***************************************************************** 09/08/07 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 15.210 ***************************************************************** 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 AFP: US says wargames not aimed at China, Iran 2 IAEA: Addressing the Global Challenges of Energy Security NUCLEAR REACTORS 3 US: Flood of New Nuclear Reactors Expected As Admission Made To Terr 4 US: The Genius Doctor Who Diagnosed Nuke Power's Deadly Disease 5 The Hindu: Demand for JPC stalls proceedings of both Houses 6 Daily Yomiuri: TEPCO union raps N-plant safety 7 The Hindu: No debate without JPC on 123 - BJP 8 BBC NEWS: Apec 'muddies the climate waters' 9 BBC NEWS: Salmond rejects UK nuclear policy 10 BBC NEWS: Groups pull out of nuclear debate 11 RIA Novosti: New Armenian nuclear power plant to cost $2 billion 12 Platts: French nuclear vendor Areva says UK nuclear relaunch 'essent 13 The Hindu: CPI(M) asks BJP to constitute 'BJPC' before seeking JPC 14 US: JOURNAL NEWS: Leak found in pipe at Indian Point 15 RosBusinessConsulting: Russian nuclear industry lacks financial supp 16 US: Brattleboro Reformer: NRC hands out passing grades to Vt. Yankee 17 US: Brattleboro Reformer: Welch urges independent review at VY 18 DutchNews.nl: Dismantling nuclear plant to cost more 19 Scotsman.com: Public talks on nuclear future 20 Reuters: Nuclear industry does not fear competition from gas 21 Reuters: Japan's TEPCO to restart thermal power units 22 US: Reuters: Penn. Beaver Valley renewal papers available - NRC 23 US: NRC: Hearing Regarding Oyster Creek License Renewal Application 24 US: Boston.com: Welch calls for safety review of aging nuclear react 25 US: wtvc.com: TVA Worker Files Whistleblower Lawsuit 26 US: KSDK NewsChannel 5: What Was Left Behind By Former Nuclear Fuel 27 Guardian Unlimited: Government nuclear talks pointless, say green gr 28 US: WCAX: NRC gave passing mark to plant before recent problems 29 icWales: Cardiff to have its say on nuclear power 30 US: NRC: NRC Issues Mid-cycle Letters for Nation’s Nuclear Plants 31 UK: NewsBlaze: Hidden Subsidy for Nuclear Power 32 Whitehaven News: Greens go red over nuclear 33 Greenpeace UK: What is the government hiding about nuclear power? | 34 US: NRC: License Renewal Application for Beaver Valley Nuclear Plant 35 Guardian Unlimited: Green groups accused in nuclear row NUCLEAR SECURITY NUCLEAR SAFETY 36 US: Dr John Gofman On Nuclear Power's Lethality & Industry's Attempt NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE 37 No Nevada Water for Nuclear Dump 38 US: [NYTr] Bush Regime Hauled to Court over New Mexico Uranium Enric 39 US: The State: Nuclear leak prompts calls for DHEC probe 40 US: AU ABC: Aust uranium bound for Russia - 41 US: AU ABC: Russia uranium deal makes good sense - Downer - 42 US: SavannahNow.com: S.C. health officials questioned on tritium lea 43 CANOE: Canada: No pressure for Canada to state intentions on nuclear 44 US: BBC NEWS: Russia in Australia uranium deal 45 US: Platts: Areva files claims for uranium prospecting in Lapland 46 ReviewJournal.com: Water use, drilling go on 47 ReviewJournal.com: Professor doubts 'surplus' 48 US: AFP: Russia joins rush for Australian uranium - 49 US: NRC: NRC to Hold Public Meeting in Gallup, N.M. on Generic 50 Business Gazette: Beach n-waste likely to rise 51 globeandmail.com: Nuclear waste imports could turn Canada into a dum 52 Pahrump Valley Times: State rejects Nye County water rights applicat PEACE 53 [NYTr] US Staging Nukes for Attack on Iran? 54 US: John Edwards Proposes Campaign To Abolish Nuclear Weapons 55 AFP: Putin, Bush fail to break missile defence tension - 56 Daily Times: VIEW: Nuclear steps undermine peace —Jimmy Carter US DEPT. OF ENERGY 57 SF New Mexican: LANL workers brace for layoffs 58 Hanford News: DOE to ship plutonium off Hanford 59 Hanford News: CREHST museum gets ready to celebrate 10-year annivers 60 Hanford News: Agencies reveal new proposed deadlines 61 Hemscott: Los Alamos head warns of possible cuts 62 lamonitor.com: Lab prepares for budget imponderables ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** FULL NEWS STORIES ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** 1 AFP: US says wargames not aimed at China, Iran by Pratap Chakravarty Fri Sep 7, 12:53 PM ET ON BOARD THE USS KITTY HAWK (AFP) - A top US navy commander involved in Indian Ocean wargames said Friday the exercises were not aimed at sending a message to either China or Iran. Seventh Fleet commander William Crowder was speaking aboard USS Kitty Hawk, the US navy's second largest supercarrier, as the six-day exercises hosted by India that began on Tuesday neared a close. "There is no connection between these manoeuvres and anything else," Crowder said in reply to reporters' questions over whether the wargames were intended to send signals to Tehran and Beijing. "The US has been jointly exercising with India since 1994 and the only thing new this time is that India has invited three more countries... This is not aimed against anyone," the fleet commander added. The movements of US carrier groups are being closely watched amid mounting tensions over Iran's nuclear programme, seen by Washington and its Western allies as a covert atomic weapons drive. The exercises involved 28 ships, one submarine and 160 warjets from the United States, Australia, Japan, Singapore and India. The nations staged the wargames 150 kilometres (90 miles) off India's Andaman island chain in the Bay of Bengal. The exercises, one of the biggest ever peacetime military events, also included super-carriers USS Nimitz, the nuclear-powered submarine USS Chicago and Indian aircraft carrier the INS Viraat. Crowder said the US Navy was not seeking an Indian Ocean base but was "looking for places to exercise with our allies." "We're really not in the business of setting up bases but we aim to boost cooperation with navies in areas such as disaster relief such as the tsunami that hit the Indian Ocean region in 2004," the vice admiral said. The Seventh Fleet is the largest of the forward-deployed US fleets, with some 50 ships, more than 200 of the latest warjets and 20,000 sailors and Marines assigned at any given time. "We have some close allies in the Asian region and we want to improve our ties," the admiral said on the deck of the 46-year-old Kitty Hawk, due to be decommissioned next year. India, which was on opposite sides of the fence from the United States during the Cold War, has also denied claims that the games were an attempt to intimidate neighbouring China, with which the country fought a brief, bitter border war in 1962. "It's completely an apolitical decision to hold the exercises off our eastern coasts in the Bay of Bengal," said Indian Navy rear admiral R.R. Suthan. "We look at the exercises as a professional interaction between the friendly navies and our allies," the Indian taskforce commander added aboard the US ship. The nuclear-armed Indian navy, which operates 137 ships, wants its supremacy in the Indian Ocean unchallenged. During the 2004 tsunami it rebuffed US offers of aid and sent out relief ships to ravaged Sri Lanka and Indonesia. Japan, Australia and Singapore also tried to distance themselves from the controversy, saying the event was just an occasion to sharpen their response to natural disasters that often hit Indian Ocean rim nations. "The quick response to the tsunami by militaries of the region did not happen by accident and so we want to use this exercise to learn more from each other," said rear admiral Nigel Coates, leading the Australian contingent. Japan, participating for the first time in a multi-nation wargame, argued the now-controversial drill would strengthen links between Asian and Western militaries. "We are flexible enough to learn the different ways from the international navies and it is easy for us to become friends on humanitarian issues," said Japan naval chief Yogi Koda on board the Kitty Hawk, as it engaged the other ships in a mock battle. Copyright © 2007 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 2 IAEA: Addressing the Global Challenges of Energy Security IAEA Chief Honoured at the World Nuclear Association Annual Symposium Staff Report 6 September 2007 The World Nuclear Association annual symposium is taking place this week in London, United Kingdom. (Photo credit; D.Calma/IAEA) The pressing need for development and the desire for more effective system of international security are two urgent challenges facing humanity, IAEA Director General Mohamed ElBaradei emphasized today in a speech in London. Dr. ElBaradei was addressing the annual summit of the World Nuclear Association (WNA), where he and the Agency were presented with the WNA Award for "Distinguished Contribution to the Peaceful Worldwide use of Nuclear Technology". The twin challenges of development and security are intertwined, Dr. ElBaradei said, after first acknowledging and thanking the WNA for the award. "Nearly every aspect of development - from reducing poverty to improving health care - requires reliable access to modern energy service, the Director General said. When these development needs remain unaddressed, the resulting misery often leads to conflict and violence, which in turn affect development efforts and impact on regional and global stability." The Director General noted that roughly 1.6 billion people still live without access to electricity and 2.4. billion have no access to modern fuels, illustrating the global energy imbalance. In some African countries, per capita electricity consumption is as low as 50 kilowatt-hours per year while in the leading industrialized countries it is 8600 kilowatts-hour per year -- about 170 times higher. He said the G8 Summit in St. Petersburg of July 2006 emphasized the importance of global energy security. In his participation at that summit the Director General emphasized that in his view global energy security means fulfilling the energy needs of all countries and peoples - including those who have no access to modern energy systems. Additionally, factors like accelerated growth in energy consumption and demand, limited supply and competition for resources, and environmental impact also affect global energy security. Renewed interest in nuclear power in recent years is driven in large part because it offers partial solutions to some of these energy security challenges, Dr. ElBaradei said. "I am not suggesting that nuclear power, by itself, is a panacea for global energy security. But if the plans and expressions of intent we are witnessing from many countries come to fruition, nuclear power is likely to have an increasingly significant role in the global energy mix," he added. He outlined four issues the nuclear community must address to fulfil nuclear's potential as a source of energy worldwide. These include: * Guarding relentlessly against the proliferation of nuclear weapons by maintaining a strong , independent organization - the IAEA - with sufficient authority and resources to carry out its mission; * Sustaining the strong performance of nuclear plants in terms of safety, security and economic operation; * Innovating and drawing from lessons learned from half a century of operating nuclear plants to design new, safer, innovative, and cost-effective reactors; and * Focusing on developing new designs and approaches that make nuclear power a safe, reliable, affordable , and practical solution for developing countries that choose the nuclear option. Dr. ElBaradei said the 1953 Atoms for Peach speech by US President Eisenhower - that paved the way for the creation of the IAEA - declared that a special purpose of atoms for peace would be to provide abundant electrical energy in the power-starved areas of the world. "That vision has yet to be realized," Dr. ElBaradei concluded. "But… the global challenges of security and development are interlinked and that addressing the energy security needs of all countries will be a key to progress on both fronts." Background: The WNA's Annual Symposium in London is held to provide a forum for its Members, spotlights the role of the WNA's worldwide affiliates and serves as a platform to listen to distinguished speakers from throughout the world nuclear industry. The symposium usually provides the occasion for the presentation of one or more WNA Awards for 'Distinguished Contribution to the Peaceful Worldwide Use of Nuclear Energy', which this year is awarded to the IAEA and its Director General Mohamed ElBaradei. Copyright ©, International Atomic Energy Agency, P.O. Box 100, Wagramer Strasse 5, A-1400 Vienna, Austria Telephone (+431) 2600-0; Facsimilie (+431) 2600-7; E-mail: ***************************************************************** 3 Flood of New Nuclear Reactors Expected As Admission Made To Terrorist Date: Sat, 08 Sep 2007 00:35:12 -0400 >The reactors also will have enhanced post-9/11 security features, including hardened concrete exteriors that can >better withstand the shock of events such as an airplane strike. So they [not identified but apparantly NRC and/or builders of new NPPs] admit that nuclear facilities currently operating are not up to full anti-terrorist potentials. Interesting [not surprising, of course] that there's an admission to the public being expendible re nuclear terrorism. Remember Al Qaeda and all terrorist organizations [including those making the reactors & facilities] already have 440 nuclear weapons around the world in the form of commercial nuclear reactors. They don't need to buy or assemble conventional nuclear weapons they just need to attack [ http://www.tmia.com/sabter.html ] what commercial nuclear vendors manufacture, NRC welcomes and NRC's counterparts welcomes around the world. That's all that matters- $$$, not life. Click URL for hyperlinks: http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/business/AP-New-Reactors.html?_r=1&oref=slogin Flood of New Nuclear Reactors Expected a.. E-Mail b.. Print c.. Save By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS Published: September 7, 2007 Filed at 10:00 a.m. ET CHATTANOOGA, Tenn. (AP) -- Federal regulators, girding for explosive growth in the nuclear power industry, say they are weeks away from an anticipated flood of license applications for new reactors not seen since the 1970s. ''There are a lot of challenges for new construction,'' said Bill Borchardt, director of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's newly created Office of New Reactors. ''And a lot of challenges for the NRC.'' The independent regulatory agency expects to receive new fast-tracked combined construction and operating license applications for as many as 29 reactors at 20 sites, most in the South, over the next three years. The first could come as early as Oct. 1, the start of the federal fiscal year. ''We have never had to do this many reviews at one time in parallel with an office that has only existed for less than 12 months,'' Borchardt said Thursday at the NRC's reactor training center in Chattanooga. ''Nobody thinks this is going to be easy.'' Borchardt has hired more than 400 inspectors, engineers and examiners to handle the load. Ultimately, the power companies will be billed for their time. The office is nearly as large as the NRC unit overseeing the country's existing 104 commercial reactor fleet. Growing electricity demand, energy supply security concerns and greenhouse gas emissions from fossil fuels are driving a nuclear revival in this country after a three-decade chill. Improvements in nuclear operating experience and efficiency have also played a role, Borchardt said. Some of the power companies expected to file soon for new reactors include the Tennessee Valley Authority, as part of the NuStart group for its Bellefonte site in Alabama; Duke Energy, for its Lee Station in South Carolina; NRG Energy, for its South Texas Project; Dominion Energy, for the North Anna site in Virginia; Southern Co., for its Vogtle plant in Georgia; and South Carolina Electric & Gas, for its Summer station. Most want to begin construction in five to six years and be online by 2015 to 2020, Borchardt said. All are looking to use advanced reactor designs, which the NRC is working to approve in advance in standardized form to hurry along the process. Two of five most likely designs already have been certified by the NRC. The others are either under review or expected to be submitted by year's end. The new reactors are expected to have significant safety improvements over current boiling-water and pressurized-water designs in today's U.S. reactors. They will have multiple independent systems to cool reactor cores in an emergency, multiple backup power systems, digital control rooms and more passive systems to open and close valves automatically by gravity or water flow, to reduce human error. The reactors also will have enhanced post-9/11 security features, including hardened concrete exteriors that can better withstand the shock of events such as an airplane strike. And to keep reactors on the fast track, most will incorporate modular construction with large parts -- the reactor vessel, for instance -- made in other locations, such as Japan. Some large components already are being ordered, Borchardt said. Using standardized design and modular construction ''allows General Electric to (be able) to claim that they can construct from first concrete to reactor critical -- an entire power plant -- in approximately 36 months,'' NRC reactor technology instructor Richard DeVercelly said. That's about how long it took to build two new reactors in Japan that use an advanced boiling-water design that the NRC has certified for U.S. power companies, he said. By comparison, TVA took five years alone to rebuild and restart its oldest reactor at the Browns Ferry station in Alabama, which returned to service this year. ''It is pretty clear that the plants will be built more rapidly (and) are going to make extensive use of modular construction,'' Borchardt said. ''One of the great lessons from the 1960s and 1970s is that you do a much better job if you can design them before you start building them. (That's true) whether you are building a house or anything else.'' Attachment Converted: article-sponsor1.gif: 00000001,00000001,00000000,2361e670 Attachment Converted: dej_button1.gif: 00000001,00000001,00000000,7ff03e3b ***************************************************************** 4 The Genius Doctor Who Diagnosed Nuke Power's Deadly Disease Date: Fri, 7 Sep 2007 23:02:52 -0500 (CDT) http://www.truthout.org/issues_06/090707HA.shtml Go to Original The Genius Doctor Who Diagnosed Nuke Power's Deadly Disease By Harvey Wasserman The Free Press Friday 07 September 2007 The nuke power industry now wants $50 billion and more in loan guarantees to build new atomic reactors. As it strong-arms Congress, the warnings of the great Dr. John Gofman, who passed away last week at 88, loom ever larger. One of history's most respected and revered medical and nuclear pioneers, Gofman's research showed as early as 1969 that "normal" radioactive reactor emissions could kill 32,000 Americans per year. At the time, Gofman was the chief medical researcher for the Atomic Energy Commission. He told the AEC that reactor emissions must be radically reduced. The AEC demanded he change his findings, then forced him out when he refused. Since then, reactor backers have ceaselessly and erroneously attacked Gofman and his findings. But they could hardly have picked a more brilliant, committed opponent. Gofman was both relentless and uncorrupted. His findings should have doomed from the start an industry he called "insane." In addition to being a world-class nuclear chemist, Dr. John William Gofman was one of history's most important heart specialists. His pioneer research helped define our modern understanding about cholesterol, distinguishing "good" fatty acids from bad. Gofman's astonishing medical discoveries remain at the core of today's common wisdom about diet and heart disease. For that work alone, Gofman was a towering figure. Throughout his life, he was friend and peer to Nobel Laureates such as Linus Pauling and George Wald. But Gofman was also a nuclear chemist. As part of the Manhattan Project that built the first atomic bombs, his pioneer work helped lead to the discoveries of plutonium and certain isotopes of uranium. Yet his career suffered from an inconvenient truth: when he discovered that atomic power plants kill people in large numbers, he refused to shut up about it. As a full professor at the University of California, Gofman's combined medical and nuclear credentials made him an obvious choice to manage health research for the Atomic Energy Commission, which both regulated and promoted the young nuclear power industry. When public questions were raised about the health impacts of radioactive reactor emissions, Gofman was dispatched to prove the industry safe. But his findings showed that reactors are serious killers. So even Gofman's towering resume could not protect him from the wrath of an industry determined to build all the power plants it could. He and co-researcher Arthur Tamplin were driven from their jobs. When their POISONED POWER detailed the killing potential of atomic energy, Gofman and Tamplin were attacked mercilessly by an industry with immense investments to protect. The experience showed that no matter how impeccable their credentials, and no matter how thorough their research, any scientists whose findings might indicate problems with atomic power would be automatically "discredited" by industry flacks to who did no comparable research. Even at his passing, the tired attacks on Gofman's findings have resurfaced. But his research remains the gold standard on the health impacts of radiation. And as a gentle but firm advocate, mentor and friend, his integrity was matched only by his willingness to step outside traditional boundaries for what he believed. One of Gofman's most powerful and influential moments came in 1974, when he agreed to defend a civil disobedient named Sam Lovejoy in the small town of Montague, Massachusetts. A member of a communal organic farm, Lovejoy had manually knocked over a 500-foot weather tower erected as a precursor to the building of a large twin reactor complex. Gofman agreed to testify in Lovejoy's defense, arguing that building two nuke reactors constituted a lethal threat to the health and safety of the community. In a monumental moment for the rise of the anti-nuclear movement, Lovejoy was acquitted. Gofman's pivotal pronouncements appear in the award-winning LOVEJOY'S NUCLEAR WAR (gmpfilms.com), which has been shown all over the world. As a pivotal struggle over a "bailout in advance" for new reactor construction rages in Congress, Gofman's words resonate with a renewed critical importance: "The decision to build nuclear power plants may very well be, for the first time, a decision that can result in the desecration of the Earth with respect for life for all future generations." "Why do we want to put every city and hamlet of the United States at risk by building a thousand of these plants? We can get the power from sunshine, very easily and economically." "When we're talking about a mass of a hundred tons or so of material, melting 5,000 degrees Fahrenheit, with water around, with hydrogen being generated and burning explosively, melting through concrete into soil, when someone tells me that we're sure it isn't going to go far away, I say that I've heard various forms of insanity, but hardly this form." "Even if this hazard of a meltdown were securely answered, it doesn't alter for one second my opposition to nuclear power, because I'm concerned about the fact that whether it melts down or doesn't melt down, you've created an astronomical amount of radioactive garbage which you must contain and isolate better than 99.99 percent perfectly, in peace and war, with human error and human malice, guerilla activity, psychotics, malfunction of equipment ... do you believe that there's anything you'd like to guarantee will be done 99.99 percent perfectly for a hundred thousand years?" After fifty years of proven failure, the nuke power industry is demanding still more taxpayer handouts to create still more of this waste. The great and good Dr. John W. Gofman warned us all against this insanity. His words and spirit remain at the core of what must be done to save this planet. