***************************************************************** 09/25/07 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 15.225 ***************************************************************** 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 NUCLEAR REACTORS 1 US: [NYTr] Nuew Nukes for Texas? Back to Failed Energy Policy of '70 2 US: New Nuke Application is Deja Vu -- Vote Masks Lack of Support fo 3 US: NRC: Agency Holding the Meetings: Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 4 US: SLO Tribune News: Layoffs begin at Diablo Canyon 5 TheStar.com: Nuclear is not the answer 6 Bangkok Post: Nuclear plant will require $8 billion 7 US: Platts: NRG submits construction permit-operating license applic 8 Platts: New UK nuclear construction does not need to be subsidized 9 US: Platts: Sustainable Nuclear Energy Technology Platform launched 10 Platts: Portuguese research reactor converts from HEU 11 Leader-Post: French nuclear firm courting Alberta town 12 US: TVA: Meeting 13 US: APP.COM: Atomic safety board weighs Oyster Creek plan | 14 US: NRC: Hillsborough NJ FONSI 15 US: NRC: Wolf Creek License renewal 16 Reuters: Chile's nuclear decision to take years-Bachelet 17 Reuters: Japan Atomic Power to shut Tsuruga nuclear unit 18 Reuters: Germany needs nuclear to meet carbon cut goal - group 19 Asia Times: Nukes wrangle threatens Indian government 20 US: UPI: N.J. company seeks OK to build 2 reactors 21 Prague Daily Monitor: koda JS Plze to upgrade Dukovany nuclear plant 22 Hemscott: Westinghouse acquires French nuclear engineering firm Asta 23 US: CBC News: Point Lepreau shut down after malfunction 24 US: TheDay.com: DEP Extends Millstone Discharge Permit By 30 Days 25 US: Huntsville Times: TVA board meeting in Huntsville Thursday; budg 26 Sydney Morning Herald: Howard holds nuclear laws until after electio 27 US: Victoria Advocate: Nuclear power begins its U.S. return through NUCLEAR SECURITY 28 Platts: UK said to have world's largest civilian Pu stockpile NUCLEAR SAFETY 29 US: Rocky Mountain News: Read workers' appeal letter 30 Helsingin Sanomat: Elevated levels of caesium hamper export of prize NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE 31 US: Carlsbad Current-Argus: GNEP determination will wait a year 32 US: Ventura County Star: EPA provides few answers on site's possible 33 Mohave Daily News: Yucca nuclear dump structures moved after fault-l 34 US: University of Utah Press: Nuclear Waste Stalemate 35 Las Vegas Now: Earthquake Fault Possible Beneath Yucca Mountain Site 36 Guardian Unlimited: US nuclear dump plan in danger after seismic sho PEACE 37 Iranian President Tells General Assembly That Nuclear Issue Is Now C 38 People's Daily: DPRK accuses U.S. of adopting double standards over 39 US: Shreveport Times: Investigation into B-52 munitions mishap conti 40 IHT: North Korea accuses US of helping Israel develop nuclear weapon 41 Japan Times: Keep the Arctic free of nuclear weapons 42 csmonitor.com: Did N. Korea give Syria nuclear aid? 43 Guardian Unlimited: North Korea denies Syria nuclear link US DEPT. OF ENERGY 44 Rocky Mountain News: Flats workers appeal aid ruling, blast governme 45 Oak Ridger: $6.7 million kick-starts DOE BioEnergy Science Center - 46 KOB.com: Senators fight efforts to cut spending at N.M. labs ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** FULL NEWS STORIES ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** 1 [NYTr] Nuew Nukes for Texas? Back to Failed Energy Policy of '70s Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2007 21:58:45 -0500 (CDT) Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit Public Citizen - Sep 25, 2007 http://www.citizen.org/pressroom/release.cfm?ID=2516 Application for New Nuclear Reactors in South Texas Sends U.S. Back to Failed Energy Policies of the 1970s Statement of Tyson Slocum, Director of Public Citizenbs Energy Program NRG Energybs request today to build two new nuclear reactors in southern Texas is dC)jC vu all over again. The U.S. has been down the nuclear power path b and it has proven to be expensive, polluting, dangerous and a security risk. Nothing has changed with any of these factors since utilities lost interest in nuclear power 30 years ago. Electricity companies are testing a revised licensing process only because federal politicians want to throw even more taxpayer dollars at an industry with which they have become far too cozy. With this application, NRG Energy is attempting to be the first in line to obtain loan guarantees and other construction subsidies for nuclear power granted in the Energy Policy Act of 2005. NRG Energy is not a poor little start-up company venturing into an innovative field to address energy needs. In the past 18 months, NRG Energy has made $835 million in profit and is positioning itself to receive federal handouts that continue to prop up a mature industry that is not economically viable. Nuclear industry heads have candidly stated that without the federal loan guarantees, the projects will come to a halt. There is no reason for U.S. taxpayers to back loans for a technology that, according to the Congressional Budget Office, has a default rate of bwell above 50 percent.b NRG Energybs proposed design for an advanced boiling water reactor should not even be eligible for loan guarantees, the purpose of which is to encourage advancement of new and innovative technology, because advanced boiling water reactors are operating in Japan, and several more are under construction in Asia. The technology isnbt that new, and it isnbt that innovative. Further, NRG is hardly deserving of taxpayer money; it paid $2 million in fines this year for falsely reporting natural gas trading information. The proposed reactors may be headed for billions in cost overruns just as in the 1970s, especially given that the cost of steel and other construction materials are skyrocketing. Two advanced boiling water reactors were built in Japan in 1996 and 1997 at a cost of $4.21 billion and more than $3.64 billion respectively. Public Citizen will fight these proposed reactors every step of the way. The flaws of nuclear power b excessive cost, security threats and long-lived radioactive waste b have not been solved. More nuclear reactors will only exacerbate these problems. The future of nuclear power looks a lot like the past. The first step to avoid repeating history is to stop wasting taxpayer dollars on bailing out this 20th century technology and focus on 21st century solutions that are clean, safe, and sustainable. * ================================================================= NY Transfer News Collective * A Service of Blythe Systems Since 1985 - Information for the Rest of Us Our main website: http://www.blythe.org List Archives: http://blythe-systems.com/pipermail/nytr/ Subscribe: http://blythe-systems.com/mailman/listinfo/nytr ================================================================= ***************************************************************** 2 New Nuke Application is Deja Vu -- Vote Masks Lack of Support for Peru FTA Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2007 17:08:26 -0500 (CDT) Sept. 25, 2007 Application for New Nuclear Reactors in South Texas Sends U.S. Back to Failed Energy Policies of the 1970s Statement of Tyson Slocum, Director of Public Citizen's Energy Program NRG Energy's request today to build two new nuclear reactors in southern Texas is dij` vu all over again. The U.S. has been down the nuclear power path - and it has proven to be expensive, polluting, dangerous and a security risk. Nothing has changed with any of these factors since utilities lost interest in nuclear power 30 years ago. Electricity companies are testing a revised licensing process only because federal politicians want to throw even more taxpayer dollars at an industry with which they have become far too cozy. READ the entire statement at http://www.citizen.org/pressroom/release.cfm?ID=2516. ### House Committee Vote Masks Lack of Democratic Rank-and-File Support for Bush NAFTA Expansion to Peru House Ways and Means Committee Shuts Out Public, Refuses to Hear Discontent Over More-Of-The-Same NAFTA Trade Policy WASHINGTON, D.C. - Today's House Ways and Means Committee non-binding vote on the Peru Free Trade Agreement (FTA) will be the high-water mark of Democratic support for Bush's proposed expansion of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), Public Citizen predicted today. READ the entire press release at http://www.citizen.org/pressroom/release.cfm?ID=2515. ### ***************************************************************** 3 NRC: Agency Holding the Meetings: Nuclear Regulatory Commission. FR Doc 07-4732 [Federal Register: September 25, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 185)] [Notices] [Page 54470-54471] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr25se07-79] NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Sunshine Act Federal Register Notice Date: Weeks of September 24, October 1, 8, 15, 22, 29, 2007. Place: Commissioners' Conference Room, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland. Status: Public and Closed. Matters to be Considered: Week of September 24, 2007 There are no meetings scheduled for the Week of September 24, 2007. Week of October 1, 2007--Tentative Monday, October 1, 2007 1:30 p.m. Periodic Briefing on Security Issues (Closed--Ex. 1 & 3) Wednesday, October 3, 2007 2 p.m. Briefing on NRC's International Programs, Performance, and Plans (Public Meeting) (Contact: Karen Henderson, 301-415-0202) This meeting will be webcast live at the Web address--http:// www.nrc.gov. Week of October 8, 2007--Tentative There are no meetings scheduled for the Week of October 8, 2007. Week of October 15, 2007--Tentative There are no meetings scheduled for the Week of October 15, 2007. Week of October 22, 2007--Tentative Wednesday, October 24, 2007 9:30 a.m. Periodic Briefing on New Reactor Issues, Part 1 (Public Meeting) (Contact: Roger Rihm, 301-415-7807) This meeting will be webcast live at the Web address--http:// www.nrc.gov. 1:30 p.m. Periodic Briefing on New Reactor Issues, Part 2 (Public Meeting) (Contact: Roger Rihm, 301-415-7807). This meeting will be webcast live at the Web address--http:// www.nrc.gov. Week of October 29, 2007--Tentative There are no meetings scheduled for the Week of October 29, 2007. \*\ The schedule for Commission meetings is subject to change on short notice. To verify the status of meetings, call (recording)--(301) 415-1292. Contact person for more information: Michelle Schroll, (301) 415-1662. The NRC Commission Meeting Schedule can be found on the Internet at: http://www.nrc.gov/about-nrc/policy-making/schedule.html. The NRC provides reasonable accommodation to individuals with disabilities where appropriate. If you need a reasonable accommodation to participate in these public meetings, or need this meeting notice or the transcript or other information from the public meetings in another format (e.g. braille, large print), please notify the NRC's Disability Program Coordinator, Rohn Brown, at 301-492-2279, TDD: 301-415-2100, or by e-mail at REB3@nrc.gov. Determinations on requests for reasonable accommodation will be made on a case-by-case basis. * * * * * This notice is distributed by mail to several hundred subscribers; if you no longer wish to receive it, or would like to be added to the distribution, please contact the Office of the Secretary, Washington, DC 20555 (301-415-1969). In addition, distribution of this meeting notice over the Internet system is available. If you are interested in receiving this Commission meeting [[Page 54471]] schedule electronically, please send an electronic message to dkw@nrc.gov. Dated: September 19, 2007. R. Michelle Schroll, Office of the Secretary. [FR Doc. 07-4732 Filed 9-21-07; 1:11 pm] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P ***************************************************************** 4 SLO Tribune News: Layoffs begin at Diablo Canyon San Luis Obispo County’s website | 09/25/2007 | By Sally Connell sconnell@thetribunenews.com Supervisors at Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant started informing 26 non-union employees this morning that they will be laid off, and another 42 will be transferred to short-term assignments before they face a similar fate. In all, 110 positions are being eliminated, including 42 jobs that will be lost through attrition because they are not currently filled, according to Pacific Gas & Electric Co. plant spokesman Pete Resler. PG&E is the largest employer in San Luis Obispo County, and Diablo Canyon is a big reason why. There are currently 1,400 employees at the plant, when 1,000 is the industry average at two-reactor plants, according to what a consultant on industry standards has informed PG&E, Resler said. The company is currently in discussions with the unions who represent approximately half of its employees about possible further layoffs, he said, but he has no idea yet how many positions might be affected. In July, Resler said that the company could lose hundreds of employees in the next two to three years. ***************************************************************** 5 TheStar.com: Nuclear is not the answer comment | | Today's Toronto Star | Star P.M. Tory vows to fast-track nuke plants Sept. 23 Progressive Conservative Leader John Tory's vow to fast-track the building of new nuclear plants shows that the only difference between Tory and Premier Dalton McGuinty on nuclear power is posturing. Tory is upfront about his love of expensive nuclear power. McGuinty's Liberals talk about their commitment to green energy, but they curiously fail to mention their $40 billion commitment to build 14,000 megawatts of nuclear power – arguably the biggest nuclear construction program in the world – in their policy platform. Tory publicly says he will streamline the approvals process for new nuclear plants, while McGuinty already quietly rewrote Ontario's environmental protection law to exempt his nuclear electricity plan from an environmental assessment. Unfortunately, all of this posturing about who can build nuclear plants faster comes at the expense of discussing clean-energy options that can keep the lights on and lower greenhouse gas emissions. Even after circumventing our environmental protection law, it takes 10 to 15 years to build a nuclear station, making it too little, far too late. The solution? Switch from nuclear and coal mega-projects to a modern portfolio of options that are quick to deploy: conservation, renewables and local, decentralized generation. We have the technology and renewable-energy potential to let our coal and nuclear stations go the way of the dinosaurs. Shawn-Patrick Stensil, Greenpeace Canada, Toronto © Copyright Toronto Star 1996-2007 | ***************************************************************** 6 Bangkok Post: Nuclear plant will require $8 billion Business >> Wednesday September 26, 2007 Construction is scheduled for 2014 YUTHANA PRAIWAN Thailand's first nuclear power plant would require a massive capital investment of at least US$8 billion, according to Dr Kamol Takabut, the director of the mechanical engineering division at the Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand (Egat). If and when the government decides to start construction in 2014, Egat will need to raise at least $8 billion to finance the high standard of construction required for the project. ''Atomic fuel has been used more around the globe lately. They say that a nuclear power plant is a 'clean fuel', but there are long procedures to catch up,'' he said. Dr Kamol said that the appropriate technology from nuclear-experienced countries such as the United States, France, Japan and Korea would need to be studied in-depth to ensure Thailand's first nuclear power plant has the highest standards. Egat is to spearhead the pilot project for Thailand's first nuclear plant. Nuclear power is expected to be a major source of energy for the country over the next decade according to the Energy Ministry's Power Development Plan (PDP). The Nuclear Power Infrastructure Preparation Committee (NPIPC), which is helping draw up the nuclear power plan, has finished writing up the initial procedures that must be followed in the lead-up to building a plant. Dr Kopr Kritayakirana, the