded by a petition from local officials eager for more information. The IAEA said last week that preliminary data indicates that the earthquake "may have exceeded the seismic design assumptions for the plant." "The agency believes a thorough investigation of the impact of the earthquake on the plant and full transparency in such investigations is required," the IAEA said. The Tokyo Electic Power Company confirmed today that 2,000 tons of water flooded the basement of the building that houses the facility's No. 1 reactor. The water escaped from damaged fire protection system piping in Unit 1, the company said, but it was not radioactive. The leak had been announced in the days following the quake, and today company spokesman Kiyoto Ishikawa said the flooding posed no environmental hazards. It now appears that the earthquake also shook a storage pool containing about 2,300 kiloliters of water and spent nuclear fuel on the fourth floor of the No. 6 reactor building, TEPCO said. The radioactive water spilled through a small hole where electric cables run through for equipment used to transport spent fuel, TEPCO said. Usually, insulation material fills the spaces between the hole and the cables, but the packing material evidently came loose during the quake, allowing the water to flow along the cables and then into an air conditioning duct before entering drainage ditches that lead to the Sea of Japan, TEPCO said. The floor where the storage pool is located is in a restricted radiation zone, but the floors into which the water flowed are outside the restricted zone, the utility said. An estimated 1.2 cubic meters of radioactive water flowed into the sea, but the company said it is still not certain about the total amount of water that flowed from the pool. TEPCO says that during the incident, radioactive material was twice vented into the air. TEPCO has started on repairs of minor damage at the plant, and the company will soon prepare a plan for the detailed check of safety-significant equipment such as the reactor internals, said the Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency. A detailed inspection of the reactors will be conducted based on that plan. Minister Amari acknowledged today that the government failed to carefully examine fault lines near nuclear power plants, and said a stricter review system is needed, the Kyodo news agency reported. The 6.8 magnitude earthquake that claimed 11 lives was located in the city of Kashiwazaki and the village of Kariwa along the Sea of Japan coast. With a combined power output capacity of more than 8,200 megawatts, the Kashiwazaki-Kariwa nuclear power plant is the world largest. The quake's epicenter was just 16 kilometers, 10 miles, away from the plant. Copyright Environment News Service (ENS) 2007. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 39 Pittsburgh Tribune-Review: Westinghouse nuclear power program gets boost - By Rick Stouffer TRIBUNE-REVIEW Tuesday, July 24, 2007 Westinghouse Electric Co. said Monday it acquired for an undisclosed price a South African company known for its work developing an alternative nuclear power technology that proponents say is extremely safe. Once Westinghouse's purchase of IST Nuclear is approved by the South Africa Competition Commission, which is expected next month, the company will become Westinghouse Electric South Africa (Pty) Ltd. All 118 IST Nuclear employees will be retained. "ISTN is a key participant in the development of the Pebble Bed Modular Reactor, and this acquisition will allow us to become even more involved as (the technology) moves toward commercialization," Nick Liparulo, Westinghouse's vice president of engineering services, said in a statement. Westinghouse is a 15 percent equity partner in a proposed 165-megawatt pebble bed facility to be built in South Africa. Pebble bed plants are built in 165-megawatt reactor sections, about one-fifth the size of FirstEnergy Corp.'s 821-megawatt Beaver Valley 1 unit in Shippingport, Beaver County. The modular layout allows the plant to grow in incrementally. "Pebble bed plants are smaller than our own AP 1000 plant design (165 megawatt vs. 1,100 megawatts), so this gives us expertise at both ends of the spectrum, plus at a time when nuclear power experts are at a premium, this gives us access to 100-plus highly skilled, highly experienced workers," Westinghouse spokesman Vaughn Gilbert said. "I think this is a very forward-looking step for Westinghouse, it shows it's definitely looking to be a player in the future," said Jay Apt, executive director of Carnegie Mellon University's Electricity Industry Center. Apt said the pebble bed technology has the potential to deal with one of the great problems associated with nuclear power: proliferation. Liparulo said Westinghouse intends to expand IST Nuclear's scope to include working on existing light water nuclear reactors worldwide. "We see this as a growth business," Liparulo said. A pebble bed reactor uses nuclear fuel encased in graphite "spheres" about the size of a billiard or tennis ball. Within the "pebbles" are 15,000 uranium particles, or kernels. During normal operation, the pebble bed contains about 456,000 pebbles. Pebble bed technology is considered by its proponents to be extremely safe because of passive safety features that require no human intervention and that can't be bypassed. The reactor is cooled with helium -- not water -- and the gas is used for energy transfer. Helium enters the top of the reactor at a temperature of 932 degrees Fahrenheit, moves between pebbles heated by nuclear fission, and leaves the bottom of the reactor vessel at a temperature of about 1,652 degrees Fahrenheit. The hot gas enters a turbine that's connected to a generator. The coolant leaves the turbine and is cooled, recompressed, reheated and returned to the reactor core. According to proponents, a feared meltdown of the nuclear reactor can't happen with a pebble bed system. There's no chance of overheating caused by radioactive decay because of the resistance to high temperatures of the billions of fuel particles within the graphite balls. In addition, helium is chemically inert, meaning it doesn't react with other elements, and it's also noncombustible. No air can enter the core and corrode the reactor's graphite. Rick Stouffer can be reached at rstouffer@tribweb.com or 412-320-7853. Back to headlines Reproduction or reuse prohibited without written consent from Tribune-Review Publishing Co. ***************************************************************** 40 asahi.com: EDITORIAL: Fire at nuclear plants - 07/24/2007 The strong earthquake that damaged Niigata and Nagano prefectures on July 16 has exposed disturbingly poor firefighting capabilities of many nuclear facilities in Japan. The deadly earthquake caused a fire at the Kashiwazaki-Kariwa Nuclear Power Plant operated by Tokyo Electric Power Co. (TEPCO). The plant's response to the fire was delayed by various factors. Alarmed by the ineptitude, the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry, which regulates the power industry, ordered electric power companies and related firms to report on their preparedness for fires at nuclear facilities. The picture that has emerged from the reports submitted to the ministry is quite troubling. Of the 10 companies that operate nuclear power plants, only about half have chemical fire engines and hotlines linked to local fire departments. None of the operators has firefighting squads on duty around the clock at their nuclear power plants. TV footage showed a column of black smoke billowing out of the Kashiwazaki-Kariwa plant immediately after the fire broke out there. Many TV viewers felt uneasy about the fact that there was no army of fire engines at the site. Given the facts revealed by the power companies' reports, there could well be replays of the frightful spectacle at other nuclear power plants. It took about two hours to douse the fire at the TEPCO plant in Niigata Prefecture. Various disruptions caused by the magnitude 6.8 quake were also behind the failure to act more quickly. The plant has an emergency hotline for firefighting efforts, but it was unusable because the temblor damaged the building where the equipment was located and workers could not enter the building. It was 12 minutes after the fire was discovered that the call to report the fire connected to the Kashiwazaki municipal fire department. But the fire department was unable to respond immediately to the accident at the plant because it was working furiously to deal with situation created by the quake. The fire department asked the plant staff to use its own firefighting team to make the initial response. Workers at the plant tried to extinguish the fire on their own, but their efforts were frustrated; the water pipes used for the plant's firefighting system had been rendered useless by the quake. In the end, local firefighters who arrived at the site more than one hour later brought the fire under control. A fire within a nuclear power plant must be subdued quickly. Otherwise, it could destroy wirings and pipes, triggering a chain reaction of trouble that could eventually lead to a nuclear disaster with a huge leak of radioactivity. It is crucial for all nuclear power plants to have their own systems to douse fires. They also need to have the ability to fight fires without depending on the fire department. The damage the latest quake caused to the Kashiwazaki-Kariwa plant also drew the attention of the International Atomic Energy Agency, the U.N. nuclear watchdog. IAEA Director-General Mohamed ElBaradei offered to have a group of experts of the agency inspect the plant and investigate the accident. The aim of the mission is to obtain information about the damage and share it internationally, according to the IAEA. One important lesson was learned when Japan's power industry was hit by a series of revelations about trouble cover-ups at nuclear power plants. That was the importance of swiftly publishing information about minor errors and glitches, allowing information to be shared among all people working in nuclear industries around the world. Details about how the firefighting operation at the TEPCO plant was delayed can be used to prevent deadly nuclear disasters in the future. The government should cooperate with the IAEA's investigation. --The Asahi Shimbun, July 23(IHT/Asahi: July 24,2007) * The Asahi Shimbun Company ***************************************************************** 41 asahi.com: Radioactive water flowed via cables - 07/24/2007 Radioactive water that leaked into the sea from a quake-hit nuclear power plant likely flowed along electric cables protruding from a damaged floor before reaching drainage ditches, the plant's operator said Monday. The July 16 earthquake rocked a storage pool containing about 2,300 kiloliters of water and spent nuclear fuel on the fourth floor of the No. 6 reactor building of the Kashiwazaki-Kariwa Nuclear Power Plant in Niigata Prefecture, according to Tokyo Electric Power Co. (TEPCO). The spilled radioactive water reached a hole about 8 centimeters in diameter where the electric cables run through for equipment used to transport spent fuel, TEPCO said. Under normal circumstances, packing material fills the spaces between the sides of the hole and cables. But the packing material apparently came loose in the magnitude 6.8 earthquake, allowing the water to flow along the cables and then into an air-conditioning duct before pouring into drainage ditches that lead to the Sea of Japan, TEPCO said. The water traveled down three floors of the building. The floor where the storage pool is located is in a radiation-controlled area. But the floors into which the water flowed are outside the restricted zone, the utility said. Water drops were found on the surface of the cables, inside the air-conditioning duct and elsewhere, TEPCO said. An estimated 1.2 cubic meters of radioactive water flowed into the sea, but the company said it is still not certain about the total amount of water that flowed from the pool. A "considerably large amount of water" must have spilled out, a TEPCO official said. "We never assumed that water could flow out of the pool," an official said. "We'd like to come up with countermeasures." The distance between the surface of the water and the top of the pool is more than 1 meter. The temblor also caused the spent fuel pools at the plant's six other reactor buildings to overflow. But no radioactive water leaked into the uncontrolled areas in these cases, according to TEPCO. TEPCO said the radioactive water that reached the Sea of Japan posed no threat to humans or the environment.(IHT/Asahi: July 24,2007) * The Asahi Shimbun Company ***************************************************************** 42 asahi.com: Niigata puts quake damage at 1.5 trillion yen and counting - 07/25/2007 KASHIWAZAKI, Niigata Prefecture--In a preliminary estimate of financial losses caused by the July 16 earthquake, the Niigata prefectural government on Tuesday put the damage at 1.5 trillion yen. Watermelons are offered to quake evacuees at a school gymnasium in Kashiwazaki, Niigata Prefecture, on Tuesday to fight the heat.