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Harvey Wasserman is senior advisor to Greenpeace USA and the Nuclear Information & Resource Service, and Senior Editor of www.solartopia.org and www.freepress.org, where this article first appeared. For a fuller account of the amazing life of Dr. John Gofman, see www.beyondnuclear.org. ***************************************************************** 5 The Hindu: Demand for JPC stalls proceedings of both Houses Friday, September 7, 2007 : 1540 Hrs New Delhi, Sept. 7 (PTI): The demand for a JPC to go into the Indo-US nuclear deal stalled proceedings in Parliament for the third day today with opposition NDA and Third Front remaining unrelenting. It was trouble from the word go in the Lok Sabha as well as the Rajya Sabha which were adjourned for an hour, minutes after assembling for the day. Similar scenes were witnessed when the two Houses reassembled at noon but Speaker Somnath Chatterjee in the Lok Sabha and Deputy Chairman K Rahman Khan in the Rajya Sabha rushed through laying of papers and passage of important Bills in the din. In the uproar, Parliament put its seal of approval on a bill to amend the Apprentices Act 1961 with the Lok Sabha passing it without discussion. The bill piloted by Labour Minister Oscar Fernandes had already been passed by the Rajya Sabha. In the Rajya Sabha, the Carriage by Road Bill 2005, aimed at regulation of common carriers was approved without any discussion. A bill to declare the Rajiv Gandhi Institute of Petroleum Technology as an institution of national importance was also introduced by Petroleum Minister Murli Deora. Amid the commotion, Parliamentary Affairs Minister P R Dasmunsi and Minister of State for Parliamentary Affairs Suresh Pachouri made identical statements in the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha, respectively, regarding the ministry being chosen for the Indira Gandhi Official Language Award for 2005/06. In the Lok Sabha, a motion for extending the time limit for presentation of the Joint Committee to go into the Office of Profit issue was also passed. The time limit has been extended till the last day of the Winter Session. As the opposition uproar continued, Speaker Somnath Chatterjee tried to pacify them by pointing out that the debate on the nuclear deal has been listed for Monday. Deputy Leader of the Opposition V K Malhotra questioned why the JPC was not being formed despite the NDA pressing for it for so many days. The NDA alleged that the Opposition had been rendered totally irrelevant in the matter by the government which is "turning a deaf ear" to the demands. Malhotra said formation of the "private" committee between the Congress and Left parties was an "insult to Parliament and the opposition" as the nuclear deal issue is a "property of the House" after three statements by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh on it. The NDA members then rushed into the Well of the House, chanting slogans like "UPA ka tamasha nahi chalega (UPA's drama cannot go on)" and "JPC lao, desh bachao (bring JPC, save the nation)". When the Upper House met at noon after an hour-long adjournment, slogan shouting NDA and Third Front members trooped into the well. Shouts of "we want JPC" and "JPC lao, desh bachao (set up JPC and save country)" reverberated in the House. In the din some papers and special mentions were laid after which the House was adjourned till 14:30 hours. Copyright © 2007, The Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the ***************************************************************** 6 Daily Yomiuri: TEPCO union raps N-plant safety TEPCO union raps N-plant safety Tokyo Electric Power Co.'s labor union has compiled safety measures at the company's Kashiwazaki-Kariwa nuclear power station that was hit by the Niigata Prefecture Chuetsu Offshore Earthquake in mid-July. At the union's central committee meeting in Tokyo a couple of weeks after the earthquake, its chairman, Seiichi Taneoka, said: "Reactors stopped safely [during the earthquake], but our company has been severely criticized. I think labor and management need to earnestly discuss companywide crisis-control measures." In compiling future countermeasures, the union saw three problems at the nuclear power plant that must be addressed to alleviate public anxiety about nuclear power safety. The first problem was a fire that broke out at a transformer. Smoke was seen billowing from the transformer immediately after the quake, but it took two hours to extinguish the blaze. The fire could not be put out initially due to a failed fire hydrant, and video footage showing black smoke spewing from the transformer was repeatedly shown on TV news programs nationwide. Moreover, no one on the scene could enter an emergency measures room equipped with a direct phone line to a local fire station because its door had been broken by the powerful earthquake. The labor union said a fire wall was installed behind the transformer and there was no danger of the fire spreading to a facility housing the nuclear reactor. But the union regretted the fact it took two hours to extinguish the fire, saying the delay gave the impression no effective measures were taken during that critical period. The second problem involved water overflowing a pool of spent nuclear fuel and eventually running into the sea. The amount of the overflow was 1.2 tons, but the water contained a small amount of radioactivity. A puddle was found at 12:50 p.m. during a patrol after the earthquake. A sample of water from the puddle was analyzed and a small amount of radioactivity was detected 5-1/2 hours later. It took a further 100 minutes before the radioactive discharge into the sea was confirmed. The third problem was the discharge of a small amount of radioactivity from an exhaust pipe of the No. 7 nuclear reactor. The procedure that stops a discharge fan in the wake of an earthquake seems to have been delayed in this case, even as the reactor itself automatically halted operation. In the meantime, radiation-contaminated steam is believed to have been discharged into the atmosphere. The seven reactors at the Kashiwazaki-Kariwa nuclear power station were put into commercial operation in succession between 1985 and 1997. Working conditions at the Kashiwazaki-Kariwa plant are far more favorable than at the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power station, where six nuclear reactors were put into operation in the 1970s, and at the Fukushima No. 2 nuclear power plant, where four reactors went online in the 1980s, according to the TEPCO labor union. One example is a control room that went into operation in the mid-1990s at the Kashiwazaki-Kariwa plant. A window was installed to meet the request of workers who complained of feeling boxed in in the confined room. The room is designed to withstand a potential terrorist attack. "The union has accumulated operational know-how about nuclear power plants," said Taneoka, who was involved in designing the Kashiwazaki-Kariwa nuclear power station and worked at the plant. "Opinions of labor union members were incorporated from the planning stage, such as when devising control panel and switchboard layout plans and suggesting safety measures." However, in the water leak at the No. 6 reactor, the pursuit of greater efficiency had an adverse side effect. The facility housing a nuclear reactor is generally divided into controlled and noncontrolled areas. The two areas are located across a thick wall or fence so radioactive contamination can be confined to the controlled area. Operators face strict safety checks, including their clothing, when they enter or exit the controlled area. At the Kashiwazaki-Kariwa plant, switchboards and other equipment were installed in the noncontrolled area to make it easier to conduct inspections. The system was designed to spare the trouble of safety checks when entering or exiting the controlled area. But the leak occurred at a conduit linking equipment across the controlled and noncontrolled areas. Some observers have suggested the move resulted from efforts by labor and management to cut corners and reduce employees' workload. Some critics have pointed out detecting the radioactive leakage took longer than was expected because an inadequate number of staff were assigned to that task. TEPCO labor and management will likely look into the possibility of increasing staff dedicated to detecting radioactive leaks or introducing a night-watch duty system for such workers. After the transformer fire, TEPCO launched a system in late July in which a chemical fire engine and firefighters remain on standby. The company must still make further efforts to bolster its own fire-fighting capabilities. As things stand, no date has been specified for when the Kashiwazaki-Kariwa nuclear power plant will resume operation. The management--which is trying to fill the electricity shortfall caused by the plant's shutdown by operating thermal and hydraulic power generators--needs to assign and prepare staff for that purpose. The union intends to enter negotiations with management about such personnel arrangements. The safety of nuclear power generation cannot be ensured unless these workplace is safe. The role of labor unions is to guarantee a proper working environment for union members so that safety can be ensured even in an emergency. Such efforts will eventually lead to halting the inclination toward emphasizing efficiency and to restoring public trust in nuclear power generation. The Daily Yomiuri, The Yomiuri Shimbun © The Yomiuri Shimbun. ***************************************************************** 7 The Hindu: No debate without JPC on 123 - BJP Friday, September 7, 2007 : 1310 Hrs New Delhi, Sept. 7 (PTI): The BJP today stuck to its stand for a Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) on the Indo-US nuclear deal, indicating it would not allow Parliament to function for another day over the issue. "Our position remains the same. We have received no proposals from the Government in connection with our demand for a JPC and voting in both the houses on the nuclear accord," party leader Vijay Kumar Malhotra said after an NDA meeting chaired by former deputy Prime Minister L K Advani. "We will press our demand again," he said a day after the NDA stalled Parliament, seeking the setting up of a JPC on the 123 agreement. Yesterday, his party colleague Sushma Swaraj insisted that the NDA would force the government to accept its demand for a JPC. "We will get it done," Swaraj said, recalling that joint parliamentary committees were finally set up on the Bofors deal and the security scam after initial refusal by the then government. "Nothing is categorical in Parliament. It's a war of nerves," Swaraj said when reminded about the government's rejection of the NDA's call. "We do not consider (the government's response) to be categorical". Swaraj said the BJP has asked the government to spell out what objections it could have in setting up a JPC on the nuclear accord. Copyright © 2007, The Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the ***************************************************************** 8 BBC NEWS: Apec 'muddies the climate waters' Last Updated: Friday, 7 September 2007, 11:02 GMT 12:02 UK ANALYSIS By Richard Black Environment correspondent, BBC News website Presidents Hu and Bush have been on opposite sides of the table If you thought that climate change was just an occasional staging post on the eternal global tour of international diplomacy, think so no more. Within the last few months the climate circus has stopped at the G8 in Heiligendamm, the UN climate convention (UNFCCC) in Vienna, and UN HQ in New York (twice) - not to mention triple dips into the prediction pot of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Over the next few months, the pace hots up. After Apec - the Asia-Pacific Economic Co-operation forum - there is the Gleneagles clean energy dialogue in Berlin, UN HQ (again), the Washington White House, and finally, in December, the UN climate convention's annual summit, this time amidst Bali's lush beauty. Did I miss a few out? I hope so. It would be nice to leave room for some content in this article among the dizzy succession of geographical name-checks and the welter of organisational initials, which is beginning to resemble the alphabet soup of heavyweight boxing. It is unfortunate that people who are talking about climate change like the US are not even members of the Kyoto Protocol Rafidah Aziz "There's a complex picture emerging," observes John Ashton, the British government's international climate change envoy. "I would draw an analogy with other international negotiations, for example on arms control. What you saw was that when it became clear that this was something the world needed to do something about, you saw a proliferation of different conversations in various fora. "That's what we're seeing now with climate change." Simple appeal So is the complexity a good or a bad thing? Bad, it appears, to some, notably the governments of Malaysia, China and the Philippines which opposed Australian and US moves to get a climate resolution from the Sydney Apec meeting. "It is unfortunate that people who are talking about climate change like the US are not even members of the Kyoto Protocol," Malaysia's trade minister Rafidah Aziz said during the preliminary skirmishes. "If you want to talk about climate change, please join in with the rest of the global community to make commitments... there's no point talking outside of the [Kyoto Protocol] forum." In other words, keep it simple, Sydney. Intense debate The Apec formula, as originally proposed by Australian premier John Howard with Washington's blessing, envisaged developed and developing nations alike signing up to goals - not on reducing greenhouse gas emissions however, but on improving "energy intensity". "Clean" technologies such as nuclear energy are an Apec priority Brought first into the political arena by President Bush, the intensity concept is basically a measure of how efficiently your economy uses energy - the ratio of wealth created to energy expended. It is a concept that environmental groups find deeply troubling. "Even with the proposed target (of a 25% improvement in intensity by 2030), we would see a net increase in emissions from the region," comments Tony Mohr, climate change campaigner from the Australian Conservation Foundation (ACF). "Intensity improves, but the economy grows as well. And that's the problem with intensity targets." In the run-up to the Apec summit, the Australian government's Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics (Abare) produced a report forecasting that under business as usual, emissions from Apec nations would grow by 130% between now and 2050. With the deployment of technologies such as renewables, nuclear, clean coal and energy efficiency, Abare calculated it would be feasible to reduce that emissions figure by 49%. So hang on, let's do the maths... 49% of 230%... subtract the original 100%... and what Abare is projecting, what Mr Howard and Mr Bush believe acceptable, is a rise in greenhouse gas emissions of about 15% by 2050. And the rise is that small only if all these clean technologies are developed and rolled out smoothly across the region, which even Abare admits is a path strewn with social and economic hurdles - it could have added technical ones, too. Asia-Pacific pact: What use? The rise could be much bigger. Writing about this Apec meeting has given me a distinct feeling of deja vu; and I know why. It is because when I covered the inaugural ministerial meeting of the Asia-Pacific Partnership for Clean Development and Climate in Sydney some 18 months ago - and apologies for thickening the alphabet soup still further - exactly the same arguments appeared. Then, as now, we had major Asian economies at the table. Then, as now, the Howard and Bush governments argued that technology and voluntary deals could bring emissions down. Then, as now, we had an Abare report showing that when they talked of bringing emissions down, they actually meant allowing emissions to rise. The climate world is certainly on twin tracks when it comes to the meaning of apparently simple words. Revenue stream There is a green sales pitch for Mr Howard's Apec push, though, and it is this. Under Kyoto, developing countries do not have any firm targets for reducing emissions. At least under the proposed Apec agreement, they would have a target for something. Being cynical for a moment, perhaps that is why China, Malaysia and the rest want to stick to the Kyoto track, and focus on developing a successor agreement when the protocol's existing targets expire in 2012. Kyoto brings no targets for developing nations; but it does bring revenue, through the Clean Development Mechanism (for clean technologies, usually) and through funds to help them adapt to the impacts of climate change. We should keep our eyes on the big picture, and the big picture is the level of ambition John Ashton A "Kyoto-2" treaty, the focus of the Vienna talks, would provide an even bigger pot. "I think there was a general concern (in Vienna) that funds for adaptation need to rise quite dramatically, and a recognition that the mechanisms in place to fund adaptation have been insufficient," said Angela Ledford-Anderson, vice-president for climate programmes at the National Environmental Trust in Washington DC. The details of any Kyoto-2 treaty are still in embryonic form, and will in all probability have barely progressed to the foetal stage before the big UN climate forum in Bali at the end of the year, to which Vienna was the official prelude. If you will permit a mixed liquids metaphor, the alphabet soup appears to be muddying the waters. "There was a reluctance among many parties to go into too much detail and a reluctance to commit until the events of the next few months, the various conversations in different fora, have taken place," observes Ms Ledford-Anderson. But on the biggest issue - a new set of emissions targets for when the current set expires in 2012 - something of a consensus did emerge at Vienna, to many observers' surprise. The aspiration that developed countries should aim to cut their emissions by 25-40% by 2020 is far from a deal, but it already looks very different from the Apec/Asia-Pacific Partnership/Bush vision. Ambition mission So how should we judge all these different fora, philosophies and processes? "We should keep our eyes on the big picture, and the big picture is the level of ambition," suggests John Ashton, emphasising that the Vienna targets derive from the scientific necessity to cut emissions as determined by the IPCC. Environment protestors have been prominent at the Apec venue "At the moment, (the US and Australian initiatives) are not ambitious enough - but they're not unique in that, the problem we all face is how we bridge the gap between where we are now and where we need to get." There is no doubt that climate politics is entering a complex phase. No longer is it the case that nations are either for Kyoto or against it; Japan, for example, is for Kyoto, and yet also for the Asia-Pacific Partnership which comes with a very different level of ambition. And no longer are the arguments just about cutting emissions. Funds for adaptation, clean technology rollout, and financing mechanisms are considered by many of the players, certainly by the developing world's superpowers. Energy security, leverage, avoided deforestation, sequestration... the list is almost as long as Angela Merkel's climate travel itinerary. But amidst these swirling, evanescent mists it is possible to discern two familiar philosophical pillars. In one, governments commit to common policies based on the science which, rightly or wrongly, they have endorsed through their membership of the IPCC, and which the Stern Review has declared affordable. In the other, they subject business-as-usual to only slight voluntary curtailments that will not distort its basic high-carbon shape. Both have high-profile, powerful backers. The myriad conversations, processes and journeys of the next four months should tell us much about which is likely to prove dominant. Richard.Black-INTERNET@bbc.co.uk * BBC Copyright Notice ***************************************************************** 9 BBC NEWS: Salmond rejects UK nuclear policy Last Updated: Friday, 7 September 2007, 16:30 GMT 17:30 UK Brian Taylor's blog Scottish First Minister Alex Salmond has fired a shot across the UK Government's bows while outlining Scotland's green credentials. Mr Salmond announced that Scotland now had the ability to produce more green energy than nuclear power. Opening an extension at a Borders wind farm, he criticised the UK Government's plans for new nuclear power stations. Scottish Labour also hit back at the first minister, accusing him of "bluster". First Minister Alex Salmond marked "Green Energy Day" during a visit to Crystal Rig wind farm, near Dunbar. We can have secure energy supplies without landing future generations of Scots with the burden of toxic radioactive waste Alex Salmond First Minister The Scottish Government acknowledges that, on average, wind farms do not actually produce more power than nuclear. According to the energy supply industry, in an average year, about 40% of the electricity used up comes from the two nuclear power stations - Hunterston B in Ayrshire and Torness in East Lothian - and 20% from renewables. Proportions can also vary - for example from July 2006 for 10 months, Hunterston B was closed for repairs. However, when running well, nuclear stations produce about 80% of their total capacity, with wind farms generating about 30%. The first minister's criticism of the Westminster government came the day before it was due to host a meeting in Glasgow on its proposals for new nuclear power stations. Most existing nuclear power stations are due to close by 2023 and the UK Government has said its "preliminary view" is that new stations should be built - to reduce carbon emissions and Britain's reliance on foreign oil and gas imports. Applications pending Mr Salmond said: "Scotland has an abundance of clean renewable energy resources - wind, wave, offshore wind, tidal, biomass and bio-fuel. "They will take their place along with initiatives in clean coal technology, in promoting micro-generation and energy conservation. "In stark contrast, the UK Government has already made up its mind to go for a new generation of nuclear power stations - only after carrying out a consultation it was forced into by the high court. Scotland cannot be powered by Alex Salmond's bluster alone Iain Gray Labour energy spokesman "Scotland neither wants nor needs new nuclear power stations and I hope the people who attend the event in Glasgow will take the opportunity to make that view absolutely clear." Mr Salmond added: "As Green Energy Day demonstrates, we can have secure energy supplies without landing future generations of Scots with the burden of toxic radioactive waste." However, Scottish Labour energy spokesman Iain Gray said answers to his parliamentary questions have revealed that applications for onshore wind power projects with a generating capacity of 4,787 Megawatts (MW) were waiting to be processed by SNP ministers. He further claimed that the Scottish Government's only wind farm decision in four months had been to reject a major development. "Of 2,500 MW of renewable generating capacity the SNP are responsible for precisely none, and it could have been more if they had not opposed wind farm developments all over Scotland," said Mr Gray. "Scotland cannot be powered by Alex Salmond's bluster alone. It is time for him to get real on renewables." * BBC Copyright Notice ***************************************************************** 10 BBC NEWS: Groups pull out of nuclear debate Last Updated: Friday, 7 September 2007, 16:41 GMT 17:41 UK The government is in favour of more nuclear power stations Environmental groups have pulled out of a consultation on whether the UK should build nuclear power stations, saying it is not a "fair and full debate". Greenpeace and Friends of the Earth are among those unhappy with the way the government has presented the arguments. They had already won a High Court ruling that a previous consultation was "seriously flawed" and "misleading". Public meetings are being held across the UK on Saturday, on the principle of including nuclear power as part of Britain's energy mix, but a coalition of groups has withdrawn its support. It is up to the government to decide, is it going to carry out a proper public consultation or not? John Sauven Greenpeace Most existing nuclear power stations are due to close by 2023 and the government has said its "preliminary view" is that new stations should be built - to reduce carbon emissions and Britain's reliance on foreign oil and gas imports. Environmental groups say that the consultation, rather than presenting a "fair and full public debate", was more about promoting nuclear power. John Sauven, from Greenpeace, told BBC News: "It is up to the government to decide, is it going to carry out a proper public consultation or not? "Their own advisers have told them that this consultation should last for nine months, it should put all the information before the public, and they have been very critical of the way it is currently being carried out." 'Stitch-up' The environmental organisations have formed a coalition, and branded the consultation process a "public relations stitch-up". Friends of the Earth said it would not be sending representatives to the meetings, and that it would make its case officially to the government. Earlier this year Greenpeace successfully challenged a previous consultation on the issue at the High Court arguing it had been "a sham". It is possible that the government might change its view John Hutton Business and Enterprise Secretary The judge granted a quashing order and the government began the new consultation. Mr Hutton said the government had made a preliminary view about the nuclear issue but did not have a "closed mind". "It is possible that the government might change its view," he said, but told the BBC it would take a "very, very strong" argument to persuade them to reduce the "nuclear element in the energy mix". 