***************************************************************** 08/10/07 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 15.187 ***************************************************************** RADBULL IS PRODUCED BY THE ABALONE ALLIANCE CLEARINGHOUSE ***************************************************************** Send News Stories to news@energy-net.org with title on subject line and first line of body NUCLEAR POLICY 1 YONHAP NEWS: Seoul to sanction state institute for loss of uranium s 2 Korea Times: Japanese Defense Chief Questions Nuke Talks Progress at 3 US: SFBG: Nuke barrels fall, go BOOM - 4 Courier-Mail: Campaigner's claims alarmist NUCLEAR REACTORS 5 Daily Yomiuri: N-plant urged to improve firefighting capability 6 The Hindu: Parliament to discuss N-deal on Aug. 14, 16 7 TheStar.com: Algae prompt reactor shutdown 8 SA Engineering News: Local PBMR-supplier finds US buyer 9 US: NRC: NRC Seeks Public Input on Environmental Impact Statement fo 10 US: NRC: NRC Size Standards; Revision (license categories) 11 US: NRC: Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc., Indian Point Nuclear Gene 12 NewsRoom Finland: Finland's TVO vexed by latest delay in nuclear con 13 US: Charlotte Business Journal: Duke has spent $40M on nuclear plant 14 Guardian Unlimited: UN Team: Keep Japanese Reactor Closed 15 US: San Luis Obispo County: Nuclear reactor at Diablo Canyon powered 16 AFP: World's largest nuke plant closed for 'months' - NUCLEAR SECURITY 17 The Guardian: Scientists call for defensive action over radiological 18 Korea Times: Korea Struggles to Find Lost Uranium NUCLEAR SAFETY 19 Daily Yomiuri: Hokkaido Electric sets new rules for workers after my 20 US: montgomeryadvertiser.com: Depot fire bursts radioactive vessels NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE 21 ReviewJournal.com: Documents about Yucca in tug of war 22 Business Gazette: USEC denies buyout talk; congressmen question cont 23 JOGJCC: Radioactive waste return costs Ł1.7m 24 Las Vegas Now: Battle Lines Drawn Over Info in Yucca Mountain Databa 25 times and star: N-waste for Sellafield landfill 26 times and star: A nuclear scrapyard is not the greatest idea PEACE 27 Japan Times: Nagasaki mayor slams nuclear talk, tests US DEPT. OF ENERGY 28 Seattle PI: Hanford accident is a wake-up call 29 Tri-City Herald: Weis named DOE's Pacific Northwest Site manager 30 Denver Post: Sick Flats' workers need quicker care 31 Knoxville News Sentinel: La. National Guard team tests its nuclear-d 32 Oak Ridger: Guard members train at new Y-12 facility - 33 NAS: Project: Development and Implementation of a Cleanup Technology ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** FULL NEWS STORIES ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** 1 YONHAP NEWS: Seoul to sanction state institute for loss of uranium samples 2007/08/10 11:41 KST By Lee Joon-seung SEOUL, Aug. 10 (Yonhap) -- The South Korean government said Friday that it will sanction a state-run atomic research institute for losing uranium samples that may have been incinerated by mistake.    The Ministry of Science and Technology said firm administrative action will be taken against the Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute (KAERI) and its supervisors for mishandling the radioactive material.    The two kilograms of uranium reported missing Thursday were kept as evidence in an unauthorized uranium enrichment experiment conducted by local scientists in the past. Included in the samples were 0.2 grams of 10 percent enriched uranium, 0.8 grams of depleted uranium, and some natural uranium.    KAERI had been holding the uranium in a special copper container that may have been destroyed with ordinary trash.    "An investigation is underway to find out exactly what happened to the uranium samples," said a ministry official. He said the samples were probably classified as industrial trash in May and handed over to a waste disposal company for incineration.    KAERI said it recently recovered the copper container and is trying to find remnants of the uranium samples in a landfill in Gyeonggi province.    Experts said that because of its small size, the material does not poise any serious danger to the environment.    He added that because the missing samples had already been checked by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), their loss would not seriously affect the country's position on maintaining a clear and transparent nuclear energy program.    KAERI was inspected by the IAEA in 2004 after admitting that its scientists had in 1982 and 2000 extracted or enriched small amounts of plutonium and uranium, two key ingredients for making nuclear weapons. It said the experiments were conducted without government approval and that the IAEA had cleared the South Korean facility of clandestine nuclear development charges.    "Seoul plans to keep the IAEA fully appraised of the mishap and submit a report on the details of its investigations once they are completed," a ministry official said.    He said the incident could tarnish the country's sterling reputation in nuclear safety, but should not be a real setback if appropriate countermeasures are taken and tough punishment meted out to those responsible.    yonngong@yna.co.kr ***************************************************************** 2 Korea Times: Japanese Defense Chief Questions Nuke Talks Progress at Summit 08-10-2007 09:04 The Japanese defense chief said Thursday her government will closely watch the outcome of the inter-Korean summit later this month, especially how much progress will be made on the North Korean nuclear issue, Yonhap News reported in Washington. "I think that in the course of dialogue, various arguments will be presented," Yonhap quoted Defense Minister Yuriko Koike as telling the audience at the Center for Strategic and International Studies during her visit to Washington. "I am not sure how far these discussions will actually lead to the solving of the nuclear issue," she said through a translator. "The question is how, to what degree there will be fruitful dialogue that will lead to the solution." South Korean President Roh Moo-hyun will travel to Pyongyang Aug. 28-30 to meet North Korea's top leader, Kim Jong-il, the second inter-Korean summit since the national division at the end of the 1950-1953 Korean War. The first was held in June 2000 between Roh's predecessor, Kim Dae-jung, and the North Korean leader. The two Koreas are technically still at war, having signed only an armistice. Japan is a member of the so-called six-party process, a multilateral forum aimed at denuclearizing the Korean Peninsula. The two Koreas, the U.S., China and Russia are the other participants. North Korean-Japanese relations are the most strained among the six countries as Tokyo presses Pyongyang to account for Japanese citizens it admitted to kidnapping in the past to train spies. Japan says it will not contribute to any aid package to the North unless the abduction issue is first resolved. Koike described the inter-Korean summit as within the context of the six-party talks, an emphasis also made by the U.S. Coming out of talks with U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, Koike quoted the secretary as saying that the U.S. would also be closely watching the results of the Korean summit. Rice hopes that the summit will contribute to and have a positive influence on the six-party talks, Koike told reporters. Rice also said she wants to see the abduction issue resolved, according to Koike. ***************************************************************** 3 SFBG: Nuke barrels fall, go BOOM - SFBG Politics Blog by Amanda Witherell Yikes, doesn't this picture give you the willies? It's from the Japanese nuclear power plant, located on a fault line like another nuke plant we know. (Ahem, Diablo Canyon.) Last month it succumbed to the Murphy's Law of its seismology. This week a UK Times reporter took a tour of the facility and reports that officials are actually considering restarting the reactors even though the superstructure is still impassable and waste leaked out after the quake. Awesome. Posted by sfbg on August 09, 2007 06:29 PM | Permalink Now imagine! Next June 8th, the nuclear industry is planning on a massive campaign to push a whole new generation of reactors on California (so goes ca, so goes the US)... At present, there's a law blocking any further development in California. Thanks to activists in Santa Cruz 30 years ago, they stopped PG&E's plan to build a whole complex of nukes a couple miles from the epicenter of the 1989 quake... Get you head out of the sands folks! These idiots want to build a whole new generation of reactors, using the same old lies that got them the first generation of reactors in the 60's.. Posted by roger | August 11, 2007 12:47 AM Posted on August 11, 2007 00:47 ***************************************************************** 4 Courier-Mail: Campaigner's claims alarmist NEWS.com.au | couriermail.com.au John Carlson August 10, 2007 12:00am AUSTRALIA is not in "grave danger" from its uranium production, despite the alarmist claims of anti-nuclear campaigners. Helen Caldicott's article (Perspectives, August 8) about nuclear waste and the US Global Nuclear Energy Partnership initiative (GNEP) totally mis-states Australia's nuclear policies, and misunderstands GNEP. It is simply not true that participation in GNEP would require Australia to accept other countries' spent nuclear fuel or radioactive waste. The Prime Minister, the Foreign Affairs Minister and several other ministers have been clear in rejecting suggestions Australia would accept nuclear waste from other countries. Foreign Affairs Minister Alexander Downer said on the ABC Radio program AM on July 20 that "we have a policy of not accepting nuclear waste and we're certainly not in the game of changing that policy". With close to 40 per cent of the world's low cost uranium, Australia has obvious interests in global nuclear energy initiatives such as GNEP. The Government supports the underlying non-proliferation objectives of GNEP, but has not yet taken a decision on participation. Nor has the Government taken any decisions on uranium enrichment or other expansion of the nuclear fuel cycle beyond the current activities of uranium mining and milling. Caldicott suggests increased use of nuclear power will increase nuclear proliferation risks. Nuclear power does not present a proliferation risk. Enrichment or reprocessing can present a risk in the wrong hands, and international attention is being given to how to strengthen control of these technologies in the future. Here, GNEP is an important initiative. GNEP aims to increase the contribution of nuclear energy to meeting the world's growing demand for electricity, while strengthening the nuclear non-proliferation regime. The GNEP concept is evolving. The basic idea is that supplier countries with advanced nuclear capabilities would provide nuclear fuel to user countries on a cradle-to-grave basis, providing an alternative to user countries acquiring enrichment or reprocessing capabilities. GNEP also aims to address spent fuel and waste management issues – spent fuel would be an energy resource to be used in fast neutron reactors by supplier countries. User countries would transfer their spent fuel to countries having these capabilities. Spent fuel recycle would be based on new technologies that avoid plutonium separation. Recycling through fast reactors would substantially reduce the period in which the eventual high-level waste must be isolated from the environment. There is nothing secret about GNEP. The US Department of Energy has a website on this topic. Overall, Caldicott's article is rife with errors and exaggerations. Space does not permit dealing with all of these, but most notable is the claim that an accident in a nuclear reactor could (trigger) a massive spontaneous nuclear explosion scattering tonnes of plutonium to the four winds . . . this is preposterous and shows a complete lack of understanding of the basic science of nuclear energy. Caldicott has either not researched her assertions, or has disregarded widely available information on this topic. John Carlson is director-general of the Australian Safeguards and Non-Proliferation Office © Queensland Newspapers. All times AEST (GMT + 10). ***************************************************************** 5 Daily Yomiuri: N-plant urged to improve firefighting capability An annual report released by the Nuclear Safety Commission calls for the earthquake-hit Kashiwazaki-Kariwa nuclear power station to boost its firefighting capability. In its 2006 white paper, the NSC said the Tokyo Electric Power Co. facility, which was damaged in the July 16 Niigata Prefecture Chuetsu Offshore Earthquake, should improve its capability to fight fires at night and during holidays. The report was submitted to a Cabinet meeting Friday. As the power station suffered a series of problems as a result of the powerful quake, such as a fire in a transformer and leaks of radioactive water, the NSC attached its view on the incident and opinions on future measures required at the plant to the white paper. The report says the fact that the plant was damaged in the quake offered an "important lesson," while noting that important safety functions worked properly, with all the nuclear reactors at the plant shutting down automatically. The plant's own firefighting services failed to act swiftly enough to put out the transformer fire, the report notes, saying this shows the plant needs to boost its capability to deal