(Minako Yoshimoto/ The Asahi Shimbun) In a report, it said about 700 billion yen would be lost from the suspension of operations at Tokyo Electric Power Co.'s Kashiwazaki-Kariwa Nuclear Power Plant, where fire broke out and radioactive materials leaked. Prefectural authorities also estimated that Niigata farmers would lose between 100 billion and 200 billion yen due to consumer fears about radioactive fallout from the nuclear power plant. Repairs to infrastructure will also run up costs. The prefecture estimated that 70 billion yen will be needed to repair roads and harbors. It said 10 billion yen will be required to restore electricity, water and gas supplies. An additional 200 billion yen would be needed for housing construction. The prefecture also estimated that tourism and other industries would lose some 300 billion yen in revenues. Meanwhile, Kashiwazaki city officials confirmed Monday that the number of fatalities from the temblor had risen to 11 with the death of Kimio Tomimatsu. Tomimatsu, 47, suffered burns while working at a foundry when the earthquake struck and was being treated at a Nagaoka hospital. Meanwhile, local fishermen said they stood to lose out badly at the start of the season for catching red sea bream because the earthquake had dislodged thousands of logs from the seabed that were now clogging their fishing nets. Fishermen said logs buried in the seabed were shaken loose by the earthquake and had floated to the surface across an area of about 20 kilometers off the Sea of Japan coast, close to the focus of the July 16 temblor. On Monday, eight fishing boats from Izumozaki, which neighbors Kashiwazaki, spent about four hours using nets to haul logs that had broken free. Fishermen said about 25 tons of logs had been collected off Izumozaki port so far. The problem could not have come at a worse time as red sea bream are now in season. The fish normally sell for about 2,000 yen per kilogram. Local fishermen said the catch was now only about one-fifth of a normal year because of the interference from logs. Meanwhile, on land, some evacuees were showing symptoms of deep vein thrombosis (DVT), dubbed economy-class syndrome, due to the cramped conditions they face while staying in temporary shelters. A team of doctors from the Niigata University medical school and the Niigata National Hospital checked 418 evacuees from July 18 and found that 70 had symptoms of DVT as of Monday. Of that number, 28 were found to have blood clots in their calf veins. Doctors said the percentage of people with DVT symptoms was higher than would be expected from people leading normal lives. Doctors were calling on evacuees to move around as much as possible and to increase their intake of liquids.(IHT/Asahi: July 25,2007) * The Asahi Shimbun Company ***************************************************************** 43 MSN: New panel to investigate Japan's quake-hit nuclear plant; report could be sent to UN - MSN-Mainichi Daily News July 25, 2007 Japan will set up an independent panel to investigate radiation leaks, burst pipes, flooding and other problems that plagued a nuclear plant after an earthquake earlier this month, the government announced Tuesday. Local media said the panel's initial report on the problems could go to the U.N. nuclear watchdog agency for review as early as September. The move comes as the government struggles to shore up confidence in its nuclear stewardship following a July 16, 6.8 magnitude earthquake that took 11 lives and triggered a wave of problems at the Kashiwazaki-Kariwa nuclear power plant, the world's biggest in terms of output. Trade Minister Akira Amari said the investigatory panel will begin work as soon as possible. No other details about the panel were immediately available. The findings are expected to be passed on to the Vienna-based International Atomic Energy Agency at a conference in September to share information that could help boost global nuclear safety standards, Kyodo News agency separately reported him as saying. The government has also proposed to the agency that Tokyo host a global workshop on atomic energy safety. Japan has said it would welcome investigators to the quake-hit nuclear site, responding to an offer last week from IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradei. Japan originally rejected help from the agency, but changed its tune following petitions from local officials eager for more inspections to assuage domestic and international concerns. Plant operator Tokyo Electric Power Co., or TEPCO, and nuclear regulators have stressed the amounts of radioactivity leaked were extremely low and posed no threat to the environment or local residents. But the damage still raised concerns, prompting the government to order it shuttered indefinitely until its safety can be confirmed. TEPCO also confirmed Tuesday that 2,000 tons of water flooded the basement of the building that houses the facility's No. 1 reactor. The leak had been announced in the days following the quake, but on Tuesday company spokesman Kiyoto Ishikawa said mosf of the water did not mix with any radioactive substances. The flooding posed no environmental hazards, he said. The trade minister also admitted Tuesday the government failed to thoroughly examine fault lines near nuclear power plants, Kyodo said Tuesday, saying a stricter review system is needed. TEPCO had earlier come under fire for being slow to notify the public about damage at the plant. In one incident, radioactive water had sloshed out of a tank and was flushed out to sea. In another, radioactive material was vented into the air in two separate instances. Plant officials said they had not foreseen such a powerful quake hitting the facility, and repeatedly underreported its impact afterward. Niigata prefecture, where the plant is located, estimates it suffered economic losses worth 1.5 trillion yen (US$12.37 billion) from the quake, of which 700 billion yen (US$5.77 billion) was linked to the closure of the power station. (AP) Leak at Japan nuke plant blamed on failure to follow operating manual July 24, 2007 Copyright 2005-2006 THE MAINICHI NEWSPAPERS. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 44 NRC: Nuclear Regulatory Commission Votes to Reconsider Limited Provision in Final Rule on Fitness for Duty News Release - 2007-07-088 - U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs Telephone: 301/415-8200 Washington, DC 20555-0001 E-mail: opa@nrc.gov www.nrc.gov The Nuclear Regulatory Commission today voted to reconsider wording in a limited provision of a recently issued final rule under Part 26 of the agency’s regulations. The rule, which the Commission approved on April 17, revises, reorganizes and clarifies requirements for determining whether nuclear power plant employees are fit for work, including new requirements for managing worker fatigue. The Commission’s vote restores the words “working on outage activities” in place of “solely performing outage activities” in rule language that relates to worker fatigue. The NRC staff proposed the “working on” language to the Commission after public comment and staff interactions with stakeholders. The language was modified following that process and before the rule was published in the Federal Register. NRC news releases are available through a free list server subscription at the following Web address: http://www.nrc.gov/public-involve/listserver.html. The NRC Home Page at www.nrc.gov also offers a Subscribe to News link in the News & Information menu. E-mail notifications are sent to subscribers when news releases are posted to NRC's Web Site. Tuesday, July 24, 2007 ***************************************************************** 45 Bulletin Online: Nuclear terrorism: The new day after Nuclear terrorism: The new day after By Hugh Gusterson | 24 July 2007 A recent New York Times opinion piece asked what we will do on the day after a nuclear terrorist attack on the United States. The June 12 op-ed, "After the Bomb," was written by William Perry, Ashton Carter, and Michael May--a former defense secretary, assistant defense secretary, and director of the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory respectively. They argue that, for a Hiroshima-sized bomb, "little could be done" for those within two miles of ground zero. Survivors downwind, however, as long as they were getting good information from government broadcasts, would be in a position to decide how many days to shelter in their basements from radiation or to decide whether "to return to pick up a beloved pet" from their home in exchange for increasing their lifelong chance of getting cancer to 21 or 22 percent. As for first responders: "Few would choose to have their risk of death from cancer go up to 30 percent. But in cases of smaller probabilities . . . a first responder might be willing to go into a radiation zone." Since there might be a second bomb, the article goes on, "people in other cities might want to evacuate on the day after, or at least move their children to the countryside, as happened in England during World War II." Meanwhile they advise that the U.S. government should refrain from attacking a country, such as Russia or Pakistan, whose fissile material was in a terrorist bomb because "their cooperation would be needed to find out who got the bombs and how many there were." Have we learned nothing since 1945? Let's review what we know of such situations from actual historical episodes rather than from the idealized fantasy world of defense intellectuals. A good place to begin is with Hiroshima itself. Those who have read John Hersey's Hiroshima, or Robert Jay Lifton's Death in Life: Survivors of Hiroshima, will see the absurdity in the depiction of those outside the two-mile radius of destruction rationally calculating the cost-benefit ratio of looking for Fluffy the dog. Far from inhabiting a separate world from those in the two-mile-wide bull's eye, they would be inundated by unimaginable scenes of survivors streaming outside the radius of immediate destruction. We know from Hiroshima that many of these people would be blinded, missing body parts, burned beyond recognition, covered in maggot-infested wounds, clutching roasted babies in stunned grief, screaming for water or medical help. In Richard Rhodes' The Making of the Atomic Bomb, a girl who was five at the time remembers Hiroshima thus: "People came fleeing from the nearby streets. One after another they were almost unrecognizable. The skin was burned off some of them and was hanging from their hands and from their chins; their faces were red and so swollen that you could hardly tell where their eyes and mouths were. From the houses smoke black enough to scorch the heavens was covering the sky. It was a horrible sight." The survivors, even if they can tune into government broadcasts, will be making few rational calculations. They will be utterly traumatized by the scenes of human devastation all around them, and many will be further devastated by the loss of spouses, children, parents, or friends caught in the eye of the nuclear storm. In such a situation some, their minds unhinged, will do stupid, heroic things (such as heading into the radiation to look for a missing spouse's workplace), while others will panic and flee when they would have been better off sitting with their canned food in the basement. If Lifton's study of the past is prologue, many more will be too psychically paralyzed to do anything much at all. First responders will not be thinking much more clearly. We know from 9/11 and Chernobyl that some will commit suicidal acts of bravery. We also know with fair certainty that some troops and other emergency personnel, far from calculating how much radiation they choose to absorb, will, in keeping with their uniforms, follow orders that consign them to death. In the chaos of the situation, the risks may be unknown. Or, if the experience of the atomic veterans is anything to go by, those giving the orders may deceive underlings about the radiation exposure they can expect, and then cover up what happened after the fact. As for residents of other cities who might "want to evacuate on the day after, or at least move their children to the countryside," this brings to mind the justly scorned plans devised under the Reagan administration: In the event of nuclear war, those with odd and even numbered license plates were to evacuate cities on alternate days. In a situation of mass panic, the freeways out of major cities, already clogged to a near-standstill every day in rush hour, would--as we saw during Katrina--freeze completely. And, anyway, where would all those people stay if they did make it out of the cities? Finally, there is the question of whether the U.S. government would behave with rational restraint. This, of course, assumes that there is a government. A terrorist nuclear attack on Washington could easily kill the president, vice president, much of Congress and the Supreme Court. But in a July 12 Washington Post op-ed, Norman Ornstein revealed that the federal government has refused to make contingency plans for its own nuclear decapitation, which means that U.S. nuclear weapons could be in the hands of small, enraged launch control teams with no clear line of authority above them. Assuming that the federal government was still there, however, we can only imagine (using the reaction to the loss of a mere two buildings on 9/11 as a metric of comparison) the public rage at the loss of a city and the intense, perhaps irresistible, pressure on the president to make someone, somewhere pay for this atrocity. We've been here before. In the 1950s, the years of "duck and cover" and backyard bomb shelters. And in the Reagan years when, amidst talk of winnable nuclear wars, Pentagon official T. K. Jones was justly ridiculed for his comment that we could survive nuclear war by digging a hole, and topping it with a door and three feet of dirt. "If there are enough shovels to go around, everybody's going to make it," he said. In the 1950s and 1980s, the American people eventually turned against these Potemkin plans, worried that they could engender a false sense of security in the face of the ultimate weapon. Such hyperrational plans are at the root of our problem in the nuclear age. Since the invention of the atomic bomb, we have surrendered control of nuclear policy to elites whose schooling in game theory and operations research has often superseded