'Long-term interests' A spokesman for his department later said time was "pressing" as most power stations were due to close within decades. He added: "John Hutton is clear that whatever decision the government finally makes, it is absolutely in the national interest that we make a decision and urgently - our livelihoods and the future health of the planet depend on us getting this right. "That is why he thinks it is so regrettable that Greenpeace's tactics seem to be to do everything they possibly can do to delay and undermine the process of consultation that they themselves demanded.'' But Liberal Democrat leader Sir Menzies Campbell said he understood concerns about the "deeply flawed consultation". "The government has failed to observe the spirit of the High Court ruling, by making up its mind on nuclear power long before this latest consultation had even begun," he said. * BBC Copyright Notice ***************************************************************** 11 RIA Novosti: New Armenian nuclear power plant to cost $2 billion 19:00 | 07/ 09/ 2007 YEREVAN, September 7 (RIA Novosti) - A new nuclear power plant (NPP) being built in Armenia on the site of an existing facility will end up costing about $2 billion, Armen Movsisyan, the Armenian energy minister, told parliament Friday. "The project's feasibility study is being carried out by Armenia, Russia, the U.S. and the International Atomic Energy Agency [IAEA]. The old NPP is to be rebuilt within four and a half years," the minister said. Movsisyan said the construction of the new plant, located in the town of Metsamor, near the Turkish border, would require a complex refit, including the installation of seismic safeguards. He added that Armenia must have a permanent source of nuclear power, and that the Armenian NPP must be operational until alternative sources are found. Movsisyan said that thanks to the Armenian government efforts "many foreign countries now understand that Armenia must have a NPP." "Only a new Armenian NPP can become an alternative to the one now in use," he said. Specialists believe the existing Armenian NPP will remain operational until 2016. It was commissioned in 1976, and includes one VVER-440 Soviet-designed reactor that generates 40-50% of Armenia's electricity. RIA Novosti ***************************************************************** 12 Platts: French nuclear vendor Areva says UK nuclear relaunch 'essential' London (Platts)--6Sep2007 French nuclear vendor Areva NP says that the revival of a nuclear power program in the UK is "absolutely essential." CEO Luc Oursel, speaking at a conference in London Thursday, said that the UK would be the first in Europe to relaunch on a large scale a nuclear power effort. Therefore, he said, it has to be successful. Success in the UK could lead other European countries planning to exit nuclear power to reconsider their plans. Also significant is that the UK is one of the most competitive markets in Europe, so a successful relaunch here would demonstrate that nuclear power is competitive with other energy sources. Copyright © 2007 - Platts, All Rights Reserved ***************************************************************** 13 The Hindu: CPI(M) asks BJP to constitute 'BJPC' before seeking JPC Friday, September 7, 2007 : 1650 Hrs New Delhi, Sept. 7 (PTI): The CPI(M) today took a dig at the BJP for seeking a Joint Parliamentary Committee to go into the Indo-US nuclear deal saying the main Opposition party should first set up a BJP committee (BJPC) to resolve their inner contradictions. The Left party also came down heavily on the BJP for "bringing the House to a standstill" on the nuclear-deal issue thus "allowing the government to get rid of discussions not only on the nuclear deal but also on other important issues." "The BJP should set up a BJPC to find out where do they stand because they are changing their position every day. The Committee can have BJP's internal leadership and those controlling it from outside as its members," senior CPI(M) leader Mohd Salim told reporters here. Salim's comments were in an apparent reference to the different views among senior BJP leaders on the nuclear deal. He claimed the BJP never came out with specific objections to the deal like the Left parties had done. "Let the BJP first decide what they want to do on the issue. What they oppose and why they oppose. Let them come out with a list of their objections," he added. Asked about Samajwadi Party's demand for a separate mechanism for addressing the concerns of other parties, he said it has been the CPI(M)'s stand that the Government should take note of the positions held by different political parties on the issue. "Every party has the right to demand. The government should take into consideration the views of all before proceeding further." Copyright © 2007, The Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the ***************************************************************** 14 JOURNAL NEWS: Leak found in pipe at Indian Point Friday, September 7, 2007 By BRIAN J. HOWARD BUCHANAN - Workers have discovered a pinhole-sized leak in a conduit used to transfer spent fuel from the reactor to the containment pool at Indian Point 2. The leak was found Wednesday during testing for groundwater contamination from leaks of radioactive tritium and strontium 90 that were first discovered in 2005. "It appears that there is a potential pinhole leak in the fuel transfer canal, which we believe could be a contributing source to the groundwater contamination that we've been talking about," said Jim Steets, a spokesman for Entergy Nuclear Northeast, the plant's owner. A vacuum test like the one that turned up the leak, as well as an ultrasonic test, will be performed to confirm the size and scope of the leak, Steets said. That will take a few more days. Repairs would follow, but would not require a reactor shutdown. Plant officials say the leak has not contributed significantly to the groundwater contamination. The origin of the leak remains unclear. "We'll know better about what might have caused it when we complete the testing that we're doing," Steets said. "You hate to speculate." Nuclear Regulatory Commission spokesman Neil Sheehan said the leak was above where external moisture was found by workers during an excavation. The leak point is under water only when the canal is flooded for refueling, which occurs every 18 to 24 months. More testing is needed before a connection can be drawn to the groundwater contamination, Sheehan said. "Whether this is the cause, whether this is part of the cause, we don't know that yet, and there's still more work to be done," he said. Buchanan Mayor Dan O'Neill learned of the leak yesterday and was assured there was no threat to the health of residents or workers at the plant. "It does not sound like it's anything major at this time ... ." O'Neill said. Phillip Musegaas, a staff attorney with the environmental group Riverkeeper, said the leak underscored why the NRC should require more thorough testing of systems holding radioactive water. "This is a switch from Entergy's earlier position, because in their relicensing application they have stated that they didn't believe there was an ongoing leak at Indian Point 2 at all," Musegaas said. "The fact that they found this on further inspection suggests that they may find more leaks." Reach Brian Howard at bjhoward@lohud.com or 914-666-6177. Copyright © 2007 The Journal News, a Gannett Co. Inc. newspaper serving Westchester, Rockland and Putnam Counties in New York. ***************************************************************** 15 RosBusinessConsulting: Russian nuclear industry lacks financial support RBC, 07.09.2007, Obninsk 15:08:56.Russia's nuclear industry is in need of financial support and better management, the Russian Prime Minister Mikhail Fradkov told journalists after visiting an Obninsk nuclear power plant. He added that competition on the global nuclear market was becoming more intense which calls for organizational measures along with financial aid. The PM emphasized that despite the competition, international cooperation in the area of nuclear technologies was gaining momentum as well. The US is one of Russia's major partners, according to Fradkov. Please send your questions and comments to webmaster@rbc.ru All rights reserved. © 1995 - 2007 RosBusinessConsulting. ***************************************************************** 16 Brattleboro Reformer: NRC hands out passing grades to Vt. Yankee BRATTLEBORO, VT By PAUL H. HEINTZ, Reformer Staff Friday, September 7 VERNON -- Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant received passing marks in a mid-cycle performance review released by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Thursday. The review, which was completed prior to a recent cooling tower collapse and unplanned shutdown, states that the Entergy Nuclear-owned plant adequately passed regular safety inspections. NRC spokesman Neil Sheehan said the report is a "high altitude review of how we think a nuclear power plant is performing," and it shows that plant's operators "were doing the things they should be doing to ensure they'd get the baseline inspection." Yankee is one of 30 nuclear plants that receive additional attention from the NRC, due to an August 2006 incident in which it sent a shipment of radioactive material to a Pennsylvania facility with an excessive amount of external radiation. Yankee was subsequently flagged with a "white" designation and underwent a supplemental inspection in July, which found that those issues had been addressed. According the report released Thursday, Yankee is on schedule to lose its white designation in October, which means it would return to the NRC's standard, baseline oversight at that point. "We (inspected) the areas involved in the shipment of this package and we're satisfied that they addressed that," Sheehan said. According to Entergy spokesman Rob Williams, "We communicate with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission every day, so (the report) sort of formalizes it periodically and puts it down on the public record. But safety has always been the highest priority here." Williams said changes have been put in place to ensure that the shipping incident does not reoccur. Because the cooling tower collapse occurred after the mid-cycle review was completed, information related to that, "would be captured in the inspection reports and in our annual assessment letter that would come out in mid-March," Sheehan said. However, he said that because the NRC does not consider cooling towers to be integral to overall plant safety, the event may not subject the plant to increased oversight. "When we look at the cooling towers, we don't consider that to be safety significant, but we haven't made any decisions on that. We're still waiting for the root cause evaluation from the plant," he said. "We're by no means done with those issues, but we're continuing to evaluate those and we haven't reached any conclusions yet." Paul Heintz can be reached at pheintz@reformer.com or 802-254-2311, ext. 275. ***************************************************************** 17 Brattleboro Reformer: Welch urges independent review at VY BRATTLEBORO, VT By PAUL H. HEINTZ, Reformer Staff Friday, September 7 BRATTLEBORO -- Rep. Peter Welch, D-Vt., introduced legislation in the U.S. House of Representatives Thursday that would allow governors and public utility commissions to call for an independent safety assessment of a nuclear power plant in their own state or a neighboring state. The bill, which was co-sponsored by four members of Congress from New Hampshire and Massachusetts, follows a similar bill introduced in the U.S. Senate in March by Sen. Bernard Sanders, I-Vt. "This legislation establishes a process for a fair, thorough and independent safety assessment," Welch said in a statement. "Recent events at Vermont Yankee have raised legitimate concerns about plant management, and Vermonters are entitled to an objective assurance that the facility is safe to operate." The bill would direct the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to develop a procedure for an independent panel to "inspect the design, construction, maintenance and operational safety performance" of a plant. The panel of at least 25 members would include no fewer than 16 NRC inspectors who work outside of the plant's region, along with at least six independent contractors and three people chosen by the state official who requested the inspection. The bill is based on a 1996 independent safety assessment performed at Maine Yankee nuclear power plant, which eventually led to the plant's closure. "Given the recent problems at Vermont Yankee, there has been growing concerns in our part of the world about the safety of the plant and the need for inspection, and I'm really glad that Congressman Welch agreed to introduce the legislation," Sanders said Thursday. Though Sanders' version of the bill has not made significant headway since it was introduced in March, he said, "I think it's provoking some very good discussion." "Needless to say, as in other areas, powerful special interests carry a lot of sway in the Congress, but we have started a serious discussion about the issue," he said. An independent assessment would have to be completed within 18 months of a request, and it could delay a plant's license extension or power uprate if safety problems were found. "The NRC's stance when it comes to independent inspections is that our current reactor oversight process very ably covers the key elements of plant performance," said NRC spokesman Neil Sheehan. He said the current process "incorporated many of the elements that helped to make up the Maine Yankee independent safety inspection, so if nothing else, we would consider an independent safety inspection duplicative of work we're already doing." Rob Williams, a spokesman for Entergy Nuclear, which operates Vermont Yankee, agreed. "We've not read the legislation, but the Maine Yankee independent inspection was a long time ago, and the lessons learned there have been incorporated into the present federal oversight process," he said. "So to impose a Maine Yankee-style inspection at any plant would be a step backward in terms of safety benefit compared to the resources expended. And that's why it's not been done." Gov. James Douglas would consider requesting an independent safety inspection of Vermont Yankee if the bill were to pass, according to spokesman Jason Gibbs, but the governor has some reservations about the authority it would grant other states to request such an inspection. "It's one option that we would certainly consider to ensure the safety of the plant," Gibbs said. "We do need to take a closer look at the bill because we do have some modest concerns about the jurisdictional issues. As a matter of policy, governors from all states are generally reluctant to concede authority to governors of other states." The bill would allow the governor or public utility commission of a state that falls within an emergency planning zone to file such a request, so New Hampshire or Massachusetts could presumably ask the NRC to conduct an inspection of Vermont Yankee. "I'm not sure we want to go down a policy road of allowing a governor of Massachusetts to determine how things ought to be regulated in Vermont," Gibbs said. "We want to be very careful about how the Congress intervenes in these sorts of jurisdictional issues." Paul Heintz can be reached at pheintz@reformer.com or 802-254-2311, ext. 275. ***************************************************************** 18 DutchNews.nl: Dismantling nuclear plant to cost more Friday 07 September 2007 The environment ministry is considering forcing the current owner of the nuclear plant in Dodewaard to pay more towards its dismantling. The company, GKN, estimates the cost at €130m. The intended new owner Covra, which specialises in radioactive waste, told the Radio 1 Argos programme it will cost €230m. The ministry wants Covra to take over the plant because it is the only company in the country that collects, treats and stores radioactive waste. Covra wants to dismantle Dodewaard before the end of the licence period in 2045. © DutchNews.nl ***************************************************************** 19 Scotsman.com: Public talks on nuclear future Saturday, 8th September 2007 PART of a massive public consultation will take place in Edinburgh tomorrow on the future of nuclear power in the UK. A group of 100 people selected as representative of Scotland's population will take part. The city is one of nine throughout the UK to hold the day-long event, which is expected to be the largest deliberative exercise of its kind. Participants will be provided with information to help them understand issues surrounding nuclear power and will spend the day debating the pros and cons. They will also be asked a number of questions on the material presented and asked to answer using electronic handsets. This article: http://news.scotsman.com/edinburgh.cfm?id=1430802007 Last updated: 07-Sep-07 12:06 BST ©2007 Scotsman.com | contact | terms & conditions ***************************************************************** 20 Reuters: Nuclear industry does not fear competition from gas Fri Sep 7, 2007 12:26PM BST By Anna Stablum LONDON, Sept 7 (Reuters) - The nuclear power industry in the United States will stay cost competitive against natural gas as long as gas prices stay above $3 per million British thermal units, senior nuclear officials told a conference this week. "Gas in $3 to 4 per million BTU (British thermal units) is probably a market when we start to compete," President and CEO Steve Tritch at Westinghouse Electric told the World Nuclear Association's annual Symposium. Today 16 percent of global energy supply comes from nuclear power, but with world demand for electricity expected to double by 2030, energy from nuclear as well as other sources would have to increase, Tritch told the London audience. On the New York Mercantile Exchange, October natural gas (NGV7: Quote, Profile, Research) traded at $5.54 per million BTU on Friday. Henry Hub natural gas futures (NGc1: Quote, Profile, Research) have held above $5 all year, according to Reuters data. "If we look at some of the recent prices of gas we feel our plants will be extremely competitive," Tritch said. Westinghouse Electric, mainly owned by Japan's Toshiba Corporation (6502.T: Quote, Profile, Research), supplies fuel as well as building reactors. Its technology is found in 60 percent of U.S. nuclear power plants. Westinghouse has operations in 12 states and 14 countries with annual sales of approximately $1.8 billion. Continued... © Reuters 2007. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 21 Reuters: Japan's TEPCO to restart thermal power units Fri Sep 7, 2007 11:24AM BST By Osamu Tsukimori TOKYO, Sept 7 (Reuters) - Tokyo Electric Power Co (9501.T: Quote, Profile, Research) said on Friday it plans to restart one of its six mothballed thermal power units in mid- to late December after a July earthquake, to help stabilise power supply in winter. The company also said it will restart two more mothballed units, No. 7 and No. 8 units at its Yokosuka plant with a total capacity of 700 megawatts before the summer of 2008. TEPCO said it does not know how much oil consumption would increase as a result of these restarts. It maintained its July outlook that it would buy around 10.5 million kilolitres (181,000 bpd) this fiscal year to March versus an initially planned 5.4 million kl (93,000 bpd). TEPCO also plans to buy about 18.8 million tonnes of LNG this business year, up from its earlier projection of 17.5 million tonnes. The restart of the 265 megawatt liquefied natural gas (LNG) fired No. 4 unit at its Goi plant in Chiba, near Tokyo, comes after a July 16 earthquake forced the indefinite closure of its Kashiwazaki-Kariwa nuclear plant in northwestern Japan, the world's largest. After losing output of 8,212 megawatts from the nuclear plant, TEPCO, Asia's top utility, has been trying to secure stable power supplies by considering restarting a number of units that have long been kept shut or even decommissioned. Next week, TEPCO plans to restart a 144 megawatt No.2 gas-turbine unit at its Yokosuka plant in eastern Japan. The unit had been decommissioned since March 2006. To meet peak summer demand, TEPCO has been granted government approval to use scandal-hit 900 megawatt Shiobara hydro power plant north of Tokyo in emergency cases between July July 30 and Sept. 7, but it no longer can operate the hydro plant from Saturday. It used the hydro plant once on August 22 when a deadly heatwave threatened to cause power outages and forced TEPCO to use an emergency measure of asking some large users to curb power use for the first time in 17 years. Excluding those units which are scheduled to be restarted by summer of 2008, the company has three more mothballed oil and gas-fired rmal units with total capacity of 875 megawatts. A TEPCO spokesman said that the company is considering restarting more mothballed or decommissioned units, but that no formal decision for restart had yet been made. TEPCO plans to conduct checks on all nuclear generators at the Kashiwazaki-Kariwa plant by early next year. The following is a list of thermal units scheduled to be restarted. Output capacity is in megawatts. PLANT UNIT FUEL CAPACITY RESTART SCHEDULE Yokosuka G/T No.2 gas oil, LNG 144 By Sept. 15 Goi No.4 LNG 265 Mid- to late Dec Yokosuka No.7 fuel oil, crude 350 Before summer '08 Yokosuka No.8 fuel oil, crude 350 Before summer '08 © Reuters 2007. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 22 Reuters: Penn. Beaver Valley renewal papers available - NRC Fri Sep 7, 2007 12:22PM EDT NEW YORK, Sept 7 (Reuters) - The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission said Friday that the application for a 20-year renewal of the operating licenses for FirstEnergy Corp.'s (FE.N: Quote, Profile, Research) Beaver Valley nuclear power plant in Pennsylvania is available for public review. The current operating licenses expire Jan. 29, 2016, for Unit 1 and May 27, 2027, for Unit 2. FirstEnergy submitted the license renewal application on Aug. 27. FirstEnergy originally submitted a license renewal application for Beaver Valley in March 2005 but the NRC said it returned that application as incomplete and unacceptable for docketing. The NRC said its staff is currently conducting its initial reviews of the new application to determine whether it contains sufficient information required for the formal safety and environmental reviews. If the application has sufficient information, the NRC said it will formally "docket," or file it and will announce an opportunity for the public to request a hearing on the renewal request. After accepting the application, the NRC usually makes a decision in about 23 months if there is no hearing and about 31 months if it grants a hearing. The 1,642-megawatt Beaver Valley station is located in Shippingport in Beaver County, about 35 miles northwest of Pittsburgh. There are two 821 MW Units 1 and 2 at the station, which entered service in 1976 and 1987. One MW powers about 800 homes in Pennsylvania. FirstEnergy's FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Co. subsidiary operates the station. FirstEnergy, of Akron, Ohio, owns and operates more than 14,000 MW of generating capacity, markets energy commodities, and transmits and distributes electricity to about 4.5 million customers in Ohio, Pennsylvania and New Jersey. © Reuters 2007. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 23 NRC: Hearing Regarding Oyster Creek License Renewal Application Scheduled for Sept. 24-26 in Toms River, N.J. News Release - Region I - 2007-044 - 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 An evidentiary hearing on an issue raised by a coalition of environmental groups with regard to an application to extend the Oyster Creek nuclear power plant’s operating license will be held in Toms River (Ocean County), N.J., beginning at 9 a.m. on Monday, Sept. 24, and concluding no later than noon on Wednesday, Sept. 26. The hearing will take place in Room 119 of the Ocean County (N.J.) Administration Building, at 101 Hooper Ave. in Toms River. (Directions are available at: http://www.co.ocean.nj.us/ComplexMapPage.aspx .) A three-judge Atomic Safety and Licensing Board (ASLB) panel led by Chairman E. Roy Hawkens will conduct the hearing, which will involve the lawyers for the parties and expert witnesses. Members of the public can observe the sessions but will not be allowed to participate. In the event matters at issue involve the discussion of proprietary information, portions of the hearing may be closed to the public. Members of the public are also advised that NRC procedures prohibit the use of signs, banners, posters and displays at all NRC adjudicatory proceedings. In July 2005, AmerGen Energy Co., LLC, which owns and operates Oyster Creek, applied to the NRC for a 20-year license extension. The current 40-year operating license for the plant, which is located in Lacey Township (Ocean County), N.J., is due to expire on April 9, 2009. Subsequently, the State of New Jersey and a coalition of environmental groups requested a hearing on the application. The state’s request was eventually turned down, but the coalition had a single contention admitted. The coalition’s contention pertains to the plant’s drywell shell, a bulb-shaped, steel liner that surrounds the reactor vessel. In the event of a severe accident at the plant, the shell would direct steam toward a large reservoir of water at the base of the reactor building, where it would be cooled and condensed. The coalition has raised concerns about corrosion of this liner, specifically in what is known as the sandbed region. During the 1980s, GPU Nuclear, the plant’s then-owner, determined that water had accumulated in a sandbed that surrounded a lower section of the shell, thereby causing corrosion. In the early 1990s, GPU, after an evaluation, removed the sandbed and coated the liner with an epoxy. The company took readings during subsequent plant shutdowns and determined the corrosion had been abated. Although that testing was suspended for several outages, AmerGen performed visual and ultrasonic tests during an outage earlier this year and informed the NRC that those examinations confirmed that the thickness of the drywell shell remained within safety margins. AmerGen has proposed taking more ultrasonic measurements in 2008, and then during every other refueling/maintenance outage, unless analysis of the measurements establishes that the period between inspections needs to be increased. In its contention, the coalition argues that the proposed period of ultrasonic inspection in the sandbed area is not adequate. Additional information about the Oyster Creek application review is available at: http://www.nrc.gov/reactors/operating/licensing/renewal/applications/o ystercreek.html NRC news releases are available through a free listserv 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. September 05, 2007 ***************************************************************** 24 Boston.com: Welch calls for safety review of aging nuclear reactors - September 7, 2007 MONTPELIER, Vt. --U.S. Rep. Peter Welch has joined U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders in calling for extensive safety reviews of older nuclear power plants following two incidents at Vermont Yankee that have shaken public faith in the Vernon reactor. Under the bill, governors would be allowed to seek independent review of the plants in their state or adjacent states when the reactors when seek power upgrades or new licenses. "Recent events at Vermont Yankee have raised legitimate concerns about plant management, and Vermonters are entitled to an objective assurance that the facility is safe to operate," said Welch, D-Vt., as he introduced the legislation Wednesday. Meanwhile, federal regulators gave Vermont Yankee a passing grade for safety in a recent inspection, before part of a cooling tower collapsed on Aug. 21, and nine days later, the plant automatically shut down, apparently because of lack of grease in a bearing that is part of a large motor-operated valve. The plant has since resumed making power. The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission mid-cycle performance review, which was released Thursday, said the Entergy Nuclear power plant passed regular safety inspections. Since the cooling tower collapse and the shutdown occured after the review, they'll be considered separately by regulators. But the plant may not be subject to increased oversight because of the tower collapse. "When we look at the cooling towers, we don't consider that to be safety significant, but we haven't made any decisions on that. We're still waiting for the root cause evaluation from the plant," said NRC spokesman Neil Sheehan. Welch said his bill was co-sponsored by four House members, from New Hampshire and Massachusetts, which border Vermont, near the Vernon reactor. "This is about safety," Welch said. "If there was an event at Vermont Yankee, it would impact the citizens of all three states. ... To have public confidence in the facility you have to have a review process the public has confidence in." Sanders introduced similar legislation in the Senate six months ago. © Copyright 2007 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. © The New York Times Company ***************************************************************** 25 wtvc.com: TVA Worker Files Whistleblower Lawsuit Contact - Richard Simms Associated Press September 7, 2007 - 6:03PM A former construction foreman at Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant filed a whistleblower lawsuit today. James Speegle claims he was fired by a Tennessee Valley Authority contractor for reporting serious safety violations at the plant. Speegle says he complained about problems with the protective coatings used in the plant's cooling system. According to the suit he was fired two days after he complained to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and his company, Stone & Webster. The suit also says TVA removed the company from the coatings project and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission later cited Stone & Webster for improper coatings work. A spokesman for Stone & Webster said the company doesn't comment on litigation. * © 2007 Freedom Communications ***************************************************************** 26 KSDK NewsChannel 5: What Was Left Behind By Former Nuclear Fuel Plant? Created: 9/6/2007 10:03:40 PM Click to watch Ann Rubin's report. By Ann Rubin (KSDK) - Westinghouse plans to spend millions to clean up a former nuclear fuel manufacturing plant in Jefferson County, Mo. So what kinds of contaminants were left behind and just how long will it take to clean up? At a community meeting Thursday night at the First Christian Church in Hematite, Westinghouse and the government laid out exactly what was found. The new study found radioactive materials, volatile organic compounds and heavy metals were left behind, buried in the soil and lingering in the water in Hematite. "Part of the ground water is contaminated and it's leached into the wells so people couldn't use them any more," resident James Downs said. Resident Donna Ives, who runs a day care out of her home, said she is especially worried about the kids. "It's a big concern because of the contamination of the water and the health of the people around here and the children," Ives said. Residents brought their questions and concerns and Westinghouse was ready with answers. Company representatives showed maps of the area, explaining that of the contaminants, only the organic materials appear to have leached into the water. The rest remains on the property. "The most important thing is we did address the immediate public health hazard when we installed the public water supply. Now what we have to go after is the contamination that remains. But there really are not a lot of pathways where people would be exposed to that," spokesperson Kevin Hayes said. The Missouri Department of Natural Resources said this was just the first step. It still needed to determine what was there before they can determine how best to get rid of it. Still they admit it's a slow process. "It doesn't indicate delay for delay's sake. It indicates delay to make sure you have the right answer to address the problem," said project manager Ben Moore. Many residents remain skeptical. They said another meeting doesn't solve anything. "For at least six, seven years they said they were going to be cleaning this up and they have not done anything yet," Ives said. Westinghouse hopes to begin the cleanup by this time next year. They expect it will cost at least $40 million and could be completed by 2010. KSDK ***************************************************************** 27 Guardian Unlimited: Government nuclear talks pointless, say green groups * Friday September 7 2007 Leading environmental groups today withdrew from a consultation on whether to build new nuclear power stations, accusing the government of a "public relations stitch-up". Meetings will be held across the UK tomorrow in which members of the public will look at the case for and against nuclear power. But the environmental groups have pulled out because they are unhappy at the way the arguments will be set out. At least six groups, including Greenpeace, Friends of the Earth, WWF and Green Alliance, claim the government is distorting the evidence and say they are considering whether to return the case to court. The consultation process was forced upon the government by the high court, which ruled in February that a previous consultation was "seriously flawed" and "manifestly inadequate and unfair". Friends of the Earth said it would not be sending observers to the new meetings as it had planned, and would spell out its concerns to ministers. This weekend's meetings were an effort by the government to address concerns that a full consultation was not being held. A spokesman for Friends of the Earth said: "We do not feel it was a fair and full public debate, it was much more about promoting the arguments for nuclear power. What we want to do is signal to the wider public and the government that we don't think this was a proper consultation." John Sauven, the executive director of Greenpeace, accused the government of pre-empting the current public consultation. "As a matter of law, the government should not change its policy on nuclear power until it has carried out a public consultation," he said. Mr Sauven told BBC Radio 4's Today programme: "You can't expect people to contribute to an exercise which the government is essentially saying itself is absolutely pointless. "And it goes much further than this because the consultation documents that we have seen are making all kinds of assertions - for example, that the nuclear waste problem is solved. "It even says nuclear power is cheaper than wind even though the government's own published documents show the exact opposite is true." The business and enterprise secretary, John Hutton, defended the government's position, saying that its preliminary view was that nuclear power should play a part in providing low-carbon energy. Mr Hutton added that he would be extremely disappointed if Greenpeace and others decided not to participate in the full consultation they had called for. While acknowledging the government's preliminary stance on nuclear energy, Mr Hutton said the government might change its view. "It is not the government that has got a closed view on these issues," Mr Hutton said. "I think it is organisations like Greenpeace that have got a closed mind. There is only one outcome that Greenpeace and other organisations want from this consultation." * Guardian Unlimited © Guardian News and Media Limited 2007 ***************************************************************** 28 WCAX: NRC gave passing mark to plant before recent problems Associated Press - September 7, 2007 7:05 AM ET VERNON (AP) - Federal regulators gave Vermont Yankee a passing grade for safety in a recent inspection, before a pair of incidents that have shaken public faith in the Vernon nuclear power plant. The US Nuclear Regulatory COmmission mid-cycle performanc review, which was released yesterday, said the Entergy Nuclear power plant passed regulator safety inspections. On August 21st, a cooling tower collapse prompted the plant to cut power in half, and nine days later, the plant automatically shut down, apparently because of lack of grease in a bearing that is part of a large motor-operated valve. It has since resumed making power. The NRC says that since those things occurred after the review, they'll be considered separately by regulators. All content © Copyright 2001 - 2007 WorldNow and WCAX. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 29 icWales: Cardiff to have its say on nuclear power Sep 8 2007 by Aled Blake, Western Mail GOVERNMENT consultation on the future of nuclear power in the UK will come to Cardiff today. It is part of a major programme in which ministers are canvassing the views of a demographically representative sample of 1,100 citizens simultaneously across nine UK cities. Evidence from the events in Belfast, Cardiff, Edinburgh, Exeter, Leicester, Liverpool, London, Newcastle and Norwich will help inform the decision due to be made later this year on the option of building new nuclear power stations. The Government has reached a preliminary view that new nuclear would be in the public interest because it believes it has the potential to make an important contribution to the UK’s energy security. John Hutton, Secretary of State for the Department for Business and Enterprise, said, ‘Time is pressing, with most of the UK’s existing nuclear power stations set to close over the next couple of decades, we must make a decision on the future of nuclear power this year. “It is right that we debate the pros and cons – our livelihoods and the future health of the planet depend on us getting this right. “The decision will be based on a careful consideration of all the evidence gathered during our consultation. That includes the views of the general public and those of the business community, energy companies, green groups and academics.” An interactive website went live in parallel – www.direct.gov.uk/nuclearpower2007 – designed to make the consultation document more accessible, splitting it into sections with dialogue boxes to capture views as respondents click through. There will also be ministerial roundtable events in September to hear from leaders of business, City investors, unions and environmental groups about their views. © owned by or licensed to Western Mail & Echo Limited 2007 ***************************************************************** 30 NRC: NRC Issues Mid-cycle Letters for Nation’s Nuclear Plants News Release - 2007-115 - U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs Telephone: 301/415-8200 Washington, DC 20555-0001 E-mail: opa@nrc.gov www.nrc.gov The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has issued mid-cycle assessment letters to the nation’s 104 operating commercial nuclear power plants. The agency’s most recent assessments show all the plants continue to operate safely. “We ensure nuclear power plants are safe, inspecting them and rating their performance regularly, as part of our mission to protect people and the environment,” said Stuart Richards, Deputy Director of the Division of Inspection and Regional Support in the NRC’s Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. “The latest round of assessments shows that about 70 percent of the nation’s commercial reactors require only the agency’s basic level of attention.” If a nuclear power plant’s performance declines, the NRC assigns additional resources to ensure the plant operator is taking the steps necessary to correct the situation. Only one plant, Palo Verde in Arizona, requires the NRC’s highest level of attention, which will include additional inspectors this fall to confirm the plant’s performance issues are being addressed. Ten plants require significant NRC attention, and another 19 plants get some additional attention. These numbers are generally comparable to last year’s mid-cycle assessments. A list of each plant’s current performance rating is available on the NRC Web site at: http://www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/actionmatrix_summary.html. Updated information on plant performance is posted to the NRC Web site every quarter. The plants also receive annual assessment letters, with the next ones to be issued in March 2008. The assessment letters sent to each licensee are available on the NRC Web site at: http://www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/index.html NRC news releases are available through a free listserv 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. September 06, 2007 ***************************************************************** 31 UK: NewsBlaze: Hidden Subsidy for Nuclear Power by Dr Gerry Wolff On Radio 4's Today programme on the 7th of September, John Hutton MP, Secretary of State, Department for Business, Enterprise & Regulatory Reform, repeated what the Government has said on previous occasions: that no subsidies would be provided for new nuclear power stations. But in the UK, as in many other countries around the world, nuclear power enjoys a very large subsidy because it is required to pay only a small fraction of the cost of insuring fully against a Chernobyl-style disaster or worse. Details of the size of this subsidy are given in Helen Caldicott's book "Nuclear power is not the answer" (ISBN-10 1595582134: ISBN-13 978-1-59558-067-2). If the Government is serious in saying that there would be no subsidies for nuclear power, then it should require the nuclear industry to pay the full cost of insuring against nuclear disasters, without any limitations on liabilities. For More Information: www.mng.org.uk/gh/ judythpiazza@newsblaze.com Copyright © 2007, NewsBlaze, Daily News ***************************************************************** 32 Whitehaven News: Greens go red over nuclear Published on 07/09/2007 BRITAIN’S green movement has put a red light on plans for a new generation of nuclear reactors, one of which might be built at Sellafield. Environmental groups including Greenpeace, Friends of the Earth and the Green Alliance, have threatened to withdraw from government consultations on whether to push ahead with the new breed of reactors, claiming a government “public relations stitch up.” New prime minister Gordon Brown is believed to be in favour like his predecessor Tony Blair. of building more reactors “as a green move” to give Britain a better balanced energy supply and cut down on damaging carbon emissions. In West Cumbria, community leaders, trades unions and the nuclear industry hope Sellafield will be given priority for a big modern reactor now that Calder Hall, the world’s first, is set to be demolished. The environmental coalition is poised to “black” the consultations claiming that so far the government has “already made up its mind and that the new consultation is nothing more than an expensive sham.” Eight meetings are to be held tomorrow (Saturday) in cities around the UK to present all sides of the nuclear debate. A High Court ruled last year that a previous consultation was “seriously flawed.” and now the Greens are suggesting they might go back to court to challenge the government on whether it is being impartial in the public debate. View this story and the latest newspaper in full digital reproduction, just like the printed copy at www.whitehaven-news.co.uk/digitalcopy ***************************************************************** 33 Greenpeace UK: What is the government hiding about nuclear power? | Posted by tracy on 7 September 2007. As a matter of law the government must keep an open mind on new nuclear power until after the "fullest public consultation." It claims that it "will consider carefully the responses we get and this will enable us to take a decision on nuclear power later in the year." One day. One thousand people. That is what the government considers full public consultation on the fate of the country and the survival of the planet. In 2006 the government initiated an Energy Review to determine how the UK will cut greenhouse gas emissions and meet our energy needs - the issue of whether or not the UK should build new nuclear power stations was high up the agenda. However, the way in which the government then proceeded to consult on nuclear power drew heavy criticism. It looked as though the government had already made up its mind on the issue of nuclear power and the consultation was mere window dressing. It was light-weight and full of misleading information. Fundamentally the process was not the "fullest public consultation" that the government had promised to conduct before giving the go-ahead on new nuclear power. So we took the government to the High Courts to challenge the legality of the of the their conclusion - that nuclear power had a "role to play" in the UK's future energy supply. In February Mr. Justice Sullivan found in favour of Greenpeace and ruled that the government's pro-nuclear decision was "unlawful." In his Judgment he described the consultation as "seriously flawed" and "manifestly inadequate and unfair" because insufficient and "misleading" information had been made available by the government to those consulted which didn't allow them to make an "intelligent response". So the government was forced to re-consult comprehensively on nuclear power prior to making decisions to allow or support new build. As a matter of law the government must keep an open mind on new nuclear power until after the "fullest public consultation." Tomorrow just over 1000 selected members of the public will be asked their view on nuclear power. But this is clearly a sham, the government has already made up its mind. In May on BBC's Politics Show Alistair Darling said, "I believe that nuclear ought to be part of the mix." In July Gordon Brown told MPs, "we have made the decision to continue with nuclear power" before the new consultation had finished. This latest round of consultation is clearly rubber stamping exercise designed to push through the Prime Minister's pre-ordained policy on nuclear energy. Along with the Green Alliance, WWF and Friends of the Earth, we published a dossier today that reveals that: * the government has rushed through the consultation in half the time recommended by its own environmental watchdog the Sustainable Development Commission * consultation materials provided for the public are misleading, inaccurate and biased towards nuclear power * repeated requests from non-governmental organisations for updates from the government about the development of public materials for the consultation and proceeding were ignored. Read all the shocking details in the dossier. Clearly this government can't get nuclear power past a fair consultation because the policy is environmentally, financially and scientifically flawed. That's why ministers have gone for a stitch-up. Again. Here's the information the government doesn't want you to see. Take a look at our new film - a Convenient Solution - if you would like to find out why nuclear power won't solve climate change and what the real solution is. ***************************************************************** 34 NRC: License Renewal Application for Beaver Valley Nuclear Plant Available for Public Inspection News Release - 2007-116 - U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs Telephone: 301/415-8200 Washington, DC 20555-0001 E-mail: opa@nrc.gov www.nrc.gov The Nuclear Regulatory Commission announced today that an application for a 20-year renewal of the operating licenses for the Beaver Valley nuclear power plant, Units 1 and 2, is available for public review. Beaver Valley Units 1 and 2 are pressurized water reactors located about 17 miles west of McCandless, Pa. The current operating licenses expire Jan. 29, 2016, for Unit 1 and May 27, 2027, for Unit 2. Beaver Valley’s operator, First Energy Nuclear Operating Co. (FENOC), submitted the license renewal application Aug. 27. The application is available on the NRC Web site at this address: http://www.nrc.gov/reactors/operating/licensing/renewal/applications.h tml. The application is also available at the Beaver Area Memorial Library, 100 College Ave., Beaver, Pa. FENOC originally submitted a license renewal application for Beaver Valley in March 2005. The NRC returned that application as incomplete and unacceptable for docketing. The NRC staff is currently conducting its initial reviews of the new application to determine whether it contains sufficient information required for the formal safety and environmental reviews. If the application has sufficient information, the NRC will formally “docket,” or file it and will announce an opportunity for the public to request an adjudicatory hearing on the renewal request. Additional information about the NRC’s review of reactor license renewal applications is available on the NRC Web site at: http://www.nrc.gov/reactors/operating/licensing/renewal.html NRC news releases are available through a free listserv 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. September 07, 2007 ***************************************************************** 35 Guardian Unlimited: Green groups accused in nuclear row Press Association Friday September 7, 2007 2:08 PM The Government has hit back at the decision by leading environmental groups to pull out of its consultation on whether to build new nuclear power stations, accusing them of having a closed mind on the issue. Responding to accusations that the Government has pre-judged the consultation, Business and Enterprise Secretary John Hutton conceded it had reached a preliminary view that nuclear should have a role in the UK's future energy mix. But he insisted: "It is possible that the Government might change its view." And he argued: "It is not the Government that has got a closed view on these issues. I think it is organisations like Greenpeace that have got a closed mind. There is only one outcome that Greenpeace and other organisations want from this consultation." The Government was forced into the process by a High Court ruling in February that a previous consultation was "seriously flawed" and "manifestly inadequate and unfair". It is bound by its own guidelines to keep an open mind on new nuclear power stations until after the "fullest public consultation". A new pull-out by key organisations will be a blow to ministers, who are running out of time to find a solution to the country's future energy gap. But green groups, including Greenpeace and Friends of the Earth, are unhappy at how the Government is presenting the evidence and are reportedly considering further legal action. They have formed a coalition and accused the Government of performing a "public relations stitch-up" over the process. Eight public meetings are being held across the UK on Saturday to look at the case for and against nuclear power. A Friends of the Earth spokesman said: "We do not feel it was a fair and full public debate, it was much more about promoting the arguments for nuclear power. What we want to do is signal to the wider public and the Government that we don't think this was a proper consultation." John Sauven, executive director of Greenpeace, accused ministers of pre-judging the consultation. "You can't expect people to contribute to an exercise which the Government is essentially saying itself is absolutely pointless," he told BBC Radio 4's Today programme. Copyright (c) Press Association Ltd. 2007, All Rights Reserved. Guardian Unlimited © Guardian News and Media Limited 2007 ***************************************************************** 36 Dr John Gofman On Nuclear Power's Lethality & Industry's Attempts To Date: Sat, 08 Sep 2007 02:48:02 -0400 Gofman also has more published in "The Bulletin Of The Atomic Scientists http://www.thebulletin.org [circa 1993], "Beware The Data Diddlers." http://www.mothersalert.org/gofman.html [Dr John Gofman On Ionizing Radiation's Potential Effects] http://www.truthout.org/issues_06/090707HA.shtml Go to Original The Genius Doctor Who Diagnosed Nuke Power's Deadly Disease Dr John Gofman On Nuclear Power's Lethality & Industry's Attempts To Date: Sat, 08 Sep 2007 02:48:02 -0400 Gofman also has more published in "The Bulletin Of The Atomic Scientists http://www.thebulletin.org [circa 1993], "Beware The Data Diddlers." http://www.mothersalert.org/gofman.html [Dr John Gofman On Ionizing Radiation's Potential Effects] http://www.truthout.org/issues_06/090707HA.shtml Go to Original The Genius Doctor Who Diagnosed Nuke Power's Deadly Disease By Harvey Wasserman The Free Press Friday 07 September 2007 The nuke power industry now wants $50 billion and more in loan guarantees to build new atomic reactors. As it strong-arms Congress, the warnings of the great Dr. John Gofman, who passed away last week at 88, loom ever larger. One of history's most respected and revered medical and nuclear pioneers, Gofman's research showed as early as 1969 that "normal" radioactive reactor emissions could kill 