NPIPC chairman, said the guidelines would be presented for approval to the National Energy Policy Council (NEPC) next month after the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) finishes its review. Nuclear experts from the private sector plan to review the measures this week. The plan would establish six subcommittees to oversee legal issues and regulations, infrastructure, technology and human resources, environmental and safety standards, public acceptance and power plant utilities. Almost a dozen laws would be amended to cover the project, covering safety standards, regulators, waste and disposal management and licence agreements. Dr Kopr said the regulations and quality standards mainly stemmed from the International Atomic Energy Agency's code of conduct. The infrastructure would be related to economic and financial possibilities. Human resources development and appropriate technology transfer would also be required. He expressed hope that a solid human development plan would increase the knowledge of nuclear power among engineers from local universities. The Energy Ministry has already begun a 2.4-billion-baht public relations campaign from 2008-11 to sell the public on the project. Possible location surveys, power system planning, the selection of technology and a feasibility study would take place over the next four years. The decision on project construction would be made afterwards. Construction is scheduled to begin in 2014. The plant would start running in 2020 and would run at full capacity in 2021. Thailand's PDP calls for a combined nuclear power capacity of 4,000 megawatts. Ian Facer, an IAEA engineer, suggested that countries that favoured nuclear power should have IAEA technical assistance. They would also need preparation to cover all activities prior to decision making to ensure the viability of the project due to its high cost. ''They need to ensure they have a sufficient number of nuclear experts, as precise construction and plant operation management are very necessary,'' Mr Facer added. © Copyright The Post Publishing Public Co., Ltd. 2007 ***************************************************************** 7 Platts: NRG submits construction permit-operating license application 2007-09-24 Washington (Platts)--24Sep2007 Merchant generator NRG has filed an application with the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission for a combined construction permit-operating license for two units at its South Texas Project site, the company said Monday. An NRC spokesman, Scott Burnell, confirmed that the application--the first for a complete COL--had been received. The combined capacity of the two reactor will be at least 2,700 MW, NRG said. The South Texas site houses two currently operating nuclear units. For more news, request a free trial to Platts Nucleonics Week at http://www.platts.com/Request%20More%20Information/index.xml?src=story or subscribe now at http://www.platts.com/infostore/product_info.php?cPath=22_41&products_id=67 Copyright © 2007 - Platts, All Rights Reserved ***************************************************************** 8 Platts: New UK nuclear construction does not need to be subsidized 2007-09-21 London (Platts)--21Sep2007 New UK nuclear construction doesn't need to be subsidized if standard, accepted international designs are adopted and fossil fuel alternatives "carry the cost of the carbon emissions associated with their use," British Energy told the UK government September 20. It called on the government not to place any restrictions on the amount of nuclear capacity that might be built. Currently the UK relies on nuclear to supply just under a fifth of its electricity and most of the debate has centered on new nuclear construction to replace aging nuclear capacity only. BE also suggested that the government quantify how much new nuclear capacity it believes is required and the timescales for its construction. That would make it "more likely" that industry will make the early investments needed to increase the country's nuclear component manufacturing capability and manpower skills, it said. BE's report to government was its response to the government's public consultation over the future of nuclear power in the UK. The 20-week consultation ends October 10. The government expects to make a decision toward the end of the year on whether to allow the private sector to pursue new nuclear construction. For more news, request a free trial to Platts Nucleonics Week at http://www.platts.com/Request%20More%20Information/index.xml?story or subscribe now at http://www.platts.com/infostore/product_info.php?cPath=22_41&products_id=67 Copyright © 2007 - Platts, All Rights Reserved ***************************************************************** 9 Platts: Sustainable Nuclear Energy Technology Platform launched Sep 21 2007-09-24 London (Platts)--24Sep2007 A new organization to focus and guide European nuclear reasearch and technology development was launched at the European Commission September 21. The "Sustainable Nuclear Energy Technology Platform" will, in the next two years, produce a strategic research agenda and a deployment strategy extending from generation II, or current reactors, to Generations III and IV reactors, according to the "Vision Report" released at the launch conference September 21. There are also plans for a sodium fast reactor prototype by 2020 and an alternative design -- either a lead -- or gas-cooled fast reactor. About 360 people representing government, utilities, industrial energy consumers, and finance and scientific circles attended the conference. A governing board and executive committee are to be appointed October 29 and 30 and a web site will be set up at www.snetp.eu for more information. "I feel really delighted to be here today, looking at the comprehensive representation from all the stakeholders in the nuclear field," said Roland Schenkel, director general of the EC Joint Research Center. "This is the message we should take back ... that here Europe is working together to establish the long-term use of nuclear energy. For me, this is the European flagship." For more news, request a free trial to Platts Nucleonics Week at http://www.platts.com/Request%20More%20Information/index.xml?story or subscribe now at http://www.platts.com/infostore/product_info.php?cPath=22_41&products_id=67 Copyright © 2007 - Platts, All Rights Reserved ***************************************************************** 10 Platts: Portuguese research reactor converts from HEU 2007-09-25 London (Platts)--25Sep2007 A Portuguese research reactor has been converted from HEU to low-enriched uranium fuel, DOE's National Nuclear Security Administration said September 24. The announcement on the 1-MW reactor at the Instituto Tecnologico e Nuclear in Sacavem, follows several other announcements in recent weeks on a global effort to convert reactors from high-enriched uranium fuel to LEU, and on a related effort to secure and blend down HEU. The annual conference on the conversion program, known as Reduced Enrichment for Research and Test Reactors, is taking place this week in Prague. For more news, request a free trial to Platts Nucleonics Week at http://www.platts.com/Request%20More%20Information/index.xml?story or subscribe now at http://www.platts.com/infostore/product_info.php?cPath=22_41&products_id=67 Copyright © 2007 - Platts, All Rights Reserved ***************************************************************** 11 Leader-Post: French nuclear firm courting Alberta town Iran president denounced as 'petty and cruel dictator' WASHINGTON -- Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was left fuming and feeling "... Gordon Jaremko, CanWest News Service Published: Tuesday, September 25, 2007 EDMONTON -- France's nuclear energy conglomerate tried to woo officials in Alberta on Monday, arguing it can build the province's first atomic power station at a site in Whitecourt, Alta. Areva Canada president Armand Laferrere trekked to the town 150 kilometres northwest of Edmonton armed with plans freshly approved by the Paris head office of his firm's parent company, and found a receptive audience. "We think it would be a great thing for our community," Whitecourt Mayor Trevor Thain said. The town council staged a public information meeting about the French atomic power company. The mayor predicted at least 75 per cent of local voters will back an atomic power project in a civic referendum he intends to hold as development plans take shape. "It's a great place to do business," Laferrere said, describing the invitation to try a project in northern Alberta as a refreshing change from initial fear and resistance Areva ran into elsewhere in building its global chain of 98 atomic power stations. "This is a sufficiently rare event in the nuclear power industry that we should show appreciation." Areva's arrival spells competition for a $6.2-billion plant proposed last August for a site near Peace River, 500 kilometres northwest of Edmonton, by Energy Alberta and Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd. Unlike its rivals, Areva made no initial claim to have an undisclosed buyer lined up for most of its proposed electricity output. Energy Alberta eventually dropped that claim after no taker stepped forward, admitting it is still trying to find customers. The Whitecourt public meeting followed months of quiet overtures by the French company to Alberta communities, provincial officials, electric utilities and construction companies. "We want things to be clear. We have nothing to hide," Laferrere said. Discussions also have been held with provincial officials including Energy Minister Mel Knight, Laferrere said. No commitments have been made by the province's political leaders. "We've had a good reception from the government," Laferrere said. "They want the marketplace to come up with a project before taking a stance. That's a very good approach -- saying 'You prove to us this can be done, and then we'll talk,"' he said. Edmonton Journal © The Leader-Post (Regina) 2007 © 2007 CanWest Interactive, a division of CanWest MediaWorks ***************************************************************** 12 TVA: Meeting FR Doc 07-4736 [Federal Register: September 25, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 185)] [Notices] [Page 54508-54509] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr25se07-95] TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY Sunshine Act Meeting Agency Holding the Meeting: Tennessee Valley Authority (Meeting No. 07- 05). Time and Date: 9 a.m. CDT, September 27, 2007, Huntsville Marriott, 5 Tranquility Base, Huntsville, Alabama 35805. Agenda Old Business Approval of minutes of August 1, 2007, Board Meeting. [[Page 54509]] New Business 1. President's Report. 2. Report of the Finance, Strategy, and Rates Committee: A. TVA annual budget for FY 2008. B. Asset Retirement Obligations Trust. C. Regulatory accounting changes. D. Authorization to issue bonds. E. Customer issues. i. Extension of contract with a directly-served customer. ii. New interruptible product--60-Minute Response program. 3. Report of the Operations, Environment, and Safety Committee: A. Combined cycle project. B. Bellefonte Combined Construction Permit & Operating License Application. 4. Report of the Human Resources Committee: A. Winning Performance measures and balanced scorecard. B. TVA Contribution to TVA Retirement System. C. Award of contract for prescription drug benefits. 5. Report of the Audit and Ethics Committee: A. Selection of external auditor. 6. Report of the Community Relations Committee. 7. Report of the Corporate Governance Committee: A. Appointment of assistant secretary. For more information: Please call TVA Media Relations at (865) 632- 6000, Knoxville, Tennessee. Information is also available at TVA's Washington Office (202) 898-2999. People who plan to attend the meeting and have special needs should call (865) 632-6000. Anyone who wishes to comment on any of the agenda in writing may send their comments to: TVA Board of Directors, Board Agenda Comments, 400 West Summit Hill Drive, Knoxville, Tennessee 37902. Dated: September 20, 2007. Maureen H. Dunn, General Counsel and Secretary. [FR Doc. 07-4736 Filed 9-21-07; 2:28 pm] BILLING CODE 8120-08-P ***************************************************************** 13 APP.COM: Atomic safety board weighs Oyster Creek plan | Asbury Park Press Online Tuesday, September 25, 2007 Hearing may conclude today BY TODD B. BATES ENVIRONMENTAL WRITER Post Comment TOMS RIVER — Is a crucial but corroded radiation containment barrier at the Oyster Creek nuclear power plant in Lacey too thin? Is the so-called drywell, which is designed to prevent a radioactive release during a nuclear accident, at risk of buckling? Is plant operator AmerGen Energy Co.'s plan to measure the barrier's thickness once every four years good enough? These and other questions were considered Monday by experts and lawyers for AmerGen, six citizens groups opposing AmerGen's request for a 20-year license renewal, and the U.S. Nuclear Re-gulatory Commission at a landmark hearing that may end today. AmerGen's plan to measure drywell shell thickness every four years is "more than adequate," said Alex S. Polonsky, a Washington lawyer for AmerGen. But there's "a huge amount of uncertainty," and AmerGen should measure the drywell thickness more than once a year, said Richard Webster, a lawyer for the citizens groups and adjunct professor at Rutgers Environmental Law Clinic. The hearing before a three-judge Atomic Safety and Licensing Board panel is the first of its kind after dozens of nuclear plant license renewal applications considered by the NRC to date, according to NRC spokesman Neil A. Sheehan and the NRC Web site. The ASLB is a quasi-judicial body within but independent of the NRC. Experts and lawyers have already filed hundreds of pages of written testimony. The six groups challenging AmerGen's license renewal application include Jersey Shore Nuclear Watch, Grandmothers, Mothers and More for Nuclear Safety (GRAMMES), New Jersey Environmental Federation, New Jersey Public Interest Research Group, Nuclear Information and Resource Service and the New Jersey chapter of the Sierra Club. At issue is whether AmerGen's plan to use ultrasound to measure the drywell's thickness every four years is adequate. The drywell shell consists of carbon steel plates welded together in the shape of an approximately 100-foot tall inverted light bulb, according to Polonsky. Corrective action taken In the 1980s, corrosion was found in the drywell's sand-bed region. But the sand bed has since been removed, an epoxycoating was applied to the shell and AmerGen has said the corrosion has been arrested. One issue is whether the plant has a lower-than-acceptable safety factor when it comes to drywell thickness. Assuming the corrosion is as extensive and severe as depicted by Rudolf H. Hausler, an expert for the citizens groups, the NRC staff estimates that the safety factor in the sand bed area does not meet an American Society of Mechanical Engineers code, according to August testimony by an NRC senior mechanical engineer. But the NRC staff "believes that the sand bed shell, with current or potential corrosion, would not be susceptible to buckling," according to the testimony by Mark Hartzman. Hartzman said at the hearing he concludes that the Oyster Creek drywell shell meets or exceeds the safety factor. Janet Tauro of Brick, a member of GRAMMES, said "I'm astounded . . . and I'm scared" when it comes to the code issue. "We still firmly believe that we've met the code, we've always met the code," said Leslie Cifelli, an AmerGen spokeswoman. This story includes material from Asbury Park Press archives. Todd B. Bates: (732) 643-4237 or tbates@app.com Copyright © 2007 Asbury Park Press. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 14 NRC: Hillsborough NJ FONSI FR Doc E7-18872 [Federal Register: September 25, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 185)] [Notices] [Page 54467-54469] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr25se07-77] NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket No. 04000341] Notice of Availability of Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact for License Amendment to Source Materials License No. STC-133, for Unrestricted Release of the Defense Logistics Agency's Facility in Hillsborough, NJ AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission. ACTION: Issuance of environmental assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact for license amendment. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dennis Lawyer, Health Physicist, Commercial and R&D Branch, Division of Nuclear Materials Safety, Region I, 475 Allendale Road, King of Prussia, Pennsylvania; telephone 610- 337-5366; fax number 610-337-5393; or by e-mail: drl1@nrc.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Introduction The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is considering the issuance of a license amendment to Source Materials License No. STC- 133. This license is held by Defense Logistics Agency (the Licensee). The license authorizes the Licensee to use licensed material at multiple sites in different States. At issue here is the Licensee's Defense National Stockpile Center Somerville Depot, located at 152 U.S. Highway Route, Hillsborough, New Jersey (the Facility). Issuance of the amendment would authorize release of the Facility for unrestricted use, but would not involve termination of the license. The Licensee requested this action in a letter dated January 3, 2007. The NRC has prepared an Environmental Assessment (EA) in support of this proposed action in accordance with the requirements of Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 51 (10 CFR Part 51). Based on the EA, the NRC has concluded that a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) is appropriate with respect to the proposed action. The amendment will be issued to the Licensee following the publication of this FONSI and EA in the Federal Register. II. Environmental Assessment Identification of Proposed Action The proposed action would approve the Licensee's January 3, 2007, license amendment request, resulting in release of the Facility for unrestricted use in accordance with 10 CFR 20.1402. License No. STC-133 was issued on July 27, 1983, pursuant to 10 CFR Part 40, and has been amended periodically since that time. With respect to the Facility, the license authorized the Licensee to use unsealed source material for purposes of storage, sampling, repackaging, and transferring materials. The Facility is situated on 77 acres of land and consists of warehouses and office space. The Facility is located in a mixed industrial area. Within the Facility, use of licensed materials was confined to a decontamination trailer and warehouses 1, 3, and 4. The area of use totaled approximately 50,000 square feet. On September 16, 2004, the Licensee ceased licensed activities at the Facility, and initiated a survey and decontamination actions there. Based on the Licensee's historical knowledge of the site and the conditions of the Facility, the Licensee determined that only routine decontamination activities, in accordance with their NRC-approved, operating radiation safety procedures, were required. The Licensee was not required to submit a decommissioning plan to the NRC because worker cleanup activities and procedures are consistent with those approved for routine operations. The Licensee conducted surveys of the Facility and provided information to the NRC to demonstrate that it meets the criteria in Subpart E of 10 CFR Part 20 for unrestricted release. Need for the Proposed Action The Licensee has ceased conducting licensed activities at the Facility, and seeks the unrestricted use of its Facility. Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action The historical review of licensed activities conducted at the Facility shows that such activities involved use of the following radionuclides with half-lives greater than 120 days: natural uranium and thorium. Prior to performing the final status survey, the Licensee conducted decontamination activities, as necessary, in the areas of the Facility affected by these radionuclides. The Licensee elected to demonstrate compliance with the radiological criteria for unrestricted release as specified in 10 CFR 20.1402 by developing derived concentration guideline levels (DCGLs) for its Facility. The Licensee conducted site-specific dose modeling using input parameters specific to the Facility and a conservative assumption that all residual radioactivity is in equilibrium. [[Page 54468]] Federal Guidance Report Number 13 was used to modify the dose conversion factors because it is based on an improved, more realistic dosimetry model. The licensee selected adults as the critical age group as the expected future use of this facility will be industrial. Based on the type of building, railroad distribution, and truck access, there is no compelling evidence to indicate that the building will be used for anything other than industrial activities. The residual radioactivity is confined to the structures of the Facility. Since there is no land or water residual radioactivity, the building occupancy scenario may appropriately be applied to the Facility. The Facility is located in an area zoned as Economic Development which includes a variety of uses. Buildings previously sold in the area have been converted to light industrial uses. The buildings would need substantial modification to convert to residential housing. The Licensee thus determined the maximum amount of residual radioactivity on building surfaces, equipment, and materials that will satisfy the NRC requirements in Subpart E of 10 CFR Part 20 for unrestricted release. The NRC reviewed the Licensee's methodology and proposed DCGLs, and concluded that the proposed DCGLs are acceptable for use as release criteria at the Facility (this approval was published October 16, 2006 in the Federal Register at pages 60770 through 60772). The NRC staff conducted a survey at the Facility on July 13, 2006, and none of the staff's results exceeded the DCGLs that were later approved for use at the Facility. The Licensee conducted a final status survey on July 11-13 and 25- 27, 2006, August 2, 2006, and November 14-16, 2006 covering the areas of use as stated in the Final Status Survey Plan, dated February 2006. The final status survey results were enclosed with the Licensee's amendment request dated January 3, 2007, and an additional information letter dated February 6, 2007. The Licensee's final status survey results were below the approved DCGLs, and are thus acceptable. The static surveys showed that the average readings in all the survey units are less than the minimum detectable activity for the instrumentation used. Based on the minimum detectable activity for static measurements, the site residual activity will result in less than 5 millirem per year dose. Based on its own survey results, and its review of the Licensee's final survey report, the staff has determined that the affected environment and any environmental impacts associated with the proposed action are bounded by the impacts evaluated by the ``Generic Environmental Impact Statement in Support of Rulemaking on Radiological Criteria for License Termination of NRC-Licensed Nuclear Facilities'' (NUREG-1496) Volumes 1-3 (ML042310492, ML042320379, and ML042330385). The staff finds there were no significant environmental impacts from the use of radioactive material at the Facility. The NRC staff reviewed the docket file records and the final status survey results to identify any non-radiological hazards that may have impacted the environment surrounding the Facility. No such hazards or impacts to the environment were identified, and the NRC has identified no other radiological or non-radiological activities in the area that could result in cumulative environmental impacts. The NRC staff finds that the proposed release of the Facility for unrestricted use is in compliance with 10 CFR 20.1402. Based on its review, the staff considered the impact of the residual radioactivity at the Facility and concluded that the proposed action will not have a significant effect on the quality of the human environment. Environmental Impacts of the Alternatives to the Proposed Action Due to the largely administrative nature of the proposed action, its environmental impacts are small. Therefore, the only alternative the staff considered is the no-action alternative, under which the staff would leave things as they are by simply denying the amendment request. This no-action alternative is not feasible because it conflicts with 10 CFR 40.42(d), requiring that decommissioning of source material facilities be completed and approved by the NRC after licensed activities cease. The NRC's analysis of the Licensee's final status survey data confirmed that the Facility meets the requirements of 10 CFR 20.1402 for unrestricted release. Additionally, denying the amendment request would result in no change in current environmental impacts. The environmental impacts of the proposed action and the no- action alternative are therefore similar, and the no-action alternative is accordingly not further considered. Conclusion The NRC staff has concluded that the proposed action is consistent with the NRC's unrestricted release criteria specified in 10 CFR 20.1402. Because the proposed action will not significantly impact the quality of the human environment, the NRC staff concludes that the proposed action is the preferred alternative. Agencies and Persons Consulted NRC provided a draft of this Environmental Assessment to the State of New Jersey's Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP) for review on February 20, 2007. By letter dated March 22, 2007, the NJDEP submitted two comments on the proposed release of the Facility for unrestricted use: (1) The NJDEP's regulations at N.J.A.C. 7:28-12 considers unrestricted use as any use that does not require the continued use of engineering or institutional controls in order to meet established standards. The NJDEP wants the Licensee to have a deed restriction placed on the Facility property limiting future use of the site to industrial or commercial purposes. (2) The NJDEP also wants the licensee to demonstrate that the final status survey results will meet the New Jersey release criterion of 15 millirem per year. The NRC staff finds that the proposed action can go forward notwithstanding the NJDEP comments. Regarding the first comment, this release is unrestricted as specified in 10 CFR 20.1402 in that there are no engineering or institutional controls required in order to meet established standards. The licensee's use of the DandD computer code default values, updated with the Federal Guidance Report 13 values for dose conversion factors, required them to consider age groups other than adults. As reflected above in the impacts assessment, the NRC staff finds that, the critical group here is adult light industrial workers, because the warehouse buildings would need substantial modification to convert them to residential housing. Since the conditions at the site meet the site specific DCGL for the critical group, an unrestricted release is approved. In addition, putting the requested deed restriction into place now would not make 10 CFR 20.1403, ``Criteria for license termination under restricted conditions,'' applicable here. While an earlier Licensee submittal (dated April 26, 2006, [ML061220479]) contained an April 17, 2006 memorandum from the headquarters of the Defense Logistics Agency indicated that the Licensee would be willing to put the requested deed restriction into place, the NRC staff finds that no deed restriction will be necessary as a prerequisite to taking the proposed action. Placing such a restriction on the property would not be consistent with unrestricted use under 10 CFR 20.1402. [[Page 54469]] Regarding the NJDEP's second comment above, the NRC staff recognizes that the State of New Jersey has established a 15 millirem per year standard (under NJDEP's regulations at N.J.A.C. 7:28-12). The NRC has previously advised the NJDEP that these regulations raise preemption concerns [ML003763858]. States are preempted from regulating NRC-licensed materials for the purposes of radiation protection unless they enter into a formal agreement with the NRC. To date, New Jersey has not done so. Moreover, as indicated above, the Licensee has developed DCGLs acceptable to the NRC which support the 25 millirem per year standard set forth in 10 CFR 20.1402, and the staff must implement these DCGLs for the purpose of evaluating the proposed action. The NRC staff has further determined that the proposed action is of a procedural nature, and will not affect listed species or critical habitat. Therefore, no further consultation is required under section 7 of the Endangered Species Act. The NRC staff has also determined that the proposed action is not the type of activity that has the potential to cause effects on historic properties. Therefore, no further consultation is required under section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. III. Finding of No Significant Impact The NRC staff has prepared this EA in support of the proposed action. On the basis of this EA, the NRC finds that there are no significant environmental impacts from the proposed action, and that preparation of an environmental impact statement is not warranted. Accordingly, the NRC has determined that a Finding of No Significant Impact is appropriate. IV. Further Information Documents related to this action, including the application for license amendment and supporting documentation, are available electronically at the NRC's Electronic Reading Room at http:// www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. From this site, you can access the NRC's Agencywide Document Access and Management System (ADAMS), which provides text and image files of NRC's public documents. The documents related to this action are listed below, along with their ADAMS accession numbers. 1. NUREG-1757, ``Consolidated NMSS Decommissioning Guidance;'' 2. Title 10 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 20, Subpart E, ``Radiological Criteria for License Termination;'' 3. Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 51, ``Environmental Protection Regulations for Domestic Licensing and Related Regulatory Functions;'' 4. NUREG-1496, ``Generic Environmental Impact Statement in Support of Rulemaking on Radiological Criteria for License Termination of NRC- Licensed Nuclear Facilities;'' 5. Defense Logistics Agency, ``Radiological Historical Site Assessment Report, Defense National Stockpile Center, Somerville Depot, Hillsborough, NJ'' dated January 2006 [ML060730422]; 6. ``Final Status Survey Plan, DNSC, Somerville Depot, Hillsborough, NJ'' dated February 2006 [ML060730417]. 7. Notice of Availability of Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact for License Amendment to Source Materials License No. STC-133 Authorizing the Use of Site-Specific Derived Concentration Guideline Levels When Determining if Unrestricted Release Criteria Has Been Met for the Defense Logistics Agency, Defense Nuclear Supply Center Depot in Somerville, NJ'' published in the Federal Register Volume 71, Number 199 on October 16, 2006, pages 60770 and 60772; 8. Defense Logistics Agency, Amendment Request letter dated January 3, 2007 containing the ``Final Status Survey Report, DNSC, Somerville Depot, Hillsborough, NJ'' dated December 2006 [ML070050120]; 9. Defense Logistics Agency, Deficiency Response Letter dated February 6, 2007 [ML070380535]; 10. State of New Jersey, Department of Environmental Protection Letter dated March 22, 2007 [ML070950546]; 11. Defense Logistics Agency, Deficiency Response Letter dated April 26, 2006 [ML061220479]; 12. Letter to the State of New Jersey Regarding Proposed Rule, Soil Remediation Standards for Radioactive Materials [ML003763858]; and 13. State of New Jersey, Department of Environmental Protection Letter dated July 20, 2006 [ML062070300]. If you do not have access to ADAMS, or if there are problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS, contact the NRC Public Document Room (PDR) Reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov. These documents may also be viewed electronically on the public computers located at the NRC's PDR, O 1 F21, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852. The PDR reproduction contractor will copy documents for a fee. Dated at Region I 475 Allendale Road, King of Prussia this 18th day of September 2007. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. James P. Dwyer, Chief, Commercial and R&D Branch, Division of Nuclear Materials Safety, Region I. [FR Doc. E7-18872 Filed 9-24-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P ***************************************************************** 15 NRC: Wolf Creek License renewal FR Doc E7-18874 [Federal Register: September 25, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 185)] [Notices] [Page 54469-54470] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr25se07-78] NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket No. 50-482] Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation; Wolf Creek Generating Station, Unit 1; Notice of Availability of the Draft Supplement 32 to the Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants, and Public Meeting for the License Renewal of Wolf Creek Generating Station, Unit 1 Notice is hereby given that the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has published a draft plant-specific supplement to the Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants (GEIS), NUREG-1437, regarding the renewal of operating license NPF-42 for an additional 20 years of operation for the Wolf Creek Generating Station (WCGS), Unit 1. WCGS is located in Coffey County, Kansas, approximately 75 miles southwest of Kansas City. Possible alternatives to the proposed action (license renewal) include no action and reasonable alternative energy sources. The draft Supplement 32 to the GEIS is publicly available at the NRC Public Document Room (PDR), located at One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852, or from the NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS). The ADAMS Public Electronic Reading Room is accessible at http://adamswebsearch.nrc.gov/ dologin.htm. The Accession Number for the draft Supplement 32 to the GEIS is ML072540026. Persons who do not have access to ADAMS, or who encounter problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS, should contact the NRC's PDR reference staff by telephone at 1-800-397-4209, or 301-415-4737, or via e-mail at pdr@nrc.gov. In addition, the Coffey County Library, Burlington Branch, located at 410 Juniatta Street, Burlington, KS 66839, has agreed to make the draft supplement to the GEIS available for public inspection. Any interested party may submit comments on the draft supplement to the GEIS for consideration by the NRC [[Page 54470]] staff. To be considered, comments on the draft supplement to the GEIS and the proposed action must be received by December 26, 2007; the NRC staff is able to assure consideration only for comments received on or before this date. Comments received after the due date will be considered only if it is practical to do so. Written comments on the draft supplement to the GEIS should be sent to: Chief, Rulemaking, Directives and Editing Branch, Division of Administrative Services, Office of Administration, Mailstop T-6D59, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001. Comments may be hand-delivered to the NRC at 11545 Rockville Pike, Room T-6D59, Rockville, Maryland 20852, between 7:30 a.m. and 4:15 p.m. on Federal workdays. Electronic comments may be submitted to the NRC by e-mail at WolfCreekEIS@nrc.gov. All comments received by the Commission, including those made by Federal, State, local agencies, Native American Tribes, or other interested persons, will be made available electronically at the Commission's PDR in Rockville, Maryland, and through ADAMS. The NRC staff will hold a public meeting to present an overview of the draft plant-specific supplement to the GEIS and to accept public comments on the document. The public meeting will be held on November 8, 2007, at the Coffey County Library, Burlington Branch, 410 Juniatta St., Burlington, KS 66839. There will be two sessions to accommodate interested parties. The first session will convene at 1:30 p.m. and will continue until 4:30 p.m., as necessary. The second session will convene at 7 p.m. with a repeat of the overview portions of the meeting and will continue until 10 p.m., as necessary. Both meetings will be transcribed and will include: (1) A presentation of the contents of the draft plant-specific supplement to the GEIS, and (2) the opportunity for interested government agencies, organizations, and individuals to provide comments on the draft report. Additionally, the NRC staff will host informal discussions one hour prior to the start of each session at the same location. No comments on the draft supplement to the GEIS will be accepted during the informal discussions. To be considered, comments must be provided either at the transcribed public meeting or in writing. Persons may pre-register to attend or present oral comments at the meeting by contacting Mr. Christian Jacobs, the NRC Environmental Project Manager at 1-800-368-5642, extension 3874, or by e-mail at WolfCreekEIS@nrc.gov no later than November 1, 2007. Members of the public may also register to provide oral comments within 15 minutes of the start of each session. Individual, oral comments may be limited by the time available, depending on the number of persons who register. If special equipment or accommodations are needed to attend or present information at the public meeting, the need should be brought to the attention of Mr. Christian Jacobs no later than October 25, 2007, to provide the NRC staff adequate notice to determine whether the request can be accommodated. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Christian Jacobs, Environmental Branch B, Division of License Renewal, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Mail Stop O-11F1, Washington, DC 20555-0001. Mr. Jacobs may be contacted at the aforementioned telephone number or e-mail address. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 18th day of September, 2007. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Samuel Hernandez-Quinones, Acting Branch Chief, Environmental Branch B, Division of License Renewal, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. [FR Doc. E7-18874 Filed 9-24-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P ***************************************************************** 16 Reuters: Chile's nuclear decision to take years-Bachelet Tue Sep 25, 2007 8:11pm BST NEW YORK, Sept 25 (Reuters) - Chile's President Michelle Bachelet said on Tuesday her government was still studying its nuclear energy development options, but warned it will be for the next government to make a decision as studies could take up to eight years. "I will do all the work, the next government will have all the studies needed," she said. "The (International Atomic Energy Agency) told us that it takes sometimes eight years to make a good decision, specifically in a country that has as many earthquakes as Chile," Bachelet added. The next Chilean government is due to take office in 2010, making it impossible for Bachelet to make the final decision of pursuing nuclear energy during her presidency. "But at least I can say I have taken the responsibility to view all the possibilities," she said. Chile, the strongest economy in Latin America and one of the healthiest among emerging countries worldwide, is strongly dependent on its neighbors for its energy needs. Copper mining, its main economic activity, is extremely energy-sensitive. Bachelet, speaking at a gathering organized by the Americas Society/Council of the Americas, during the United Nations General Assembly meetings in New York this week, said that all arguments for or against nuclear energy are being discussed. She also said viability studies were being done on solar, biomass and wind-power energy. Chile currently depends on Argentina for natural gas imports, but its eastern neighbor is struggling to supply its domestic market. Gas-rich Bolivia, which plans to quadruple its gas output to Argentina in the next two-and-a-half years, refuses to sell gas to Chile because of a dispute over Bolivia's sea access. © Reuters 2007. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 17 Reuters: Japan Atomic Power to shut Tsuruga nuclear unit Tue Sep 25, 2007 7:01am BST TOKYO, Sept 25 (Reuters) -Japan Atomic Power Co said on Tuesday it would manually shut its 357-megawatt No.1 nuclear power generation unit at its Tsuruga plant on Wednesday for unplanned repair. The electricity wholesaler said in a statement the shutdown was to replace a mechanical seal of the reactor's recirculating pumps and that it would start lowering output from the unit from 1500 GMT on Tuesday. A company spokesman said no restart date has been set but that the shutdown period would not be long. © Reuters 2007. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 18 Reuters: Germany needs nuclear to meet carbon cut goal - group Tue Sep 25, 2007 11:04am EDT BERLIN (Reuters) - Germany can meet its target of reducing carbon dioxide emissions by 36 percent by 2020 only if it keeps nuclear power plants, which are being phased out, German industry group BDI said on Tuesday. In a study co-authored by consulting firm McKinsey, the BDI found emissions could not be cut by more than 31 percent by 2020, compared with 1990 levels, without retaining atomic power or harming Germany's economy. Even achieving the 31 percent reduction would need further investment in technology and would raise the cost of cutting carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions up to 175 euros ($246) per CO2 tonne saved, up from the current 20 euros, the BDI said. The German government in August agreed to a plan to help reduce the country's emissions of greenhouse gas CO2 by 36 percent by 2020 compared with 1990 levels. Conservative Chancellor Angela Merkel is bound by her coalition agreement with the Social Democrats to phase out nuclear power by the early 2020s and risks a serious crisis with her coalition partners if she reneges on it. Opposition to nuclear energy remains high in Germany, though it is experiencing a revival in other European countries. The BDI's study, which examined Europe's biggest economy to see how to cut carbon emissions without sacrificing living standards or economic growth, comes a week after the EU outlined plans to get tough with external energy suppliers like Russia. The European Commission wants to open up its own gas and power markets to more competition and set stricter terms for foreign ownership of EU assets. Germany and France oppose the new EU plans. © Reuters2007All rights reserved ***************************************************************** 19 Asia Times: Nukes wrangle threatens Indian government Sep 26, 2007 By Praful Bidwai NEW DELHI - As India's coalition government tries to complete the controversial nuclear cooperation deal with the United States, it finds itself caught between domestic opposition to the agreement from its left-wing allies and pressure from Washington to seal the deal. For the agreement to be completed, it needs to be approved by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), and must receive unconditional exemption from the rules for nuclear commerce set by the 45-nation Nuclear Suppliers' Group (NSG), before it is put up for ratification by the US Congress. At stake is the survival of India's United Progressive Alliance government, which needs the support of the left for a parliamentary majority. After a second round of talks between the UPA coalition and the left in a 15-member committee three days ago, the two sides seem no closer to reconciling their differences on the deal. The Communist Party of India (Marxist), India's largest leftist party, has asked the UPA government to put off all talk of completing the deal by six months. And in a sign that the ruling Congress party could be readying for early elections, Rahul Gandhi, scion of India's famed Nehru-Gandhi political dynasty, was named general secretary of the Congress. Rahul's mother Sonia is the powerful president of the party. Rahul's great-grandfather Jawaharlal Nehru, grandmother Indira Gandhi and father Rajiv were all prime ministers, and his appointment comes after calls from within the party that he play a greater political role. The present government has a mandate until 2009, but many believe that elections will come earlier if the deadlock over the landmark nuclear deal is not settled. India's leftist parties oppose the deal because they see it as it a way of bringing India into the US strategic orbit and of compromising sovereign decision-making on foreign policy, security and nuclear matters. They also have reservations about the economic viability of nuclear-generated electricity, which the deal seeks to promote in a big way. Other critics of the deal stress that it would weaken the global non-proliferation norm and help India build up its nuclear-weapons arsenal, and hence trigger a dangerous nuclear-arms race in the subcontinent and Asia as a whole. Meanwhile, the US is setting the timetable for the negotiations process at the IAEA and the NSG. The chief US technical negotiator for the deal, Richard Stratford, has said: "The US wants to meet the entire prerequisites of the operationalization of the deal by the end of this year." Washington has told India that it wants to present the deal formally for approval at the NSG's meeting in South Africa on November 11. This means that India will have to negotiate a special inspections (safeguards) agreement with the IAEA well before that. The sequencing and timing of the process are being largely determined by the domestic political calculations of the US administration, which is heavily invested in the deal. The administration of President George W Bush would like to present the agreement for the US Congress's ratification soon after its winter break. "This only leaves a narrow window of opportunity for pushing the deal quickly through Congress," said M V Ramana, an independent nuclear-affairs analyst at the Center for Interdisciplinary Studies in Environment and Development in the Indian city of Bangalore. "Clearly, the Bush administration feels that it can use the deal before the next presidential election in favor of the Republican Party by touting it as a major foreign-policy achievement - in contrast to Iraq and Afghanistan. That's why it seems to be in a hurry to speed up the negotiations process." Added Ramana: "There may be yet another calculation, too. President Bush's advisers know that Prime Minister Manmohan Singh faces serious domestic opposition to the deal, and they probably want to help him by building countervailing pressure against the left." However, the United States' pressure tactics may have the opposite effect. They could well precipitate a major confrontation between the UPA and the leftist parties, leading to the unraveling of the government. So far, the left has desisted from threatening to topple the government. Last month, the UPA and the left agreed to set up a joint committee to resolve differences on the deal. They have focused, in particular, on a special law called the Henry J Hyde Act passed by the US Congress last December, and the "123" agreement signed between the two governments this past July to amend Section 123 of the US Atomic Energy Act so as to permit nuclear cooperation with India, although it has not signed the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and is a de facto nuclear-weapons state. The UPA has made no specific commitment to stop taking steps to complete the deal until the committee completes its deliberations, but it was agreed that "the operationalization of the deal will take into account the committee's findings". A speeded-up negotiation process with the IAEA and the NSG is likely to muddy the waters of the UPA-left talks and might lead to their collapse. The Communist Party of India recently warned that if the government held talks with the IAEA on a safeguards agreement at its general conference in Vienna, the CPI would regard it as a "breach of trust". Indian Atomic Energy Commission chairman Anil Kakodkar did address the IAEA meeting last week, but refrained from making a specific mention of the US-India nuclear deal during his speech. However, he held informal consultations with IAEA director