common sense and human wisdom. As interesting as it might be to ask what rational actors would do in the event of nuclear attack, human beings are not rational actors. If they were, we wouldn't have thousands of nuclear weapons in the world today. © 2007 Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists ***************************************************************** 46 WIRED: "Obsolete" Nuke Gear: Still Nasty By Noah Shachtman July 23, 2007 | 8:31:00 PMCategories: Los Alamos and Labs, Nukes   Some folks are suggesting that we should go easy on Roy Lee Oakley, the inept contract worker who tried to sell nuclear gear to an FBI agent posing as a French embassy employee. The argument: the sections of a gaseous diffusion barriers Oakley tried to pawn off were “obsolete and [have been] replaced by cheaper and more efficient methods of uranium enrichment.” Obsolescence is irrelevant from a proliferation stand-point. As one might infer from Iraq’s pre-1991 EMIS [electromagnetic isotope separation] program, “obsolete” technologies are still perfectly adequate to make nuclear weapons. Peter Zimmerman nailed this in one of my favorite articles, Proliferation: Bronze Medal Technology is Enough: To acquire a stockpile of weapons of mass destruction and their delivery missiles, a country does not need to take home the gold medal in the military-technology Olympics. It can strive merely for the bronze medal and obtain an arsenal that can deter its neighbors with the threat of nuclear destruction. Indeed, for a state seeking to acquire nuclear weapons, success with older, tried and proven technologies—whose names can be found in college textbooks, and which are components of commercial products—is preferable to failure in developing the most modern weapons used by the more advanced states. Thus, Iraq’s rediscovery of the electromagnetic isotope separation system (EMIS, or calutrons) as an alternate means of enriching uranium (rather than relying on imported technologies that might have been embargoed) set a precedent that others are likely to follow. The bronze medal earns a developing country a place on the winners’ podium; failure in the pursuit of a high technology does not. (Orbis 38:1, Winter 1994) In addition to EMIS, Iraq before 1991 also pursued a gaseous diffusion program just as China did to produce fissile material for early Chinese nuclear weapons. GD might not be the preferred route but than again, you can’t always get what you want. Hell, once you’ve chosen enrichment over plutonium separation, you’re already making big compromises. Of course, an interesting question is what information a would-be nuclear state would acquire from examining a sample of the classified material. Given that the composition of the barrier material is the major technological challenge, my guess (and it is a guess) is that the harm might be significant—measured in terms of saving months or more of research—even if the scientists used the barrier for nothing more than confirmation that another method of enrichment (such as EMIS or centrifuges) would be a better investment. -- Jeffrey Lewis, cross-posted at ArmsControlWonk.com I have to say that this was one of the most informative public pieces about the needs, and reasons, for nuclear secrets that I've ever read. Research can oftentimes be "guess-and-check" (especially if expert knowledge is lacking), and anything that might help narrow down these possible avenues is always greatly desired. While nuclear (esp. WMD) technology is difficult, it's the savings in time and different research routes that stolen information could provide that is most important - especially when dealing with rogue nations. Nice job! Posted by: in_surfer | Jul 24, 2007 5:38:28 AM Also, it reinforces the key observation: Designing a nuclear bomb is EASY, especially a Uranium bomb (the US "test" of the Uranium bomb was called 'dropping it on Japan', while the Plutonium bomb is what was tested in the desert first. Yet only North Korea has failed when testing their plutonium bomb). Designing a Uranium bomb would actually be a good senior project for physics majors, it really is that simple... It is the MATERIALS and MANUFACTURING that are hard. For a uranium bomb, you need to isotope separate several kilograms of U235 from a ton of U238. Thats atoms which weigh 1% less. Information on Uranium enrinchment is very VERY sensitive, and is why AQ Kahn caused so much trouble for the world. And for a plutonium bomb, you need a working reactor to produce enough plutonium, and then you need to machine a perfect sphere of plutonium. As a bonus, plutonium with water and O2 will form nicely pyrophoric plutonium hydride, so all the plutonium manufacturing needs to be done in an oxygen free environment. Posted by: Nicholas Weaver | Jul 24, 2007 8:09:06 AM As the “some folks” referred to in this post, I should point out that, once again, Jeffrey’s reading skills seem to be somewhat deficient. I didn’t say anywhere that the prosecutors or anyone else should go easy on Oakley. I clearly said it appeared to me that he broke the law and should be punished. My point was that the doom and gloom pronouncements about what would have happened if Oakley had sold the barriers to the French (or anyone else) needed to be tempered by the fact that gaseous diffusion wasn’t the technology of choice for countries interested in nuclear proliferation. That has nothing to do with whether Oakley broke the law, whether Oakley should be prosecuted, or what penalty (under the Federal Sentencing Guidelines or any other consideration) should be imposed. Posted by: Clif Burns | Jul 24, 2007 8:04:11 PM © 2007 CondéNet, Inc. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 47 The Hawk Eye: Loebsack pushes for faster response Congressman chides Labor Department on pace of former IAAP workers' claims. By KILEY MILLER kmiller@thehawkeye.com Southeast Iowa's representative in Congress is seeing red over red tape and delays in a compensation program for sick nuclear weapons workers. In a discussion on the floor of the House of Representatives chamber Wednesday, Rep. Dave Loebsack, D-Iowa, called on the Department of Labor to explain a backlog in claims made under the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program. "Since I took office, I have heard many, many stories about how the government delays in situations such as this," Loebsack said in a telephone interview Thursday. "One of the things I can do as a Congressman is put as much pressure onto (the Department of Labor) as possible to cut through the bureaucracy." Responding Friday, Shelby Hallmark of the Labor Department's Office of Worker Compensation Programs in the Labor Department said his office issues an annual report to Congress and that keeping lawmakers and the public informed about complicated compensation programs was essential. Hallmark added that his staff hoped to arrange a meeting with Loebsack. "We certainly care, and we want to make sure the Congress knows we are managing this program as quickly and carefully as we can," he said. When Loebsack ousted veteran Rep. Jim Leach in November, he took charge of a district that includes the Iowa Army Ammunition Plant in Middletown, home to a Cold War nuclear weapons program once overseen by the Atomic Energy Commission and later the responsibility of the Department of Energy. In the late 1990s, government officials began looking into high rates of cancer and other illnesses attacking men and women employed in the program. That investigation culminated in 2005 when the Bush Administration granted automatic compensation to former AEC and DOE workers diagnosed with certain types of cancer and lung disease. While that ruling cleared the way for approval of more claims, Loebsack argues many sick workers and their families still face an "undue burden of proof." Even those who can verify their employment and illnesses sometimes endure long waits before receiving checks, he said. "I'd say we're helping 10 or 12 people through our office as we speak," Loebsack said. To drive home his concerns, the Congressman requested an open discussion on the House floor with Rep. Dave Obey, D-Wis., chairman of the House Appropriations Committee. During their dialogue, Loebsack cited "mismanagement and delays" as reasons why 23 percent -- or 11,829 -- of the 51,188 claims nationwide have been paid. "Congress made clear in enacting the compensation program that our nation's Cold War heroes should be justly compensated for illnesses they contracted while serving our country," Loebsack told his fellow members of the House. "Sadly, the Department of Labor has failed to ensure that the claims are properly processed and approved." Hallmark said Loebsack's statistics are more than a year old, dating to February 2006, whereas updated numbers are available on the Labor Department's Web site. In addition, the statistics are limited to Part B of the compensation program, which covers radiation-related illnesses. Loebsack also used the word "claims," when in fact Hallmark believes the correct word should have been "cases." In the murky vocabulary of the compensation program, each sick nuclear weapons program worker constitutes one case. A claim is a request for compensation. Because multiple family members may pursue compensation based on the illness of a single worker, the number of claims can be greater than the number of cases. In Hallmark's view, comparing the number of cases to the number of people paid is not the way to judge management of the compensation program because it ignores claims that were denied. Using the most recent figures and incorporating both approved and denied claims, Hallmark said 81 percent of cases submitted to the Department of Labor have been settled. Of the remaining cases, the majority await a dose reconstruction from the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health to estimate the degree to which a worker was exposed to radiation and other toxic substances on the job. "In discussing how well the program is being carried out, there tends to be a focus on how many people have gotten paid," Hallmark said. While he finds that mindset problematic, the Labor Department official pointed out a significant milestone. Within the next few weeks, he said, the total payout to former energy workers will pass the $3 billion mark. Laurence Fuortes, a University of Iowa professor of public health, oversees a health-screening program for IAAP workers. His work frequently puts him in contact with the Energy Department, but he and his team members also serve as liaisons between Iowa claimants and the Department of Labor. In that role, Fuortes has seen some claims expedited quickly while others drag. He also has advocated on behalf of people who have had claims denied because of simple errors such as incorrect or conflicting terminology in a medical diagnosis. "If you're asking me if there is a systematic problem, I don't have the information to answer that," Fuortes said. "I do believe we can assist (the Department of Labor) in quality assurance." Fuortes reminded people who have received Part B money that the Department of Labor should automatically have filed a Part E claim on their behalf, as well. The second half of the massive compensation act, Part E reimburses workers and their families for lost wages and physical impairment caused by exposure to toxic chemicals. If a successful claimant has not received notification of a Part E filing, Fuortes suggests follow up with the Labor Department. Alternatively, Loebsack's constituents can request assistance from his office. Along with more information on what he perceives as the logjam in claims, the Congressman wants answers from the Labor Department on four other areas: * Staffing at offices assigned to administer the program. * Quality of communication with claimants. * The process through which claims are approved or denied, as well as oversight measures in place to assure claims are handled properly. * And, the possibility of providing greater departmental assistance to people wishing to file claims, many of whom are elderly and in poor health. Loebsack isn't sure how he'll use the information. "It may require more legislation to hold them accountable," he said. The Hawk Eye 800 S. Main St., Burlington, Iowa 319-754-8461 · 1-800-397-1708 · FAX: 319-754-6824 Circulation: 319-754-8462 · Classified: 319-754-8463 Problems? Contact the webmaster. ©2007 The Burlington Hawk Eye ***************************************************************** 48 Daily Commercial News: Contractors face risks from unexploded munitions July 24, 2007 HALIFAX Halifax’s other explosion still poses health and safety risks, even 62 years later, says the organizer of a conference on munitions dumped in the sea. Terry Long, who is putting together the first international conference on chemical and conventional munitions dumped at sea, said weapons are still lingering after the 1945 magazine explosion in Bedford. “The explosion that went up for the two days would have thrown 20-millimetre rounds, mortars, depth charges, naval shells, bullets, all that kind of stuff and much, much more,” he said in an interview. The result is that a lot of munitions are still laying around Bedford and Dartmouth, he said, and with so much construction being done without experts nearby, someone could get seriously hurt. “I’m surprised nobody has been killed in Halifax to date, and you can quote me on that,” Long said. It was early on the evening of July 18, 1945, almost 28 years after the 1917 Halifax Explosion, that the city’s other explosion occurred. The Bedford Basin Magazine held shells, bombs, mines, torpedoes and 50,000 depth charges. Most of the ammunition was stored inside, but some of it was kept outside in piles that extended close to a jetty, where it’s