with fires at night and on holidays. The white paper also refers to nuclear plants' concealment of accidents and problems, and falsification of data, including that by Hokuriku Electric Power Co.'s Shika nuclear power plant, which hid a criticality incident in 1999, and urges electric companies and manufacturers concerned to improve transparency. The report was scheduled to be released at the end of July, but its release was postponed so the lessons from the Niigata quake could be analyzed. The Daily Yomiuri, The Yomiuri Shimbun ***************************************************************** 6 The Hindu: Parliament to discuss N-deal on Aug. 14, 16 Friday, August 10, 2007 : 1630 Hrs Delhi New Delhi, Aug. 10 (PTI): A discussion on Indo-US civil nuclear deal will be held in Parliament on August 14 and 16. Stating this here today, Parliamentary Affairs Minister P R Dasmunsi maintained that the government wants the discussion on the issue as early as possible. The government has nothing to hide and is ready to discuss the issue, he told reporters. Prime Minister Manmohan Singh will make a statement in Parliament on August 13. The government's Left allies as well as opposition NDA and UNPA have rejected the 123 nuclear agreement concluded last month and are pressing for a debate on the issue in Parliament. However, while NDA and UNPA are demanding the debate under Rule 184, which entails voting, the Left wants the discussion without voting under Rule 193. With the nuclear deal set to dominate the proceedings of Parliament, External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee will not be travelling to Bishkek, Kyrgyzstan, next week for the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) meet. Copyright © 2007, The Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the ***************************************************************** 7 TheStar.com: Algae prompt reactor shutdown Toronto Star | Star P.M. Latest outbreak fouls the water intake system that cools plant turbines Aug 10, 2007 04:30 AM Tyler Hamilton Energy Reporter Some forms of green energy are not welcome in Ontario. An unexpected build up of algae on a lake-water intake system used for cooling has forced Ontario Power Generation to temporarily shut down one of its Pickering nuclear reactors until the fast-growing green muck is cleaned up. Experts say bad-smelling blooms of Cladophora algae are linked to warmer water temperatures and are likely to get worse as a result of global warming and high phosphorous levels caused by lawn fertilizers, agricultural runoff and detergents entering the lake. Zebra mussels, which didn't exist in Lake Ontario when the Pickering plant was built, also contribute to the problem by filtering the lake water so much that it's easier for the sun to shine through. More sunlight results in more algae growth. "Recent hot weather has resulted in an increased growth of algae in Lake Ontario," OPG said yesterday. "Wind and wave conditions ...have increased the flow of algae, causing a larger than normal amount of algae to enter the station's water intake systems." Algae builds up on screens and filters, reducing the flow of water that's necessary for cooling purposes. OPG spokesperson Bill McKinlay said Pickering B Unit 5 was shut down so that water flow can be diverted to units 6, 7, and 8 while the algae are removed. "It could take a few days, a couple of days maybe," said McKinlay, emphasizing that the shutdown of unit 5 has nothing to do with the reactor's maintenance outages last month and earlier this summer. "It's totally unrelated." This isn't the first time algae has disrupted the operation of OPG's nuclear fleet. Unit 1 at Darlington generating station had to be shut down briefly on Sept. 29, 2005 as a result of algae buildup, while units 5, 6, and 8 at Pickering B were taken offline on Aug. 19, 2005, because of a similar event. OPG estimates that Cladophora fouling of cooling water intakes has cost the company more than $30 million in lost power generation over the past 12 years. As a result, the company installed a mesh barrier in the lake in May hoping to block the flow of algae by as much as 30 per cent. The effectiveness of the barrier will be studied over the year in collaboration with the University of Waterloo and the Durham region. OPG, in the environmental assessment report it recently filed to the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission in relation to the possible refurbishment of Pickering B, said climate change and rising lake temperature could lead to increased algae and zebra mussel growth. "Temporary reactor power reductions could be required," the company said. "None of the potential effects associated with climate change are expected to pose any risk to workers, members of the public or the environment." TheStar.com | | | | | | | Toronto Star | | | | | | © Copyright Toronto Star 1996-2007 | ***************************************************************** 8 SA Engineering News: Local PBMR-supplier finds US buyer 11 August 2007 www.creamermedia.co.za US group to buy PBMR-supplier IST Nuclear Nuclear technology group Westinghouse Electric Company has agreed to buy IST Nuclear (ISTN), a provider of services and systems for the Pebble Bed... SA nuclear industry association to launch this week South Africa will on Thursday launch a new South African Nuclear Industry Association (Sania), an umbrella body that will consider the interests of... Pebble-bed modular reactor project PBMR safety report to be completed by August Decision to build new nuclear plant beneficial for PBMR By: Mariaan Olivier Published: 10 Aug 07 - 0:00 Nuclear technology group Westinghouse Electric Company has agreed to buy IST Nuclear (ISTN), a provider of services and systems for the pebble-bed modular reactor (PBMR), to grow its capabilities in the South African nuclear market, it announced last month. The sale, contingent on approval from South Africa’s Competition Commission, was likely to be completed this month and would see ISTN operating under the name Westinghouse Electric South Africa. Vice-president of Westinghouse engineering services Nick Liparulo commented that the acquisition of ISTN would allow Westinghouse to become more involved in the PBMR as it moved toward commercialisation. “We intend to expand ISTN’s scope to include working with Westinghouse in servicing existing light water reactors in South Africa and elsewhere,” he added. Rita Bowser, Westinghouse regional vice-president for South Africa, said the ISTN acquisition would allow the company to better serve the local nuclear market. “We are even better positioned to help South Africa meet the critical demand for clean, safe and reliable energy.” Westinghouse also said that South Africa was a promising market for the AP1000, its third-generation PWR system. The company said that it would promote AP1000 systems, to assist in meeting the country’s fast- growing demand for electricity. Westinghouse technology is the basis for about a half of the world’s operating nuclear plants, including 60% of those in the US and 100% in South Africa. Edited by: Laura Tyrer Any re-distribution of this information is strictly prohibited. Copyright © Creamer Media (Pty) Ltd Website Credits 0.119s - 87pq + 4rq ***************************************************************** 9 NRC: NRC Seeks Public Input on Environmental Impact Statement for Indian Point Nuclear Plant License Renewal Application News Release - Region I - 2007-048 - U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs, Region I 475 Allendale Road, King of Prussia, Pa. 19406 www.nrc.gov CONTACT: Diane Screnci (610) 337-5330 Neil A. Sheehan (610) 337-5331 E-mail: opa1@nrc.gov Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff will conduct two public meetings on Wednesday, Sept. 19, on the environmental review related to the license renewal application for the Indian Point nuclear power plant. Members of the public are invited to attend and comment on environmental issues they believe the NRC should consider during its review of the applicant’s proposal to extend by 20 years the operating licenses for the two reactors at the site, located in Buchanan (Westchester County), N.Y. , and operated by Entergy Nuclear Northeast. There will be two sessions held that day at the Colonial Terrace catering facility, 119 Oregon Road in Cortlandt Manor, N.Y. (Directions to the facility are available at: http://www.colonialterracecaterers.com/ .) Attendees are advised that parking may be limited. The first session will begin at 1:30 p.m. and continue until 4:30 p.m. The second session, which will follow the same format as the first meeting, will get under way at 7 p.m. and continue until 10 p.m. The NRC will host an “open house” beginning 1 hour before the start of each meeting to provide members of the public with an opportunity to talk informally with agency staff. However, formal comments must be expressed during the transcribed meetings. Both sessions will start with an overview and an NRC staff presentation on the environmental review process for license renewal applications. After the NRC presentation, audience members will be given the opportunity to present their comments on environmental issues they consider worthy of review as the agency reviews the Indian Point application. “During public meetings we held in Cortlandt Manor on June 27 regarding our overall review process for the application, we explained there will be several opportunities for members of the public to raise concerns or offer comments on the proposed license extension for the Indian Point plant. The meetings scheduled for September 19th will be one such opportunity and we look forward to receiving the public’s input,” said Bo Pham, the NRC Senior Project Manager who is leading the environmental review. Under NRC regulations, the original operating license for a nuclear power plant has a term of 40 years. The license may be renewed for up to an additional 20 years if NRC requirements are met. The current operating licenses for Indian Point 2 and 3 expire, respectively, on Sept. 28, 2013 and Dec. 12, 2015. Entergy’s license renewal application for Indian Point was received by the NRC on April 30, 2007. As part of the application, the company submitted an environmental report, which is posted on the NRC’s web site at: www.nrc.gov/reactors/operating/licensing/renewal/applications/indian-p oint.html. It is also available for review at the NRC’s Public Document Room in Rockville, Md. , which can be reached by phone at 800-397-4209, and at the following area libraries: The White Plains Public Library, 100 Martine Ave. , White Plains, N.Y. ; the Hendrick Hudson Free Library, 185 Kings Ferry Road, Montrose, N.Y. , and the Field Library, 4 Nelson Ave. , Peekskill, N.Y. An existing NRC document, “Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Power Plants” (NUREG-1437), assesses the scope and impact of environmental effects that would be associated with license renewal at any nuclear power plant site. The document for which the NRC will gather information at the Sept. 19th meetings will be a supplement to that generic environmental statement that is specific to Indian Point. It will contain a recommendation regarding the environmental acceptability of the license renewal action. At the conclusion of the information-gathering process, the NRC staff will prepare a summary of the conclusions reached and significant issues identified. A copy will be sent to each person who participated in the “scoping” process. The summary will also be available on the NRC’s web site through the Public Electronic Reading Room at: www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html and at the libraries previously listed. Help in accessing documents through the Reading Room is available by contacting the NRC’s Public Document Room at 800-397-4209 or by e-mail at pdr@nrc.gov. The NRC staff will subsequently prepare a draft environmental impact statement (EIS) supplement for public comment and will hold public meetings at a future date to solicit comments. After consideration of comments on the draft report, the NRC will prepare a final EIS supplement. Interested individuals may register to attend or present oral comments at the Sept. 19th meetings by contacting Bo Pham at 800-368-5642, ext. 8450, or by e-mail to IndianPointEIS@nrc.gov 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. Friday, August 10, 2007 ***************************************************************** 10 NRC: NRC Size Standards; Revision (license categories) FR Doc E7-15554 [Federal Register: August 10, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 154)] [Proposed Rules] [Page 44988-44990] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr10au07-16] NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 10 CFR Parts 2 and 171 RIN 3150-AI15 AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission. ACTION: Proposed rule. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is proposing to amend the size standards it uses to qualify an NRC licensee as a small entity under the Regulatory Flexibility Act and making the same change to its annual fee rule. NRC proposes to increase the receipts-based small business size standard from $5 million to $6.5 million to conform to the standard set by the Small Business Administration (SBA). This size standard reflects the most commonly used SBA size standard for the nonmanufacturing industries. SBA adjusted this standard on January 23, 2002 (67 FR 3041) and on December 6, 2005 (70 FR 72577) to account for inflation. DATES: The direct final rule will become effective on October 24, 2007, unless significant adverse comments on the amendment are received by September 10, 2007. If the rule is withdrawn as a result of such comments, timely notice of the withdrawal will be published in the Federal Register. Comments received after September 10, 2007 will be considered if it is practical to do so, but the NRC is able to ensure only that comments received on or before this date will be considered. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by any one of the following methods. Please include the following number (RIN 3150-AI15) in the subject line of your comments. Comments on rulemakings submitted in writing or in electronic form will be made available for public inspection. Because your comments will not be edited to remove any identifying or contact information, the NRC cautions you against including personal information such as social security numbers and birth dates in your submission. Mail comments to: Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, ATTN: Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff. E-mail comments to: SECY@nrc.gov. If you do not receive a reply e- mail confirming that we have received your comments, contact us directly at (301) 415-1966. You may also submit comments via the NRC's rulemaking Web site at http://ruleforum.llnl.gov. Address questions about our rulemaking Web site to Carol Gallagher (301) 415-5905; e-mail CAG@nrc.gov. Hand deliver comments to: 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852, between 7:30 a.m. and 4:15 p.m. on Federal workdays. Fax comments to: Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission at (301) 415-1101. Publicly available documents related to this rulemaking may be examined and copied for a fee at the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR), Public File Area O1F21, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland. Selected documents, including comments, can be viewed and downloaded electronically via the NRC's rulemaking Web site at http://ruleforum.llnl.gov. Publicly available documents created or received at the NRC are available electronically at the NRC's Electronic Reading Room at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. From this site, the public can gain entry into the NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS), which provides text and image files of NRC's public documents. If you do not have access to ADAMS, or if there are problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS, contact the NRC Public Document Room (PDR) Reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737 or by e-mail to PDR@nrc.gov. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael Lesar, Chief, Rulemaking, Directives and Editing Branch, Office of Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, telephone (301) 415- 7163, e-mail mtl@nrc.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: For additional information see the direct final rule published in the Rules and Regulations section of this Federal Register. Procedural Background This rulemaking has the simple aim of updating NRC's size standards to reflect those of the SBA. Because the NRC believes that this action should not cause controversy, the NRC is using the direct final rule process for this rule. The amendment in this rule will become effective on October 24, 2007. However, if the NRC receives significant adverse comments on this direct final rule by September 10, 2007, the NRC will publish a document that withdraws this action. In that event, the comments received in response to these amendments would then be considered as comments on the companion proposed rule published elsewhere in this Federal Register, and the comments will be addressed in a later final rule based on that proposed rule. Unless the modifications to the proposed rule are significant enough to require that it be republished as a proposed rule, the NRC will not initiate a second comment period on this action. A significant adverse comment is a comment where the commenter explains why the rule would be inappropriate, including challenges to the rule's underlying premise or approach, or would be ineffective or unacceptable without a change. A comment is adverse and significant if: (1) The comment opposes the rule and provides a reason sufficient to require a substantive response in a notice-and-comment process. For example, a substantive response is required when: (a) The comment causes the NRC staff to reevaluate (or reconsider) its position or conduct additional analysis; (b) The comment raises an issue serious enough to warrant a substantive response to clarify or complete the record; or (c) The comment raises a relevant issue that was not previously addressed or considered by the NRC staff. (2) The comment proposes a change or an addition to the rule, and it is apparent that the rule would be ineffective or unacceptable without incorporation of the change or addition. (3) The comment causes the staff to make a change (other than editorial) to the rule. List of Subjects 10 CFR Part 2 Administrative practice and procedure, Byproduct material, Classified information, Environmental protection, Nuclear materials, Nuclear power plants and reactors, Penalties, Source material, Special nuclear material, Waste treatment and disposal. 10 CFR Part 171 Annual charges, Byproduct material, Holders of certificates, registrations, approvals, Intergovernmental relations, [[Page 44989]] Non-payment penalties, Nuclear materials, Nuclear power plants and reactors, Source material, Special nuclear material. For the reasons set out in the preamble and under the authority of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974, as amended, and 5 U.S.C. 553, the NRC is proposing the following amendments to 10 CFR parts 2 and 171. PART 2--RULES OF PRACTICE FOR DOMESTIC LICENSING PROCEEDINGS AND ISSUANCE OF ORDERS 1. The authority citation for part 2 continues to read as follows: Authority: Secs. 161, 181, 68 Stat. 948, 953, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2201, 2231); sec. 191, as amended, Pub. L. 87-615, 76 Stat. 409 (42 U.S.C. 2241); sec. 201, 88 Stat. 1242, as amended (42 U.S.C. 5841); 5 U.S.C. 552; sec. 1704, 112 Stat. 2750 (44 U.S.C. 3504 note). Section 2.101 also issued under secs. 53, 62, 63, 81, 103, 104, 68 Stat. 930, 932, 933, 935, 936, 937, 938, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2073, 2092, 2093, 2111, 2133, 2134, 2135); sec. 114(f), Pub. L. 97- 425, 96 Stat. 2213, as amended (42 U.S.C. 10143(f)); sec. 102, Pub. L. 91-190, 83 Stat. 853, as amended (42 U.S.C. 4332); sec. 301, 88 Stat. 1248 (42 U.S.C. 5871). Sections 2.102, 2.103, 2.104, 2.105, 2.721 also issued under secs. 102, 103, 104, 105, 183i, 189, 68 Stat. 936, 937, 938, 954, 955, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2132, 2133, 2134, 2135, 2233, 2239). Section 2.105 also issued under Pub. L. 97- 415, 96 Stat. 2073 (42 U.S.C. 2239). Sections 2.200-2.206 also issued under secs. 161b, i, o, 182, 186, 234, 68 Stat. 948-951, 955, 83 Stat. 444, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2201(b), (i), (o), 2236, 2282); sec. 206, 88 Stat. 1246 (42 U.S.C. 5846). Section 2.205(j) also issued under Pub. L. 101-410, 104 Stat. 90, as amended by section 3100(s), Pub. L. 104-134, 110 Stat. 1321-373 (28 U.S.C. 2461 note). Sections 2.600-2.606 also issued under sec. 102, Pub. L. 91-190, 83 Stat. 853, as amended (42 U.S.C. 4332). Sections 2.700a, 2.719 also issued under 5 U.S.C. 554. Sections 2.754, 2.760, 2.770, 2.780 also issued under 5 U.S.C. 557. Section 2.764 also issued under secs. 135, 141, Pub. L. 97-425, 96 Stat. 2232, 2241 (42 U.S.C. 10155, 10161). Section 2.790 also issued under sec. 103, 68 Stat. 936, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2133) and 5 U.S.C. 552. Sections 2.800 and 2.808 also issued under 5 U.S.C. 553. Section 2.809 also issued under 5 U.S.C. 553, and sec. 29, Pub. L. 85-256, 71 Stat. 579, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2039). Subpart K also issued under sec. 189, 68 Stat. 955 (42 U.S.C. 2239); sec. 134, Pub. L. 97-425, 96 Stat. 2230 (42 U.S.C. 10154). Subpart L also issued under sec. 189, 68 Stat. 955 (42 U.S.C. 2239). Subpart M also issued under sec. 184 (42 U.S.C. 2234) and sec. 189, 68 Stat. 955 (42 U.S.C. 2239). Appendix A also issued under sec. 6, Pub. L. 91-550, 84 Stat. 1473 (42 U.S.C. 2135). 2. In Sec. 2.810, paragraph (a)(1) is revised to read as follows: Sec. 2.810 NRC Size Standards. (a) * * * (1) Concern that provides a service or a concern not engaged in manufacturing with average gross receipts of $6.5 million or less over its last 3 completed fiscal years; or * * * * * PART 171--ANNUAL FEES FOR REACTOR LICENSES AND FUEL CYCLE LICENSES AND MATERIALS LICENSES, INCLUDING HOLDERS OF CERTIFICATES OF COMPLIANCE, REGISTRATIONS, AND QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM APPROVALS AND GOVERNMENT AGENCIES LICENSES BY THE NRC 3. The authority citation for part 171 continues to read as follows: Authority: Sec. 7601, Pub. L. 99-272, 100 Stat. 146, as amended by sec. 5601, Pub. L. 100-203, 101 Stat. 1330 as amended by sec. 3201, Pub. L. 101-239, 103 Stat. 2132, as amended by sec. 6101, Pub. L. 101-508, 104 Stat. 1388, as amended by sec. 2903a, Pub. L. 102- 486, 106 Stat. 3125 (42 U.S.C. 2213, 2214); and as amended by Title IV, Pub. L. 109-103, 119 Stat. 2283 (42 U.S.C. 2214); sec. 301, Pub. L. 92-314, 86 Stat. 227 (42 U.S.C. 2201w); sec. 201, Pub. L. 93-438, 88 Stat. 1242, as amended (42 U.S.C. 5841); sec. 1704, 112 Stat. 2750 (44 U.S.C. 3504 note). Sec. 171.16 Annual fees: Materials licensees, holders of certificates of compliance, holders of sealed source and device registrations, holders of quality assurance program approvals, and Government agencies licensed by the NRC. 4. In Sec. 171.16, paragraph (c) introductory text is revised to read as follows: * * * * * (c) A licensee who is required to pay an annual fee under this section may qualify as a small entity. If a licensee qualifies as a small entity and provides the Commission with the proper certification along with its annual fee payment, the licensee may pay reduced annual fees as shown in the following table. Failure to file a small entity certification in a timely manner could result in the denial of any refund that might otherwise be due. The small entity fees are as follows: ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Maximum annual fee per licensed category ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Small Businesses Not Engaged in Manufacturing and Small Not-For-Profit Organizations (Gross Annual Receipts): $350,000 to $6.5 million............................ $2,300 Less than $350,000.................................. 500 Manufacturing entities that have an average of 500 employees or less: 35 to 500 employees................................. 2,300 Less than 35 employees.............................. 500 Small Governmental Jurisdictions (Including publicly supported educational institutions) (Population): 20,000 to 50,000.................................... 2,300 Less than 20,000.................................... 500 Educational Institutions that are not State or Publicly Supported, and have 500 Employees or Less: 35 to 500 employees................................. 2,300 Less than 35 employees.............................. 500 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ [[Page 44990]] * * * * * Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 27th day of July, 2007. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Luis A. Reyes, Executive Director for Operations. [FR Doc. E7-15554 Filed 8-9-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P ***************************************************************** 11 NRC: Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc., Indian Point Nuclear Generating Unit Nos. 2 and 3; Notice of Intent To Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement and Conduct Scoping Process FR Doc E7-15636 [Federal Register: August 10, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 154)] [Notices] [Page 45075-45076] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr10au07-129] NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket Nos. 50-247 and 50-286] Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. (Entergy) has submitted an application for renewal of Facility Operating Licenses Nos. DPR-26 and DPR-64 for an additional 20 years of operation at Indian Point Nuclear Generating Unit Nos. 2 and 3. Indian Point is located in Buchanan, NY. The current operating licenses for Indian Point Nuclear Generating Unit Nos. 2 and 3 expire on September 9, 2013, and December 12, 2015, respectively. The application for renewal, dated April 23, 2007, as supplemented by letters dated May 3, 2007, and June 21, 2007, was submitted pursuant to Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) Part 54. A notice of receipt and availability of the application, which included Entergy's environmental report (ER), was published in the Federal Register on May 11, 2007 (72 FR 26850). A notice of acceptance for docketing of the application for renewal of the facility operating license was published in the Federal Register on August 1, 2007 (72 FR 42134). The purpose of this notice is to inform the public that the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) will be preparing an environmental impact statement (EIS) related to the review of the license renewal application and to provide the public an opportunity to participate in the environmental scoping