general Mohamed ElBaradei and nuclear officials from different countries. It is uncertain, however, if the deal will sail smoothly through the IAEA, and especially the NSG. Although the IAEA bureaucracy, and ElBaradei in particular, is sympathetic to the deal, the agency's board of governors may not be unanimous in conceding India's demand for a special safeguards protocol, which limits inspections on Indian facilities to the period during which they receive imported supplies. Typically, the IAEA demands safeguards in perpetuity. Indian officials are hopeful that along with their US counterparts they will be able to persuade the board. "Securing exceptional exemptions for India from the NSG might prove even more difficult," argued Achin Vanaik, professor of international relations and global politics at the University of Delhi. "Several members of the group have reservations about making a special, indeed unique, exception for India because that will damage the global non-proliferation regime. Some, such as New Zealand, Ireland and the Nordic states, have expressed their opposition. "Even countries like Germany, the Netherlands and Japan seem inclined not to grant an unconditional exemption to India. It is hard to tell if combined lobbying by India, the US and other supporters of the deal like Britain, France and Russia will bring the fence-sitters on board. And what position China will adopt remains the greatest unknown," Vanaik said. Beijing is known to favor a "criteria-based" generic approach, rather than a country-specific one, to the question of exempting de facto nuclear-weapons powers such as India and Pakistan from the tough regime of NSG rules. It also enjoys a remarkably friendly relationship with Pakistan, and would not like to see India acquire more nuclear weapons as a consequence of the US deal. However, China may not want to be the sole NSG member state to be seen to be opposing the US-India nuclear deal. It will probably wait to see how other countries play their cards before revealing its own hand. Said Vanaik: "If the NSG negotiations get significantly delayed because of opposition or reservations, the deal might get jeopardized. The US Congress will soon get preoccupied with domestic issues as the presidential election approaches. And it is far from clear if Bush will have the political capital or the ability to push the deal through once he becomes a proper lame duck." (Inter Press Service) © Copyright 1999 - 2007 Asia Times Online (Holdings), Ltd. Head Office: Unit B, 16/F, Li Dong Building, No. 9 Li Yuen Street East, Central, Hong Kong Thailand Bureau: 11/13 Petchkasem Road, Hua Hin, Prachuab Kirikhan, Thailand 77110 ***************************************************************** 20 UPI: N.J. company seeks OK to build 2 reactors United Press International - NewsTrack - Business - Published: 25, 2007 at 8:38 AM WASHINGTON, 25 (UPI) -- A New Jersey energy company has asked the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission for permission to build two reactors in Texas, the company said. NRG Energy Inc. of Princeton, N.J., said it wanted to build and operate a two-reactor, 2,700-megawatt addition to its existing South Texas nuclear station near Bay City, Texas, "enough to power more than 2 million homes," the company said. The request, the first submitted to the NRC in 29 years, comes under a new licensing process that lets companies submit a single application for a construction permit and conditional operating license, eliminating the risk a firm could build a plant but not be allowed to run it, The Wall Street Journal reported. The nuclear agency expects a flood of applications over the next 15 months, covering as many as 29 new reactors at 20 sites as power companies hope to qualify for billions of dollars in federal incentives and loan guarantees offered in the Energy Policy Act of 2005, the newspaper said. NRG's application likely will revive debate about building nuclear reactors, especially since the industry doesn't have a federal repository for the radioactive waste from an existing U.S. fleet of 104 operating reactors, the newspaper said. © Copyright United Press International. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 21 Prague Daily Monitor: koda JS Plze to upgrade Dukovany nuclear plant - By CTK / Published 25 September 2007 Plzen, Sept 24 (CTK) - Czech nuclear equipment maker Skoda JS will sign a contract worth Kc4.5 billion to modernise the Dukovany nuclear plant with state-run power producer CEZ in two weeks, Skoda JS chief executive Miroslav Fiala told CTK today. Skoda JS will renew a complete controlling system at Dukovany by 2015. Skoda JS beat Skoda Praha in the tender. "The goal of the contract is to replace outdated analogue control systems with modern digital ones and to secure the operation of the power station at least until 2025," said Fiala. The contract is the biggest order Skoda JS has obtained in its modern history. The company has already started preparatory work on the project and it will begin to produce the equipment this year. Owing to the contract, Skoda JS will hire 10 engineers. Skoda JS expects to raise sales by Kc0.5 billion to Kc2.7 billion this year. Skoda JS has been supplying controlling and information systems to Dukovany since 2000. The first contract worth Kc6.9 billion will be completed in 2009. Skoda JS with 800 staff is in the hands of Russia's OMZ. The company exports 50 percent of its output. This story is from the Czech News Agency (CTK). The Prague Daily Monitor and Monitor CE are not responsible for its content. Copyright 2007 by the Czech News Agency (CTK). All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 22 Hemscott: Westinghouse acquires French nuclear engineering firm Astare PARIS (Thomson Financial) - Westinghouse Electric Co, part of Toshiba Corp, said it has acquired French nuclear engineering company Astare for an undisclosed sum. The US-based nuclear power group said the deal, following its acquisition of IST Nuclear in South Africa two months ago, will further strengthen its global presence in the nuclear sector. tfn.paris@thomson.com gt/hjp COPYRIGHT Copyright Thomson Financial News Limited 2007. All rights reserved. The copying, republication or redistribution of Thomson Financial News Content, including by framing or similar means, is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of Thomson Financial News. Hemscott PLC - Serious Investment Research Copyright 2007 Hemscott Group Limited. ***************************************************************** 23 CBC News: Point Lepreau shut down after malfunction Last Updated: Tuesday, September 25, 2007 | 4:03 PM AT Generators at the Point Lepreau nuclear power plant were shut down Tuesday following a technical malfunction the night before. NB Power spokesperson Heather MacLean said at roughly 10 p.m. Monday, instruments controlling parts of the generating station stopped working properly. The plant's safety system immediately shut down power generation at Lepreau, she said. There was no danger to Lepreau staff, and they are now investigating the exact cause of the shutdown, MacLean said. "We will be looking at the exact problem that was identified by the safety system, and so we're still evaluating that and we'll have a better appreciation for that later today," she said. "Then once we have that identified, we will start working to correct it." The outage shouldn't affect NB Power customers across New Brunswick, MacLean said. The plant won't be generating any electricity until next week, she said. Copyright © CBC 2007 ***************************************************************** 24 TheDay.com: DEP Extends Millstone Discharge Permit By 30 Days By Patricia Daddona Published on 9/25/2007 The state Department of Environmental Protection will decide by the end of next month how it will apply new federal court findings to Dominion's application for a water discharge permit at Millstone Power Station. DEP Spokesman Dennis Schain said Monday that the agency has granted Millstone owner Dominion a 30-day extension to Oct. 30 to work with the DEP on the draft permit, which could undergo drastic revisions in order to comply with the court ruling. In January, the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ordered the federal Environmental Protection Agency to clarify or change its laws involving whether electric power plants must stop fish kills by using “the best technology available.” That includes “closed systems” that use massive, expensive cooling towers and evaporation to remove heat from the water used to cool power plants. On Oct. 31, Schain said, DEP's Adjudications Office, which handles public hearings “is expecting a full report from DEP staff on the direction it expects to take with the Millstone permit application in light of the (federal) case.” The proposed permit originally required the company to reduce water flow when the winter flounder are in season and install water pumps that vary the amount of water to reduce flow, where possible. Then the DEP began studying that draft permit in the context of the court ruling, suspending any action, and has so far found it is likely to revise the proposed permit. That could include new recommendations for use of alternate methods and technologies to cool the plants, Schain has said. Public hearings have yet to be held on the issue. Waterford Contact Us at 1 (860) 442-2200 | New London, CT | © 1998-2007 The Day Publishing Co. 101 ***************************************************************** 25 Huntsville Times: TVA board meeting in Huntsville Thursday; budget, nuclear plant talks on the agenda - al.com Posted by Brian Lawson September 25, 2007 10:59 AM The Tennessee Valley Authority's board of directors will meet in Huntsville at 9 a.m. Thursday at the Marriott, 5 Tranquility Base. To address the board during the public meeting, speakers are required to register before it begins. The agenda includes discussion of the utility's budget for fiscal 2008 and an application to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to pursue a new nuclear plant at Bellefonte in Jackson County. For more information, contact Jeff McKenzie, 865-632-7301. ©2007 al.com. All Rights Reserved. RSS Feeds | Complete Index ***************************************************************** 26 Sydney Morning Herald: Howard holds nuclear laws until after election - www.smh.com.au Phillip Coorey Chief Political Correspondent September 26, 2007 LEGISLATION flagged by the Prime Minister, John Howard, six months ago to pave the way for the establishment of a nuclear industry in Australia has been shelved until after the election. Coalition sources said nuclear politics was proving unpopular and the Government had no desire to highlight the issue with the election so close and the Coalition trailing in the polls. "We want to minimise any barnacles at this juncture. We want smooth sailing from here on," a source said. On April 28, in the middle of the debate on uranium mining at Labor's national conference, Mr Howard announced a raft of measures designed to propel Australia towards a nuclear future. While most of the measures were not to be implemented until next year, the Prime Minister indicated that some steps could be taken "immediately". These included changing environmental legislation that prohibits "nuclear activity" to allow nuclear power, uranium enrichment and reprocessing. Mr Howard also gave notice of laws "removing unnecessary constraints impeding the expansion of uranium mining such as overlapping and cumbersome regulations relating to the mining and transport of uranium ore". The laws were expected to pass by the end of this year. Parliament is scheduled to sit again on October 15 unless Mr Howard calls the election before then. If Parliament reconvenes, the Coalition does not intend to introduce any of the proposed legislation. One spokesman said the decision to delay the legislation until after the election was prompted by last month's belated pledge that no nuclear power station would be built without a local plebiscite. Mr Howard was forced to make the pledge after he generated anger by saying commercial decisions would dictate the site of nuclear plants. "That heralded the end of all talk about it," a Coalition source said of the Government's nuclear plans. A Coalition spokesman said the Government remained a keen advocate for nuclear energy as a solution to climate change. "It's still our intention to do these things but not until next year," he said. Labor opposes nuclear power in Australia. With the Australian rules and rugby league grand finals on Saturday and Sunday respectively, few expect the election will be called this weekend. Mr Howard said he would attend both matches. "Now that's giving you a full run-down of what I'm going to do," he said of his weekend plans. The Opposition Leader, Kevin Rudd, angrily warned his MPs yesterday against arrogance and hubris after a report that backbenchers and factions were already fighting over the positions of speaker and Senate president. "Winning this election and 16 seats is like climbing Everest and I will be coming down like a ton of bricks on anyone showing any level of arrogance," Mr Rudd said. The Government leapt on the report. The Treasurer, Peter Costello, said Mr Rudd "is measuring up the curtains at the Prime Minister's residence" while Mr Howard said Labor was overwhelmed with its own sense of triumphalism and hubris. In Tasmania yesterday, Mr Rudd outbid Mr Howard on health spending in the state by promising $50 million in upgrades in the two Coalition seats of Braddon and Bass. Mr Howard has promised to take over the Mersey Hospital in Braddon at a cost of $45 million. When news happens: send photos, videos & tip-offs to 0424 SMS SMH (+61 424 767 764), or Copyright © 2007. The Sydney Morning Herald. ***************************************************************** 27 Victoria Advocate: Nuclear power begins its U.S. return through Matagorda County Application filed to build two new reactors September 25, 2007 - Posted at 12:00 a.m. BY JUSTIN BUEHLER - MATAGORDA ADVOCATE BAY CITY - NRG Energy, Inc. and South Texas Project Nuclear Operating Company filed an application Monday with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to build two new reactors in Matagorda County. The application is the first to be submitted in 29 years. This "will make an enormous contribution toward the greater energy security of the United States," David Crane, NRG's President and Chief Executive Officer, said on the company's Web site. The combined reactors will put out at least 2,700 megawatts of electricity, according to a press release issued by NRG Energy Inc - enough to power over 2 million homes. The energy company expects the reactors, which will sit on the project's 12,220-acre site, to be operational by 2014 and 2015. "We are very pleased to be a part of this milestone application for the first new nuclear plant in decades," Matagorda County Judge Nate McDonald said. "The South Texas Project has an outstanding record of safety and excellent performance and is a good neighbor in our community," he said. "We welcome this expansion and look forward to helping bring additional clean, safe nuclear power to Texas." The submission of the combined license application comes less than 18 months after NRG filed a letter of intent to submit an application with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. It will now be reviewed by the commission, which could take two-months, according to the press release. "It is then anticipated that the NRC could take up to 42 months for its detailed review process including staff discovery, site visits, company responses, hearings and NRC Environmental Impact Statement," according to the release. NRG anticipates beginning construction on the two reactors sometime in 2010. Once built, the facility will create more than $9 billion in economic benefit for the region, NRG claims. In addition, over 4,000 construction workers will be recruited to build the project. When the construction is finished, STP will have about 800 new positions at the plant. Justin Buehler is a reporter for the Matagorda Advocate. Contact him at 979-244-1330 or jbuehler@vicad.com. ***************************************************************** 