believed a fire began and triggered a series of explosions that miraculously killed just one person. Many unexploded shells were hurled into the harbour and surrounding property. Munitions turn up periodically and must be destroyed before construction projects can proceed. Munitions dumped at sea certainly aren’t limited to Halifax harbour and its environs, but can be found all around the province. Long said there are 3,000 munitions sites around Nova Scotia, including shipwrecks, other ships that were purposely sunk to dispose of the munitions they were carrying and even a site that contains depleted uranium near Halifax harbour. “I think the depleted uranium site is something that’s not very well known. I know there’s a lot of people talking about it internationally, and they are going to come to the conference to talk about it.” Long wouldn’t specify the exact site of the depleted uranium, other than to say it is near the mouth of Halifax harbour. “You can easily find wrecks off Halifax, such as the City of Vienna, which ran aground on Black Rock during the Second World War. The better majority of the ship is gone, and the only things remaining in about 20 feet of water are the munitions, which you can easily swim over,’’ he said. He said one site off Sydney has been documented to contain over 180,000 tonnes of conventional munitions. Canadian Press 500 Hood Rd, 4th Flr., Markham, ON. L3R 9Z3 Phone: 905-752-5408 | Fax: 905-752-5450 Toll free: 800-465-6475 | Toll free Fax: 888-396-9413 E-mail: dcnonl@reedbusiness.com © 2007 Reed Business Information a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 49 Bradenton.com: Suit against Lockheed Martin filed 07/24/2007 | COURT BRIEFS BRADENTON - Another lawsuit has been filed against Lockheed Martin Corp. by Wanda Washington, vice president of Family Oriented Community United and Strong, an advocacy group representing Tallevast residents. Washington filed a civil suit Monday at the Manatee County Courthouse. The complaint was not available Monday to explain why the suit was filed. More than 300 Tallevast residents have filed two suits against Lockheed Martin claiming property damage as a result of the contamination that leaked from the Loral American Beryllium Co. plant, now known to cover 200 acres. One week ago, Beatrice and Charlie Ziegler and Leroy Mazon filed a suit against Lockheed Martin, claiming personal injury damages as a result of workplace exposures and dust brought home during the plant operations. The plant operated from the early 1960s through 1996 making parts for nuclear weapons and nuclear reactors for the Defense and Energy departments. Lockheed bought the beryllium plant in 1996 in a corporate buyout of Loral. Lockheed was owner of the plant when the contamination was found and is therefore responsible for cleaning up the plume. Attorney to appeal ruling BRADENTON - An attorney plans to appeal a local court's rejection of his request that the Manatee County School District pay his attorney's fees in a lawsuit against the district. In a court notice, activist David Miner asked the 2nd District Court of Appeals to overturn the local court's decision. Miner filed a public records lawsuit against Superintendent Roger Dearing on June 14 because he said the district had failed to give him the two independent appraisals done on the Superior Electronics property. The district bought the building, on U.S. 301 and 63rd Avenue East, for $15.8 million. The district decided to give Miner the records, before Circuit Judge Paul Logan could rule on the matter. Logan later said Miner was not entitled to attorney's fees because the appraisals were exempt from public disclosure until 30 days after the sale closing, and that it was lawful for the district to deny Miner access to them when he made the request. Miner's appeal was made last week. - Sylvia Lim ***************************************************************** 50 Daily Yomiuri: Akita village hopes to be radioactive waste site A village mayor in Akita Prefecture has revealed his intention to apply for his village to become a candidate for a disposal site for high-level radioactive waste from nuclear power plants. Kamikoanimura Mayor Hiraoki Kobayashi said Monday he was considering applying to have a feasibility study conducted to assess his village's suitability as a nuclear waste disposal site as a way of helping restore the village's tattered finances. He added, however, that he would withdraw the plan if the majority of the village residents opposed it. Kobayashi will visit all the residents' associations in the village to explain the project. "If we're able to get financial support by cooperating with the central government, it's like killing two birds with one stone," Kobayashi told The Yomiuri Shimbun. "A high-level radioactive waste site is incomparably safer than a nuclear power plant." Selection of the disposal site is made based on applications from local governments, with the final decision made after two years of documentation screening and four years of detailed research. During the initial two-year selection period, the central government will provide an annual subsidy of 1 billion yen to candidate municipalities, which they can spend how they like. When the study advances to the next stage, up to 7 billion yen in subsidies will be granted by the central government over four years. The candidate municipality will receive more than half of the subsidies, while the rest is granted to adjacent local governments. But Akita Gov. Sukeshiro Terada indicated his opposition to the mayor's bid. "It's too shortsighted to apply for the feasibility study just because it will restore the village's fiscal health. [The mayor] should think more about neighboring municipalities and the entire prefecture," Terada said. High-level radioactive waste, which is left after reprocessing used nuclear fuel, needs to be buried at least 300 meters belowground because of its high radioactivity. The central government plans to open a high-level radioactive waste site in the 2030s. © The Yomiuri Shimbun. ***************************************************************** 51 Las Vegas SUN: Editorial: Nuclear wasted Today: July 24, 2007 at 7:24:39 PDT Federal government uses Gibbons' Yucca Mountain actions against Nevada Go v. Jim Gibbons arrogantly dismissed wise advice on the state's battle to stop federal plans to put a nuclear waste dump at Yucca Mountain and now is seeing it bite Nevada. State officials say the Energy Department has been illegally using water for a drilling project at Yucca Mountain, 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas. Doing so violates a 2003 court-ordered agreement on water use, said State Engineer Tracy Taylor, Nevada's water czar. However, instead of holding a firm line and immediately telling federal officials to stop, Gibbons decided to let the illegal water grab go on for 30 more days so workers at Yucca Mountain could wrap up the project. On Friday an attorney for the Energy Department called Nevada's position "unacceptable" and argued that by allowing 30 days of water use, the state "implicitly recognizes" that the Energy Department has a legitimate need for the water. As reported by Jeff German in the Las Vegas Sun last week, Gibbons met with other state officials involved in the Yucca fight and ignored their advice. With the Energy Department clearly in the wrong, they urged him to come down hard on the Energy Department, but Gibbons reminded all present that he was a lawyer and geologist. He gave the Energy Department room to maneuver and ammunition against the state. He has clearly shown his ignorance on the issue, having, for example, to rescind an appointment last week to the Nevada Commission on Nuclear Projects after it was learned he had named a dump supporter to the panel. The only good news on Yucca Mountain last week came from Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., a presidential candidate who showed a keen understanding of the issue. She called for congressional hearings on Yucca Mountain because of the flawed work and Bush administration's handling of it, and she said if she is elected she will stop the project. That is the type of strong message that Nevada's governor should send to Washington. Gibbons' message, one of implicit conciliation, is unacceptable. All contents copyright 2005 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 52 ReviewJournal.com: Railroad cost estimates for Yucca top $3 billion Jul. 24, 2007 By STEVE TETREAULT STEPHENS WASHINGTON BUREAU WASHINGTON -- The cost of building a government railroad across rural Nevada to carry nuclear waste to Yucca Mountain has grown beyond $3 billion and is climbing with groundbreaking still several years away, according to new estimates. The Department of Energy has set $3.155 billion as the latest price tag to run rail about 319 miles from Caliente in eastern Nevada to the Yucca site in Nye County, about 100 miles northwest of Las Vegas. Previously, a cost estimate disclosed in December 2005 was $2 billion. The numbers underscore the growing cost of the proposed Nevada nuclear waste complex, and the likely challenges facing the Energy Department to secure funding from Congress for the undertaking. "I think this is going to be a big pill to swallow on Capitol Hill," said Bob Loux, executive director of the Nevada Agency for Nuclear Projects. "This goes to show the longer things get delayed, the more expensive it will be for the rising costs of concrete and steel," Loux said. "But also that this is a more difficult job than they thought before." The Energy Department in March estimated that repository construction and transportation, and initial operations at the site, would cost $27 billion. The department has not updated broader and longer range "life cycle" costs, which were at $57.6 billion in 2001. The government still is at least several years away from breaking ground for a railroad and for waste-handling buildings beyond the five-mile long wide-mouth exploratory tunnel and study facilities at the site already. Project director Ward Sproat, at a meeting Friday with Nevada county officials, said railroad groundbreaking likely will be delayed beyond 2009, according to several meeting participants. Sproat told them that he was not sure if the rail project would have the funding to start by then, officials said. DOE has routinely steered money from Yucca transportation segments to complete a license application that is considered to be a more pressing priority. A 54-page draft national transportation document containing the new railroad cost estimates was circulated last week among state and local officials, potential repository vendors and other stakeholders. DOE spokesman Allen Benson said the new dollar amounts for a Nevada railroad are based on "a better understanding of the cost of facilities, understanding there was a lot more work done on (the plan) and we have had a better look at the costs." "As we come closer to construction, we will have to update the costs," Benson said. "This is where we are at this point." z The rail cost estimates include features such as an equipment yard, maintenance facilities, a train control center and sidings to connect the line to existing track in Caliente, according to the DOE transportation document. Bob Halstead, a transportation consultant under contract to the state of Nevada, said DOE's estimate still might be low. "Not knowing what went into these numbers but having done detailed cost exercises and having revisited the numbers to adjust them, I would say these DOE numbers seem credible but they still might be too low. The high number could be $3.6 billion or $3.7 billion," Halstead said. Halstead also said that as the rail costs continue to grow, DOE might come under pressure from trucking companies to abandon rail and ship nuclear waste to the Yucca site by truck as a more economical choice. That scenario would open a host of new controversies, though, as the most likely truck routes would traverse the populated Las Vegas Valley, he said. Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal, 1997 - 2007 ***************************************************************** 53 Daily News Journal: Meeting to discuss radioactive dumping www.dnj.com - DNJ staff reports State officials will continue to listen to concerns today about the dumping of low-level radioactive materials at the Middle Point Landfill in the Walter Hill community. The Tennessee Solid Waste Advisory Committee will host the meeting at 10 a.m. in the 17th floor conference room at L&C Tower, 405 Church St. in Nashville. The committee has been charged by the state Legislature to review the Bulk Survey For Release program. The program allows private companies to dispose of materials with "extremely low levels of radiation" in five Tennessee landfills, including Middle Point. The committee will make recommendations on the program to state officials by Sept. 3. Under the program, millions of pounds of low-level radioactive materials have been dumped in the Rutherford County landfill on Jefferson Pike since the 1990s. The materials being disposed of under the program are not from nuclear reactors themselves, but are mainly construction debris, including parts of outbuildings, dirt and torn-up sidewalks, according to the state's Division of Radiological Health. A moratorium on taking the processed materials is in effect at Middle Point as the committee reviews the program. The Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation will present its recommendation to the committee on Aug. 16. State and industry representatives say the level of radiation in the materials going into Middle Point under the program are so low as to be insignificant. However, opponents of the program say there is no safe level of radiation — any increase raises the risk level. In addition, they are also concerned because Middle Point Landfill is located next to the Stones River, the main source of drinking water for most of Rutherford County. Copyright ©2007 The Daily News Journal. All rights reserved. Users of this site agree to the Terms of Service and Privacy Policy/Your California Privacy Rights. (Terms updated March 2007) ***************************************************************** 54 NRC: Notice of Intent to Prepare a Generic Environmental Impact Statement for Uranium Milling Facilities FR Doc E7-14362 [Federal Register: July 24, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 141)] [ Notices] [Page 40344-40346] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr24jy07-139] NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION AGENCY: United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). ACTION: Notice of Intent (NOI). SUMMARY: The NRC announces its intent to prepare a Generic Environmental Impact Statement (GEIS) in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and NRC's NEPA implementing regulations contained in 10 CFR Part 51. The GEIS will assess the potential environmental impacts associated with uranium recovery at milling facilities employing the in-situ leach (ISL) process. The GEIS may also assess the potential environmental impacts of alternative methods of uranium recovery (including the conventional milling process). DATES: The public scoping process required by NEPA begins with publication of this NOI and continues until September 4, 2007. Written comments submitted by mail should be postmarked by that date to ensure consideration. Comments mailed after that date will be considered to the extent possible. NRC will conduct two public meetings to assist in defining the appropriate scope of the GEIS, including the significant environmental issues to be addressed. The meeting dates, times and locations are listed below: Meeting Date: August 7, 2007, 7 p.m. to 9:30 p.m. Meeting Location: Parkway Plaza Hotel and Convention Center, 123 West E Street, Casper, WY 82601, Phone (307) 235-1777. Meeting Date: August 9, 2007, 7 p.m. to 9:30 p.m. Meeting Location: Hilton Albuquerque, 1901 University Boulevard, NE., Albuquerque, New Mexico, 87102, Phone: (505) 884-2500. For both meetings, members of the NRC staff will be available for informal discussions with members of the public from 6 p.m. to 7 p.m. The formal meeting and associated NRC presentation will begin at 7 p.m. For planning purposes, those who wish to [[Page 40345]] present oral comments at the meeting are encouraged to pre-register by contacting Carol Walls of the NRC by telephone at 1-800-368-5642, Extension 8028, or by e-mail at CAW@nrc.gov no later than August 3, 2007. Interested persons may also register to speak at the meetings. Depending on the number of speakers, each speaker may be limited in the amount of time allocated for their comments so that all speakers will have an opportunity to offer comments. ADDRESSES: Members of the public and interested parties are invited and encouraged to submit comments to the Chief, Rules Review and Directives Branch, Mail Stop T-6D59, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001. Due to the current mail situation in the Washington, DC area, the NRC encourages comments to be submitted electronically to nrcrep@nrc.gov. Please refer to the ``Uranium Recovery GEIS'' when submitting comments. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For general information on the NRC NEPA process, or the environmental review process related to this GEIS, please contact: James Park, Environmental Project Manager, Division of Waste Management and Environmental Protection (DWMEP), Mail Stop T-8F5, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, by phone at 1-800-368-5642, Extension 6935, or by e-mail at JRP@nrc.gov, For general or technical information associated with the safety and licensing of uranium milling facilities, please contact: William Von Till Environmental, Branch Chief, Uranium Recovery Branch, DWMEP, Mail Stop T-8F5, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555- 0001, by phone at 1-800-368-5642, Extension 0598, or by e-mail at RWV@nrc.gov. Information and documents associated with the GEIS are available for public review through the NRC electronic reading room: http:// www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. Documents may also be obtained from the NRC Public Document Room at U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Headquarters, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland, 20852-2738. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 1.0 Background The NRC is expecting numerous license applications for in-situ leach (ISL) uranium milling facilities in the coming 2-3 years. This GEIS is intended to address the common issues associated with environmental reviews of such milling facilities located in the western United States. Because there are environmental issues common to ISL milling facilities, the NRC staff will be addressing these common issues generically to aid in a more efficient environmental review for each separate license application, if and when these applications are submitted. ISL milling facilities recover uranium from low grade ores that may not be economically recoverable by other methods. In this process, a leaching agent, such as oxygen with sodium bicarbonate, is added to native ground water for injection through wells into the subsurface ore body to dissolve the uranium. The leach solution, containing the dissolved uranium, is pumped back to the surface and sent to the processing plant, where ion exchange is used to separate the uranium from the solution. The underground leaching of the uranium also frees other metals and minerals from the host rock. Operators of ISL facilities are required to restore the ground water affected by the leaching operations. The milling process concentrates the recovered uranium into the product known as ``yellowcake'' (U3O8). This yellowcake is then shipped to uranium conversion facilities for further processing in the overall uranium fuel cycle. One alternative to ISL milling is the conventional uranium milling process that extracts uranium from mined ore. At conventional mills, the ore arrives via truck and is crushed, ground, and leached. In most cases, sulfuric acid is the leaching agent, but alkaline leaching can also be done. The leaching agent not only extracts uranium from the ore but also several other constituents (e.g., vanadium, selenium, iron, lead, and arsenic). Conventional mills extract 90 to 95 percent of the uranium from the ore. These mills are typically in areas of low population density, and they typically process ores from mines within 50 kilometers (30 miles). Conventional mills may also produce significant quantities of waste materials, known as mill tailings, from the ore processing. These tailings are contained in impoundments which can be as large as 250 to 300 acres in extent. It is estimated that roughly 95% of the incoming ore ends as mill tailings. These mill tailings contain most of the radioactive progeny of uranium and may be a significant source of radon and radon progeny releases to the environment. The GEIS will focus on the construction, operation, and decommissioning of ISL mills and also assess alternative methods of uranium recovery. It is noted that the hardrock mining associated with conventional uranium milling is regulated by other entities (e.g., the U.S. Bureau of Land Management, and various state agencies). For more information on the uranium fuel cycle, please see Regulating Nuclear Fuel, NUREG/BR-0280, Rev. 1, (which can be found online at: http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/nuregs/ brochures/br0280/ ). 2.0 Alternatives To Be Evaluated No action--The no-action alternative would be to not build nor license potential uranium milling facilities. Under this alternative the NRC would not approve future license applications. This alternative serves as a baseline for comparison of the potential environmental impacts. Proposed action--The proposed action is the construction, operation, and decommissioning of an ISL uranium mill. Implementation of the proposed action would require the issuance of an NRC license under the provisions of 10 CFR Part 40. Alternatives--The conventional milling process is one alternative. Other alternatives not listed in this notice may be identified through the scoping process. 3.0 Environmental Impact Areas To Be Analyzed The following resource areas have been tentatively identified for analysis in the GEIS: --Public and Occupational Health: Addressing the potential public and occupational consequences from construction, routine operation, transportation, and credible accident scenarios (including natural events), and decommissioning; --Waste Management: Addressing the types of wastes expected to be generated, handled, stored and subject to re-use or disposal; --Land Use: Addressing land use plans, policies and controls; --Transportation: Addressing the transportation modes, routes, quantities, and risk estimates; --Geology and Soils: Addressing the physical geography, topography, geology and soil characteristics; --Water Resources: Addressing the surface and ground water hydrology, water use and quality, and the potential for degradation; --Ecology: Addressing wetlands, aquatic, terrestrial, economically and recreationally important species, and threatened and endangered species; --Air Quality: Addressing meteorological conditions, ambient [[Page 40346]] background, pollutant sources, and the potential for degradation; --Noise: Addressing ambient noises, sources, and sensitive receptors; --Historical and Cultural Resources: Addressing historical, archaeological, and traditional cultural resources; --Visual and Scenic Resources: Addressing landscape characteristics, man-made features and viewshed; --Socioeconomics: Addressing the demography, economic base, labor pool, housing, transportation, utilities, public services/facilities, education, recreation, and cultural resources; --Environmental Justice: Addressing the potential disproportionately high and adverse impacts to minority and low-income populations; and --Cumulative Effects: Addressing the impacts from past, present, and reasonably foreseeable actions at and near the site. The examples under each resource area are not intended to be all inclusive, nor is this list an indication that environmental impacts will occur. The list is presented to facilitate comments on the scope of the GEIS. Additions to, or deletions from, this list may occur as a result of the public scoping process. 4.0 Scoping Meetings This NOI is to encourage public involvement in the GEIS process and to solicit public comments on the proposed scope and content of the GEIS. NRC will hold public scoping meetings as described above to solicit both oral and written comments from interested parties. Scoping is an early and open process designed to determine the range of actions, alternatives, and potential impacts to be considered in the GEIS, and to identify the significant issues related to the proposed action. Scoping is intended to solicit input from the public and other agencies so that the analysis can be more clearly focused on issues of genuine concern. The principal goals of the scoping process are to: --Identify public concerns; --Ensure that concerns are identified early and are properly studied; --Identify alternatives that will be examined; --Identify significant issues that need to be analyzed; and --Eliminate unimportant issues. The scoping meetings will begin with NRC staff providing a description of NRC's role and mission followed by a brief overview of NRC's environmental review process and goals of the scoping meeting. The bulk of the meeting will be allotted for attendees to make oral comments. 5.0 Scoping Comments Written comments should be mailed to the address listed above in the ADDRESSES section. The NRC staff will prepare a scoping summary report in which it will summarize public comments. The NRC will make the scoping summary report and project-related materials available for public review through its electronic reading room: http://www.nrc.gov/ reading-rm/adams.html. Further, an NRC Web site will be established in the near future to keep the public abreast of the current schedule and to post important documents. 6.0 The NEPA Process The GEIS will be prepared according to NEPA and NRC's NEPA implementing regulations contained in 10 CFR part 51. After the scoping process is complete, the NRC will prepare a draft GEIS. The draft GEIS is scheduled to be published by April 2008. A 45- day comment period on the draft GEIS is planned, and a public meeting(s) to receive comments will be held approximately three weeks after publication of the draft GEIS. Availability of the draft GEIS, the dates of the public comment period, and information about the public meeting will be announced in the Federal Register, on NRC's Web page, and in the local news media. The final GEIS is expected to be published in January 2009 and will incorporate, as appropriate, public comments received on the draft GEIS. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 20th day of July, 2007. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Gregory F. Suber, Branch Chief, Environmental Review Branch, Environmental Protection and Performance Assessment Directorate, Division of Waste Management and Environmental Protection, Office of Federal and State Materials and Environmental Management Programs. [FR Doc. E7-14362 Filed 7-23-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P ***************************************************************** 55 Industrial Market Trends: Nuclear Waste in Nevada to Wait ISBN: 0974322563 Format: Paperback, 349pp Publisher: Lean Enterprises Institute, Inc. Paperback, May 2005 B&N online price: $24.95 Read more July 24, 2007 By Fred White Having faced stiff opposition since its inception, the national Yucca Mountain Repository, an underground storage facility for nuclear waste in Nevada, won’t open for at least a decade. In the early days of nuclear energy, dealing with radioactive waste seemed like an afterthought, and a stickling point, of the industry and its well-wishers. It soon became clear that not too many people wanted it in “their backyards.” As a result, the waste has remained near the nuclear power plants that produce it. Many people, including scientists at the National Academy of Science, had recommended a single, safe and well-protected place for it. The U.S. stopped reprocessing nuclear fuel during the late 1970s by order of President Jimmy Carter, who wanted to curtail the availability of the weapons-grade material produced by the process. This decision turned what had been a resource back into a waste product, and “made the lack of a viable long-term disposal strategy for radioactive waste even more apparent,” according to a Carnegie Mellon University paper: A 1987 Congressional amendment to the Nuclear Waste Repository Act of 1982 mandated consideration of only one location, Nevada’s Yucca Mountain. Since the act required that the [Department of Energy] DOE establish a permanent repository, the elimination of all other sites from review meant that Yucca Mountain was named as the location before the feasibility studies and environmental assessments had been completed. As might be expected, this situation has bred major litigation as well as significant opposition from forces in the state of Nevada. The waste is currently stored at individual plants, awaiting permanent transfer to the national Yucca Mountain Repository in Nevada. But Yucca Mountain has faced stiff opposition and won’t open for at least a decade. The DOE has announced plans to open the Yucca Mountain facility in Nevada as the nation’s permanent underground storage facility for radioactive nuclear waste by 2017, when the facility is expected to begin accepting nuclear waste. This date assumes full necessary funding is provided, there are no litigation delays, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) completes review of the License Application within three years of submission, and the NRC finds that the DOE has the necessary nuclear quality and safety culture. Polls indicate that a notable number of Nevadans are against the repository. Although about 15 percent of Las Vegas’ electricity for over two million people is supplied by the Palo Verde nuclear station in Arizona and about half the waste will be from America’s manufacture of nuclear weapons, a two-thirds’ majority of state residents still feel it is unfair for their state to have to store nuclear waste when there are no nuclear power plants in Nevada. No one lives at Yucca Mountain, according to the project’s Web site, which says, “The closest year-round housing is about 14 miles south of the site… .” One of the fears of water users in the Western U.S is leakage of radioactive particles from the Yucca Mountain site. In the West, water is precious, and perhaps with droughty weather, getting more so. According to Eureka County’s Board of Commissioners and the DOE, the waste will be encased in a multilayer stainless steel and nickel alloy package covered by titanium drip shields that function also as rock shields. Plans are for the nuclear waste to be shipped to the site by rail and/or truck in robust containers approved by the NRC. The transport of spent fuel in Europe and Asia is routine with few safety or security issues. Globally, train, truck and ship have already transported over 70,000 MTU (metric tons of uranium) of spent fuel. In 2002, the Yucca Mountain Repository Project completed its site characterization activities. Also that year, Congress and the President approved the development of a geologic repository at Yucca Mountain. These approvals were based on two extensive scientific reports: the Yucca Mountain Science and Engineering Report, which describes the science and engineering completed during site characterization activities; and the Yucca Mountain Site Suitability Evaluation, which describes the information that supported the Secretary of Energy’s evaluation of whether Yucca Mountain is a suitable site for a repository. In March 2006, the majority staff of U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works issued a 25-page paper called Yucca Mountain: The Most Studied Real Estate on the Planet. The conclusions: • Extensive studies consistently show Yucca Mountain to be a sound site for nuclear waste disposal. • The cost of not moving forward is extremely high. • Nuclear waste disposal capability is an environmental imperative. • Nuclear waste disposal capability supports national security. • Demand for new nuclear plants also demands disposal capability. Last month a Senate subcommittee voted to cut $50 million from Yucca Mountain spending in 2008, but its chairman said the DOE still should be able to meet the project’s goals for the coming year, reported The Las Vegas Review-Journal. The House bill will fully fund Yucca Mountain, suggesting the final budget may be relatively close to the DOE request unless opponents force deeper cuts before final passage. The $444.5 million Yucca Mountain budget proposed by the energy and water appropriations subcommittee amounts to a 10 percent slash in the current administration's request for the fiscal year that begins Oct. 1. The cost to continue storing nuclear waste at their respective plants is estimated to be anywhere from $200 billion to $400 billion. Resources The Western New York Nuclear Service Center (The West Valley Site) New York State Energy Research and Development Authority Radioactive Waste Management: An Environmental History Lesson for Engineers (and Others) by M. Joshua Silverman Carnegie Mellon University History Department Eureka County Yucca Mountain Information Office Nuclear Waste Update by Abby Johnson and Sarah Walker, Winter 2007 SNWA's Water Efficient Technologies Program Surpasses 1 Billion Gallons Saved Southern Nevada Water Authority, May 8, 2007 YUCCA MOUNTAIN: Waste site request cut by Steve Tetreault The Las Vegas Review-Journal, June 27, 2007 Nevada Study Shows Yucca Mountain Project Will Cost Much More than Storing Nuclear Waste at Existing Reactor Sites Office of the Governor Agency for Nuclear Projects, Feb. 8, 2007 Technorati tags: Nevada Yucca_Mountain cost nuclear radioactive safety waste water | Add to Y!MyWeb | Digg it | Add to Slashdot Copyright © 2007 Thomas Publishing Company Terms ***************************************************************** 56 KFDA: Two clean rooms set up for underground physics NewsChannel 10 / Amarillo, TX: newschannel10.com - Associated Press - July 24, 2007 6:35 PM ET CARLSBAD, N.M. (AP) - The federal government's nuclear waste repository near Carlsbad will be home to high energy physics experiments that have to be protected from cosmic rays and naturally occurring radiation on the earth's surface. The Energy Department's chief scientist at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant -- Roger Nelson -- says it's ironic a salt bed that now has megacuries of nuclear waste can be a low radiation area. Two multi-ton clean room modules have been lowered into the repository known as WIPP for the physics experiments under a project called EXO. Nelson says the modules eventually will form a single sequential clean room. He says each module will contain ever-cleaner operations to remove potential contaminants. All content © Copyright 2000 - 2007 WorldNow and KFDA. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 57 Las Vegas Now: Newest Fight Over Yucca Mountain Concerns Water The newest fight over the Yucca Mountain waste repository concerns water. President George Bush named the site 90 miles north of Las Vegas as the storage place for all of the nation's nuclear waste. The state of Nevada has been fighting the Department of Energy in an effort to end the project. The state engineer reinstated a cease and desist order on the use of the state's water to drill into the mountain for the repository. The DOE filed their appeal Monday to be able to keep drilling so the repository can open in 2017. All content © Copyright 2000 - 2007 WorldNow and KLAS. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 58 DOE: DOE Seeks Industry Participation for Engineering Services to Design Next Generation Nuclear Plant July 23, 2007 Gen IV Reactor Capable of Producing Process Heat, Electricity and/or Hydrogen WASHINGTON, DC –The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) today announced that the Idaho National Laboratory (INL) is issuing a request for expressions of interest from prospective industry teams capable of providing engineering design services to the INL for the conceptual design phase of the Department’s Next Generation Nuclear Plant (NGNP). The NGNP seeks to utilize cutting-edge technology in the effort to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by enabling nuclear energy to replace fossil fuels in the petrochemical and transportation industries. The high-temperature reactor is based on research and development activities supported by the Generation IV nuclear energy systems initiative at DOE’s INL. NGNP supports President Bush’s Advanced Energy Initiative, which advocates the increased use of nuclear energy, therefore increasing our nation’s energy security. “Proceeding with conceptual design for the Next Generation Nuclear Plant brings the Department of Energy another step closer to developing this advanced new technology,” DOE Assistant Secretary for Nuclear Energy Dennis Spurgeon said. “Through this effort, DOE will foster a public-private partnership to complete this development and spur the commercial scale deployment of advanced clean and safe nuclear energy as quickly as possible.” Expressions of interest are due to the Idaho National Laboratory, the Department’s lead laboratory for development of the NGNP, by August 20, 2007, and will be used to identify a qualified pool of candidates to provide future engineering and design services. The specific scope of work will be developed as the contracts with the Idaho National Laboratory are negotiated. This announcement builds on the pre-conceptual design activities for which $8 million was awarded in September 2006. All pre-conceptual design contract deliverables were submitted in July of this year. The NGNP proposes to build a high temperature reactor capable of producing hydrogen, electricity and/or process heat. Once expressions of interest are received and evaluated, a request for proposals will be issued to develop the conceptual design, expected to begin in FY2008. During this phase, the NGNP reactor’s performance, safety and functional requirements will be defined in detail as well as estimated cost and schedule for its construction and operation. This design will provide the basis for subsequent analyses and design details leading to the submittal of a NGNP license application to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. The Department seeks to complete the design and construction of a prototype NGNP at DOE’s Idaho National Laboratory by 2021. Read more information concerning how to respond to the request for expressions of interest. This request is not a formal solicitation requesting proposals and does not represent a commitment by the Idaho National Laboratory to award a contract. Read additional information on DOE’s nuclear energy programs. Media contact(s): Angela Hill, (202) 586-4940 U.S. Department of Energy | 1000 Independence Ave., SW | Washington, DC 20585 1-800-dial-DOE | f/202-586-4403 ***************************************************************** 59 DOE: North American Energy Ministers Take Further Action on Energy Security and the Environment July 23, 2007 Joint Communiqué VICTORIA — Energy ministers for Canada, Mexico and the United States took another step toward enhancing North American energy security and environmental protection, announcing concrete actions on energy science and technology, energy efficiency, deployment of clean energy technologies and other cooperative projects. The North American energy ministers met in Victoria, B.C., today where the Honourable Gary Lunn, Minister of Natural Resources, hosted his counterparts Ms. Georgina Kessel, Secretary of Energy for Mexico, and U.S. Secretary of Energy Samuel W. Bodman. Among the collaborative efforts they endorsed was the first-ever trilateral agreement on energy science and technology — a framework designed to stimulate innovation and to share and help build capacity in all three countries. The ministers also reconfirmed their commitment to further aligning energy-efficiency standards on key consumer products, noting that recent collaborative efforts had resulted in the harmonization of energy performance standards for refrigerators, air conditioners and large electric motors. “Whether it is developing cleaner and more efficient ways to produce and use conventional energy or advancing our knowledge of renewable energy, science and technology are fundamental to increasing energy security, sustaining economic prosperity and protecting our environment,” said Minister Lunn. “With greater North American cooperation, all three of our nations can increase the potential return on our investments in energy science and technology.” “Our challenge in North America is to make the use of energy compatible with economic growth and the preservation of the environment. Basic and applied scientific research, which this agreement promotes, is a key factor in