process, as defined in 10 CFR 51.29. In addition, as outlined in 36 CFR 800.8, ``Coordination with the National Environmental Policy Act,'' the NRC plans to coordinate compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act in meeting the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA). In accordance with 10 CFR 51.53(c) and 10 CFR 54.23, Entergy submitted the ER as part of the application. The ER was prepared pursuant to 10 CFR part 51 and is publicly available at the NRC Public Document Room (PDR), located at One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852, or from the NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS). The ADAMS Public Electronic Reading Room is accessible at http://adamswebsearch.nrc.gov/dologin.htm. The Accession Number for the ER is ML071210530. Persons who do not have access to ADAMS, or who encounter problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS, should contact the NRC's PDR reference http://www.nrc.gov/reactors/operating/licensing/renewal/applications/indian-point.html. In addition, the ER is available for public inspection near Indian Point at the following three public libraries: the White Plains Public Library, 100 Martine Avenue, White Plains, NY 10601; the Field Library, 4 Nelson Avenue, Peekskill, NY 10566; and the Hendrick Hudson Free Library, 185 Kings Ferry Road, Montrose, NY 10548. This notice advises the public that the NRC intends to gather the information necessary to prepare a plant-specific supplement to the Commission's ``Generic Environmental Impact Statement (GEIS) for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants'' (NUREG-1437), related to the review of the application for renewal of the Indian Point Nuclear Generating Unit Nos. 2 and 3 operating licenses for an additional 20 years. Possible alternatives to the proposed action (license renewal) include no action and reasonable alternative energy sources. The NRC is required by 10 CFR 51.95 to prepare a supplement to the GEIS in connection with the renewal of an operating license. This notice is being published in accordance with NEPA and the NRC's regulations found in 10 CFR Part 51. The NRC will first conduct a scoping process for the supplement to the GEIS and, as soon as practicable thereafter, will prepare a draft supplement to the GEIS for public comment. Participation in the scoping process by members of the public and local, State, Tribal, and Federal government agencies is encouraged. The scoping process for the supplement to the GEIS will be used to accomplish the following: a. Define the proposed action which is to be the subject of the supplement to the GEIS. b. Determine the scope of the supplement to the GEIS and identify the significant issues to be analyzed in depth. [[Page 45076]] c. Identify and eliminate from detailed study those issues that are peripheral or that are not significant. d. Identify any environmental assessments and other EISs that are being or will be prepared that are related to, but are not part of, the scope of the supplement to the GEIS being considered. e. Identify other environmental review and consultation requirements related to the proposed action. f. Indicate the relationship between the timing of the preparation of the environmental analyses and the Commission's tentative planning and decision-making schedule. g. Identify any cooperating agencies and, as appropriate, allocate assignments for preparation and schedules for completing the supplement to the GEIS to the NRC and any cooperating agencies. h. Describe how the supplement to the GEIS will be prepared, and include any contractor assistance to be used. The NRC invites the following entities to participate in scoping: a. The applicant, Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. b. Any Federal agency that has jurisdiction by law or special expertise with respect to any environmental impact involved, or that is authorized to develop and enforce relevant environmental standards. c. Affected State and local government agencies, including those authorized to develop and enforce relevant environmental standards. d. Any affected Indian tribe. e. Any person who requests or has requested an opportunity to participate in the scoping process. f. Any person who has petitioned or intends to petition for leave to intervene. In accordance with 10 CFR 51.26, the scoping process for an EIS may include a public scoping meeting to help identify significant issues related to a proposed activity and to determine the scope of issues to be addressed in an EIS. The NRC has decided to hold public scoping meetings for the Indian Point Nuclear Generating Unit Nos. 2 and 3 license renewal supplement to the GEIS. The scoping meetings will be held at the Colonial Terrace, 119 Oregon Road, Cortlandt Manor, New York, on Wednesday, September 19, 2007. There will be two sessions to accommodate interested parties. The first session will convene at 1:30 p.m. and will continue until 4:30 p.m., as necessary. The second session will convene at 7 p.m. with a repeat of the overview portions of the meeting and will continue until 10 p.m., as necessary. Both meetings will be transcribed and will include: (1) An overview by the NRC staff of the NEPA environmental review process, the proposed scope of the supplement to the GEIS, and the proposed review schedule; and (2) the opportunity for interested government agencies, organizations, and individuals to submit comments or suggestions on the environmental issues or the proposed scope of the supplement to the GEIS. Additionally, the NRC staff will host informal discussions one hour before the start of each session at the Colonial Terrace in Cortlandt Manor. No formal comments on the proposed scope of the supplement to the GEIS will be accepted during the informal discussions. To be considered, comments must be provided either at the transcribed public meetings or in writing, as discussed below. Persons may register to attend or present oral comments at the meetings on the scope of the NEPA review by contacting NRC's Senior Project Manager, Mr. Bo Pham, at 1-800-368-5642, extension 8450, or by e-mail to the NRC at IndianPointEIS@nrc.gov no later than September 10, 2007. Members of the public may also register to speak at the meeting within 15 minutes of the start of each session. Individual oral comments may be limited by the time available, depending on the number of persons who register. Members of the public who have not registered may also have an opportunity to speak, if time permits. Public comments will be considered in the scoping process for the supplement to the GEIS. Mr. Pham will need to be contacted no later than September 10, 2007, if special equipment or accommodations are needed to attend or present information at the public meeting, so that the NRC staff can determine whether the request can be accommodated. Members of the public may send written comments on the environmental scope of the Indian Point Nuclear Generating Unit Nos. 2 and 3 license renewal review to: Chief, Rules and Directives Branch, Division of Administrative Services, Office of Administration, MailstopT-6D59, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC, 20555-0001, and should cite the publication date and page number of this Federal Register notice. Comments may also be delivered to the NRC, Room T-6D59, Two White Flint North, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852, from 7:30 a.m. to 4:15 p.m. during Federal workdays. To be considered in the scoping process, written comments should be postmarked by October 12, 2007. Electronic comments may be sent by e-mail to the NRC at Indian PointEIS@nrc.gov, and should be sent no later than October 12, 2007, to be considered in the scoping process. Comments will be available electronically and accessible through ADAMS at http://adamswebsearch.nrc.gov/dologin.htm. Participation in the scoping process for the supplement to the GEIS does not entitle participants to become parties to the proceeding to which the supplement to the GEIS relates. Notice of opportunity for a hearing regarding the renewal application was the subject of the aforementioned Federal Register notice (72 FR 42134). Matters related to participation in any hearing are outside the scope of matters to be discussed at this public meeting. At the conclusion of the scoping process, the NRC will prepare a concise summary of the determination and conclusions reached, including the significant issues identified, and will send a copy of the summary to each participant in the scoping process. The summary will also be available for inspection in ADAMS at http://adamswebsearch.nrc.gov/dologin.htm. The staff will then prepare and issue for comment the draft supplement to the GEIS, which will be the subject of a separate notice and separate public meetings. Copies will be available for public inspection at the above-mentioned addresses, and one copy per request will be provided free of charge. After receipt and consideration of the comments, the NRC will prepare a final supplement to the GEIS, which will also be available for public inspection. Information about the proposed action, the supplement to the GEIS, and the scoping process may be obtained from Mr. Pham at the aforementioned telephone number or e-mail address. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 6th day of August 2007. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Rani Franovich, Branch Chief, Environmental Branch B, Division of License Renewal,Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. [FR Doc. E7-15636 Filed 8-9-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P ***************************************************************** 12 NewsRoom Finland: Finland's TVO vexed by latest delay in nuclear construction 10.8.2007 at 11:33 A consortium comprising France's Areva and Germany's Siemens, the turnkey supplier of the third nuclear power station of Teollisuuden Voima (TVO) has informed the Finnish utility of yet another delay in construction, TVO said in a statement Friday. Areva-Siemens has told TVO that the execution of the works, in particular the need to satisfy safety requirements, is more demanding than previously anticipated. "TVO is of course disappointed to learn about this setback," said in the statement Martin Landtman, TVO's director of the Olkiluoto 3 project. The latest delays are expected to push the start of commercial operation to 2011. /STT/ © Copyright STT 2007 © 1995 – 2005, Virtual Finland Produced by: Ministry for Foreign Affairs of Finland Department for Communication and Culture/Unit ***************************************************************** 13 Charlotte Business Journal: Duke has spent $40M on nuclear plant - General Assembly and regulators say Duke can recover those initial costs Charlotte Business Journal - August 10, 2007 by John Downey Senior staff writer Duke Energy Carolinas spent $40.6 million through June 30 on planning for its proposed William S. Lee Nuclear Station near Gaffney, S.C. The company also says costs for its proposed 800-megawatt Cliffside plant appear to have stabilized at around $1.8 billion for construction and close to $600 million in interest. This article is for Paid Print Subscribers ONLY. If you are already a Charlotte Business Journal subscriber please create or sign into your bizjournals.com account to link your valid print subscription and have access to the complete article. © 2007 American City Business Journals, Inc. and its licensors. ***************************************************************** 14 Guardian Unlimited: UN Team: Keep Japanese Reactor Closed Friday August 10, 2007 6:46 AM By HIROKO TABUCHI Associated Press Writer TOKYO (AP) - A quake-damaged reactor in northern Japan should not be reopened until more tests are conducted, a U.N.