28 Platts: UK said to have world's largest civilian Pu stockpile 2007-09-21 London (Platts)--21Sep2007 The UK has by far the largest civilian separated plutonium stockpile in the world, the Royal Society said September 21. The potential consequences of a major accident or security breach to its storage "are so severe" that the UK government should urgently develop a strategy for the plutonium's long term use or disposal, it said. The UK is expected to own around 100 metric tons of separated Pu by 2012, said the society, which is the UK's National Academy of Science. "Indefinite storage in its present form is not an acceptable long-term solution," it said. The "optimal option" is to convert the stockpile of Pu oxide powder into mixed-oxide, or MOX, fuel and burn it in reactors to the spent fuel standard, it said. However, the currently operating Sellafield MOX manufacturing plant won't be available to fabricate such MOX until around 2022/23 because of its existing contracts with overseas customers. An additional MOX fuel fabrication plant will therefore need to be built before that date, it said. Pu immobilization is not currently commercially deployable, it added. Copyright © 2007 - Platts, All Rights Reserved ***************************************************************** 29 Rocky Mountain News: Read workers' appeal letter September 25, 2007 Rocky Flats SEC00030 Petitioner On behalf of: Rocky Flats United Steelworkers of America, Local 8031 2280 E. 139th Avenue Brighton, CO 80602 The Secretary of Health and Human Services Attention: Executive Secretary to the Department Administrative Review Request, SEC 00030 200 Independence Avenue, SW Washington, DC 20201 RE: Formal Letter of Appeal of Determination by Michael O. Leavitt for SEC Status for Rocky Flats Workers Who Were Exposed to Radiation Dose from 1967 to 2005 and to Radiation Dose Other Than Neutron from 1952 to 1966 Dear Secretary Michael Leavitt, On behalf of the Rocky Flats workers who were members of the Rocky Flats United Steelworkers of America, Local 8031, we write to formally appeal your decision dated August 6, 2007, and yet oddly not sent to the petitioners until August 27, 2007 ? three full weeks after the decision was made. This delay in notification simply highlights a long and troubled process in which timeliness has always been an issue at the forefront. Perhaps the Secretary figured that since the sick and dying Rocky Flats workers have already been waiting two and a half years for a decision, that an extra 21 days wouldn?t kill us ? or would it? Sadly 10 percent of our sick workers die waiting for their claims to be processed by the U.S. Government. Our understanding of our legal rights under the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act of 2000 allow us to appeal to the Secretary of Health and Human Services in writing and that you will then appoint your own 3-person "independent" panel to review your decision. We, hereby, formally appeal. We also understand that we can appeal based on "substantial errors in the implementation of the procedures" and to challenge "record of substantial factual errors" that were used to deny our petition. We appeal based on both implementation and error in factual basis in accordance with the points of appeal listed below. Please notify us regarding the membership of your panel as soon as you have appointed it and advise us if any additional information is required from the Petitioner. I encourage you to break with the consistent untimely nature of your office and this process and to appoint the panel immediately and get a final ruling so that we can take our next steps with respect to Legislative and Legal remedies before too many more of our workers die waiting for the Government to make good on the Congressional promise to take care of our sick workers. POINTS OF APPEAL BASED ON "SUBSTANTIAL ERRORS IN THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PROCEDURES ENUMERATED" 1) Failure to provide information to the petitioner in accordance with the provision of the law. NIOSH and now the Secretary of Health and Human Services have exhibited a pattern of withholding and delaying communication of information to the Rocky Flats petitioner throughout this process ? including "accidentally" removing the petitioner and petitioner representative from the e-mail distribution for notification of meetings for a six month period of time. The petitioners were added back to the list and an apology was issued by NIOSH for their accidental mistake. Several times including before the May 3, 2007, and June 12, 2007 meetings, reports were prepared by the Advisory Board?s contractor that were discussed at the meetings, yet NIOSH failed to distribute the reports to the Petitioner until minutes before or in some cases after the meetings ? thus preventing the Petitioner from being able to prepare for the meetings. Board members voiced similar complaints about the timely provision of information by NIOSH at its June 11 and 12 meeting in Denver. This pattern of blatant disrespect for the Petitioner?s rights is further evident in that the Secretary of HHS did not even bother to notify the petitioner of his decision until three week after he made it ? leaving it up to the news media and frustrated members of the Colorado Congressional delegation to do his dirty work ? indicating a lack of pride in his own decision. It took a call from Carolyn Boller in Congressman Udall?s office before Mr. Elliott finally issued a letter on behalf of the Secretary. 2) Timeliness. NIOSH failed to meet the Congressionally mandated deadline of 180 days to make its recommendation on the Petition. The recommendation was not made until 440 days after the Petition was submitted February 15, 2005. The Rocky Flats petition should be approved based on the Government?s failure to meet timeliness requirements of the Act. The Rocky Flats Petition was submitted on February 15, 2005. The Secretary did not issue his decision until August 6, 2007 ? 902 days after the petition was submitted ? 902 days while our workers, sick with cancer, suffered and many died. The NIOSH recommendation on this petition was issued 440 days following receipt in spite of the fact that the 2005 EEOICP Act Revision required a recommendation, by law, in 180 days. The Advisory Board on Radiation Safety and Health (the Board) recommendation did not occur until June 2007. The law requires timeliness and fairness. This process has been neither timely nor fair to the Rocky Flats workers who are sick with cancer. Furthermore, it is unacceptable that individual Rocky Flats claimants wait an average of 742 days for their claims to be processed from submittal to the time a positive ruling is made. This delay has meant that 67 Rocky Flats workers (10 percent of those ultimately approved), who would have been compensated, died waiting. It is clear that timeliness is not being met in the case of individual Rocky Flats claimants or in the case of the Rocky Flats Petition. This factor alone is enough to warrant approval in full of the Rocky Flats Petition. The question was not could NIOSH ever reconstruct dose with accuracy. It has been two and a half years and substantial issues are still outstanding. The law did not say ? petitioner point out flaws in the government?s ability to reconstruct dose; NIOSH fix some of the flaws (admitting inabilities) and then recommend denial of \ petition based on a new set of standards that did not exist at the time the petition was submitted. The law clearly states: "The purpose of the compensation program is to provide timely, uniform, and adequate compensation. . . . " Justice Delayed is Justice Denied. 3) Conflict of Interest Invalidates the Process. As noted by Congressman Hostettler in a March 9, 2007, letter, "At Rocky Flats, a manager of health physics programs prepared NIOSH?s site profiles, TIBS, is actively involved in the evaluation of a SEC petition, which includes validation of results used in his previous work." Individuals who have testified AGAINST workers in worker compensation hearings are serving key roles in the NIOSH process. The Government?s own General Accounting Office identified conflicts of interest. 4) Non-Cohesion in the Board. The Board vote of 6 to 4 showed considerable dissention in opinion of the Board members. This vote is not a strong endorsement for the Board?s recommendation. In fact, many issues were left unresolved at the time of the vote, as evidenced by the split vote. In addition, the Board?s expert contractor Sanford Cohen and Associates (SC&A) had identified many open issues and concerns with NIOSH?s approaches. The Board has not given a strong endorsement to the Department of Health and Human Services. 5) Actions Outside the Boundaries of the Authority under the Act. This process was intended to include a timely evaluation and recommendation regarding the merit of the petition ? to answer the question, did the petitioner prove that there was a class of workers for which the Government could not accurately reconstruct dose. The Board?s role was to evaluate and recommend, never to fix. The Board, albeit with good intentions, became intertwined with a process to develop a set of new science, methods, models, guidance, technical basis documents and assumptions over the last two years. These were directed at serving as the basis to deny the Rocky Flats petition. These new document will ultimately result in thousands of dose reconstructions that must now be redone in accordance with the new standards. The fact that dose reconstructions are being declared "invalid" and are being redone serves as strong evidence to the Department of Health and Human Services and the members of Congress that it was, in fact, not possible for NIOSH to reconstruct dose for the Rocky Flats workers at the time the petition was submitted. We are gravely concerned that this action and the Secretary?s decision to deny the petition based on this action opens the entire EEOICPA process up to severe scrutiny either as part of a Congressional investigation or litigation. This situation would severely tarnish the U.S. Government, the U.S. Congress and your agency in particular. 6) Inconsistent Application of Conflict of Interest Requirements. NIOSH inconsistently applied conflict of interest standards to stack the Advisory Board on Radiation Health to deny worker petitions in accordance with political pressure and statements made by top leaders in HHS. For example Mark Griffon was allowed to vote in spite of his relation with the union, while Josie Beach was denied her right to vote based on her membership in a union at the Hanford Site. Interestingly, because of NIOSH?s delay in the petition process, the Rocky Flats workers were in fact no longer members of the United Steelworkers union at the time of the Board?s vote. There was no financial tie or benefit or association and so there was no reason that Ms. Beach should have been denied her right to participate. The Petitioner requested for the Conflict of Interest to be re-evaluated based on the fact that there was no longer one and NIOSH said it did one but refused to provide any evidence that such a re-review was conducted or the name of the attorney who conducted the review. The following is a direct quote from the Petitioner?s Presentation to NIOSH on May 3, 2007 ? "We have learned that some members of the Board have been instructed that they cannot vote on the Rocky Flats petition based on relationship with the United Steelworkers. As a direct result of NIOSH?s delay in addressing this petition, if ever valid, such a restriction is no longer valid today for the following reasons: 1)The Rocky Flats workers on behalf of whom this petition was filed no longer have any financial or contractual relationship with the United Steelworkers; 2) Local 8031 no longer has a single nuclear worker in its membership; 3) The United Steelworkers no longer receive any dues from the former Rocky Flats members nor do they provide representation or services to the members; 4) The United Steelworkers do not benefit in any way from the approval of this petition; 5) NIOSH on its own right expanded the class to include all RF employees so it is no longer a "Steelworker" petition. Therefore no relational conflict exists today. No legal basis was ever provided. 7) Inappropriate Expansion of the Rocky Flats Class of Workers from its Original Submittal as a "Steelworker" Petition to include all Rocky Flats Workers. This decision was extraordinarily inappropriate for the following reasons: 1) the U.S. Steelworkers filed the petition on behalf of its membership under the special provisions for labor organizations. The U.S. Steelworkers of America, Local 8031 had no right of legal representation for members of the expanded class and therefore those new class members were unrepresented; 2) no information was gathered on behalf of the expanded class or included in the petition; 3) they are now, effectively, denied based on a petition that submitted no information on their behalf and so they went unrepresented in the process. We believe NIOSH did this on purpose to make the Class unpalatably large so that it would have to be denied ? they had no intention of granting SEC status for Rocky Flats workers so they wanted to deny everyone in one action. 8) Politics and Budget Denied the Rocky Flats Petitioners a Fair Review Based on Science, Instead the Board and NIOSH Were Pressured to Find Any Reason to Deny Petition 00030. We are concerned that politics and budget were a major factor in the decision process. This is particular disturbing in light of the deliberate action on NIOSH?s part to expand the class from its original size of 4,000 Steelworkers potentially, with less than 1,400 expected to be ultimately compensated to a class, with no basis, of 20,000 people. In making this expansion, NIOSH stated in its April 7, 2006, recommendation, "NIOSH determined that all employees were similarly or identically exposed, and therefore, cannot be disaggregated from the union workers with respect to their work and exposures." This statement is a gross error in representation. The union Collective Bargaining Agreement clearly defines the work scope of the Steelworkers facilitating ease in disaggregating the union workers from other workers with respect to both work and exposure. The hourly Steelworkers were the only ones that performed hands-on (hands in the gloves) weapons production and chemical recovery operations at the Rocky Flats site and therefore are a distinct and separate class with clear and inherent danger in their positions for the highest occupational exposures. An undated memo roughly late 2005, from White House?s Office of Management and Budget to Labor Department OMB Passback outlined a plan to contain growth in benefits from new SECs by requiring "administrative clearance" before the HHS Secretary can make a decision, and calls for a White House led interagency task force to "address any imbalance" in the Advisory?s Board?s membership. In this context, this appears to intend a tilt in the Advisory Board?s composition against approval of SECs. 9) Deputy Secretary Applied Pressure Against SECS. "Just in case there was any question, it's my strong belief that we should do everything possible to oppose these SEC (special cohort status) amendments".? June 18, 2004, e-mail from Shelby Hallmark, Department of Labor deputy assistant secretary Oddly, just months before (before the OMB Passback memo), Mr. Shelby was singing a different tune. "If there?s a justification for an SEC anywhere, common sense suggests that it should be at Rocky." ? Feb. 26, 2004, e-mail from Shelby Hallmark, Department of Labor deputy assistant secretary for the Office of Workers' Compensation Programs. He also was previously so bold as to publicly criticize the validity of dose reconstruction: "Does it make any sense to continue to defend a dose reconstruction process that will just get more complicated and attenuated?"?Shelby Hallmark, Department of Labor deputy assistant secretary. Someone needs to look into what made him change his tune. Was it science or politics? 10) Suppression of Scientific Points. Members of the Advisory Board?s Contractor, SC&A, were silenced and pressured not to discuss views contrary to the position of NIOSH. 