overcoming this challenge successfully,” said Secretary Kessel. “Canada and Mexico are the top energy suppliers to the United States and serve as key partners as we work to advance the energy and economic security of our nations,” U.S. Secretary of Energy Samuel W. Bodman said. “Today’s trilateral agreement renews our joint efforts to ensure sustainable energy development, increase energy efficiency and advance the use of clean energy technologies across North America and the world.” The ministers announced that discussions will continue to identify specific ways to increase cooperation on research and development and to reduce barriers to the deployment of new technologies in a wide variety of areas, including biofuels, gas hydrates, hydrogen, carbon capture and storage, clean coal and electricity transmission. To further these efforts Canada, the U.S. and Mexico will exchange scientific and technical personnel in order to participate in joint studies and projects. The ministers emphasized the importance of seizing opportunities in energy efficiency. They committed to strengthening trilateral cooperation on motor vehicle fuel efficiency and “standby power” consumption, and identified seven additional energy-using products as potential candidates for harmonization. Regarding “standby power” — the electricity consumed by common products such as televisions, computers, and others when not in use — the ministers agreed to support a trilateral workshop that will be held in Mexico City in September to explore possible joint approaches. The ministers discussed the importance of continuing to increase the region’s energy security, recognizing the critical contribution that an integrated energy market makes to the North American economy, representing approximately US $150 billion in trade between the three countries. While recognizing and fully respecting the jurisdictional authorities of each country, they committed to working together to further enhance the effectiveness of the North American energy market. Cooperation on energy issues has also been a key element of discussions among the leaders of Canada, Mexico and the U.S. since 2005. Last year in Cancun, the countries’ leaders renewed their commitment to trilateral cooperation on energy conservation, clean energy technologies and bringing new energy technologies to the marketplace. The outcomes of today’s meeting will demonstrate to leaders the effectiveness of cooperation by the energy ministers on energy security in advance of the North American Leaders’ Summit to be held August 20 and 21 in Montebello, Quebec. Energy will continue to be one of the important issues for the leaders at their meeting. Media may contact: Kathleen Olson Director of Communications Office of the Minister Natural Resources Canada Ottawa 613-996-2007 Homero Nińo de Rivera Head of the Communication Unit Mexico-Secretariat of Energy 011 52 55 5000-6243 Email: homero@energia.gob.mx Eduardo Marin Director for Information Mexico-Secretariat of Energy 011 52 55 5000-6244 Email: emarin@energia.gob.mx Anne Womack Kolton Director of Public Affairs U.S. Department of Energy 202-586-4940 Megan Barnett Deputy Press Secretary U.S. Department of Energy 202-586-4940 The general public may contact: Telephone: 1-800-O-Canada (1-800-622-6232) Teletypewriter: 1-800-926-9105 Facsimile: 613-992-0792 The Trilateral Agreement for Cooperation in Energy Science and Technology media backgrounder is available at the Canadian Natural Resources NewsRoom. Media contact(s): Megan Barnett, 202-586-4940 DOE Seeks Industry Participation for Engineering Services to Design Next Generation Nuclear Plant Department of Energy and Nuclear Regulatory Commission Increase Cooperation to Advance Global Nuclear Energy Partnership Second Major U.S. Climate Change Science Program Report Issued U.S. Department of Energy | 1000 Independence Ave., SW | Washington, DC 20585 1-800-dial-DOE | f/202-586-4403 ***************************************************************** 60 Tri-City Herald: Ex-PNNL analyst may drop lawsuit against Richland lab Published Tuesday, July 24th, 2007 JOHN TRUMBO HERALD STAFF WRITER A former cyber security analyst for the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory says he's ready to drop his wrongful termination lawsuit against the lab after learning that his dismissal had nothing to do with him being a gun rights activist. Joe Huffman claimed in his lawsuit filed in December that his supervisors at the Richland lab trumped up a case for firing him because they didn't like his off-hours interest in firearms and target shooting at explosives. Huffman announced in an e-mail to the Herald and others Thursday that the gun issue was not central to the termination. He said he believes his bosses overreacted to his using lab computers while searching the Internet for nonbusiness and personal purposes. Huffman, 51, was fired in June 2005 "for violating PNNL policies (involving) inappropriate and unauthorized use of PNNL computers," PNNL spokeswoman Judith Graybeal said in December. Huffman said in the recent e-mail to the Herald that his personal Internet use on lab time was less than half the average for other employees, which he said has been "about 8,000 nonwork related (Web) transactions per month." Huffman said his blogging activities about firearms topics, while not in violation of lab rules, prompted his bosses to start building a case to get rid of him. Huffman, who lives in Moscow, Idaho, said he decided to consider dropping the lawsuit because there wasn't any issue involving race, gender, age or the right to gun ownership that would work in his favor. Rather than argue about excessive personal use of lab computers, he chose to back down. Lab spokeswoman Staci West said the lab had no comment at this time because the dismissal paperwork has not been filed in the case. © 2007 Tri-City Herald, Associated Press & Other Wire Services ***************************************************************** 61 Knoxville News Sentinel: Y-12 modernization report due out nearly a year ago By Frank Munger (Contact) Tuesday, July 24, 2007 OAK RIDGE — The government’s preparation of an environmental impact statement to support modernization of the Y-12 nuclear weapons plant is running about a year behind schedule. Steven Wyatt, a federal spokesman at Y-12, said the report’s delay is due to the “numerous and diverse public comments” received during the initial phase of the project. The Site-Wide Environmental Impact Statement was required after the National Nuclear Security Administration, a part of U.S. Department of Energy, proposed building a new Uranium Processing Facility. Construction of the UPF, which would replace the plant’s main production facility, is considered a major federal action. The project is estimated to cost about $2 billion, nearly double the original estimate. The facility would be used to process highly enriched uranium and manufacture components for nuclear warheads. Peace activist Ralph Hutchison said the delayed SWEIS likely reflects the difficulty in preparing such a document as more and more people — at the grassroots level, as well as in Congress — question the need to produce nuclear weapons. Hutchison said he believes the government is trying to “inoculate” the documents so they’ll stand up to legal reviews and challenges. He said opposition has broadened in regard to Complex 2030, the government’s overall plan to reshape the weapons complex — including Y-12. He said the same is true of a controversial proposal to develop a new weapon system, known as the Reliable Replacement Warhead. Wyatt said a final draft document for Y-12 modernization could be sent to Department of Energy headquarters in Washington sometime this summer. That would be followed by another public comment period and a “record of decision” in early 2008, he said. Previously, federal officials had said the final decision would come in December 2006. Hutchison, coordinator of the Oak Ridge Environmental Peace Alliance, recently alerted members of his group about the delays and asked them to be prepared to comment on short notice in case DOE releases the new Y-12 documents without warning. Environmental activists and peace groups criticized DOE for the timing of the first public meeting on the project, which was held Dec. 15, 2005. Some suggested federal officials intentionally scheduled it in the middle of the holiday season to limit public input. Senior writer Frank Munger may be reached at 865-342-6329. © 2007, Knoxville News Sentinel Co. ***************************************************************** 62 Federal Times: Energy office reinvents itself Legacy Management proves it’s a high performer By CELINDA CRAWFORD July 23, 2007 The Energy Department’s Office of Legacy Management (LM) was established in 2003 to serve as the steward for the nation’s Cold War nuclear legacy. LM is responsible for the long-term surveillance and maintenance of environmental remedies, promotion of beneficial reuse, and the records and information management associated with more than 70 former nuclear weapons production sites in 26 states. LM is also responsible for the administration of contractor pension plans and retirement benefits for more than 12,000 former contractor workers. In 2005, LM initiated a rigorous self-assessment using the tools and techniques contained in the Office of Management and Budget Circular A-76, Performance of Commercial Activities and the high-performance organization principles contained in the Government Accountability Office’s Commercial Activities Panel report. As a result, LM developed and implemented a most efficient organization that is projected to generate $15 million in savings over five years; a 29 percent reduction from baseline operational costs. On Feb. 13, OMB granted the department’s request for an OMB Circular A-76 deviation to accept LM’s high-performing organization proposal as an alternative to a competitive sourcing study. LM was established with a staffing level of 81 full-time employees and was assigned responsibility for a variety of programs and activities that spanned multiple organizations within the Energy Department. The initial staffing, provided by transfers from predecessor organizations, was composed of very senior and high-graded employees. In many cases, the staff did not have the skills necessary to accomplish the office’s mission and were not located in close proximity to LM’s customers or key facilities. LM initiated a critical review of mission, functions and human capital assets using the tools and techniques contained in OMB Circular A-76. Part of that approach included application of the principles of high-performing organizations: clearly defining mission and goals; understanding the customer base; and, establishing a leadership philosophy and a set of core values. Using a variety of employee-management teams, LM took the following actions: transferred out non-mission-related work to other Energy organizations and accepted the transfer of mission-related work (a net increase of $120 million of scope); aligned the LM budget with specific mission goals and established performance measurement tools; initiated 10 directed reassignments of staff; obtained early retirement authority; provided training in critical mission need areas; identified and prioritized critical hires — limiting hiring authority to the director; re-engineered federal and contractor business processes; closed one office location and opened three others to improve customer service and address additional scope; and completed a reorganization. By taking action on the self-assessment, LM reduced its authorized staffing to 58 full-time employees by 28 percent without a reduction in force; realized an immediate $3 million in savings in fiscal 2007; and proposed an estimated $15 million in savings over the five-year life of the high-performing organization certification period. LM also improved its supervisor-to-employee ratio from 1:7 to 1:12, realigned its staff to improve customer service, and restructured its organization into matrixed teams to improve communications and operations. Upon LM’s designation as a high-performing organization, it had to commit to a number of conditions. Those commitments include providing the products and services proposed at the cost, quality and performance proposed; complying with all OMB and Energy Department post-competition accountability requirements, including periodic reports of progress and accomplishments; and including accountability for performance as an high-performing organization in the director’s, senior staff’s, and, where appropriate, in employee performance standards. One commitment that is unusual in A-76 situations is that LM has the freedom to operate within an established full-time employee ceiling rather than by full-time employees assigned to defined functions and products; as noted, LM is responsible for overall staffing cost reductions during the life of the high-performing organization designation. If LM performs successfully, it is exempt from the contracting out reviews in OMB Circular A-76 for a period of five years; at the end of that period, it may reapply for continued designation and continued exemption. If LM should not perform to the levels to which it committed, OMB may rescind the high-performing organization designation. Should this occur, all LM full-time employees defined as commercial activities could be subjected to a competitive outsourcing feasibility study. The LM high-performing organization success story demonstrates that a small organization of dedicated federal employees can successfully develop an innovative approach to program and human capital management and gain control over its own destiny if its employees can recognize historical and organizational