32,000 Americans per year. At the time, Gofman was the chief medical researcher for the Atomic Energy Commission. He told the AEC that reactor emissions must be radically reduced. The AEC demanded he change his findings, then forced him out when he refused. Since then, reactor backers have ceaselessly and erroneously attacked Gofman and his findings. But they could hardly have picked a more brilliant, committed opponent. Gofman was both relentless and uncorrupted. His findings should have doomed from the start an industry he called "insane." In addition to being a world-class nuclear chemist, Dr. John William Gofman was one of history's most important heart specialists. His pioneer research helped define our modern understanding about cholesterol, distinguishing "good" fatty acids from bad. Gofman's astonishing medical discoveries remain at the core of today's common wisdom about diet and heart disease. For that work alone, Gofman was a towering figure. Throughout his life, he was friend and peer to Nobel Laureates such as Linus Pauling and George Wald. But Gofman was also a nuclear chemist. As part of the Manhattan Project that built the first atomic bombs, his pioneer work helped lead to the discoveries of plutonium and certain isotopes of uranium. Yet his career suffered from an inconvenient truth: when he discovered that atomic power plants kill people in large numbers, he refused to shut up about it. As a full professor at the University of California, Gofman's combined medical and nuclear credentials made him an obvious choice to manage health research for the Atomic Energy Commission, which both regulated and promoted the young nuclear power industry. When public questions were raised about the health impacts of radioactive reactor emissions, Gofman was dispatched to prove the industry safe. But his findings showed that reactors are serious killers. So even Gofman's towering resume could not protect him from the wrath of an industry determined to build all the power plants it could. He and co-researcher Arthur Tamplin were driven from their jobs. When their POISONED POWER detailed the killing potential of atomic energy, Gofman and Tamplin were attacked mercilessly by an industry with immense investments to protect. The experience showed that no matter how impeccable their credentials, and no matter how thorough their research, any scientists whose findings might indicate problems with atomic power would be automatically "discredited" by industry flacks to who did no comparable research. Even at his passing, the tired attacks on Gofman's findings have resurfaced. But his research remains the gold standard on the health impacts of radiation. And as a gentle but firm advocate, mentor and friend, his integrity was matched only by his willingness to step outside traditional boundaries for what he believed. One of Gofman's most powerful and influential moments came in 1974, when he agreed to defend a civil disobedient named Sam Lovejoy in the small town of Montague, Massachusetts. A member of a communal organic farm, Lovejoy had manually knocked over a 500-foot weather tower erected as a precursor to the building of a large twin reactor complex. Gofman agreed to testify in Lovejoy's defense, arguing that building two nuke reactors constituted a lethal threat to the health and safety of the community. In a monumental moment for the rise of the anti-nuclear movement, Lovejoy was acquitted. Gofman's pivotal pronouncements appear in the award-winning LOVEJOY'S NUCLEAR WAR (gmpfilms.com), which has been shown all over the world. As a pivotal struggle over a "bailout in advance" for new reactor construction rages in Congress, Gofman's words resonate with a renewed critical importance: "The decision to build nuclear power plants may very well be, for the first time, a decision that can result in the desecration of the Earth with respect for life for all future generations." "Why do we want to put every city and hamlet of the United States at risk by building a thousand of these plants? We can get the power from sunshine, very easily and economically." "When we're talking about a mass of a hundred tons or so of material, melting 5,000 degrees Fahrenheit, with water around, with hydrogen being generated and burning explosively, melting through concrete into soil, when someone tells me that we're sure it isn't going to go far away, I say that I've heard various forms of insanity, but hardly this form." "Even if this hazard of a meltdown were securely answered, it doesn't alter for one second my opposition to nuclear power, because I'm concerned about the fact that whether it melts down or doesn't melt down, you've created an astronomical amount of radioactive garbage which you must contain and isolate better than 99.99 percent perfectly, in peace and war, with human error and human malice, guerilla activity, psychotics, malfunctio n of equipment ... do you believe that there's anything you'd like to guarantee will be done 99.99 percent perfectly for a hundred thousand years?" After fifty years of proven failure, the nuke power industry is demanding still more taxpayer handouts to create still more of this waste. The great and good Dr. John W. Gofman warned us all against this insanity. His words and spirit remain at the core of what must be done to save this planet. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Harvey Wasserman is senior advisor to Greenpeace USA and the Nuclear Information & Resource Service, and Senior Editor of www.solartopia.org and www.freepress.org, where this article first appeared. For a fuller account of the amazing life of Dr. John Gofman, see www.beyondnuclear.org. ------- Jump to today's Truthout Issues: Today's Truthout Issues -------------- APEC "Muddies the Climate Waters" No Nevada Water for Nuclear Dump Global Warming Threatens Nation's Public Lands The Genius Doctor Who Diagnosed Nuke Power's Deadly Disease New York City Taxi Strike Has an Unlikely Leader Congress Votes to Repeal Global Gag Rule Why Men Should Be Included in Abortion Discussion -------------- t r u t h o u t Home (In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. t r u t h o u t has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is t r u t h o u t endorsed or sponsored by the originator.) "Go to Original" links are provided as a convenience to our readers and allow for verification of authenticity. However, as originating pages are often updated by their originating host sites, the versions posted on TO may not match the versions our readers view when clicking the "Go to Original" links. Print This Story E-mail This Story | t r u t h o u t | issues | environment | labor | women | health | voter rights | multimedia | donate | contact | subscribe | about us Attachment Converted: 2.print.gif: 00000001,00000001,00000000,3e390548 Attachment Converted: 2.ClrSpc.indent_2.gif: 00000001,00000001,00000000,48cd2cd4 Attachment Converted: 2.mail.gif: 00000001,00000001,00000000,23713a96 ***************************************************************** 37 No Nevada Water for Nuclear Dump Date: Fri, 7 Sep 2007 23:02:57 -0500 (CDT) http://www.truthout.org/issues_06/090707EB.shtml Go to Original No Nevada Water for Nuclear Dump By Ralph Vartabedian The Los Angeles Times Wednesday 05 September 2007 A federal judge rules against Energy officials, who say they need 8 million gallons to continue work on the Yucca Mountain site. The Energy Department's controversial plan to build a nuclear waste dump in Nevada was trumped by Western water law Tuesday, when a federal judge rejected the agency's demand for 8 million gallons of water that state officials have refused to release. Energy officials said they needed the water to drill test holes at Yucca Mountain, the site about 90 miles north of Las Vegas where the government wants to store about 70,000 metric tons of high-level nuclear waste from across the nation. President Bush and Congress approved the site in 2002, but a series of legal and political setbacks has stalled the project - and raised questions about when and if the dump will open. In a stinging rebuke Tuesday, U.S. District Judge Roger L. Hunt denied an injunction sought by the Energy Department against Nevada, saying the department had made contradictory arguments that had no merit and were not supported by federal law. "The validity of Western states' groundwater rights and the right to regulate water in the public interest is not a right to be taken lightly, nor is it a right that can cavalierly be ignored or violated by a federal agency," Hunt said in his 24-page opinion. Hunt said Energy officials had acted with "arrogance" and possibly misled Bush when they said Yucca Mountain was suitable to store radioactive waste. Energy spokesman Allen Benson said the department had just received the ruling and would have no immediate comment. "It was a very strongly worded opinion," said Joseph R. Egan, a nuclear energy attorney representing Nevada. "The judge has very strongly telegraphed that DOE has no case whatsoever." Without access to millions of gallons of state-controlled water, the Energy Department's only option may be to truck in water over long distances, placing another burden on the project and starting another activity that state officials could block. The water fight between federal and state officials has been raging since the project's outset, when the state engineer first denied water permits to build at Yucca Mountain. The engineer recently denied permits for significantly more water as the federal government increased the number of holes it said it needed from about 15 to more than 80. Hunt said agency officials had waffled on why they needed to drill so many holes. Nevada officials contend the government's increased drilling was part of the "site characterization" - a step crucial to assessing whether radioactive waste can be stored safely there. If so, the federal government is in trouble. All site characterization was supposed to have been completed in 2002, when Energy officials said Yucca had met its criteria as a suitable site. If the drilling program is essential to understanding the site and eventually getting a license, then "it would appear that the DOE misled Congress and the president," Hunt said. Energy officials deny that the drilling is part of site characterization, but Hunt wrote: "Its own documents contradict that argument." Robert R. Loux, executive director of the Nevada Agency for Nuclear Projects, said the ruling was important because it prevented federal officials from collecting data that would be crucial to any future license application to build the dump. Loux said the Energy Department ultimately would need sweeping exemptions from federal environmental, health, water and transportation laws to move forward with the dump. Energy officials said they would file an application to build the dump next year. ***************************************************************** 38 [NYTr] Bush Regime Hauled to Court over New Mexico Uranium Enrichment Plant Date: Fri, 7 Sep 2007 19:53:55 -0500 (CDT) Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit [... but we're all supposed to be totally freaked by Iran's nuclear research program.] Public Citizen - Sep 7, 2007 http://www.citizen.org/pressroom/release.cfm?ID=2507 Public Interest Groups Appear in Federal Appeals Court to Challenge License for Proposed New Mexico Uranium Enrichment Plant Louisiana Energy Servicesb Project Would Violate Law and NRC Safety Regulations WASHINGTON, D.C. b The Nuclear Information and Resource Service (NIRS) and Public Citizen today appeared before the United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit to challenge the legality of the license for Louisiana Energy Servicesb (LES) proposed uranium enrichment plant near Eunice, N.M. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) granted the license in June 2006, despite not having decided on the classification of the depleted uranium waste the facility will create. bThe license violates NRCbs regulations because it would allow the huge quantities of hazardous radioactive waste the plant would produce to be disposed of by shallow-land burial, even though the agencybs own regulations do not allow it and radiation doses to the public would far exceed regulatory limits,b said Michael Mariotte, executive director of NIRS. bThe NRC ultimately may decide that the waste is not suitable for near-surface disposal, which will cost billions of dollars, and LES hasnbt ensured that funding.b NIRS and Public Citizen also contend that the license is illegal because the NRC issued an environmental impact statement, then decided it was incomplete and had to supplement it after the public hearing. But under federal law, the public must have the complete and final environmental impact statement for consideration at the time of the hearing. bLES and the NRC are on shaky legal ground here,b said Michele Boyd, legislative director of Public Citizenbs Energy Program. bWebve gone to the federal courts because the NRC has refused to meaningfully address the hazards this project poses to the people of New Mexico and nearby west Texas.b LES is a consortium of European and U.S. energy companies dominated by Urenco, a group of British, Dutch and German government and corporate entities, including industry giants such as Exelon Corp., Entergy Corp., Duke Energy and Westinghouse Electric Co. Each of these companies has an interest in greater ownership of the nuclear fuel chain and formed LES to develop a new uranium enrichment facility. LESbs license, approved on June 23, 2006, was the first issued by the NRC for a full-scale uranium enrichment plant. NIRS and Public Citizen sued the NRC challenging the license in August 2006, after nearly three years of hearings on the project before an NRC administrative law panel. Attorney Lindsay Lovejoy of New Mexico is representing the two groups. * ================================================================= .NY Transfer News Collective * A Service of Blythe Systems . Since 1985 - Information for the Rest of Us . .339 Lafayette St., New York, NY 10012 http://www.blythe.org . List Archives: https://blythe-systems.com/pipermail/nytr/ . Subscribe: https://blythe-systems.com/mailman/listinfo/nytr ================================================================= ***************************************************************** 39 The State: Nuclear leak prompts calls for DHEC probe 09/07/2007 Agency under fire after news of contamination at Barnwell waste site By SAMMY FRETWELL - sfretwell@thestate.com Conservation groups are seeking an internal investigation of South Carolina’s environmental protection agency because of concerns its staff did not disclose key details of a nuclear waste leak near Barnwell. They want to know if agency staff members have the authority, the money — or the leadership — to regulate and protect the environment. A letter released Thursday asks the Department of Health and Environmental Control board to investigate. Conservationists also want the release of all pollution records about Barnwell County’s low-level atomic waste landfill. Meanwhile, state Rep. Bakari Sellers, D-Bamberg, said he may seek a legislative investigation of the agency. “We are tired of a DHEC which shrinks from taking on polluting industries,’’ said Ann Timberlake, director of the Conservation Voters of S.C. “We are tired of our regulators appearing as enablers and defenders’’ of industries. DHEC, the state’s chief environmental regulatory agency, has been under fire since The State newspaper reported Aug. 19 on tritium levels in groundwater at the Barnwell County landfill that many people were unaware of. The newspaper obtained maps DHEC had sealed at the landfill operator’s request, but that later were released under the Freedom of Information Act. The maps showed more than 30 monitoring wells at the site had radioactive tritium levels in excess of the Environmental Protection Agency’s safe-drinking water standard. Some levels were hundreds of times higher than the standard. DHEC staff members say the information isn’t new. But environmentalists, nearly a dozen state legislators and people living near the landfill say they don’t remember DHEC disclosing the information to them. Bo Aughtry, a developer who chairs the DHEC board, was non-committal on the request for an internal review, but defended the agency’s staff. “They get unfairly cast, and it is frustrating to me,’’ he said. “They work long hours. They are sensitive to the citizens of our state.’’ Agency officials for years have acknowledged tritium leaked from the landfill in the late 1970s, but insist it poses little threat to the public. Sellers, whose district includes Barnwell County, said DHEC staff members gave the impression during legislative debate last spring that the nuclear waste dump was safe. Energy Solutions, the site’s operator, tried unsuccessfully to keep the landfill open beyond its 2008 date to close to the nation. “I am struck by how often regulators said things like ‘the site is being operated in a safe manner,’” Sellers said during a news conference. “Clearly, DHEC’s own monitoring stations indicate otherwise.’’ In her letter, Timberlake said the agency has other problems. They include a failure to consider public input on an air permit near Charleston and its inability to provide clear, easy-to-understand water pollution data. Reach Fretwell at (803) 771-8537. ***************************************************************** 40 AU ABC: Aust uranium bound for Russia - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation) By Karen Barlow Updated September 7, 2007 13:33:00 Soon after arriving in Sydney, Vladimir Putin signed an agreement to buy Australian uranium. (APEC 2007 Taskforce) Russia's President Vladimir Putin arrived for the APEC summit this morning, and in tow was a limousine or two of Russian tycoons keen to do business and on the lookout for new markets. Australian uranium is top of the Russians list, even though they have stockpiles of their own. Mr Putin arrived this morning for APEC fresh from two days of deal-making in Indonesia. He signed a 15-year agreement to sell military hardware to the Indonesians using Russian military credit, worth $1.2 billion. It is a sign of Russia's emerging influence in South East Asia, which Mr Putin would like to extend to Australia. At an APEC business summit dinner last night, Prime Minister John Howard declared Australia open for Asia-Pacific business. "I hope you take away from Australia some memories of a country which is optimistic [and] hopeful," he said. "A country which is very comfortable with its role in this part of the world. A nation that seeks to interact in a positive fashion with both the large and the small economies." Safeguards One of the largest economic interactions of APEC will be the sale of Australian uranium to Russia. Soon after the Sydney arrival of Mr Putin, he signed an agreement allowing it to buy Australian uranium for its nuclear reactors. It is a money spinner for Australia and according to Russia analyst, Sydney University's Professor Graeme Gill, it is a big deal for Russia. "They have got a lot of uranium of their own and this is a way by going outside and bringing in uranuim, it is a way of, in a sense, painting them of being good world citizens," he said. "Because increasingly what we have seen, the sale of uranium to a whole range of states, not just by Australia but by other states and by Russia getting into this the hope is on the Russian side. "That what they will appear to be is a country which is obeying the rules, it is playing by the rules and it is a good international citizen." The Australian uranium would be for civilian use. There would be safeguards against military use and selling it on to third parties. Anti-nuclear groups, the Greens and the Democrats are not impressed with Russia's track record on nuclear management. But on ABC TV's Lateline program on Wednesday, US Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice gave the deal her blessing. She said Russia already has a stockpile of nuclear weapons and understands the threat posed by passing nuclear material onto Iran. But Professor Gill has some reservations. "The problem is that there is no way of actually verifying what they do with it and it may very well be the case that what Russia do will be to use Australian uranium for domestic purposes," he said. "What that does is free up Russian sources of uranium, which they can then ship abroad." ***************************************************************** 41 AU ABC: Russia uranium deal makes good sense - Downer - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation) Updated September 7, 2007 21:19:00 At least $1 billion worth of uranium a year could be exported to Russia under the agreement. (AFP: BHP Billiton/SkyScans) Foreign Affairs Minister Alexander Downer says the nuclear safeguards agreement signed today with Russia paves the way for the export of at least $1 billion worth of uranium a year. The agreement has yet to be ratified by federal Parliament and by Russia's Duma. It stipulates that Australian uranium can not be sold on to any other nations or used for weapons. Mr Downer says Russia is planning to massively increase its nuclear power station capacity over the next 20 years "So there's no doubt there will be a very big demand from Russia for uranium and Australia has around 40 per cent of the world's uranium reserves," he said. "If we can negotiate a satisfactory safeguards agreement with Russia to export that uranium then that makes good sense." But Greens Senator Christine Milne says Australians can not be confident that any misuse of uranium in Russia would be uncovered. "We have this crackdown on the free press, we have a return to punitive psychiatry, people being put back in asylums, just like in the old days of the KGB," she said. "How would Australians know just what is going on in Russia when there is just no free society." Senator Milne says the Greens will move for a Senate inquiry into the deal on Monday. ***************************************************************** 42 SavannahNow.com: S.C. health officials questioned on tritium leaks at Barnwell Kirsten Singleton | Friday, September 7, 2007 at 12:30 am COLUMBIA, S.C. - Lawmakers and environmentalists Thursday called for inquiries into the South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control, after a recent media report detailed more tritium leaks at the Barnwell landfill than some legislators previously believed. "This isn't a little issue," said Rep. Joan Brady, R-Columbia. "This is about public safety. This is about public health. This is about drinking water." Tritium levels in the groundwater below the landfill exceed the federal Environmental Protection Agency's standard for safe drinking water, according to records obtained by The State, a daily newspaper in Columbia. Brady said that information was not revealed last spring when legislators debated whether to close the site next year. She was on the committee that voted 16-0 in March to shutter the site to all but three states when the closure deadline arrives next year. The issue of whether to keep the site open still may arise during the 2008 legislative session. DHEC spokesman Thom Berry said, as part of the committee hearings, that DHEC was asked to give a five-minute presentation and answer any questions the lawmakers had. Brady cautioned against automatically judging DHEC. But, she said, "not asking the right question is not an excuse for not giving the right answer." Committee members were told that the facility once leaked radioactive tritium, although a company spokesman said the leak was "caught in time" and that the facility itself notified DHEC about the leak. Chem-Nuclear requested that maps detailing more extensive information be labeled "proprietary information" exempt from the Freedom of Information Act, and DHEC complied. DHEC did not review the information until The State requested it under FOIA, and at that point decided the maps were not proprietary information, Berry said. The agency generally accepts companies' requests that information be labeled "proprietary," without review, until someone questions that designation, he said. Otherwise, Berry said, "We'd spend an awful lot of time, probably a huge amount of time, on that (review) process." Conservation Voters of South Carolina Executive Director Ann Timberlake wrote a letter to the DHEC board, which was made public Thursday. "The classification of the plume maps as 'proprietary,' and DHEC's general reluctance to offer pertinent information, raise larger questions about whether the agency is adequately notifying both the public and policy makers about the state of South Carolina's environment," she wrote. State Rep. Bakari Sellers, D-Denmark, said he might push for a Legislative Audit Council review of the agency. But Sellers said he will follow the lead of S.C. Attorney General Henry McMaster, who has met with Chem-Nuclear and DHEC officials as part of his inquiry into the situation. © 2007 SavannahNOW and the Savannah Morning News. ***************************************************************** 43 CANOE: Canada: No pressure for Canada to state intentions on nuclear partnership September 7, 2007 By BRUCE CHEADLE Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper answers reporters questions at a news conference at the APEC summit in Sydney, Australia Friday Sept 7, 2007. (CP PHOTO/Tom Hanson) SYDNEY, Australia (CP) - Canada is interested in the commercial opportunities presented by a U.S.