11) Methods were used as Basis of Denial that did not exist when the Petition was submitted. NIOSH blatantly ignored legal time requirements in favor of stalling to allow time to develop band-aid fixes to coerce the Advisory Board into voting against the petition. The development of new TIBs is not part of the Petition review process and it is for this reason that it took two and a half years for a determination to be issued. Our workers died while NIOSH desperately dabbled in science under the threat that its program would be eliminated spelling an end to the multi-million dollar business that is dose reconstruction ? a NIOSH and HHS jobs program at the expense of the workers and the taxpayers. POINTS OF APPEAL: "SUBSTANTIAL FACTUAL ERRORS" 1) Missing Data. We are very concerned that between 1964 and 1992, that 33% of the worker cases reviewed were found to have missing data. To quote the Board?s contractor ? "There are large gaps in internal dose data, notably for 1964-1992" "NIOSH has not demonstrated its ability to fill existing data gaps for external dose in a manner that would produce bounding dose estimates that would satisfy the requirements of 42 CFR, Part 83." 2) Lack of Scientific Evidence to Support Particle Size Selected for High Fired Oxides. NIOSH used one single data point to determine what particle size to use, but no research has been done to support it. PNNL-MA-860 Chapter 8.0 issued January 31, 2003 "The precise nature of super class Y material is not known, although it appears to have been associated with processes involving high fired plutonium oxides. 3) Lack of Research or Scientific Basis for how High Fired Oxides are metabolized in the body. PNNL-MA-860 Chapter 8.0 issued January 31, 2003 "The precise nature of super class Y material is not known, although it appears to have been associated with processes involving high fired plutonium oxides. How can you go from knowing little to having it all figured out to the point you can model it without doing any scientific research or studies? Garbage in --- garbage out. 4) Unproven Scientific Models employed. New models were created and not adequately proven. Fly-by-night, overnight science ? NIOSH thinks they can develop in three months, what still has been failing after three decades. Dose Reconstruction is not a science. Defense Threat Reduction Agency Dose Reconstruction Program stated" . . . upper-bound doses from external gamma, neutron, and beta exposure are often under estimated, sometimes considerably, particularly when doses are reconstructed." 5) Faulty Co-Worker Model. In addition, we are very concerned about the co-worker model?s reliance on the ability to remember or track what buildings workers were in for periods of time given the transient nature of the hourly work force. We are very concerned that fundamental facts and understanding about the processes and radionuclides present in the buildings (for example Building 881) remain unclear to NIOSH even after more than 28 months of review of the petition. 6) Inaccuracy of Model to account for undocumented exposures to the head and back. We are concerned about the inaccuracy of monitoring of external exposure to the upper torso, head and back when dosimeter is blocked or pointed in opposite direction. We are concerned about the validity of dose records for workers in high dose jobs. We are concerned about the adequacy of the co-worker model and NIOSH?s ability to apply it. 7) Gross Error in Fact Contributed to NIOSH?s Decision to Expand the Class. NIOSH?s part to expand the class from its original size of 4,000 Steelworkers potentially, with less than 1,400 expected to be ultimately compensated to a class, with no basis, of 20,000 people. In making this expansion, NIOSH stated in its April 7, 2006, recommendation, "NIOSH determined that all employees were similarly or identically exposed, and therefore, cannot be disaggregated from the union workers with respect to their work and exposures." This statement is a gross error in representation. The union Collective Bargaining Agreement clearly defines the work scope of the Steelworkers facilitating ease in disaggregating the union workers from other workers with respect to both work and exposure. The hourly Steelworkers were the only ones that performed hands-on (hands in the gloves) weapons production and chemical recovery operations at the Rocky Flats site and therefore are a distinct and separate class with clear and inherent danger in their positions for the highest occupational exposures. 8) Significant Divergence in Scientific Opinion. SC&A stated that it, too, has concern over NIOSH?s ability to implement its stated methods, approaches, and coworker models to enable "dose reconstruction with sufficient accuracy," as prescribed by 42 CFR Part 83.". We are concerned that while the Pacific Northwest Nuclear Laboratory stated in 2003 that "the precise nature of Super Class Y material is not known", that NIOSH developed adjustment factors to accommodate these exposures and used only one single data point to determine particle size for modeling. Fundamental facts remain unknown about high fired oxides. We are concerned that the standard being applied appears to be whether something is "plausible" or not. We repeatedly here things like it is plausible that a model will work or it is plausible that the 0s recorded met that the dosimeter was not turned in. The Webster New World Dictionary defines the word plausible as "seemingly true; often implying disbelief" or "applies to that which at first glance appears to be true . . . but which may or may not be so." We do not plausibility is an appropriate standard by which to make decisions as important as whether or not sick workers should be compensated. The fact that it has been more than two years and significant factors are still unresolved means the petition was valid and should be approved. The fact that NIOSH has modified the site profile, added new TIBs, changed the particle size for high fired oxides, developed new co-worker models, added adjustment factors, tweaked other models, Etc. , means that NIOSH could not accurately reconstruct dose otherwise they would not have made all the changes. Department of Labor Official Shelby Hallmark asked the question "Does it make any sense to continue to defend a dose reconstruction process that will just get more complicated and attenuated?" As evidenced by the addition of nine new technical guidance documents in the time since the Rocky Flats Petition was submitted, we would have to agree with Mr. Hallmark, this process has gotten far too attenuated to allow accurate dose reconstruction. It is for these reasons and based on the facts described above, that we hereby formally request a review of the Secretary of HHS?s decision dated August 6, 2007, that determined Rocky Flats workers from 1967 to 2005 and those exposed to dose other than neutrons from 1952 to 1966 "do not meet the statutory criteria for addition to the SEC." Please count this letter as our formal request for administrative review and our appeal of the Secretary?s decision. Respectfully, Anthony DeMaiori Jennifer Thompson Former President, USWA, Local 8031 Official Petitioner-Designated Representative Scripps Newspaper Group — Online © 2007 The E.W. Scripps Co. ***************************************************************** 30 Helsingin Sanomat: Elevated levels of caesium hamper export of prized matsutake mushrooms to Japan Alternative suggestion is to create recipes for Japanese tourists The matsutake mushroom (Tricholoma matsutake), a great delicacy of Japanese cuisine, was accepted among commercial edible mushroom species in Finland only this year, even though they have probably grown in Finnish forests for ages. According to researcher Eira-Maija Savonen from the Finnish Forest Research Institute (METLA), this mushroom species has more or less vanished from Japanese forests. Previously, a maximum amount of 12 million kilos of matsutake mushrooms were picked in Japanese forests, while today the annual yield is only 100,000 kilos. The price for the matsutake can consequently go up to hundreds of euros per kilo. The matsutake boom began in Finland only this year after these mushrooms were found in Finnish forests in connection with a METLA study. The yield has been fairly good, even though the annual amounts of matsutake can differ considerably depending on the region. The matsutake mushroom grows on dry sandy pine-forest land. It forms a symbiotic relationship with the roots of pine, and forest felling is its worst enemy. METLA has started a research project, aiming at protecting the future of the matsutake even in clear felling areas. However, it is likely that it will take decades before any results from this project appear. The export enthusiasm that sprang up over the matsutake in Finland this summer has been tempered by the fact that the mushrooms tested in Central Finland still exhibit elevated levels of the radioactive isotope caesium-137, even 20 years after the Chernobyl nuclear accident. According to a Swedish study, thanks to the matsutake, there could be a two- to threefold increase in the accrued revenues from the timber production of a pine forest over a period of 100 years. Japan has been buying matsutake mushrooms from Sweden for some ten years or more, while the Finnish export is limited by the fact that the toxicity of mushrooms in Central Finland still exceeds EU recommendations. According to the Finnish Food and Safety Authority (Evira), the careful pre-processing of mushrooms is necessary. The caesium levels in mushrooms can be lowered by up to 70-80% by soaking or boiling. METLA’s Eira-Maija Savonen is advising Finnish restaurants to create matsutake recipes and dishes for Japanese tourists. "Many Japanese visitors who cannot afford this high-priced delicacy at home would be happy to see his or her hopes come true in Finland", believes Savonen. So far, matsutake mushrooms have been found as far south as Kouvola, and they appear to be most plentiful in Kainuu and Finnish Lapland. Previously in HS International Edition: Matsutake enthusiasm grows in north of Finland (28.8.2007) EVIRA: Evidence of Chernobyl nuclear accident still in Finnish fish and mushrooms (28.8.2007) Another Finnish mushroom boom: Mamma mia, what a year for the boletus mushrooms! (9.9.2003) Links: Finnish Forest Research Institute, METLA Evira Press Release, 27.8.2007 Matsutake (Wikipedia) Helsingin Sanomat 25.9.2007 - TODAY ***************************************************************** 31 Carlsbad Current-Argus: GNEP determination will wait a year By Stella Davis Article Launched: 09/24/2007 09:53:03 PM MDT CARLSBAD ? To build or not to build the nation's first integrated nuclear fuel reprocessing facility? The answer to that question is at least a year away, members of the New Mexico Legislature's Economic and Rural Development Committee were told Monday. The committee, which includes Rep. John Heaton, D-Carlsbad, Rep. Bill Gray, R-Artesia, and Sen. Carroll Leavell, R-Jal, met in Carlsbad Monday. David Kessel from Sandia National Laboratories Carlsbad Programs Group gave the committee an overview of the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership and the progress that has been made to date. The cities of Carlsbad and Hobbs and Lea and Eddy counties formed a partnership and became a contender for the project, along with 12 other communities and federal facilities. The proposed site for the integrated nuclear fuel reprocessing facility submitted by the partnership is located halfway between Carlsbad and Hobbs. The city of Roswell and Los Alamos National Laboratory are also competing for the facility. GNEP was launched in February of 2006 as part of President George Bush's advanced energy initiative. It was established as a federal program and funded at $80 million. Funding for 2007 was $167.5 million. Proposed funding for 2008 is $405 million. Kessel said the draft of the GNEP programmatic environmental impact statement will be open to public comment later this year. The final draft will be completed in late spring of 2008, and Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman will issue a record of decision in the summer of 2008. "The record of decision that he will announce is if the DOE will continue to move forward with the program," Kessel explained following his presentation. "Whether he will announce a chosen site at that time is a question that has yet to be answered." Kessel said DOE has awarded $16 million to four applicants from the nation's industry sector to develop a business plan, a technology roadmap, conceptual design studies and a communications plan. Leavell said if the Eddy-Lea partnership is successful in bringing the project to the southeastern part of the state, the economic impact for both communities could be "huge." "It could bring between 10,000 and 20,000 jobs and millions of dollars," he said. "Lea and Eddy counties and the cities of Carlsbad and Hobbs have done everything right at this time. I have heard very minimum opposition to the project and strong support for it in each of the communities." According to the DOE, the facility - wherever it is built - would demonstrate certain technologies that could change the way spent nuclear fuel from commercial light-water nuclear power reactors is managed. The DOE says that it intends to demonstrate three key elements that would comprise a proliferation-resistant closed fuel cell. The three key elements include a proliferation-resistant process to separate useable elements in commercial spent nuclear fuel from waste elements, conversion of transuranic waste and an advanced fuel recycling facility. Copyright © 2007 Carlsbad Current Argus, a MediaNews Group Newspaper. ***************************************************************** 32 Ventura County Star: EPA provides few answers on site's possible dangers - Oxnard By Scott Hadly (Contact) Tuesday, September 25, 2007 The Halaco Files Visit our Halaco Web site for more information and background on the Halaco site. They wanted answers, but on Monday night the Environmental Protection Agency just wasn't ready to give any. At the first public hearing in Oxnard since the former Halaco metals recycling plant was included on a list of Superfund hazardous waste sites, people had plenty of questions. "We expect additional testing to fill the data gaps," said Wayne Praskins, the Superfund site manager. "Only after we get a complete picture of the site will we know what we need to do and how much it will cost." The purpose of the meeting was to update people about the hazards and contamination at the nearly 40-acre site next to Ormond Beach. But many of the more than 70 people who attended the meeting had very specific questions. Gary Moss, who works at a paper recycling plant next to the old smelting facility, asked if any testing had been done at local schools. Lupe Anguiano asked if the owners would pay for the cleanup. "I'm interested in corporate responsibility," she said. Praskins did his best to answer the questions but said the EPA was still working on answering many of the uncertainties. Although the site is fenced, there are signs of repeated trespassing, and the EPA has already gone door to door and sent out mailers in both English and Spanish warning people to stay away from the shuttered plant. The danger now is for those who trespass on the site, and Praskins reiterated that people should stay away not just because of the contamination, but also because many of the old buildings there are unsafe and could collapse. The city of Oxnard had ordered the company to tear down the aging, cavernous smelter building over the summer, but the work was stopped because of nesting swallows. The EPA has also asked the current owners to provide better security of the property to keep people out. Now both city and federal officials are waiting for the current owners to act. The 28-acre waste pile is owned by the company Alpha and Omega, while the 11-acre site where the smelter stands continues to be owned by the Haack family, which formerly operated Halaco, federal officials said. Praskins said the Haack family and Halaco's former general manager, Dave Gable, have all been identified as potentially liable for the cleanup costs. But at