barriers to innovation, refuse to accept the status quo, and work together with one another and interested customers and stakeholders to develop a results-oriented novel organization. The LM story isn’t over; it has just begun. Celinda Crawford is the director of the Office of Business Operations in the Energy Department’s Office of Legacy Management. Use of this site signifies your agreement to the Terms of Service (Last Modified: April 18 2007 09:38:49.) ***************************************************************** 63 Oak Ridger: Hoag named Y-12 Site Office senior project director - Story last updated at 12:01 am on 7/24/2007 Daniel Hoag Daniel K. Hoag has been named the senior project director for the National Nuclear Security Administration’s Y-12 Site Office. Hoag is responsible for the oversight of approximately $4 billion of construction and modernization projects currently under way or proposed for the future at the Y-12 National Security Complex. He leads a team of federal project managers who are assisting in the day-to-day project control and oversight activities associated with these large-scale projects, which includes the nation’s new storehouse for enriched uranium, the Highly Enriched Uranium Materials Facility (HEUMF). Theodore Sherry, Manager of the Y-12 Site Office (YSO), said, “I am delighted to announce this selection. Dan has an immense amount of management experience at Y-12. He is a key player in our efforts to ensure the safe and cost-effective completion of HEUMF and other facilities and infrastructure associated with Y-12’s long range modernization program.” Hoag has more than 27 years of experience as a safety professional. He has previously held other key management positions at YSO, serving as the assistant manager for operations, assistant manager for programs and as chief of the Environment, Safety and Health Branch. Before joining the YSO staff, Hoag served as a safety engineer at the U.S. Department of Energy’s Savannah River Site (SRS) in Aiken, S.C. Hoag received a Bachelor of Science degree in industrial safety from the University of Central Missouri in 1980, and an Master of Science degree in safety from The University of Tennessee in 1994. He is a Certified Safety Professional. The mission of the NNSA’s Y-12 Site Office is to ensure the safe, secure and cost-effective operation of the Y-12 National Security Complex. YSO employees perform program oversight, contract and administrative management, and technical evaluation and assessment to meet this mission. Account Manager Needed in Knoxville, 2nd shift: M-F. 3 years applied exp. a must. Background & drug screen. 30-35K, ex... | © 2004 The Oak Ridger | Conditions of Use ***************************************************************** 64 NAS: Project: Prospective Benefits of DOE's Energy Efficiency and Fossil Energy R&D Programs--Phase 2 Project Title: PIN: BEES-J-04-01-A Major Unit: Division on Engineering and Physical Sciences Sub Unit: Board on Energy and Environmental Systems RSO: Offutt, Martin Subject/Focus Area: Project Scope The Phase 2 activity follows the completion of Phase 1, which resulted in the issuance of two reports on methodology for estimating prospective benefits and evaluating energy R&D programs at DOE. These reports are posted in the project record with project identification number BEES-J-03-01-A in the Current Projects System At least three issues will require attention as part of the Phase 2 Task. These issues include: (a) further improving the estimation of the value of environmental benefits (e.g., reduced emissions), (b) further improving the estimation of the value of security benefits (e.g., reducing oil imports or more reliable electricity supplies), and (c) determining how to estimate the overall benefits of the options under a variety of scenarios. The first two issues involve the public good rather than direct economic benefits. The committee will build on the foundation of work from Phase 1 and the body of literature that exists to determine appropriate values for these factors. The committee might commission "white papers" defining the state of knowledge and suggesting how the methodology could incorporate these estimates. For (c) options evaluation, the committee will consider the extent to which an analytical foundation is appropriate, building on the Phase 1 work, and incorporating the full range of benefits for representative scenarios. In addition, the committee will consider mechanisms for quantifying knowledge benefits and include them as appropriate in the overall evaluation. The Committee will also provide a peer review function of how DOE is evaluating prospective benefits of various Energy Efficiency (EE) and Fossil Energy (FE) programs/projects. As in Phase 1, several panels will be separately appointed to assist the committee in Phase 2. A workshop will be held early in Phase 2 to discuss the Phase 1 reports and methodology, following which the committee will write a letter report that will set the stage for the work to be accomplished in Phase 2. A final report will be issued at the conclusion of Phase 2, about the end of April 2006. The panels will write panel reports documenting the results of the analyses of the prospective benefits of the various programs/projects in EE and FE chosen by the committee to evaluate. These panel reports may be issued separately or incorporated into the Phase 2 final report. The project is sponsored by the U.S. Department of Energy The approximate starting date for this project is 3/15/2005 Project Duration: 14 months Provide FEEDBACK on this project. Contact the Public Access Records Office to make an inquiry or to schedule an appointment to view project materials available to the public. Committee Membership Meetings Meeting 1 - 07/13/2005 Meeting 2 - 09/15/2005 Meeting 3 - 10/26/2005 Meeting 4 - 02/10/2006 Reports Reports having no URL can be seen at the Public Access Records Office Letter Report on Revised Methodology for Prospective Benefits Evaluation Final Report: Prospective Evaluation of Applied Energy Research and Development at DOE (Phase Two) Email: info@nas.edu ***************************************************************** 65 NAS: Project: Technical Assessment of Environmental Programs at the Los Alamos National Laboratory Project Title: Technical Assessment of Environmental Programs at the Los Alamos National Laboratory PIN: NRSB-O-05-04-A Major Unit: Division on Earth and Life Studies Sub Unit: Nuclear and Radiation Studies Board RSO: Wiley, John Subject/Focus Area: Chemistry; Earth Sciences; Environmental Issue Project Scope The National Academies will undertake technical assessments of ongoing and planned environmental remediation and monitoring programs at the Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) and provide recommendations to improve their technical and cost effectiveness and reduce worker, public, and environmental risks. This study will focus on specific scientific and technical issues related to groundwater monitoring and contamination migration at LANL as follows: 1. General review of groundwater protection at LANL: What is the state of the laboratory's understanding of the major sources of groundwater contamination originating from laboratory operations and have technically sound measures to control them been implemented? Have potential sources of non-laboratory groundwater contamination been identified? Have the potential impacts of this contamination on corrective-action decision-making been assessed? Does the laboratory's interim ground water monitoring plan follow good scientific practices? Is it adequate to provide for the early identification and response to potential environmental impacts from the laboratory? Is the scope of groundwater monitoring at the laboratory sufficient to provide data needed for remediation decision-making? If not, what data gaps remain, and how can they be filled? 2. Specific data-quality issues: Is the laboratory following established scientific practices in assessing the quality of its groundwater monitoring data? Are the data (including qualifiers that describe data precision, accuracy, detection limits, and other items that aid correct interpretation and use of the data) being used appropriately in the laboratory's remediation decision making? 3. Recommendations to improve the future effectiveness of the laboratory's groundwater protection program with respect to: Potential remedial actions for the groundwater contamination, especially for radionuclide contamination for which DOE is self-regulating; and Monitoring for long-term stewardship. This project is sponsored by the U.S. Department of Energy. The approximate start date for the project is February 1, 2006. An interim report will be issued in fall 2006 and a final report will be issued at the end of the project in approximately 15 months. Project Duration: 15 months Provide FEEDBACK on this project. Contact the Public Access Records Office to make an inquiry or to schedule an appointment to view project materials available to the public. Committee Membership Meetings Meeting 1 - 03/23/2006 Meeting 2 - 05/16/2006 Meeting 3 - 08/14/2006 Meeting 4 - 10/16/2006 Meeting 5 - 12/05/2006 Reports Reports having no URL can be seen at the Public Access Records Office Plans and Practices for Groundwater Protection at the Los Alamos National Laboratory: Interim Status Report Plans and Practices for Groundwater Protection at the Los Alamos National Laboratory: Final Report Email: info@nas.edu ***************************************************************** 66 NAS: Project: Development and Implementation of a Cleanup Technology Roadmap for DOE's Office of Environmental Management Project Title: Development and Implementation of a Cleanup Technology Roadmap for DOE's Office of Environmental Management PIN: NRSB-O-06-03-A Major Unit: Division on Earth and Life Studies Sub Unit: Nuclear and Radiation Studies Board RSO: Crowley, Kevin Subject/Focus Area: Environmental Issue Project Scope A National Academies committee will provide technical and strategic advice to the DOE-EM's Office of Engineering and Technology to support the development and implementation of its cleanup technology roadmap. Specifically, the study will identify: o Principal science and technology gaps and their priorities for the cleanup program based on previous National Academies reports, updated and extended to reflect current site conditions and EM priorities and input form key external groups, such as the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board, Environmental Protection Agency, and state regulatory agencies. o Strategic opportunities to leverage research and development from other DOE programs (e.g., in the Office of Science, Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management, and the National Nuclear Security Administration), other federal agencies (e.g., Department of Defense, Environmental Protection Agency), universities, and the private sector. o Core capabilities at the national laboratories that will be needed to address EM's long-term, high-risk cleanup challenges, especially at the four laboratories located at the large DOE sites (Idaho National Laboratory, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, and Savannah River National Laboratory). o The infrastructure at these national laboratories and at EM sites that should be maintained to support research, development, and bench and pilot scale demonstrations of technologies for the EM cleanup program, especially in radiochemistry. The committee will provide findings and recommendations, as appropriate, to EM on maintenance of core capabilities and infrastructure at national laboratories and EM sites to address its long-term, high-risk cleanup challenges. The project is sponsored by the U.S. Department of Energy. The approximate start date for the project is February 1, 2007. A report is expected to be released at the end of the project in approximately 16 months. Project Duration: 16 months Provide FEEDBACK on this project. Contact the Public Access Records Office to make an inquiry or to schedule an appointment to view project materials available to the public. Committee Membership Meetings Meeting 1 - 03/12/2007 Meeting 2 - 06/13/2007 Meeting 3 - 08/27/2007 Meeting 4 - 10/31/2007 Meeting 5 - 01/08/2008 Reports Reports having no URL can be seen at the Public Access Records Office Email: info@nas.edu ***************************************************************** 67 NewsChannel6: Idaho Cleanup Project Holds Safety Rodeo to Celebrate Reporter: Suzanne Hobbs Employees on the Idaho Cleanup Project are celebrating the completion of a big goal one year in the making. The 2,100 employees at the Idaho Nuclear Technology and Engineering Center have reached star status. That's the highest safety status possible. Today at the Idaho site they held a unique rodeo to show off the skills of forklift operators. They were put to the test by competing in various activities involving obstacle courses like hauling a bucket of water without spilling, and forklift basketball. The large group was also treated to a BBQ lunch by managers who wanted to say thanks for having a safe year. Brent Rankin: "It's an employee-driven program, employee led and so this is our way of saying thank you for all the effort, volunteer effort they've put into it and for a job well done." Since C.W.I. arrived in Idaho two years ago, the company made it a goal to achieve this STAR status. Rankin says it took one year of hard work by the staff to get to this point. All content © Copyright 2000 - 2007 WorldNow and kpvi. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 this material is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. For more information go to: *****************************************************************