-led proposal for a new international nuclear club but feels no pressure to join the fray immediately, Prime Minister Stephen Harper said Friday. With barely a week to go before a key planning meeting in Vienna on the proposed Global Nuclear Energy Partnership, the world's biggest uranium producer still hasn't said publicly whether it will attend the talks. The Conservative government has been tight-lipped about the so-called GNEP, saying only that Canada is reviewing the matter. The initiative is controversial because it proposes that uranium exporting countries bring back spent fuel for disposal on their home turf. Harper, in his first public comment on the proposed partnership since May 2006, denied that Canada is feeling any pressure to join despite the involvement of key allies Australia and the United States. Australia announced its intention to join this week. Between them, Australia and Canada supply upwards of 60 per cent of the world's uranium. "We haven't felt pressured to make a determination by any particular timeline," the prime minister told a news conference with Canadian media at the Asia-Pacific Economic Co-operation summit. He cited two Canadian priorities in understanding the GNEP arrangement, neither of which directly dealt with the nuclear waste question. "One is to ensure that our uranium industry and that our nuclear industry are not left out of any of the international opportunities that other countries may take advantage of," said Harper in response to a question about why Canada has yet to make a public declaration on participation in the Sept. 16 meeting in Vienna. "And at the same time, we would obviously want to make sure that any kind of international agreement, or any kind of international co-operation, fully respects the non-proliferation agreements and the non-proliferation objectives that Canada and other major countries have long subscribed to." Keeping nuclear materials out of the hands of rogue states is one of the GNEP's express objectives, along with promoting the nuclear industry and providing an energy source that doesn't emit greenhouse gases. Harper's comments came as Australia signed a new deal Friday with Russia to supply nuclear fuel for civilian use. Nuclear energy and its position in the global fight against climate change has become a major subtext of the APEC forum taking place this week in Sydney. Reports indicate the prominence of nuclear energy is becoming something of a political football as the leaders of 21 pan-Pacific economies sit down for face-to-face talks Saturday. New Zealand's foreign minister, Winston Peters, said Thursday the proposed leaders' communique for the APEC summit still hasn't resolved the matter. "There are questions that will be decided on one particular issue by the leaders' meeting itself," Peters was quoted as saying in the New Zealand press. "That will be the issue of what level of reference is made to nuclear energy." Harper held a bilateral meeting Friday with New Zealand Prime Minister Helen Clark, but a briefing note from the Prime Ministers' Office made no mention of nuclear issues being discussed. The Harper government's hesitation in declaring a clear position on GNEP isn't surprising, despite more than a year of internal government discussions and cross-border talks. Internal government talking points from 2006, obtained by The Canadian Press, showed enthusiasm for the proposal, but that has never been expressed publicly. The issue is politically sensitive for the minority Conservatives, and the Opposition Liberals have been quick to exploit the government's public indecision. "I am concerned about Prime Minister Harper going off to Australia and having discussions behind closed doors to potentially broker a deal - a deal that would have all of the waste generated from the uranium we sell to the world, back on our doorstep for disposal," Liberal Leader Stephane Dion told a meeting of the Ontario Energy Association. "Imagine, we would become a global nuclear waste garbage dump." Environmental groups have also pounced on the GNEP. "The Bush nuclear program would turn Canada into an international radioactive waste dump, and the Harper government has not allowed any public debate," Dave Martin, energy co-ordinator for Greenpeace Canada, said in a release. ***************************************************************** 44 BBC NEWS: Russia in Australia uranium deal Last Updated: Friday, 7 September 2007, 11:36 GMT 12:36 UK The deal was greeted with smiles Australia has agreed a deal to sell uranium to Russia, on condition that the substance, used to generate nuclear power, is not passed on to Iran. One of the world's largest holders of uranium reserves, Australia recently agreed a similar deal with China. Australian Prime Minister John Howard said "stringent" controls would be in place to ensure the substance was not resold for use in nuclear weapons. Guarantees Russia has strong ties with Tehran, whose budding nuclear programme is the source of a long-standing dispute with the international community. Any uranium that is sold to Russia will be sold under very strict safeguards Australian Prime Minister John Howard Iran has maintained it is pursuing nuclear technology for peaceful purposes and has taken steps to begin the process of enriching uranium in defiance of the UN Security Council. Russia, China and India are all keen to purchase uranium to develop civilian nuclear energy programmes. But the sale of large quantities of the substance, used as a fissile material in nuclear weapons, has raised concerns about arms proliferation. "Any uranium that is sold to Russia will be sold under very strict safeguards," Mr Howard said after meeting the Russian leader in Sydney ahead of a summit of Pacific Rim leaders. Australia is cashing in on its abundant uranium stocks "This new agreement will allow the supply of Australian uranium for use in Russia's civil nuclear power industry and provide a framework for broader co-operation on peaceful nuclear-related activities." President Putin dismissed suggestions any uranium stocks would be used for military purposes either by Russia or any third party. "I simply don't understand what people are talking about," he said. "We are buying uranium from Australia for purely economic reasons." Dangers Australia controls 40% of global uranium reserves and has been courted by several leading powers including China, which bought an estimated $250m worth of uranium last year. Australia has agreed, in principle, to a similar deal with India, although critics of this point out that India is not signed up to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation treaty. The Bush administration, a key ally of Australia, is believed to be comfortable with both the Russian and Indian deals, but environmental groups are disturbed by the signals they send. "The primary danger is that supplying Australian uranium to Russian nuclear plants, it frees up Russia to do whatever it pleases with its own deposits," said Steve Shalhorn, chief executive of the Australian arm of Greenpeace. * BBC Copyright Notice ***************************************************************** 45 Platts: Areva files claims for uranium prospecting in Lapland Paris (Platts)--6Sep2007 Areva has filed claims for uranium prospecting in southern Lapland, reserving a 227-square-kilometer area (56,092 acres), the company said in a statement September 4. Most of the property is owned by the Finnish state. Areva has one year to apply for a license to prospect in the area. Areva was denied uranium prospecting licenses in January on the grounds that the area involved was too big. The area now being applied for is smaller. Post this story to: del.icio.us | Digg | Newsvine | NowPublic | Reddit Copyright © 2007 - Platts, All Rights Reserved ***************************************************************** 46 ReviewJournal.com: Water use, drilling go on Sep. 07, 2007 Yucca Mountain site manager rebuffs order By KEITH ROGERS REVIEW-JOURNAL Ricardo Villanueva, left, and Robert Gillum prepare a drill July 26 in Midway Valley, near Yucca Mountain. Borehole drilling operations have continued there despite a state order that the federal government cease using Nevada's water for such work at the planned nuclear waste site. Photo by John Locher. What began in June as a clear attempt by the state engineer to stop the Department of Energy from drilling boreholes at the planned Yucca Mountain nuclear waste site now appears as clouded as the muddy water that's in the center of the dispute. At the close of business Thursday, DOE's acting director of the Yucca Mountain Site Operations Office sent State Engineer Tracy Taylor an overnight letter declaring that the so-called first phase of drilling that's been under way this year "is not affected by the cease and desist order (and) is anticipated to conclude by the end of September." That means DOE intends to use an additional 191,000 gallons of Nevada's water, or more than half of an acre-foot, according to the letter from James W. Hollrith, acting director of the Yucca Mountain Site Operations Office. That's enough water to supply one household in the Las Vegas Valley for a year. Hollrith's letter came less than a week after U.S. District Judge Roger Hunt denied an emergency motion by U.S. attorneys representing DOE who sought to block Taylor's June 1 cease-and-desist order. Taylor's order was temporarily lifted on June 12 and then reinstated on July 20 when Department of Justice attorneys at the time said the conditions were "unacceptable." Taylor had offered to let the Energy Department use the water for 30 days, but after that "the use of water for any bore hole drilling whatsoever is prohibited," he wrote in a July 16 letter. That matches the tone of Hunt's 24-page ruling in favor of the state. In essence, his ruling said any DOE use of water for borehole drilling to collect rock samples needed to support a license application for constructing a repository and surface facilities was outside the scope of a court-approved agreement. The state "faced the unauthorized use of its water, a violation of state water law, a violation of an agreement it entered in good faith, a violation of this court's order authorizing that agreement, and interference with its obligation to its citizens to enforce its laws and preserve its water," Hunt wrote in his Aug. 31 decision to deny the Justice Department's emergency motion. Hunt's ruling let stand Taylor's June 1 cease-and-desist order. But that order only instructs DOE to "cease and desist the use of water for the second phase of the bore hole drilling project," not the first phase that DOE continued to keep in operation. Earlier Thursday, Taylor spokesman Bob Conrad said from the state engineer's perspective, "The cease-and-desist is meant to be for water use regardless of whether its Phase 1 or Phase 2." About two hours later, though, in his letter to Taylor, Hollrith wrote: "DOE has decided to immediately discontinue using water for drilling and boring activities associated with the (Phase 2) borehole drilling program, as provided in your June 1" cease-and-desist order. Conrad reacted, saying in an e-mail that the state engineer "has not read this letter. However, I can say that we appreciate the DOE halting the use of water" for Phase 2 drilling. ... We will continue discussions with the DOE regarding the use of water for Phase 1 drilling and other purposes." Bob Loux, executive director of the Nevada Agency for Nuclear Projects and a longtime opponent of the Yucca Mountain Project, said, "For every day that goes by they're drilling and collecting data." "The state engineer can issue a new cease-and-desist order. That's one of the ways to solve it," Loux said. "These guys (DOE officials) are being flagrant in light of the judge's order. We think they're thumbing their nose at the court." Today, a new chapter in the Yucca water saga will unfold when an inspector from the Nevada Division of Water Resources goes to the site, 100 miles northwest of Las Vegas, to verify compliance with Taylor's cease-and-desist order. If the inspector is denied access or finds that water is being used to cool and lubricate drill bits or create mud for collecting rock samples, Loux said, then Nevada's attorneys could file an emergency motion of their own with Hunt, asking him to find DOE officials in contempt of a federal order. Nevada Senior Deputy Attorney General Marta Adams, who represents Loux, said Thursday, "I'm going to explore every option to force DOE to comply with the court's order, which found that borehole drilling is an unauthorized purpose for use of Nevada's water, regardless of which phase it is." Links powered by inform.com Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal, 1997 - 2007 Stephens Media, LLC Privacy Statement ***************************************************************** 47 ReviewJournal.com: Professor doubts 'surplus' Sep. 07, 2007 Tapping rural groundwater will cause harm, article's author says By LISA KIM BACH REVIEW-JOURNAL James Deacon, 73, looks out at the Las Vegas Valley from his Henderson home Thursday. Deacon, a UNLV professor emeritus, wrote an article predicting groundwater tapping will threaten species. Photo by Sara Tramiel/Review-Journal There's no such thing as "surplus water." It might be described that way by Southern Nevada Water Authority officials when they apply for permission to tap into the state's rural water supply, said James Deacon, a professor emeritus of environmental studies at UNLV. But there really is no "surplus." Every drop that's siphoned off to slake the growing thirst of Las Vegas already sustains a form of life, said Deacon, the lead author of a newly published research piece in BioScience magazine. The article in the September issue examines the consequences of depleting Nevada's groundwater reserves. It's a practice Deacon said poses a serious threat to both Nevada agriculture and 20 species of already endangered wildlife, from the Devil's Hole pupfish to the Southwestern Willow flycatcher. "The only way we're going to avoid environmental disaster and disaster to rural livelihoods is to combine growth stabilization policies with creative, cutting-edge technology," Deacon said, echoing the points he presented to readers of the national publication on biology research. That means pushing conservation over consumption, using technology to improve water reclamation, and finding a way to slow growth. Deacon acknowledged that turning away from growth and allowing the demand for water to flatten out flies in the face of the developer-friendly policies maintained by local governments. He hopes to shift public support away from growth agendas and refocus it on keeping Las Vegas livable. "This is the most policy-directed piece of science writing I've ever done," Deacon said of the peer-reviewed article crafted over four years. "We must recognize the cost we're imposing, not only on our neighbors, but also on the environment." The impetus for Deacon's scholarly activism is the water authority's plan to divert water from a rural aquifer that extends across the central and southern state for use in Las Vegas. In April, the state engineer gave the water authority permission to take up to 40,000 acre-feet of water annually from Spring Valley, the White Pine County aquifer due west of Snake Valley. The water authority is seeking permission to tap into other eastern Nevada water resources. Kay Brothers, deputy general manager of the water authority, has read part of Deacon's article and been briefed on the rest of it by staff members. She said she respects Deacon and his position but said he fails to consider the safeguards that will prevent the worst-case scenario from happening. "You can manage the groundwater system," Brothers said Thursday. "There's also a body of law in place to protect the groundwater system and monitor the impact on sensitive resources." And no one can deny the need for more water, which Brothers said is not rooted solely in growth. Drawing off water from the rural groundwater reserves also is a form of drought protection at a time when Colorado River resources are diminishing. "If we can't utilize the groundwater resources in this state, what are we going to do?" Brothers asked. The water authority already encourages conservation and issues rebates for replacing grass with desert-friendly landscaping, Brothers said. The water authority also has negotiated for a larger share of the Colorado River. But controlling growth, as Deacon suggests, is something Brothers said she cannot even begin to address. "I don't know how to do that," Brothers said. "How do you tell people not to move here?" Deacon examined the laws that govern water use and the protection of sensitive resources and found them lacking. The laws were written at a time when no one envisioned the type of expansion now taking place, he said. One of the results is that the potential claims on rural water reserves are now greater than the expected annual input. Deacon found that existing groundwater permits for the 78 basins examined in the article appropriate 102 percent of the basins' cumulative perennial yield. That gap could widen drastically should the state engineer approve additional requests from other entities for water allocations from the rural reserves. History shows the consequences of that course of action, Deacon said. In the 1950s, overzealous groundwater pumping led to the failure of major Las Vegas Valley springs, leading to the extinction of more than one native fish, including the Las Vegas dace. "Providing for the water needs of a growing Las Vegas Valley by relying on historical practices is a recipe for ecological disaster," Deacon said in the article. "New technologies can help increase water availability and efficiency of use, but in the long run they are futile unless combined with reduced growth of human populations." Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal, 1997 - 2007 Stephens Media, LLC Privacy Statement ***************************************************************** 48 AFP: Russia joins rush for Australian uranium - by Lawrence Bartlett Fri Sep 7, 3:41 AM ET SYDNEY (AFP) - Russia on Friday joined a rush by nuclear powers for access to Australia's huge uranium reserves as President Vladimir Putin signed a landmark deal to import the strategic fuel. The agreement he signed with Prime Minister John Howard came just months after Australia ratified a deal to sell uranium to China to feed its voracious appetite for energy. Also in the queue is fellow Asian giant India, with Howard announcing last month that he had struck an agreement in principle with his Indian counterpart Manmohan Singh to sell uranium to New Delhi. In each case Howard has stressed that stringent safeguards would be put in place to ensure the uranium is not used in nuclear weapons, but each has also marked a significant break with past policies. "Any uranium that is sold to Russia will be sold under very strict safeguards," he said after meeting the Russian leader in Sydney, where both will attend a weekend Asia Pacific summit. "This new agreement will allow the supply of Australian uranium for use in Russia's civil nuclear power industry and provide a framework for broader cooperation on peaceful nuclear-related activities," he said. Both Howard and Putin dismissed concerns that Russia would sell Australian uranium to third countries such as Iran. "I simply don't understand what people are talking about," Putin said, pointing out that Russia already exports large quantities of enriched uranium for military use, including 30 tonnes a year to the United States. "We are buying uranium from Australia for purely economic reasons." Putin was due to meet later in the day with US President George W. Bush but the United States has already said it is not concerned about the uranium deal. Russia already had a large stockpile of nuclear weapons and the uranium was unlikely to end up in Iranian hands, US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice told Australian television on Wednesday. "This isn't an issue for us. The Russians have plenty of weapons, let's be realistic about it. The Cold War produced more than a surplus." Howard is a strong supporter of the US president and has made it clear the deal with India depends on implementation of a landmark civilian nuclear deal between New Delhi and Washington. The United States backs Australian exports to India, but critics point out that the agreement means scrapping Australia's policy of refusing exports to countries which have not signed the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). Howard, however, has said many Australians would find it "strange" that it was acceptable to sell uranium to China -- which has signed the NPT -- but not to India. An irony in all the deals is that Australia does not have a nuclear energy programme of its own, although Howard has been talking up the prospect recently as an answer to global warming. He has also pointed to the economic benefits of exporting uranium. No details were given of the value of exports to Russia, but a senate committe last year was told that the deal with China was worth some 250 million dollars (205 million US) a year. Environmentalists have opposed all the deals, and Greenpeace said Friday the agreement with Russia meant Australia could be helping fuel nuclear proliferation. "The primary danger is that by supplying Australian uranium to Russia nuclear plants, it frees up Russia to do whatever it pleases with its own deposits," said the group's Australian chief Steve Shallhorn. Copyright © 2007 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 49 NRC: NRC to Hold Public Meeting in Gallup, N.M. on Generic Environmental Statement for Uranium Recovery Operations News Release - Region IV - 2007-033 - U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs, Region IV 611 Ryan Plaza Drive, Suite 400, Arlington TX 76011 www.nrc.gov CONTACT: Victor Dricks Phone: 817-860-8128 E-mail: opa4@nrc.gov The Nuclear Regulatory Commission is seeking public comment for a “generic environmental impact statement” (GEIS) the agency intends to develop for uranium recovery operations, including in situ leach recovery facilities and conventional mills. The NRC is expecting numerous applications for new uranium recovery operations in the next two to three years. This GEIS is intended to address the common issues associated with environmental reviews of in situ leach and conventional milling facilities located in the western United States. Because there are environmental issues common to both types of facilities, the NRC staff will be addressing these common issues generically to aid in a more efficient environmental review for each separate license application, if and when these applications are submitted. Members of the NRC staff will hold a public meeting Sept. 27 in Gallup, N.M. to discuss the scope of the GEIS. Members of the public are invited to comment on environmental issues that will be addressed in the GEIS, including land use, public and occupational health, waste management, water resources, air quality, historical resources and others. The meeting in Gallup will be held at the Best Western Inn and Suites, 3009 West Hwy. 66 from 7:00 p.m. to 9:30 p.m. NRC staff will hold an informal open house to meet members of the public from 6:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. The NRC held two public meetings on this topic last month in Albuquerque, N.M., and Casper, Wyo. Information about the GEIS was published in the Federal Register on July 24 and Aug. 31. The agency is accepting written comments on the scope of the GEIS. The deadline for comments has been extended to Oct. 8. Comments should be addressed to Chief, Rules Review and Directives Branch, Mail Stop T-6D59, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C., 20555-0001; or by electronic mail to URLGeis@nrc.gov NRC news releases are available through a free listserv 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. September 06, 2007 ***************************************************************** 50 Business Gazette: Beach n-waste likely to rise THE amount of radioactive material found on West Cumbrian beaches is likely to increase, Sellafield bosses have warned. In their most recent newsletter, they say that this is because their new radiation tracking device, known as the Groundhog, operates at half speed and is more likely to pinpoint radioactivity. When the last set of figures came out in July, they were questioned by environmental campaigners for showing the number of radioactive finds had almost doubled in a month. Originally, it showed 35 finds were made. This was later updated by Sellafield to 69. Sellafield will carry out a new survey, using the Groundhog but they do expect more radiation to be found. Bosses say the beaches will remain safe to use while the work goes on. Martin Forwood of pressure group Cumbrians Opposed to a Radioactive Environment, said: “While we welcome them being more open about it this news points to Sellafield admitting there is a problem which needs addressing. “This Groundhog is problematic, as whatever it finds it does not detect alpha radiation like plutonium.” 08 September 2007 © 1995-2007 CN Group. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 51 globeandmail.com: Nuclear waste imports could turn Canada into a dump - Dion SHAWN MCCARTHY AND GLORIA GALLOWAY Globe and Mail Update September 7, 2007 at 6:23 AM EDT ? Canada would become a "nuclear waste garbage dump" if the federal government agrees to import spent nuclear fuel from other countries under a proposed international partnership, Liberal Leader Stéphane Dion said yesterday. In a speech to an Ontario energy conference, Mr. Dion noted the Conservative government is considering joining the U.S.