-backed team said Friday after concluding an onsite inspection. The inspection team from the U.N.'s nuclear watchdog made that conclusion after a four-day assessment of the Kashiwazaki-Kariwa nuclear power plant, which remains shut down after it was damaged by an earthquake last month. The magnitude-6.8 quake on July 16 killed 11 people and injured more than 1,000. It also caused malfunctions and leaks at the plant - the world's largest in terms of capacity - and raised concerns about safety at Japan's nuclear power stations. Philippe Jamet, who heads the International Atomic Energy Agency team, said further tests must be carried out before the plant can be reopened and the process could take months. ``It's not something you can do quickly. It was a big earthquake,'' Jamet said. Plant operator Tokyo Electric Power Co. has come under fire after revealing hundreds of problems in the quake's aftermath. A fire charred an electrical transformer, a small amount of radioactive water leaked into the sea and some 400 barrels of low-level radioactive materials tipped over. Earlier this week, the operator said some plant workers also were splashed with a small amount of radioactive water while cleaning, but they were wearing protective gear and were not exposed. TEPCO officials said they had not foreseen such a powerful quake hitting the facility. Preliminary studies of the surrounding area have shown that a fault line may extend next to, or even directly below, the nuclear power plant. The government has since said it planned to overhaul earthquake safety standards at plants across Japan. In a report on nuclear power released Friday, the government stressed the need to address growing public concerns over the safety of nuclear power plants, as well as cover-ups of hundreds of minor problems and illegal repairs. ``As one of the world's most quake-prone nations, it is important for us to achieve earthquake resistance based on the latest scientific knowledge,'' the report said. ``Safety must be the absolute priority. In order to avoid misconduct, we should also learn from failures from the past and take precautions to prevent accidents.'' Until last year, Japan had required plants to be built to withstand a 6.5-magnitude quake. In September, the government began implementing tougher guidelines, though they have not set a new magnitude level. Japan relies heavily on its nuclear program, which supplies about 30 percent of its electricity. The country plans to build another 11 reactors by 2017, eventually boosting nuclear power's share of electricity production to 40 percent. Guardian Unlimited © Guardian News and Media Limited 2007 ***************************************************************** 15 San Luis Obispo County: Nuclear reactor at Diablo Canyon powered down today for repairs | 08/10/2007 | Operators at Diablo Canyon nuclear power plant began reducing power today on one of the plant’s two nuclear reactors to repair a malfunctioning steam stop valve. On Thursday morning, operators noticed that the unit was producing less than the normal amount of power. They discovered that the stop valve was reducing the amount of steam that was getting to the unit’s high pressure turbine and began shutting down the unit, said Sharon Gavin, Pacific Gas and Electric spokeswoman. “We are working around the clock, but it will be several days before we make repairs and the unit is back to full power,” she said. The malfunctioning valve was part of the unit’s non-nuclear system. The plant’s other unit experienced similar problems in 1992. The last time a unit at Diablo Canyon was taken offline for repairs was Aug. 31, 2006 when one of the unit’s developed a small water leak. – David Sneed ***************************************************************** 16 AFP: World's largest nuke plant closed for 'months' - Friday August 10, 07:54 PM TOKYO (AFP) - UN inspectors said Friday that the world's largest nuclear plant in Japan will be closed for months, weeks after being hit by an earthquake. A mission from the UN nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), spent four days inspecting the Kashiwazaki-Kariwa plant. The giant facility northwest of Tokyo caught fire and leaked a small amount of radiation following a powerful earthquake on July 16, which killed 11 people in unrelated incidents. "When you think of starting such a plant, you have to very carefully think about what you have to check first" and the possibility of future earthquakes, IAEA team leader Philippe Jamet said. "This is one of the tasks in the following months (or) a year, I don't know, that has to be carried out, if this plant is to restart," Jamet told reporters after meeting with authorities in Tokyo. But asked if the team's final report would be bad news for Japan, Jamet said: "I'm not too worried." He said the team would present its preliminary findings to IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradei on Monday at the UN agency's Vienna headquarters. "It's very important for us that all the different countries can have good lessons to learn from this earthquake," Jamet said. The plant's operator, Tokyo Electric Power Co., has already downgraded earnings forecasts on the assumption that the seven-reactor facility will be down for at least the rest of the financial year. Authorities have ordered it shut until the company confirms its safety. Tokyo Electric, the world's largest private power company, said the leaked radiation was far below amounts that would be dangerous but came under criticism for initially under-reporting the severity of the incident. Despite its propensity for earthquakes, Japan relies on nuclear plants for nearly one-third of its power needs as it has virtually no natural energy resources. The government invited the IAEA team in the hope of easing concern both at home and overseas. Jamet said he had a "very serious" conversation Friday with Japanese nuclear safety authorities including some disagreements. "It's completely impossible that you always agree on everything," he said. "And to a certain extent it's our job to push them as far as we can to make sure that what they say is really trustable. So that's what happened," he said, stressing that the IAEA will issue 'an independent statement'." The company and government have acknowledged they did not anticipate an earthquake as strong as 6.8 on the Richter scale in the area of the Kashiwazaki-Kariwa plant. In a report issued Friday on nuclear safety, the Cabinet Office said Japan "learned a great lesson as the quake affected facilities with lower quake-resistance, even though the safety of the nuclear reactors remained intact." ***************************************************************** 17 The Guardian: Scientists call for defensive action over radiological attacks * Julian Borger * Friday August 10 2007 A group of scientists warned yesterday that terrorists could learn from last year's murder of Alexander Litvinenko to carry out radiological attacks on cities far more devastating than a dirty bomb. While a dirty bomb - using explosives to disperse radioactive material - would be unlikely to kill more than a hundred people, the scientists argue, several hundred could be killed if they swallowed or inhaled the material, like Mr Litvinenko, who drank tea laced with a lethal isotope, polonium-210, in London last November. In an article in the journal Survival, the three authors from King's College London call on the government to take precautionary measures, for example restricting access to radioactive materials which are now commonly available and easy to dissolve in water, allowing them to be sprayed over a large number of people. "Terrorists have already shown considerable interest in acquiring 'dirty bombs'. They may now try to replicate the murder of Litvinenko on a larger scale, or contrive other means to place radioactive sources inside, or in direct contact with, their victims," warns the article in Survival, a quarterly published by the International Institute for Strategic Studies. The authors call such methods I3, for inhalation, ingestion and immersion. One of the writers, Peter Zimmerman, a nuclear physicist, said yesterday that a well-planned radiological attack "would be capable of killing several hundred, maybe upwards of a thousand, and paralysing a city without any question at all." The article does not provide details of the most devastating method of attack the authors have conceived, for security reasons, but Professor Zimmerman described one scenario using a water-soluble radioactive isotope widely used in hospitals and industry: "I can then tap into the anti-fire spray in a theatre, and if I can trigger the spray, I can soak everyone in the room." Polonium-210, which was used in Mr Litvinenko's murder, is even more deadly because it emits alpha radiation, which is not picked up by radiation sensors. The King's College scientists also believe that an I3 attack would inspire more terror than a chemical or biological or even a dirty bomb attack, because of public horror that the radioactive material could be widely dispersed before it became clear the attack had taken place. Another of the authors, Brooke Rogers, a social psychologist who is working with the Home Office to help prepare the government response to such an attack, said: "People are less afraid of a biological attack, like the plague, because they believe it can be treated." She said an intensive information campaign was necessary to keep the public informed and prevent panic. Prof Zimmerman argued other steps could be taken, making industrial and medical radiation sources much harder to come by. For example, the production of the water-soluble radioactive isotope in powdered form should be stopped, and replaced in hospitals and factories with a glassy non-soluble variant. * Guardian Unlimited © Guardian News and Media Limited 2007 ***************************************************************** 18 Korea Times: Korea Struggles to Find Lost Uranium 08-10-2007 17:29 By Kim Tae-gyu Staff Reporter The Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute (KAERI) is having a hard time searching for 2.7 kilograms of uranium sent to an incinerator by accident in May. The state-run institute learned of the grave mistake on Aug. 6 and formed a task force to find the material that had drawn the attention of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). Included in the missing material are 1.9 kilograms of natural uranium and 0.8 kilograms of depleted uranium as well as 0.2 grams of enriched uranium, which is still being investigated by the IAEA. ``Uranium doesn't burn. So the uranium in question should remain intact at the waste dump. Our staff members will look hard for it,'' a KAERI spokesman said. ``But the hitch is that the uranium was processed months ago and is smaller than the size of a golf ball. We are afraid that it may take months to find it,'' he said. This means that the KAERI may be unable to meet the request of an IAEA inspector, who visited the Daejeon-based KAERI Tuesday in order to examine the enriched uranium, to find the lost material by the end of the month. However, KAERI does not seem overly concerned. ``We are not required to report the loss of such a tiny amount of uranium to the IAEA. But we reported the matter because it was examined by the IAEA,'' the spokesman said. ``Even under the worst-case scenario _ our failure to find the uranium _ the IAEA is not expected to take serious issue with it,'' he said. The 0.2 grams of enriched uranium, which has an enrichment level of approximately 10 percent, was made in an experiment to obtain substances used for high-end medical equipment in 2000. The material was uncovered in 2004, but KAERI argued that the low-enriched uranium had nothing to do with weapons, which use highly-enriched uranium. However, the IAEA sent an investigation team to Korea in 2004 to check the material. In this climate, KAERI staff disposed of the uranium in error while the IAEA investigation is technically still ongoing. voc200@koreatimes.co.kr ***************************************************************** 19 Daily Yomiuri: Hokkaido Electric sets new rules for workers after mystery fires Hokkaido Electric Power Co. has tightened controls on workers building a nuclear power plant reactor in Hokkaido where burned paper was found in a toilet Thursday, in the latest incident following five other small fires that had broken out there since early July, it has been learned. The power company on Thursday implemented additional rules, such as prohibiting workers from being alone in a prefabricated office, in an attempt to prevent more fires breaking out on the construction site of the No. 3 reactor building at the Tomari nuclear power plant in Tomarimura. The company had as recently as Tuesday barred workers from being alone as burned toilet paper was found in a portable toilet that day. The office was not covered under these fire prevention precautions. However, Thursday's fire started in a workers' toilet inside the prefabricated office area, spurring the firm to come up with three additional measures: -- The installation of outside security cameras. -- Banning workers from moving around within the prefabricated office unaccompanied. -- More thorough body searches. Before Thursday, workers had not been allowed to be alone in the facility building, and when a person went to the toilet or another place where in normal circumstances they would be alone, a colleague was required to confirm there was nothing unusual on his or her return. However, a partner company was entrusted to deal with the inside of the prefabricated office, and that area had not been covered by the ban on workers moving around unaccompanied. About 250 employees from about 20 affiliated companies regularly use the office. "I deeply apologize for causing such anxiety," Shunsuke Shirai, head of the company's nuclear power department, said at a press conference Thursday on the fires. However, construction work in the nuclear reactor building is continuing as no fires have broken out since it was restarted on Aug. 3 after work had been suspended and an action plan formulated. "The fire prevention measures are still effective," Shirai said. The Hokkaido police are questioning workers and other people connected to the plant about their involvement with the fires. The Daily Yomiuri, The Yomiuri Shimbun ***************************************************************** 20 montgomeryadvertiser.com: Depot fire bursts radioactive vessels August 11, 2007 Depot fire bursts radioactive vessels ANNISTON -- A fire at the Anniston Army Depot burst several containers that held radioactive gas, threatening a warehouse of contaminated material, an incident first made public by the Wisconsin nonprofit group Nukewatch. Anniston Army Depot spokeswoman Joan Gustafson said the fire, discovered about 7 p.m. Monday and extinguished within 30 minutes, was reported to the Calhoun County Emergency Management Agency on Tuesday. She said she had not planned a news release because the fire was so small. montgomeryadvertiser.com and its related sites are pleased to be able to offer its users the opportunity to make comments and hold conversations online. However, the interactive nature of the Internet makes it impracticable for our staff to monitor each and every posting. Since the montgomeryadvertiser.com does not control user submitted statements, we cannot promise that readers will not occasionally find offensive or inaccurate comments posted on our Web site. In addition, we remind anyone interested in making an online comment that responsibility for statements posted lies with the person submitting the comment, not montgomeryadvertiser.com or its related sites. All comments posted should comply with the montgomeryadvertiser.com's terms of service. Copyright © 1997- 2007 The Advertiser Co. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 21 ReviewJournal.com: Documents about Yucca in tug of war Aug. 10, 2007 Licensing Support Network at issue By STEVE TETREAULT STEPHENS WASHINGTON BUREAU WASHINGTON -- Battle lines are forming in a dispute over whether the Department of Energy is withholding important documents from the public about its Yucca Mountain research. Thirteen environmental groups have lined up behind the state of Nevada, which charges that DOE does not plan to make available all relevant documents in advance of certifying a key database for the proposed nuclear waste site. The Energy Department has responded that the state's charge is unfounded and off-base. The pro-repository Nuclear Energy Institute and staff for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission agree. The dispute was aired in legal documents filed in the past week at the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. A three-judge administrative panel assembled by the NRC is expected to weigh in this fall on the argument. Lawyers have clashed off and on for the past three years over the ground rules for millions of pages of documents that will play into the government's bid to license a nuclear waste repository at the Yucca site 100 miles northwest of Las Vegas. The Energy Department has said it plans to file a license application by June 30, 2008. Leading up to that, DOE says it has posted 3.4 million documents to a pre-licensing database made available to the state and other stakeholders preparing for NRC license hearings. The database, known as the Licensing Support Network, is required to be certified at least six months before DOE files its application. But Nevada attorneys filed an NRC complaint this summer that DOE is likely to omit important documents, such as analysis model reports that will serve as the building blocks for the license application. The application itself is a highly technical document that will run thousands of pages. Without access to key documents and time to review the supporting material, it will be difficult for Nevada to mount strong challenges against the project in license hearings, state officials have said. "Those are the documents that everyone needs to see in advance." said Bob Loux, executive director of the Nevada Agency for Nuclear Projects. "Otherwise, the whole LSN is pointless." Nevada called on the administrative judges to scrutinize DOE's database and to require "all documentary material" to be posted. Other groups that oppose the Yucca repository echoed the state's request in an NRC filing on Aug. 3. They included the Progressive Leadership Alliance of Nevada, the National Environmental Trust, Sierra Club, Citizen Alert, Public Citizen, and the Nevada Nuclear Waste Task Force. "As the representatives of many citizens of Nevada and members of the public throughout the nation, we must be able to know about the specific information upon which the U.S. Department of Energy will rely in making plans and decisions," the groups said. But the Energy Department says Nevada is being "alarmist" and that what the state wants "is impractical in the real world." "This is not a situation where a participant has deliberately delayed finalization of documents," lawyers said in an Aug. 3 NRC filing. Development of a licensing application "is an ongoing process," and the department will continue to generate supporting documents up to the time it submits its application, government lawyers said. The NRC already has recognized that would be the case, they added, and new documents would be added to the database on a rolling basis. "There is a wealth of information currently available for the participants to review," they said. The Nuclear Energy Institute said Nevada's request was "far wide of the mark" of what NRC requires and "in fact is inconsistent with common sense." Sue wrote on August 10, 2007 01:31 PM: For anyone who would like review the 3.4 million documents already on the NRC database, visit http://www.lsnnet.gov/. I agree with Fred. Start researching today. Study the science, there's no shortage of studies on this site. I wonder Nevada representatives can't understand the studies. Asking for more won't help that issue... Fred wrote on August 10, 2007 08:59 AM: Kim T., I agree that the health of our citizens and economy is what we're talking about. Rather than some vague reference, please state specifically what health risks Yucca Mountain poses, and the likelihood of those risks. Then please compare those risks to the current alternatives of coal-generated electricity, such as airborne sulphur, mercury, and CO; as well as mining deaths and toxic wastes that are not contained and inventoried. You might also research how many square miles of wind farms or solar panels we would need to replace coal and natural gas. Do your research. Study the facts. You'll find it all boils down to this: IF we want electricity without global warming, nuclear must play a major role. And even if fuel is recycled, there are still wastes that must be kept in a secure, remote place. It's not about states, it's not about NIMBY, it's not about anybody being forced into anything. Do your research before it's too late. Kim T. wrote on August 10, 2007 08:13 AM: No kidding, Roger. And too bad if it's 'inconvenient' for them. This is the health of our citizens and economy we're talking about. Nevada isn't going to just lie down and take it in the shorts. Roger wrote on August 10, 2007 07:38 AM: DOE attempting to cover up their incometemce? Why am I not surprised? Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal, 1997 - 2007 Stephens Media, LLC Privacy Statement ***************************************************************** 22 Business Gazette: USEC denies buyout talk; congressmen question contract Maryland Community Newspapers Online Friday, Aug. 10, 2007 Nuclear fuel supplier lost $13.4M in second quarter by Kevin J. Shay | Staff Writer Shortly after releasing poor quarterly results, Bethesda uranium-enrichment company USEC is dealing with reports that it could be acquired by a Utah nuclear business. Energy Solutions of Salt Lake City would make a buyout offer for USEC, a former federal government entity that supplies fuel to commercial reactors, if they win a joint bid for a 15-year, $9.5 billion U.S. Department of Energy contract, two congressmen wrote in an Aug. 1 letter. But a USEC spokeswoman said this week that the company is not a ‘‘co-sponsor of any proposal to DOE.” ‘‘We have engaged in no material agreement with Energy Solutions,” Elizabeth Stuckle said. The alleged potential purchase was discussed in a letter by Michigan Democrats John D. Dingell, chairman of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, and Bart Stupak, chairman of the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, to Energy Secretary Samuel W. Bodman. The lucrative contract involves the decontamination and decommissioning of uranium-enrichment plants in Ohio and Kentucky, according to the congressmen. ‘‘After taking over USEC, Energy Solutions claims it would deploy the uranium enrichment centrifuge technology that USEC is currently testing” in Ohio, they wrote. The Energy Department has received materials containing ‘‘confidential and business proprietary information” from Energy Solutions, said Megan Barnett, a department spokeswoman. ‘‘However, DOE has made no decision to award any contract to Energy Solutions based on the materials received.” Energy Solutions specializes in handling nuclear waste, including spent nuclear fuel. USEC reported on Aug. 2 a second-quarter net loss of $13.4 million, compared with a profit of $21.6 million for the same period last year. Higher power costs and an increase in the price of uranium from Russia contributed to the loss, officials said. USEC purchases uranium from Russia under a contract with the U.S. government. Revenue declined by 60 percent for the quarter to $211.1 million. Earnings and revenue can also vary on the timing of when nuclear plants refuel, Stuckle said. In USEC’s first quarter, net income and sales both increased over the previous year, and in 2006 overall net earnings more than quadrupled over 2005 to $106.2 million, while revenue rose by 19 percent to $1.85 billion. USEC still is on schedule to begin commercial operations of the $2.3 billion uranium enrichment plant in Ohio using the centrifuge technology by 2009, Stuckle said. The Ohio plant has been closed, although USEC is testing the new technology to enrich uranium at that plant. Concerns over higher costs But USEC is facing higher power costs and spending on the centrifuge project, company officials said in the second-quarter report filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. USEC expects to spend about $320 million on the centrifuge project this year and about double that next year, executives said. ‘‘We expect that we will need participation by third parties and⁄or the U.S. government to finance and complete the project under our revised deployment schedule,” USEC executives said. ‘‘There can be no assurance that we will attract the capital we need to complete the American Centrifuge project in a timely manner or at all.” As for the alleged sole source contract, it would be ‘‘deeply troubling” if Energy Solutions and USEC were awarded that contract to do the work on a non-competitive basis, Dingell and Stupak wrote. ‘‘Full and open competition is the only way to objectively assess if the government is receiving the best value,” they wrote. ‘‘If this sole source contract were approved, would the contract price paid to Energy Solutions constitute an indirect subsidy to fund a takeover of USEC and the financing of the centrifuges plant?” USEC officials are also concerned about an Energy Department proposal to reduce its backing of debt on new nuclear reactors from 100 percent to 90 percent, Stuckle said. Some proposed new nuclear plants might not be built without the full backing of the government, she said. USEC started in the early 1990s as a federal government entity and became a private company a few years later. Copyright 2007 Post-Newsweek Media, Inc./Gazette.Net ***************************************************************** 23 JOGJCC: Radioactive waste return costs Ł1.7m John O'Groat Journal and Caithness Courier: By Iain Grant Published: 10 August, 2007 DOUNREAY officials yesterday defended the Ł1.7 million cost of returning a batch of radioactive waste which was exported from the site to Peru nine years ago. The 2.9 tonne load of thorium nitrate arrived on Wednesday after a marathon sea-and-road trip. The material was originally produced at Dounreay as a by-product of a reprocessing contract undertaken in 1991. The UKAEA subsequently signed a contract with Kukala, a Lima-based company, to supply it with material to fuel gas mantles. It was sent over in July 1998 but was never used. The terms of the contract, brokered by a Dounreay-based contractor, were never publicised but the order is believed to have been worth a few tens of thousands of pounds. As Peru lacks any specialist treatment or disposal facilities, moves were begun last year to return the thorium to Dounreay. A dozen-strong team from Dounreay went over to Lima to prepare for the operation to move the 43 drums of the waste. They took out two tonnes of equipment required to prepare and package the metallic sludge for its month-long return journey. The movement was sanctioned after a protracted series of negotiations and discussions involving government bodies and corporations in both countries. Dounreay director Simon Middlemas yesterday said the return of the waste was the most responsible solution given the lack of specialist facilities in Peru. He said the thorium is to be conditioned at Dounreay, along with the tonne or so of the material which has remained on site since the 1991 contract. It would be treated as intermediate-level waste and kept in secure stores, ready for final disposal in the yet-to-be-built UK national waste repository. Mr Middlemas denied the Ł1.7 million bill was a waste of money that could otherwise have been devoted to the clean-up of the site. He said: "I suppose you could look at it like that but, on the other hand, you have to take into account the money required to decommission a site like this. "We have got a multi-billion-pound programme here to provide the best value for money for the taxpayer and do the work very safely as well. "When you look at it in that context, Ł1.7 million – while it might look a lot to you or me – is very small." Neither did the director believe that the affair had been an embarrassment for the UKAEA. "I wouldn't say it's been an embarrassment," said Mr Middlemas. "The UKAEA of today is looking at restoring the site and I don't really want to comment on decisions taken in the past. "That was in the past and practices then are completely different to what they are now." Colin Punler, the site's head of communications, said previous reports that the operation would cost Ł3 million were misleading. This figure, he said, includes the work needed to condition and store the waste and the cost of its eventual disposal. Mr Punler said: "This would have had to go ahead had the waste remained at Dounreay so it's a little bit misleading to include it." iain-grant@ukf.net All content copyright 2007 Scottish Provincial Press Ltd. ***************************************************************** 24 Las Vegas Now: Battle Lines Drawn Over Info in Yucca Mountain Database Battle lines are being drawn in a dispute over whether the Energy Department is withholding important information about Yucca Mountain. Thirteen environmental groups and the state of Nevada say the DOE hasn't met requirements to post documents on a key database before it applies to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission for an operating license for the proposed nuclear waste dump. The Energy Department calls the claim unfounded. It's backed by the pro-repository Nuclear Energy Institute and NRC staff. All content © Copyright 2000 - 2007 WorldNow and KLAS. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 25 times and star: N-waste for Sellafield landfill Published on 10/08/2007 SELLAFIELD’S own landfill site is set to take certain types of low-level radioactive waste under proposed changes. British Nuclear Group is asking for planning permission not only to run the so-called Calder tip for another 20 years but also to increase the height of the landfill site by up to nine metres as well as changing the profile. It is proposed after discussions with the Environment Agency that in future the tip should take some “radioactively contaminated” wastes such as de-watered sewage sludge, de-watered road sweepings, timber, moss, grit, vegetation, bird and small animal carcasses. Planning permission rests with Cumbria County Council, but Copeland’s planning panel has recommended approval subject to certain issues being resolved. These relate to surface water run-off, erosion of the landfill, leaching of contaminants and coastal erosion. ***************************************************************** 26 times and star: A nuclear scrapyard is not the greatest idea Published on 10/08/2007 I'M WRITING to appeal to residents of Allerdale to think about the Swedish-owned plant that has been granted planning permission by Cumbria County Council to receive contaminated steel, and other radioactively contaminated materials, from sites around the UK for processing and subsequent disposal of the contaminants at Drigg, and recycling of decontaminated steel. The bulk of the contaminated steel will come from Sellafield and the plant, at Lillyhall, will cut this up and send it through a shotblasting chamber for all surface materials (rust, paint, etc) to be removed. It is in the rust and paint coatings, and in internal voids of steel sections, that radioactive particles may be present. All such removed surface coating is to be sealed into drums and sent to Sellafield. This process is already up and running at Sellafield, but I understand that the process that is carried out on contaminated steelwork, which requires that all items are monitored for 40 hours, is causing a bit of a log jam and the automatic wheel abraders, which do the shotblasting, are underused. I suspect, therefore, that the process at Lillyhall will not be subject to the same scrutiny. Even if the process can be considered as safe as is reasonably practicable, the perceived risk is unacceptable. In recent years the whole of Lillyhall has undergone vast landscaping improvements and a host of new "clean" industry has been attracted here. The thought of a nuclear scrapyard in its midst is bizarre. As far as I can determine the only factors put forward in favour of this plant are that 30 "high quality" jobs will be created and that "if the project does not go ahead it could send out all the wrong signals as to West Cumbria's willingness and abilities to deal with its liabilities and will adversely affect the WCDA's efforts to attract investment to the area" - this statement being taken from a report by the head of environment to the development control committee of Cumbria County Council along with its recommendation to approve the scheme. An additional 30 jobs don't seem much to me. I have taken on an additional 20 staff in the past year and many, many more continue to be attracted to Lillyhall. What worries me is that the establishment of this nuclear scrapyard, with its 30 jobs, will be a disincentive for other industries to locate here, as seems to have happened with the proposed farmers co-operative cheese factory. I fear this is the thin end of the wedge which may be being driven right now into this part of West Cumbria. No doubt the decontamination of scrap steel is a highly lucrative enterprise and, given that there are reported to be hundreds of thousands of tons of contaminated steelwork to be dealt with, how many more of the vacant sites here at Lillyhall will be given over to this business? Thirty jobs aren't many to be sure, but maybe the WCDA has its sites set on encouraging its rapid expansion as they may regard this as conforming to their aim of finding “innovative approaches to the nuclear decommissioning process." I would argue that this is not an innovative process. It is already being carried out at Sellafield, and it is also a very low grade process. Recycling is to be applauded and is already taking place. To run the risk of contaminating other areas seems wrong and the decision by Cumbria County Council flies in the face of Allerdale councillors who, only last month, refused permission for the plant to go ahead as it contravened their policy EM11 which relates to the location of scrapyards in inappropriate areas and it was agreed that this Business Park at Lillyhall is certainly not an appropriate site. Iggesund have already expressed their objection too and I hope many more will feel the same way. Let’s keep this activity on the licensed site that is Sellafield. I'm very comfortable with that and I really don't think it's a good idea to turn Lillyhall into a radioactively contaminated scrapyard. ALAN DAWSON Managing Director Alan Dawson Associates View this story and the latest newspaper in full digital reproduction, just like the printed copy at www.timesandstar.co.uk/digitalcopy ***************************************************************** 27 Japan Times: Nagasaki mayor slams nuclear talk, tests japantimes.co.jp Web Friday, Aug. 10, 2007 By ERIC JOHNSTON Staff writer NAGASAKI — Nagasaki marked the 62nd anniversary of the atomic bombing here Thursday with criticism of nations that have tested or are suspected of possessing or pursuing nuclear weapons, and people in Japan who advocate acquiring them. A relative of atomic bomb victims prays at the peace monument in Nagasaki's Peace Park on Thursday, the 62nd anniversary of the bombing of the city. KYODO PHOTO "India, Pakistan and North Korea have taken up nuclear arms under the excuse of self-defense. In the Middle East, the nuclear nonproliferation structure is being shaken by Israel, generally regarded as possessing nuclear weapons, and by the suspicions of nuclear (arms) development in Iran," said Nagasaki Mayor Tomihisa Taue in the city's annual peace declaration. But Taue reserved his sharpest criticism for Prime Minister Shinzo Abe's government, which saw Fumio Kyuma resign as defense minister last month for saying the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki "could not be helped" — remarks critics interpreted as implying he felt the attacks were justified. Some of Abe's close advisers have even called on Japan to rethink its commitment to the three nonnuclear principles of not possessing, manufacturing or introducing atomic weapons. Kyuma, who won his Lower House seat from a Nagasaki electoral district, usually attends the peace ceremony every year. But not this year. Kyuma to skip Nagasaki A-bomb ceremony Nuclear hell revisited A-bomb legacy fading: filmmaker "In the midst of erroneous interpretations of the atomic bombings and discussion of potential nuclear weapons possession in Japan, it's necessary to enact the three nonnuclear principles into law, not merely state them as national policy," Taue said. Thursday's ceremony took place at Nagasaki Peace Park in the northern part of the city, which was the hypocenter of the blast that, by the end of 1945, had left 74,000 dead. Survivors and kin of the dead began arriving at dawn to pay their respects before the formal ceremony, which included Abe and senior members of the ruling and opposition parties. City officials estimated that by the time the event began at 10:40 a.m., about 5,500 people were present. With the strains of Samuel Barber's "Adagio for Strings" playing over loudspeakers, atomic bomb survivors and relatives approached the peace memorial, burning incense and offering prayers. Some said their biggest worry now was for the victims who were children when the bomb was dropped but are now elderly and suffering radiation-related illnesses. Saburo Nishizawa, 70, who was in Nagasaki when the bomb was dropped, said many of those who were young when they survived the bomb remained healthy until middle age. "But they're now in their 60s and 70s and are falling ill to radiation-related illnesses. Unless the central government approves more of their applications, Nagasaki will have a health disaster on its hands in a few years." The government has recognized about 250,000 people nationwide as victims of both the Hiroshima and Nagasaki atomic bombings, but has only approved 2,200 of them as patients officially suffering from radiation-related illnesses. Approval qualifies the patient for monthly benefits of approximately Ą140,000. Earlier this week, Abe met hibakusha in Hiroshima and indicated he would consider making the approval process less strict. "The government will take steps to review the application and approval process for those who are in need of care," Abe said Thursday before meeting with Nagasaki hibakusha in the afternoon. The Japan Times ***************************************************************** 28 Seattle PI: Hanford accident is a wake-up call Opinion Last updated August 9, 2007 6:26 p.m. PT By HELEN WHEATLEY The Hanford nuclear waste site had its worst accident in years on July 27. A pipe burst and sprayed the air and ground with some of the hottest material to be found on the site. The accident happened at an old single-shell tank that dates back to the early 1950s. It holds highly radioactive sludge left over from producing the nation's first nuclear weapons. A contractor, CH2M Hill, was transferring the waste from the failing old tank to a new one. Put your finger on the end of a straw and suck the other end. What happens to the straw? That appears to be what happened out on the Hanford tank farm Besides cesium, strontium, americium, plutonium and a toxic soup of non-radiological hazardous chemicals, the peanut butter-thick sludge is chunked up with salt cake and other glop. Engineers try to stir this up, and thin it with a bit of water. They have designed all kinds of redundancies to prevent disasters in the line carrying the sludge from one tank to another. Less thought went into the pipe carrying in clean water. After all, the water should flow into the tank, not out. Unless the pump clogs up. And somebody reverses the pump to clear it. And it doesn't work, so they do it again. Do you see that straw collapsing? Or maybe the suction finally works, and a hundred gallons of deadly brew pours out into the vacuum, escaping its half-century prison, bursting from the weakened line, and spilling onto the ground and into the air. Did CH2M Hill know that it had a problem on its hands? It seems an increase in radiation levels registered right after the pump was run at about 2 a.m. A team was not sent to investigate until about eight hours later. What the team found was deemed serious enough to order Hanford workers to take cover. That event raises many red flags. Why did the engineering mistakes occur? Was it a case of too much pressure to produce results, without enough planning and oversight? Were the investigators properly protected? Could an earlier investigation have stopped workers from coming onto the site in the first place, instead of giving them a belated order to take cover? Why did it take so long to make an official discovery of the accident? Oregon Sen. Ron Wyden, for one, has asked the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board to become involved. There are 149 old single-shell tanks at Hanford, and Wyden calls the commitment to getting the waste out "tenuous." The federal government has poured billions into building a plant to treat the waste. But the plant is additional billions over budget, years behind schedule and technologically novel and uncertain. There aren't enough double shell tanks to receive the old waste; July's pipe accident is not the first problem encountered trying to pump material from one tank to another. This is a good time to ask questions because the U.S. Department of Energy is putting together a new contract for managing the high-level radiation waste tanks at Hanford. For CH2M Hill, it is not such a good time for accidents to happen. That's why Wyden called for a truly independent investigation, "not just of the most recent release and its underlying causes, but to also examine the operational assumptions, plans, schedule and engineering approach used in the tank waste transfer program." Right now, Wyden stands alone. Who in Washington will join his call to get to the bottom of what happened