-led Global Nuclear Energy Partnership, which could include a requirement that Canada take back waste from countries to which it exports uranium or sells Candu reactors. Prime Minister Stephen Harper is in Australia for a meeting of the Asia-Pacific Economic Co-operation forum, where the nuclear partnership is expected to be discussed. Like Canada, Australia is a major uranium producer and its government has expressed interest in joining the group, which includes nuclear powers such as the U.S., France, China and Russia. "I am concerned about Prime Minister Harper going off to Australia and having discussions behind closed doors to potentially broker a deal - a deal that would have all of the waste generated from the uranium we sell to the world, back on our doorstep for disposal," Mr. Dion told a meeting of the Ontario Energy Association. "Imagine - we would become a global nuclear waste garbage dump." In an interview, the Liberal Leader said the Conservatives have failed to provide leadership on the disposal of nuclear waste. Last spring, the government endorsed a plan for disposal of the nuclear waste, including decades of above-ground storage at the reactor sites, followed by deep burial at a central storage area. The plan left open the door for possible reprocessing of domestic nuclear waste. This week, Natural Resources Minister Gary Lunn said he believes it is inevitable that the spent fuel, which contains significant energy potential, will be reprocessed, and then reused by the domestic Candu owners. However, Mr. Lunn denied Canada would be required to accept imported waste under the global partnership agreement. Mr. Harper told a Friday afternoon press conference in Sydney that he felt no pressure to decide, within a particular time frame, whether Canada should take part in the initiative. "Obviously, in terms of anything internationally in this, Canada would have two priorities. One is to ensure that our uranium industry and our nuclear industry are not left out of any of the international opportunities that other countries may take advantage of," he told reporters. "And, at the same time, we would obviously want to make sure that any kind of international agreement or any kind of international co-operation on nuclear energy fully respects the non-proliferation agreements and the non-proliferation objectives that Canada and other major countries have long subscribed to." But Mr. Dion wants the government to take a stand. He said Canada has to decide what to do with its own nuclear waste - including whether the industry will be allowed to reprocess the spent fuel rods - before it deals with the international issue. "First, we need to have a debate in Canada about what to do with our own waste. If we are comfortable, if we have a solution - if all the majors are saying 'I want a site in my community - let's talk after. But we are not there." In Sydney, Foreign Minister Maxime Bernier said the government will make that decision "in the near future." Canada and Australia, both non-members but major uranium producers, have been asked to attend a conference about the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership in Vienna on Sept. 16."We have been very clear right now that no decision has been taken here in Canada," Mr. Bernier said. "Australia and Canada, we are two major producers in the world and we have considerable interests in whatever the United States and the international community have in mind - in terms of future uranium development and production and marketing - so we will have a decision in the near future about our participation." Australian Trade Minister Warren Truss said yesterday that between them, Australia and Canada accounted for about 60 to 70 per cent of the world's uranium production. "We could reach an agreement that we both take every means to ensure it is used for peaceful purposes," Mr. Truss told The Australian newspaper. "Because we are in such an influential position, we could make sure the uranium is used wisely and under proper supervision." The Canadian nuclear industry is keen to see the government join the international grouping, arguing that if it does not, Canada will be shut out of the lucrative business of reprocessing nuclear waste. That technology is expected to become more attractive as countries build more reactors and supplies of raw uranium become tighter. Murray Elston, president of the Canadian Nuclear Association, said the federal government undertook an exhaustive review of nuclear-waste disposal issues, including the possibility that the industry would reprocess domestically produced waste. "Now, Mr. Harper is now talking to the folks in Australia about not only accessing the value of energy which is still in our materials here, but the prospect that having sent the uranium to other areas, that we could then repatriate it to make it available for more energy for the external market," said Mr. Elston, who was also attending the conference in Niagara Falls. He added that the "repatriation" of the waste would allow poor, undeveloped countries to purchase nuclear reactors without them - and the rest of the world - having to worry the disposal of the radioactive waste. © Copyright 2007 CTVglobemedia Publishing Inc. All Rights Reserved. globeandmail.com and The Globe and Mail are divisions of CTVglobemedia Publishing Inc., 444 Front St. W., Toronto, ON  Canada M5V 2S9 Phillip Crawley, Publisher ***************************************************************** 52 Pahrump Valley Times: State rejects Nye County water rights applications Sep. 07, 2007 By MARK WAITE PVT Nye County plans to appeal the recent denial of five applications for county water rights in the Amargosa Desert. The applications were filed Feb. 16, 2000, to appropriate about 18,600 acre-feet of water annually. An acre foot is 326,000 gallons, or enough to serve two families for a year. State Engineer Tracy Taylor, in his ruling dated July 16, concluded, in denying the five applications, "There is no unappropriated water in the Amargosa Desert hydrographic basin, approval of the applications would conflict with existing rights and approval of the applications would threaten to prove detrimental to the public interest." The water rights applications were protested by the National Park Service, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and U.S. Department of Energy. The National Park Service claimed it had senior water rights and the application would diminish the resources of Death Valley National Park. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service expressed concerns over Ash Meadows National Wildlife Refuge and habitat for endangered species. The DOE urged the application not be granted until litigation is concluded regarding Yucca Mountain water permit applications, for which the agency claimed it had senior water rights. Nye County hydrologist Tom Buqo differed with the U.S. Geological Survey over the perennial yield in that basin, which includes Amargosa Valley. The state engineer noted his office typically relies on information provided by the U.S. Geological Survey, which in this case estimated a perennial yield of 24,000 acre feet annually in the basin, 17,000 acre feet discharged by springs in Ash Meadows and 7,000 acre feet from underground water in the Amargosa Desert. Buqo said the groundwater yield in the basin could be as high as 40,000 to 47,000 acre feet. Buqo said the past estimates of recharge over the source of water were highly uncertain, and some estimates significantly underestimated recharge from the Spring Mountains and the Sheep Range. Recharge over the Panamint Range has also been ignored or discounted, the county hydrologist stated. The USGS countered by saying Buqo's calculations overestimated the groundwater "evapo-transpiration" rate in the gravel and pebble soil. The maps were also biased on the high side in terms of the area where the water table is less than 50 feet, according to testimony of the hearing. "Although numerous new studies have been conducted, none of the cited studies offer a new and convincing value for perennial yield in the Amargosa Desert Hydrographic Basin," the state engineer's ruling states. In the Nye County Water Resource Plan, released in 2004, Buqo wrote the existing groundwater would be adequate to provide for anticipated needs in Amargosa Valley for the next 50 years if the higher perennial yield of over 40,000 acre feet were accepted by the Nevada Division of Water Resources. Jim Marble, director of the Nye County Department of Natural Resources, said a two-year study is currently under way to determine groundwater recharge and evapotranspiration in Amargosa Valley. "We believe that data may support the issuance of additional water rights out there," Marble said. "I wouldn't say it's a dead effort, we can appeal it; we've got more data coming." The county had hoped to obtain the water rights for future municipal use, Marble said. The state engineer found evidence indicated the committed water resources for all water rights in the Amargosa Desert Hydrographic Basin were over 62,000 acre feet annually. Committed resources include 24,078 acre feet, not counting 476 domestic wells and the potential for future wells, the state engineer stated. But the state engineer was more concerned about future growth in Amargosa Valley. Taylor mentioned 27,904 acres of land were available for disposal by the BLM in the hydrographic basin. The state engineer added, "Nye County is working on an omnibus lands bill to set aside additional land for both community purposes and commercial purposes. With the amount of land that is and will be available for development, the potential for a dramatic increase in the number of domestic wells appears certain." Buqo is quoted as testifying during the hearing a parceling ordinance, requiring the purchase and dedication of water rights to offset the impact of additional domestic wells created due to parceling, exists in Pahrump Valley. But the state engineer notes, "The ordinance does not apply to Amargosa Valley, where parceling can occur in a manner that bypasses the subdivision requirements of the Nevada Division of Water Resources." The state engineer also denied water rights applications filed in October 1993 and October 1996 by Frederick C. and Sandra J. Fellwock and David Mulkey, trustees of the David A. Mulkey Living Trust. The first was second in priority to applications filed by Amargosa Resources Inc. for 25,000 acre feet of groundwater. The ARI application was to serve 400 homes on 320 acres, which would result in the basin being fully appropriated, the state engineer's ruling stated. The state engineer noted previous applications to appropriate water for irrigation in the Amargosa Desert were denied. A state engineer's order issued May 14, 1979, designated the Amargosa Desert Hydrographic Basin as a groundwater basin in need of additional administration. All water rights applications on file in the state engineer's office are subject to an analysis. The state engineer must determine whether there is unappropriated water before granting a request for a new appropriation of underground water. An analysis of the basin's recharge and discharge is used to determine that. The perennial yield is central to that equation, the maximum amount of ground water that can be salvaged each year over the long term without depleting the groundwater reservoir. In 1996 the forfeiture of water rights in the Amargosa Desert reduced the permitted water rights from 41,400 acre feet to 26,600 acre feet. Marble said a prior ruling by the state engineer's office denied a Nye County application for water rights on the Nevada Test Site because the county didn't have access to the water. That decision is also being appealed, he said. In February 2000 Nye County filed a total of 10 applications for water rights totalling 33,000 acre feet in the basins of the Nevada Test Site including Yucca Flat, Mercury Valley, Rock Valley, Jackass Flats and Crater Flats. For comment or questions, please e-mail webmaster@pahrumpvalleytimes.com Copyright © Pahrump Valley Times, 1997 - ***************************************************************** 53 [NYTr] US Staging Nukes for Attack on Iran? Date: Fri, 7 Sep 2007 13:24:19 -0500 (CDT) Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit Booman Tribune via Info Clearing House - Sep 6, 2007 http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article18325.htm http://www.boomantribune.com/story/2007/9/5/171126/7241 U.S. Staging Nukes for Iran? By Larry Johnson Why the hubbub over a B-52 taking off from a B-52 base in Minot, North Dakota and subsequently landing at a B-52 base in Barksdale, Louisiana? Thatbs like getting excited if you see postal worker in uniform walking out of a post office. And how does someone watching a B-52 land identify the cruise missiles as nukes? It just does not make sense. So I called a old friend and retired B-52 pilot and asked him. What he told me offers one compelling case of circumstantial evidence. My buddy, letbs call him Jack D. Ripper, reminded me that the only times you put weapons on a plane is when they are on alert or if you are tasked to move the weapons to a specific site. Then he told me something I had not heard before. Barksdale Air Force Base is being used as a jumping off point for Middle East operations. Gee, why would we want cruise missile nukes at Barksdale Air Force Base. Canbt imagine we would need to use them in Iraq. Why would we want to preposition nuclear weapons at a base conducting Middle East operations? His final point was to observe that someone on the inside obviously leaked the info that the planes were carrying nukes. A B-52 landing at Barksdale is a non-event. A B-52 landing with nukes. That is something else. Now maybe there is an innocent explanation for this? I canbt think of one. What is certain is that the pilots of this plane did not just make a last minute decision to strap on some nukes and take them for a joy ride. We need some tough questions and clear answers. What the hell is going on? Did someone at Barksdale try to indirectly warn the American people that the Bush Administration is staging nukes for Iran? I donbt know, but it is a question worth asking. Copyright - Booman Tribune * ================================================================= .NY Transfer News Collective * A Service of Blythe Systems . Since 1985 - Information for the Rest of Us . .339 Lafayette St., New York, NY 10012 http://www.blythe.org . List Archives: https://blythe-systems.com/pipermail/nytr/ . Subscribe: https://blythe-systems.com/mailman/listinfo/nytr ================================================================= ***************************************************************** 54 John Edwards Proposes Campaign To Abolish Nuclear Weapons Date: Sat, 08 Sep 2007 00:58:51 -0400 Anyone have more details other than what appears at the bottom of this? http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/news/news-usa-politics-edwards.html Edwards Proposes International Anti - Terrorism Body a.. E-Mail b.. Print c.. Save By REUTERS Published: September 7, 2007 Filed at 4:29 p.m. ET Skip to next paragraph NEW YORK (Reuters) - Democratic presidential hopeful John Edwards on Friday proposed creating a new international organization to enable allies to share intelligence in the fight against terrorism. The former U.S. senator and 2004 vice-presidential candidate called existing bodies inadequate. The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) was a military group and the United Nations included member states which supported terrorism, he said. The proposed Counterterrorism and Intelligence Treaty Organization (CITO) would be based on what Edwards called the pillars of his counterterrorism policy: strength and cooperation. "CITO will allow members to voluntarily share financial, police, customs and immigration intelligence. Together, nations will be able to track the way terrorists travel, communicate, recruit, train and finance their operations," Edwards said in a speech at New York's Pace University. Edwards is considered one of the leading candidates for the Democratic nomination, which will be determined in primary elections starting early next year ahead of the November 2008 general election. He billed the proposal as a "bold new anti-terror strategy" and launched it in New York just four days before the city commemorates the sixth anniversary of the September 11 attacks. "CITO is not a panacea, nor will it be perfect. But it would represent a big first step in a new direction," Edwards said. He announced a series of other proposals for his counterterrorism strategy including the creation of 1,000 annual scholarships to improve language skills for students who pursue careers in intelligence and diplomacy, and he pledged an international campaign to rid the world of nuclear weapons. Attachment Converted: article-sponsor2.gif: 00000001,00000001,00000000,2361e670 Attachment Converted: once_88x31_Nowplaying.gif: 00000001,00000001,00000000,6c2b0599 Attachment Converted: reuters_sidebar.gif: 00000001,00000001,00000000,579467f5 ***************************************************************** 55 AFP: Putin, Bush fail to break missile defence tension - by Stephen Boykewich Fri Sep 7, 8:33 AM ET SYDNEY (AFP) - US President George W. Bush and his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin failed to make clear progress in talks Friday to defuse tensions over US missile defence plans that have angered Moscow. The presidents met at a hotel in Sydney as 21 nations attending an Asia Pacific summit here agreed a common statement on climate change after intense wrangling between rich and emerging nations, a source at the talks said. Before meeting Putin, Bush held talks with South Korean President Roh Moo-hyun after which he said he would consider a formal peace deal to end the Korean war only after North Korea gives up nuclear weapons and programmes. But it was the US leader's meeting with his Russian counterpart, which came after Putin signed a landmark deal allowing Australia to export uranium to Russia, that dominated the flurry of top level meetings in Australia. Visibly grim after their hour-long meeting, Putin said the talks had been "above all related to missile defence." But neither man gave any hint of coming any nearer on Washington's plans to deploy a missile shield in Central Europe which have provoked an increasingly tense standoff between the two sides. The Russian leader said experts from both sides would meet again soon to inspect a Russian radar station in Azerbaijan that Moscow has proposed using as an alternative to the Central Europe sites. Moscow says the US plans to deploy elements of a missile defence shield in Poland and the Czech Republic will upset the balance of power, while Washington insists it is aimed against potential attacks from Iran or North Korea, posing no threat to Russia. The talks, which Bush called "both cordial and constructive," also touched on Iran's nuclear programme, Russia's bid to join the World Trade Organisation and environmental issues. While the two men may not have made diplomatic breakthroughs, they could have a chance to untangle their lines in a wilder setting after Putin invited Bush to come fishing in Siberia. In other developments around the summit, the top US envoy for North Korea announced that experts from China, Russia and the United States would go to North Korea September 11-15 to study how Pyonygang's nuclear facilities could be disabled. "We want this disabling to take place by December 31st. So we have to look at our ideas for disabling against the actual facility," Christopher Hill said. North Korea in February agreed to make a full declaration of all its nuclear programmes and to disable them in return for aid, security and diplomatic guarantees, notably normalisation of ties with Washington. Nuclear deals were also on the agenda for Putin and host Prime Minister John Howard, who sought to ease fears that planned uranium sales to Russia posed a proliferation risk. The Australian leader vowed that "any uranium that is sold to Russia will be sold under very strict safeguards." Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) forum delegates had been struggling to hammer out a statement on climate change, with emerging nations resisting Australia's plans to set clear goals on curbing emissions of greenhouse gases. But a senior Southeast Asian official closely involved in the talks said late Friday that senior officials had finally agreed on a draft agreement to go to the leaders. The draft refers only to "aspirational" goals to reduce emissions and affirms that the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (FCCC), which meets next in Bali in December, is the main forum for debate. The Asia Pacific leaders are also expected to issue a statement calling for urgent action to break deadlocked World Trade Organisation talks on bringing down tariffs and other trade barriers. Australia's largest city was tightly locked down ahead of the summit of leaders that formally gets underway Saturday, with the harbourside hub patrolled by 5,000 police and soldiers on land, sea and in the air. A series of protests brought some light relief to proceedings, although there was a tense but brief standoff between police and demonstrators at one event. One of the most watched was also the cheekiest -- anti-war activists making their point with a "21-bum salute," baring one posterior for every government at the summit. Copyright © 2007 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The ***************************************************************** 56 Daily Times: VIEW: Nuclear steps undermine peace —Jimmy Carter Leading News Resource of Pakistan Saturday, September 08, 2007 Knowing since 1974 of India’s nuclear ambitions, I and other American presidents imposed a consistent policy: no sales of nuclear technology or uncontrolled fuel to India or any other country that refused to sign the NPT. Today, these restraints are in the process of being abandoned By abandoning many of the nuclear arms agreements negotiated in the last 50 years, the United States has been sending mixed signals to North Korea, Iran, and other nations with the technical knowledge to create nuclear weapons. Currently proposed agreements with India compound this quagmire and further undermine the global pact for peace represented by the nuclear nonproliferation regime. At the same time, no significant steps are being taken to reduce the worldwide arsenal of almost 30,000 nuclear weapons now possessed by the United States, Russia, China, France, Israel, Britain, India, Pakistan, and perhaps North Korea. A global holocaust is just as possible now, through mistakes or misjudgments, as it was during the depths of the Cold War. The key restraining commitment among the five original nuclear powers and more than 180 other nations is the 1970 Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). Its key objective is “to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons and weapons technology...and to further the goal of achieving nuclear disarmament.” In the last five-year review conference at the United Nations in 2005, only Israel, India, Pakistan, and North Korea were not participating — the first three have nuclear arsenals that are advanced, and the fourth’s is embryonic. The American government has not set a good example, having already abandoned the Anti-Ballistic Missile treaty, binding limitations on testing nuclear weapons and developing new ones, and a long-standing policy of foregoing threats of “first use” of nuclear weapons against non-nuclear states. These recent decisions have encouraged China, Russia, and other NPT signatories to respond with similar actions. Knowing since 1974 of India’s nuclear ambitions, I and other American presidents imposed a consistent policy: no sales of nuclear technology or uncontrolled fuel to India or any other country that refused to sign the NPT. Today, these restraints are in the process of being abandoned. I have no doubt that India’s political leaders are just as responsible in handling their country’s arsenal as leaders of the five original nuclear powers. But there is a significant difference: the original five have signed the NPT, and have stopped producing fissile material for weapons. India’s leaders should make the same pledges, and should also join other nuclear powers in signing the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty. Instead, they have rejected these steps and insist on unrestricted access to international assistance in producing enough fissile material for as many as 50 weapons a year, far exceeding what is believed to be India’s current capacity. If India’s demand is acceptable, why should other technologically advanced NPT signatories, such as Brazil, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and Japan — to say nothing of less responsible nations — continue to restrain themselves? Having received at least tentative approval from the US for its policy, India still faces two further obstacles: an acceptable agreement with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and an exemption from the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG), a 45-nation body that — until now — has barred nuclear trade with any nation that refuses to accept international nuclear standards. The non-nuclear NSG members are Argentina, Australia, Austria, Belarus, Belgium, Brazil, Bulgaria, Canada, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Kazakhstan, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Africa, South Korea, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, and Ukraine. The role of these nations and the IAEA is not to prevent India’s development of nuclear power or even nuclear weapons, but rather to assure that it proceeds as almost all other responsible nations on earth do, by signing the Non-Proliferation Treaty and accepting other reasonable restraints. Nuclear powers must show leadership, by restraining themselves and by curtailing further departures from the NPT’s international restraints. One-by-one, the choices they make today will create a legacy — deadly or peaceful — for the future. —DT-PS Jimmy Carter is a former President of the United States Daily Times - All Rights Reserved Site developed and hosted by WorldCALL Internet Solutions ***************************************************************** 57 SF New Mexican: LANL workers brace for layoffs By ANDY LENDERMAN | The New Mexican September 7, 2007 The director of Los Alamos National Laboratory told employees Thursday to prepare for layoffs. The best-case scenario is a no-growth budget, Director Michael Anastasio said. And the worst case scenario is a $350-million cut that could result in 2,500 layoffs. Even a flat budget could result in some staff reductions because of increased costs. ``The steps we have taken over the last year have served as a hedge against employee layoffs,'' Anastasio told employees in a memo. ``These actions include cutting non-personnel costs, reducing spending and managing attrition across the laboratory.'' The lab absorbed an estimated $175 million in shortfall last year that came from higher taxes, a management fee and other costs. ``But given the current budget uncertainty and given that the biggest cost for the laboratory is personnel, these steps may not prove to be sufficient,'' Anastasio said. The federal fiscal year begins Oct. 1. But Anastasio said the lab's budget would likely be subject to a continuing resolution for several months, where Congress would fund the continued operation of government at a yet to be determined level. ``This creates a significant problem since it is unknown when a budget will be approved or what the budget will be,'' Anastasio said. ``We believe the magnitude of the problem ranges from a best-case scenario flat budget to a budget cut by more than $350 million.'' Anastasio has formed a team to meet with the U.S. Department of Energy and National Nuclear Security Administration next week to start working on a ``workforce restructuring plan.'' ``Our preparations will be grounded in fairness with a lot of care and thought behind them. Looking at the laboratory as a whole, our plan will focus on preserving the right jobs and people so that the laboratory can successfully carry out its missions,'' Anastasio said The lab's 2007 fiscal year budget is more than $2.1 billion, and the lab employs a total of 12,115 workers. Of those, 9,046 are permanent employees of Los Alamos National Security LLC, which manages the lab for the government. ``The director characterized for employees that there are many different # scenarios, and in one such worst case scenario requested by NNSA, translated to an estimated 2,500 positions,'' lab spokesman Jeff Berger said. The House of Representatives earlier this year passed a budget that would cut nearly $400 million from nuclear weapons programs at Los Alamos and Sandia National Laboratories, compared to the 2007 fiscal year. The Senate version of that federal spending bill, which covers energy and water projects, basically restored those cuts. However, that bill has yet to clear the full Senate and go to conference committee, where House and Senate leaders iron out their differences. The conference committee members have yet to be named. ``The impact is more devastating than we initially thought when I opposed the bill and more devastating to America's security as well,'' U.S. Rep. Heather Wilson, R-N.M., said in an interview. She said the budget cuts would impact the labs ability to maintain the reliability of the nuclear weapons stockpile. U.S. Rep. Tom Udall, D-N.M., has encouraged the lab to diversify from nuclear weapons work. He said Thursday that Anastasio's announcement is a necessary planning exercise required by law. ``No one wants job cuts at LANL and this should not be taken as an indication that there will be,'' Udall said in a statement. ``I have been assured that as the appropriations process continues the final conference report will fully fund the mission of the lab.'' Udall voted for the House bill, and Wilson voted against it. U.S. Sens. Pete Domenici and Jeff Bingaman also said Thursday that they would work to protect the lab's budget. Wilson said she would lobby President Bush for a veto, if needed. ``If we're not able to get a budget closer to the Senate proposal, I would definitely recommend to the president that he veto this bill,'' Wilson said. Contact Andy Lenderman at 986-3073 or alenderman@sfnewmexican.com. Copyright 2007 The New Mexican, Inc. ***************************************************************** 58 Hanford News: DOE to ship plutonium off Hanford This story was published Thursday, September 6th, 2007 Annette Cary, Herald staff writer The Department of Energy could begin shipping weapons-grade plutonium and unused nuclear fuel off the Hanford nuclear reservation in 30 days. Sending the material to Savannah River, S.C., will clear the way for the demolition of the Plutonium Finishing Plant and save more than $100 million in security costs. The plutonium is stored in a vault at the Plutonium Finishing Plant in central Hanford. "This is a key part of the Department of Energy's efforts to dispose of plutonium," James Rispoli, DOE assistant secretary of environmental management, said in a media conference call Wednesday. In addition to 2,300 canisters of plutonium from Hanford, DOE also plans to ship 700 canisters of plutonium from Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California and the Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico. Each canister, the size of a large coffee can, can hold almost 10 pounds of plutonium, but their weights vary. DOE notified Congress of its decision to consolidate plutonium at Savannah River on Wednesday and now must wait 30 days before shipments may begin. "Once the 30-day notification runs, we plan to begin with the campaign at Hanford," Rispoli said. DOE had planned an accelerated cleanup schedule at the Plutonium Finishing Plant where plutonium produced in Hanford reactors was made into metal buttons the size of hockey pucks for eventual conversion for weapons use. But because of delays in shipping the plutonium from the plant, demolition work slowed in the last two years and some of the funds intended for cleanup of the plant were shifted to radioactive sludge vacuuming and removal at the K Basins. DOE expects the nationwide consolidation of plutonium not yet made into nuclear weapons triggers to take about three years. Once the weapons-grade plutonium and unused fuel left over from the Fast Flux Test Facility are removed from the Plutonium Finishing Plant, heavy security at the plant will be reduced, making cleanup there more efficient. DOE is required to have all the buildings in the complex, many of them heavily contaminated with radioactive material, torn down by 2016. Under new security standards set after 9/11, the Plutonium Finishing Plant needs more than $100 million in security upgrades. However, those have been waived on the condition that the plutonium is shipped off site. Savannah River has long been discussed as the site where plutonium would be consolidated. But before designating it as the consolidation site, DOE was required to prove it had a definite disposition path for the waste before adding more plutonium to the plutonium already stored there. In August at Savannah River, DOE began building the Mixed Oxide Fuel Fabrication Facility which will be used to turn some of the surplus plutonium into fuel for commercial nuclear power reactors. DOE also plans to use another existing facility in Savannah River, the H Canyon, and possibly a proposed new, small-scale plutonium vitrification Facility there to recycle surplus materials, then prepare waste for disposal at Yucca Mountain, Nevada. "I applaud the leadership shown by DOE officials in achieving this plan," Rep. Doc Hastings, R-Wash., said in a statement. "Consolidation will make our country and community more secure, will save taxpayers' millions and will simplify Hanford cleanup." © 2007 Tri-City Herald. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 59 Hanford News: CREHST museum gets ready to celebrate 10-year anniversary This story was published Friday, September 7th, 2007 Michelle Dupler, Herald staff writer The CREHST museum has come a long way since its days in the basement of the Richland federal building. From the 1960s until about the mid-1990s, the collection of artifacts showcased the American science and ingenuity embodied in the Hanford nuclear site. But when government cutbacks threatened to shut the science center down, the community rallied and the Columbia River Exhibition of History, Science and Technology was born, said Director Gwen Leth. "They wanted to keep the story alive," Leth said. CREHST will celebrate its 10th anniversary Saturday with a day of activities, music and a buy-one-get-one-free special on admission. Leth and Terry Andre, the museum's education coordinator, sat in Leth's office Wednesday and reflected on a decade of exhibits and programs. The original collection, still on display in CREHST's current home on Lee Boulevard near Howard Amon Park, includes a 222 hot cell showing how technicians once used mechanical arms to handle plutonium, cross-sections of concrete and metal tanks used to bury waste, pictures of the Day's Pay bomber plane Hanford workers bought for the government during World War II by each sacrificing one day's pay, and a pictorial timeline of several decades of global history since Hanford's construction in 1943. The museum's mission has expanded over the years to include information on the region's geology, technology and the early history of the towns of White Bluffs, Hanford and Richland - small settlements of a couple hundred people each until the federal government swooped in and the population swelled with workers for the new plutonium processing plant in the latter days of World War II. Andre flipped through a thick stack of photos and fliers and spoke with pride about annual science camps for children, two exhibits that traveled to Richland from the Smithsonian Institution, parties celebrating physics and Albert Einstein, live music shows, walking tours of the city's government-built alphabet homes and museum theater. Between 10,000 and 15,000 people from around the globe visit the museum each year, and Leth hopes to see that grow once CREHST becomes part of the Hanford Reach Interpretive Center planned at Columbia Point. CREHST will close once the interpretive center opens for visitors sometime in 2010, according to the schedule published by The Reach. But its spirit will live on as its exhibits are transferred to the new building. "It's like we're the seedand The Reach is the flower," Andre said. "The main thing is our vision and our mission will continue in The Reach exhibits," Leth said. In the meantime, Leth and Andre are planning another Smithsonian exhibit coming in 2009 that will focus on the relationship between food and culture. "We have no intention of slowing down," Andre said. © 2007 Tri-City Herald. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 60 Hanford News: Agencies reveal new proposed deadlines This story was published Friday, September 7th, 2007 Annette Cary, Herald staff writer SEATTLE - Hanford regulators are considering living with long delays in emptying Hanford's leak-prone underground tanks and also starting operations of the vitrification plant. In exchange they may require more effort to clean up Hanford contamination deep underground and in ground water, particularly in plumes closest to the Columbia River. "We don't have a deal," said Nick Ceto, EPA Hanford program manager. "These are things we have talked about that we think we have some agreement on." After five negotiating sessions that began in May, the Department of Energy and its regulators - the state of Washington and the Environmental Protection Agency - have not been able to reach a deal on new legally binding deadlines for Hanford cleanup. The talks were arranged after DOE missed key cleanup deadlines outlined in the Tri-Party Agreement on emptying tanks of radioactive waste and announced it would be years late in starting to treat the tank waste at the vitrification plant under construction. The state could take legal action, but agreed to try negotiations. "We have a long way to go in terms of an agreement," Jane Hedges, the nuclear waste program manager for the Washington State Department of Ecology, told the Hanford Advisory Board at its meeting Thursday in Seattle. But after keeping quiet on all details of the negotiations, the agencies want input from key groups, including the board, the tribes and the state of Oregon, before the negotiations continue, said Washington state and federal officials. The proposed changes "are very, very disturbing, but it is a recognition of reality," said Jeff Luke, who represents the Hanford nonunion and nonmanagement work force on the board. "If it goes to litigation it takes years and years and years." Under discussion is allowing DOE to start the vitrification plant in 2019, which is eight years past the current deadline. But it would be required to meet 35 new interim deadlines for finishing parts of the plant to make sure it keeps on track. The $12.2 billion plant is being built to turn waste left from the past production of plutonium for the nation's weapons program into a stable glass form. Because the plant was not designed to treat all 53 million gallons of waste held in underground tanks, a second treatment method will be needed. But testing of bulk vitrification, which would immobilize some of the least radioactive waste in larger pieces of glass, also has fallen behind the Tri-Party Agreement schedule. DOE would be required to have a decision on the final design of a bulk vitrification pilot plant by the end of this year and then would be required to proceed with a decision on whether to proceed with bulk vitrification or expand the vitrification plant. All the waste would be required to be treated by 2047. The deadline for emptying the leak-prone single-shell tanks into newer double-shell tanks would be extended from the current deadline of 2018 to 2040. "Pretty shocking," said Gerald Pollet, who represents Heart of America Northwest on the board. So far DOE has emptied seven of 149 single-shell tanks, even though it had a deadline of emptying 16 of the tanks a year ago. Under the changes being considered, it would be required to empty 20 more for a total of 27 by September 2019. That would increase the current pace from emptying about one tank a year to emptying 11/2 tanks a year. "We certainly understand your concerns about the number of tanks to be retrieved," Hedges said. "It has slowed down dramatically." Part of DOE's problem is that it expected the vitrification plant to be treating waste in 2011, which would free up space in double-shell tanks to hold more waste from newly emptied single shell tanks. To increase the pace of emptying the tanks, DOE would have to raise the fill height of the double shell tanks and might have to finish filling a double-shell tank that it wanted to reserve for certain waste it proposed not turning into glass. Instead, DOE had proposed sending that particular waste to a national repository in New Mexico, that now accepts Hanford debris contaminated with plutonium. Under current regulations, New Mexico will not accept the waste. DOE also would be required to complete a study of the seven tanks emptied to determine how fast the rest of the single-shell tanks are deteriorating. Some have held waste since World War II and all are decades past their design life. In exchange for delays in emptying tanks and building the vitrification plant, EPA and the state want DOE to do more work to protect ground water and the Columbia River. That includes stopping two polluted plumes of ground water from entering the Columbia River before the current deadline of 2024. A plume of hexavalent chromium, a hazardous chemical, would have to be contained by December 2012 and a plume of radioactive strontium would have to be contained by December 2016. Both plumes are near reactors built along the river. In addition, DOE would have to stop a uranium plume from entering the river just north of Richland by December 2018. DOE is looking at new approaches to contain the plume after a plan to let it naturally dissipate did not work. DOE also would have to contain plumes of technetium 99, uranium and carbon tetrachloride in central Hanford by December 2020. In another measure to protect the river, DOE would be required to focus attention on how to clean up contamination deep underground in central Hanford before it reaches the ground water. There is no proven technology to clean up the waste now, but DOE would be required to start full-scale tests of possible technologies by September 2011. No deadline now is set for the work. "I would like to see a more aggressive attitude by all parties in going after cleanup," said Tom Carpenter, who represents the Government Accountability Project on the advisory board, after the agencies' presentation. While many of the board members who spoke criticized at least a part of the proposal, many said they liked one of the plans under discussion. DOE would be required to produce an annual report looking at the total cost of remaining cleanup and a schedule for getting it done. It would be used in making the case to DOE and Congress for adequate funding for cleanup. "If everything else doesn't work out, I hope that can be preserved," said Ken Niles, a board member representing the Oregon Department of Energy. Negotiations are expected to resume in October. The agencies plan to ask for public comment before any agreement is final. © 2007 Tri-City Herald. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 61 Hemscott: Los Alamos head warns of possible cuts ALBUQUERQUE, N.M. (AP) - The director of Los Alamos National Laboratory told employees Thursday the lab must plan for possible layoffs, saying the nuclear weapons lab doesn't know how much money Congress will give it next year. Michael Anastasio said in a memo that outlined the steps managers have taken -- such as cutting non-personnel costs and reducing spending -- 'as a hedge against employee layoffs.''But given the current budget uncertainty and given that the biggest cost for the laboratory is personnel, these steps may not prove to be sufficient,' Anastasio warned in the memo, issued after an all-employees meeting. In late July, Anastasio told jittery workers at the northern New Mexico lab that there would be no further cuts before the new federal budget year begins Oct. 1. The U.S. House has passed a bill that eliminated about $350 million from the lab's current budget of $2.2 billion. A Senate committee essentially left the current budget intact. That isn't expected to change when the full Senate votes on the measure, leaving a conference committee to produce a final version. There's no way to estimate the impact on employees, but to delay a contingency plan only would compound the problem, said Anastasio, who recently finished his first year as head of the lab under its new private operator, Los Alamos National Security LLC. He formed a team to meet with National Nuclear Security Administration and Department of Energy officials to start developing what he called 'a work force restructuring plan.' The plan 'will focus on preserving the right jobs and people so that the laboratory can successfully carry out its missions,' he said, adding that the plan will enable the lab to deal with 'any budget uncertainties in the future.' The House bill affects other labs in the DOE's complex, including Sandia National Laboratories in Albuquerque, which held a manager's meeting Thursday and said it also is planning for the future. In June, Sandia officials said that lab faced a potential $180 million cut. Stephanie Holinka, a spokeswoman for Sandia, said Thursday the lab has not announced any layoffs but is 'trying to do some serious and unpleasant planning.''We wanted employees to know that it wasn't looking very good for anything to pass anytime soon. ... We're not happy; we're nervous; this planning process will be going on for some time,' she said. Greg Mello of Albuquerque, a member of the Los Alamos Study Group, a nuclear watchdog group, contended it would be good for the nation if lab budgets are deeply cut over the next few years. 'There would be no need for layoffs this year, back-of-the-envelope calculations suggest, if NNSA and our congressional delegation worked together on a few relatively easy reforms including retirement incentives,' he said. Copyright 2007 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. Copyright 2007 Hemscott Group Limited. ***************************************************************** 62 lamonitor.com: Lab prepares for budget imponderables The Online News Source for Los Alamos ROGER SNODGRASS Monitor Assistant Editor A week into September, budget uncertainties in Washington have prompted the nation's nuclear weapons chief to conclude that the funding situation for Los Alamos National Laboratory and the rest of the complex are nearing a critical threshold. In an all-hands meeting and a memo to employees Thursday, LANL director Michael Anastasio shared part of a note he had received Wednesday night from Thomas D'Agostino, administrator of the National Nuclear Security Administration. "Since we have no ability to estimate how long we may have to operate under these conditions, we have to anticipate that it will be for an extended period of time," D'Agostino wrote. "This situation unfortunately will cause some significant impacts to our sites' operating budgets and could affect our workforce." Even if a lengthy period of continuing resolutions can be avoided, he concluded, "changes to missions and work for other programs will likely cause workforce impacts in FY 2008." Among the uncertain scenarios in Washington now looms the possibility that any unresolved budget bills would have to be funded by continuing resolution for next fiscal year beginning Oct. 1, and perhaps included in an omnibus spending bill. A catchall spending bill funded the Department of Energy and laboratories last year. But which bills will pass before a catchall becomes necessary, how long continuing resolutions would last and how they would be structured are all unknowns at this point. "We believe the magnitude of the problem ranges from a best-case scenario flat budget to a budget cut by more than $350 million," Anastasio wrote in his memo to employees. D'Agostino's call for precautionary planning invoked an antique provision of the 1993 National Defense Authorization Act, known as Section 3161. The measure passed by Congress as the cold war ended mandated a planning process for restructuring workforces at defense nuclear facilities. According to a Department of Energy background paper, the plans were directed "to be guided by a fundamental objective: to mitigate the impacts on workers and communities, especially those whose service had helped maintain our nuclear deterrent force during the Cold War." "Thus, I have formed a team who will meet with DOE and NNSA beginning next week to start developing a Work Force Restructuring Plan," Anastasio said in the memo, adding that the planning would encompass prospects for future years. "This plan will also put us in a better position to deal with any budget uncertainties in the future," he said. A laboratory spokesperson said this morning that the lab's team would be led by Deputy Director Jan Van Prooyen and would be traveling to Washington, D.C. next week. From Washington, D.C. a flurry of statements have come from members of the New Mexico Congressional delegation. "The unfortunate reality in Congress is that we rarely pass appropriations bills by the end of the fiscal year," said Sen. Jeff Bingaman, D-N.M and chairman of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee. "That said, I will be among those pushing to have the Energy and Water spending legislation come to the Senate floor this month, and if that's not possible it's my hope we will have a final bill as soon after that as possible." While it is increasingly likely that there will be an omnibus spending bill, Bingaman's office indicated, it remains to be seen which bills will end up in it. Sen. Pete Domenici, R-N.M., said the lab managers were prudent and responsible to begin the planning process. "At the same time, it is important to realize that FY2008 spending levels -either in a final Energy and Water Appropriations Bill or a continuing resolution that includes the labs' funding - have not been established," he said in his statement. Domenici's spokesman Chris Gallegos said that the key to what might happen if the energy and water appropriations bill goes into a continuing resolution is what the rules are for determining the funding levels. "They could set funding at the current level, at the level of the president's budget request, or the lower of the bills passed by either the House or the Senate," he said. "Since only the House bill has passed at this point, that bill would now set the standard." Sizeable budget reductions contained in the House bill, could yet be restored in a Senate bill, which has yet to be given final approval. Rep. Tom Udall, D-N.M. said in a statement that the lab's planning effort is necessary. "No one wants job cuts at LANL, and this should not be taken as an indication that there will be (any)," he said, adding that he was still confident that a final conference report resolving differences between the House and Senate "will fully fund the core mission of the lab." In Santa Fe, Gov. Bill Richardson called for the New Mexico delegation to collaborate in support of the laboratories and their employees. He also ordered the state departments of Workforce Solutions, Economic Development and Higher Education to work with LANL on workforce restructuring plans. Rep. Heather Wilson, R-N.M., who represents the district in which Sandia National Laboratories is located, said the labs were taking the right steps to plan for possible budget impacts, but that she would be working hard to make sure the impacts didn't happen. Editor's note: Further coverage of community leaders' reactions to Anastasio's announcement will follow on Sunday. © 2003 Los Alamos Monitor All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 this material is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. For more information go to: *****************************************************************