at Tank S-102? Let's seek some fresh, disinterested opinions, before we see more inadvertent experiments in elementary physics. Helen Wheatley is Heart of America Northwest's board president. seattlepi.com serves about 1.7 million unique visitors Send comments to newmedia@seattlepi.com Send investigative tips to iteam@seattlepi.com ©1996-2007 Seattle Post-Intelligencer ***************************************************************** 29 Tri-City Herald: Weis named DOE's Pacific Northwest Site manager (about) Friday, August 10th, 2007 03:37 PDT HERALD STAFF Michael Weis will be the new manager of the Department of Energy's Pacific Northwest Site Office in Richland. Weis, who has been deputy manager of the DOE Richland Operations Office since 2004, will assume oversight of the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory in his new position. DOE announced the change Thursday, noting that Weis has been a manager and engineer for DOE for more than 20 years. "Mike Weis has an outstanding track record as a manager for DOE," said George Malosh, chief operating officer of the DOE Office of Science. Weis joined DOE in 1995 with the Rocky Flats Field Office in Colorado, serving in several positions. He was assistant manager for performance assessment. He also worked for DOE's Office of Environmental Management in Washington, D.C., and held management positions, including associate deputy assistant secretary for the Office of Environmental Management. Weis has bachelor of science and master of science degrees in metallurgical engineering from the Colorado School of Mines. He also taught high school chemistry and physics, and was recognized in Denver for excellence in education. Weis will oversee performance of PNNL, which is one of DOE's 17 national laboratories. PNNL has 4,200 employees. He replaces Julie Erickson, who has been acting site officer manager since October 2006. © 2007 Tri-City Herald, Associated Press & Other Wire Services ***************************************************************** 30 Denver Post: Sick Flats' workers need quicker care editorial Congress should pass legislation to address the medical needs of those exposed to radiation at the former nuclear weapons plant. By The Denver Post Editorial Board Article Last Updated: 08/09/2007 08:35:28 PM MDT Health and Human Services Secretary Michael Leavitt erred when he decided to deny sick former Rocky Flats workers the relief they deserve. Sen. Ken Salazar, Rep. Mark Udall and other members of Colorado's congressional delegation have responded appropriately with plans to introduce new legislation that addresses the medical needs of the workers exposed to radiation at the old weapons factory. Though similar legislation has failed in the past, the new Congress needs to step in and do what the old Congress failed to do: help the civilian defense workers who risked their health and lives to win the Cold War. Before Rocky Flats closed in 1988, more than 22,000 people worked there making plutonium triggers for atomic weapons. Thousands have become ill with cancer and other illnesses. Many have died. A former Rocky Flats worker asked a presidential advisory board more than two years ago for expedited medical coverage for all former workers with certain radiation-related cancers. It was a bold move endorsed by members of Colorado's congressional delegation and Gov. Bill Ritter. But the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health turned down the request and instead recommended in June that only a small group employed at the plant from 1952 to 1966 get expedited medical coverage and $150,000 each in compensation. (The board was an offshoot of former energy secretary Bill Richardson's efforts to develop scientific data that would help link the radiation and poisons in nuclear plants to workers' illnesses so they could get compensated.) The board's decision left more than 10,000 workers without compensation. That means they will be forced to submit individual petitions to the government to try to prove that their jobs caused their illnesses, a process that is onerous and could take years. In the end, the workers could still be left without compensation. Colorado's congressional delegation urged Secretary Leavitt to override the panel and grant the requested relief to all ill workers. On Tuesday, Leavitt announced his decision to endorse the panel's recommendations. His decision was unfair to all of the former federal workers who were exposed to potentially deadly radiation while doing their jobs. Leavitt said he "spent considerable time reviewing the information," and that while he understood the former plant employees would be "disappointed," they were entitled to pursue their claims individually. He also noted that as of July 12, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health had completed "dose reconstructions" for 1,150 employees exposed to radiation at Rocky Flats. He said those employees would be eligible for compensation if the "probability of causation" is 50 percent or higher, "therefore supporting the employee's claim that their radiation exposure was causally related to their cancer." That's little comfort to those whose causation probability is 49 percent. It's inexcusable that sick workers should be made to endure a further delay. The workers already waited more than two years to hear back from the advisory panel. Many had claims pending well before that. Salazar, Udall and other Colorado lawmakers in Washington need to move quickly to introduce new legislation. And this time around, Congress needs to do the right thing. All contents Copyright 2007 The Denver Post or other copyright ***************************************************************** 31 Knoxville News Sentinel: La. National Guard team tests its nuclear-detection skills at Y-12 By Frank Munger (Contact) Friday, August 10, 2007 OAK RIDGE — The bad guys got bloodied, and nuclear terror was averted — at least for the day. That was the outcome of Thursday’s intense exercise at a one-of-kind training facility at the Y-12 nuclear weapons plant. Members of a special unit from the Louisiana National Guard battled extreme heat — it was 140 degrees inside their protective suits — to test their nuke-detection skills and equipment. They were preparing for the type of terrorist event that many experts believe is inevitable. In this training scenario, the team members surveyed a stolen van after terrorists inside had been killed in a shootout. They knew, based on preliminary monitoring, that radioactive materials were inside. As it turned out, the smoking van was hauling so-called dirty bombs that could have been exploded to disperse radioactive materials across a large area. “The purpose of our unit is to respond to catastrophic events, whether it be weapons of mass destruction or terrorist events, a flood or hurricane, anywhere within our state or — if needed — anywhere in the United States,” Maj. Greg Parker, commander of the 62nd Civil Support Team from Louisiana, said after the exercise. Members of the news media were invited to view the test at the Nuclear and Radiological Field Training Center, a relatively new training site at a secure ridgetop location near Y-12. Kurt Westerman, former leader of a U.S. Army nuclear disablement team, heads the Oak Ridge training facility. It’s based at a converted World War II-era facility that once was a storehouse for uranium used in atomic bombs. Westerman said the Y-12 facility is the only place in the United States where emergency responders can train with “relevant” amounts of radioactive materials in a high-security setting with the assistance of top-level nuclear experts. He said the four trainers have more than 100 years of experience responding to dangerous situations around the world. The Y-12 official said he could not discuss the specific kinds of radioactive materials used in the training exercises or the actual amounts. Senior writer Frank Munger may be reached at 865-342-6329. © 2007, Knoxville News Sentinel Co. ***************************************************************** 32 Oak Ridger: Guard members train at new Y-12 facility - Story last updated at 12:18 am on 8/10/2007 Scott Fraker/Staff Members of the Louisiana Army National Guard are debriefed as part of the training exercise at the Y-12 plant. Click to view all photos The Y-12 National Security Complex has converted a former nuclear research facility used during the Manhattan Project into space for hands-on nuclear and radiological field training for civil support teams from across the nation. It’s reportedly the only facility of its kind in the country. The Nuclear and Radiological Field Training Center is located within the Y-12 National Security Complex and allows for the use of realistic quantities of radiological and nuclear materials. More than 20,000 square feet of high bays, hot cells, change rooms, research labs, control rooms, and office space can be set up to replicate nuclear or radiological hazards that may be found in the event of a terrorist attack or natural disaster. Designed to train military units that operate in a nuclear and/or radiological environment, as well as federal, state and local emergency response units that may respond to nuclear or radiological incidents, the center currently has six operational scenarios, including: • Dirty bomb explosion in an office environment; • Dirty bomb laboratory; • Nuclear research laboratory; • Nuclear materials drum storage area; • Vehicle transportation accident scenario; and • A vehicle smuggling scenario. These six scenarios were developed based on previous training groups’ requirements, according to the news release from Y-12. Existing scenarios may be changed or additional scenarios can be configured to fit the requirements of each customer. This week a 22-member civil support team from Louisiana has been training at the new center, according to Bridget B. Correll, marketing manager for BWXT Y-12, which operates the Y-12 plant for the National Nuclear Security Administration. On Thursday, the scenario involved a possible “dirty bomb” inside a van. Military units which comprise the civil support teams donned their protective gear and used detectors to discover whether the van was contaminated, she said. With Oak Ridge’s temperature in the high 90s Thursday, the thermometer within their protective gear reached as high as 114 degrees, she said. In addition to dealing with the scenarios, the military personnel bring and test the gear and equipment they’d be using in their states in the case of such an emergency. “Before the Nuclear and Radiological Field Training Center, there were no hands-on training scenarios. All training was done in a classroom setting and with extremely small amounts of radiological or nuclear hazards,” Kurt Westerman, program manager for Nuclear and Radiological Field Training center, is quoted as saying in the news release. “For the trainees, this is often the first time they have been in an environment that duplicates what they might actually see in the event of a terrorist incident or disaster.” The center has already conducted training with several state Weapons of Mass Destruction Civil Support Teams (WMD-CST) — active-duty National Guard units created to respond to terrorist incidents, as well as other disasters and catastrophic events. Some of the training was done Thursday. All trainees use their own equipment and receive hands-on experience in areas such as search and identification of nuclear and radiological materials, package and transport of those materials, consequence management, casualty extraction, site characterization, and decontamination. The 4th WMD-CST Georgia was one of the first teams trained at the Y-12 site. Though they have participated in radiological training at multiple Department of Defense and Department of Energy sites, Capt. Mark Stewart of the 4th WMD-CST said the training they received at Y-12's Nuclear and Radiological Field Training Center far exceeded expectations. “The 4th CST was able to optimize our existing radiological reconnaissance search techniques, tactics and procedures, as well as gain confidence identifying sensitive materials in challenging scenarios,” Stewart said. “The Y-12 staff was familiar with our equipment and was able to slightly modify the way we operate using the tools we already have in our kit, instead of forcing us to get new equipment or drastically changing the way we work.” Before beginning the field training center, Westerman served for 27 years in active and reserve duty with the U.S. Army. He also worked with BWXT's nuclear non-proliferation and counterterrorism unit for six years. However, it's his experience as the leader of an Army nuclear disablement team that gives him the hands-on expertise needed to develop realistic training in variety of scenarios. In addition to Westerman, three other experts perform the hands-on training and set up all equipment and scenarios. Their combined experience includes the removal of surrendered materials from numerous foreign countries and a wealth of knowledge in radiological controls at Y-12. | © 2004 The Oak Ridger ***************************************************************** 33 NAS: Project: Development and Implementation of a Cleanup Technology Roadmap for DOE's Office of Environmental Management Project Title: 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 ***************************************************************** 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: *****************************************************************