Monday's meeting, many people wanted answers to the broader question about what, if any, health consequences there are for people who have lived next to the plant during its 40 years of operation. A survey is currently being done by the State Department of Environmental Health and won't be complete until sometime next year. Others wanted to know what will happen to the estimated 710,000 cubic yards of magnesium, arsenic, barium, beryllium, cadmium, chromium, copper, mercury, lead and zinc piled up at the site. "We don't just want it to be cleaned up. We want it removed," said County Supervisor Kathy Long. Praskins' message was that the Superfund cleanup process is long but methodical. On average it takes a decade to clean up a Superfund site. The EPA has already spent more than $5 million stabilizing the mound of waste, covering it with a natural fiber carpet and grading the edges to stop erosion. Praskins said the Superfund listing by the EPA shows that the federal agency was committed to the long-term cleanup of the site. Now that the site has been included on the Superfund list, the EPA must draw up what's called the "record of decision," which outlines possible cleanup alternatives. Those could include removing the pile, or leaving it in place but capping it or eliminating the contamination in some way. Estimates for cleaning up the site have ranged widely, from less than what has already been spent to more than $70 million. Digging up and hauling away the material to a hazardous waste site would be the most expensive option, but it may be the only one that works because the site is surrounded by wetlands and sits over extensive ground water. The account to clean up the site, along with 1,304 others on the Superfund list, is largely overcommitted, and costs may dictate which options are feasible. Several people at the meeting had more immediate concerns regarding large amounts of low-level radiation that have been found buried at the site. Again, Praskins said the EPA has not yet decided on the best way to clean up the material. Comments Posted by Face99 on September 25, 2007 at 9:02 a.m. (Suggest removal) Don't be down, you may live long enough to see the EPA at snail pace get around to this cleanup. Posted by carexpritch on September 25, 2007 at 11:40 a.m. (Suggest removal) Gee, I wonder where all the Federal money is going instead during the past few years and apparently for a few more.... Scripps Newspaper Group — Online © 2007 The E.W. Scripps Co. ***************************************************************** 33 Mohave Daily News: Yucca nuclear dump structures moved after fault-line study Monday, September 24, 2007 10:53 PM PDT LAS VEGAS (AP) - Engineers made plans to move some structures at the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste dump after rock samples indicated a fault line unexpectedly ran beneath their original location, an Energy Department official said Monday. Allen Benson, a spokesman for the U.S. Department of Energy in Las Vegas, said adjustments to the project were made in June. ‘‘In the spring we discovered the true course of the Bow Ridge fault line. As a result we moved locations several hundred feet'' to the east, he said. ‘‘That's why we do studies, to come up with information to make the repositories safer.'' The department responded to a published report that cited a May 21 letter in which U.S. Geological Survey maps showed the Bow Ridge fault ‘‘may be farther east than projected.'' The Las Vegas Review-Journal said it obtained the documents last week. Bob Loux, head of the Nevada Agency for Nuclear Projects and the state's chief anti-Yucca administrator, said he was not reassured by what he called ‘‘just-in-time engineering.'' ‘‘This represents a complete lack of understanding about the site's characteristics,'' Loux said. ‘‘They've been out there for 25 years or longer. And they get surprises like this. This is basic geology, stuff they should have known all along.'' The May 21 letter and maps show the fault beneath where officials hoped to build concrete pads to store spent radioactive fuel canisters for cooling before they are entombed in tunnels inside the mountain, about 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas. Core samples from 250 feet below the surface showed the fault is hundreds of feet east of where scientists thought it was, and that it passes beneath the initial site for the storage pads, forcing their relocation, Benson said. Recent rock core sampling operations have spurred a legal battle in federal court in Las Vegas. State Engineer Tracy Taylor has asked U.S. District Judge Roger Hunt to order the Energy Department to stop using Nevada water for cooling and lubricating drill rigs collecting rock samples. Hunt denied the state request last week. Congress in 2002 picked Yucca Mountain to become the nation's nuclear waste dump, with plans calling for entombing 77,000 tons of spent radioactive fuel hauled to Nevada from 39 states. But the plan has been delayed by legal challenges, money shortages, scientific controversies and political opposition. Planners now concede the dump won't open before 2017. Project officials say they are continuing to develop repository design, construction and operating plans in preparation for applying next year for a license from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. To meet that self-imposed June 2008 deadline, project planners are taking a nontraditional approach to risk assessments, based on probabilities that earthquakes will occur. A scientist for a project contractor told an oversight panel last week in Las Vegas that planners expect to know by February what could go wrong with surface facility equipment, and potential consequences. Michael Frank of Bechtel SAIC Co. called the task ‘‘a very large effort with a compressed schedule.'' Seismologist Leon Reiter said more than 10 faults within a 20-mile radius of Yucca Mountain could generate ground motion. Tri-State Online // Mohave Daily News Privacy Policy 2435 Miracle Mile / Bullhead City, Arizona 86442-7311 / 928-763-2505 Last updated: Tuesday, September 25, 2007 ***************************************************************** 34 University of Utah Press: Nuclear Waste Stalemate Political and Scientific Controversies $25.00 Available August 2007 Robert Vandenbosch and Susanne E. Vandenbosch 328 pp., 6 x 9 Paper $25.00s ISBN 978-0-87480-903-9 Political Science Diminishing oil supplies, global warming due to use of fossil fuels, persistent strife in the Middle East, and increasing demands for energy have led to the search for additional energy sources. Many feel that a significant expansion of nuclear power will be necessary to meet projected needs. However, although nuclear power has been produced commercially for over thirty years,no country has yet found a permanent solution for the disposal of high-level nuclear waste. This book examines the complex political, legal, and scientific issues relating to the disposal of that waste. The political controversies discussed here include the power of governors to veto placement of high-level nuclear waste repositories in their states, the use of incentives for spent-fuel acceptance, the use of Indian reservations as host sites, control of a Nuclear Waste Fund, and whether a state without a nuclear reactor should be required to accept spent fuel. The scientific controversies discussed include monitored surface storage versus permanent geological disposal, burial above or below the water table, the probability of serious seismic and volcanic events, and long-term hazard assessment. This book is unique in its comprehensive discussion of the issues related to nuclear waste storage. Robert Vandenbosch is emeritus professor of chemistry at the University of Washington and has published extensively in physics and chemistry journals and lectured widely throughout the world. He is co- author of Nuclear Fission. Susanne E. Vandenbosch received her PhD in political science from the University of Washington. Her research has been published in several political science journals. The University of Utah Press 1795 E. South Campus Drive, #101 SLC, Utah 84112-9402 Phone: (800) 621-2736 Fax: (800) 621-8476 ©2004 University of Utah Press. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 35 Las Vegas Now: Earthquake Fault Possible Beneath Yucca Mountain Site Tedd Florendo, Reporter Drilling operations at the Yucca Mountain project, north of Las Vegas, have unearthed a big surprise that could create concern about the project. New rock samples show preliminary evidence of an earthquake fault right underneath where Yucca Mountain project planners want to handle highly radioactive waste. U.S. Geological Survey maps show the fault beneath where officials hope to build concrete pads to store spent radioactive fuel canisters. The possible discovery of a fault doesn't surprise environmental science professor Barry Perlmutter who says Nevada ranks third in the nation, behind California and Alaska, for active fault lines. View recent earthquake activity in Nevada and California The head of the Nevada Agency for Nuclear Projects calls the finding an example of technical work being done after-the-fact. Executive Director Bob Loux says this is one of the reasons the project should be stopped. "If you had a bunch of spent fuel on this concrete pad and some sort of event that triggered the fault, the dry canisters could fall and come apart and release some of the contents," he said. The Department of Energy released a statement saying safety is their number one concern and the purpose of the drilling is to find specific places to put the concrete facilities. They say they will not build on spots that are seismically active. Congress picked Yucca Mountain in 2002 to become the nation's nuclear waste dump. reporter Tedd Florendo. All content © Copyright 2000 - 2007 WorldNow and KLAS. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 36 Guardian Unlimited: US nuclear dump plan in danger after seismic shock Special report: United States of America Fred Attewill Tuesday September 25, 2007 A tunnel inside the Yucca Mountain nuclear repository. Photograph: Laura Rauch/AP The most expensive public works project in the US was today in disarray after it emerged that a planned giant nuclear dump would be located on a faultline. Rock samples from deep within Yucca Mountain, in Nevada, showed that the fault runs directly beneath the site where the US federal government planned to store 70,000 tonnes of highly radioactive waste. More than $8bn (£4bn) has already been spent on the $58bn project, which had been due to open in 2017, but the proposals - approved by George Bush in 2002 - may now have to be redrawn. Samples taken from 76 metres below the surface of the mountains, which are around 90 miles north-west of Las Vegas, revealed that the Bow Ridge fault passes hundreds of metres to the east of where scientists believed it lay. The measurements were backed up by US Geological Survey maps and a letter, the Las Vegas Review-Journal reported yesterday. The fault is now thought to run beneath a storage pad where spent radioactive fuel canisters would be cooled before being sealed in a maze of tunnels inside the mountain. Bob Loux, the executive director of the Nevada Agency for Nuclear Projects, expressed amazement that the US Department of Energy had only just carried out the "11th hour" drilling tests. "It certainly looks like DoE has encountered a surprise out there, and it certainly speaks to the fact they haven't done the technical work they should have done years ago," he told the paper. "It's going to have to cause some change of the design in the final analysis. It's going to impact the safety case." The state of Nevada - the third most seismically unstable in the US - has long opposed the project on the grounds that earthquake activity makes the site unsafe. Since 1976, there have been 621 seismic events of magnitude greater than 2.5 on the Richter scale within a 50-mile radius of Yucca Mountain. The Department of Energy refused to comment on the claims, but project officials said they were continuing to develop repository design, construction and operating plans in preparation for applying next year for a licence from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Guardian Unlimited © Guardian News and Media Limited 2007 ***************************************************************** 37 Iranian President Tells General Assembly That Nuclear Issue Is Now Closed Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2007 20:01:29 -0400 IRANIAN PRESIDENT TELLS GENERAL ASSEMBLY THAT NUCLEAR ISSUE IS NOW CLOSED New York, Sep 25 2007 8:00PM The issue of <"http://www.un.org/webcast/ga/62/2007/pdfs/iran-eng.pdf">Iran’s nuclear activities is a matter only for the United Nations atomic watchdog now and not the Security Council, the country’s President told the General Assembly today as he accused “arrogant powers” of abusing the Council to prevent Iran enjoying its rights and entitlements. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad welcomed what he said was a shift by the UN International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) towards supporting the rights of its Member States while supervising their nuclear activities. “Previously, they illegally insisted on politicizing the Iranian nation’s nuclear case, but today, because of the resistance of the Iranian nation, the issue is back to the Agency, and I officially announce that in our opinion the nuclear issue of Iran is now closed and has turned into an ordinary Agency matter,” he said. The Security Council imposed sanctions on Iran last year amid concern over the exact nature and scope of the country’s nuclear activities. Earlier this month, however, IAEA Director General Mohamed ElBaradei welcomed Iran’s agreement on a timeline to address all outstanding issues. Stressing that Iran’s nuclear activities have always been entirely peaceful and transparent, Mr. Ahmadinejad said Tehran had been deprived of other members’ technical assistance and sometimes even IAEA support, despite having fulfilled all of its obligations. Even some centres not involved in the fuel cycle production or requiring Agency supervision were closed, he told the Assembly’s annual high-level debate. “For about five years, some of the aforementioned powers have, by exerting pressure on the IAEA, attempted to prevent the Iranian nation from exercising its rights… The Iranian nation came to the firm belief that the main concern of these powers is not the possible deviation of Iran’s nuclear activities, but is to prevent its scientific progress under this pretext.” Mr. Ahmadinejad devoted much of his speech to criticism of “certain powers,” which he said were responsible for many of the world’s problems. These powers routinely breached human rights despite claiming to be exclusive advocates of those rights; aggressively attacked indigenous cultures and national values; promoted lewdness and violence; perpetuated gross economic imbalances between countries; violated rules of international law and disrespected their global commitments; and escalated the arms race. Mr. Ahmadinejad warned these countries “to learn from history and their actions,” saying they had lost the competence to lead the planet, and that international relations would soon change. “The era of darkness will end, prisoners will return home, the occupied lands will be freed, Palestine and Iraq will be liberated from the dominion of the occupiers, and the people of America and Europe will be free of the pressure exerted by the Zionists. “The tender-hearted and humanity-loving governments will replace the aggressive and domineering ones. Human dignity will be regained. The pleasing aroma of justice will permeate the world, and people will live together in a brotherly and affectionate manner.” He announced that Iran would help establish the “Coalition for Peace,” which he described as “a front of fraternity, amity and sustainable peace based on monotheism and justice.” The Iranian leader also called for the General Assembly to be viewed and treated as the UN’s most important pillar, with the urgent task of reforming the Security Council. “The presence of some monopolistic powers has prevented the Security Council from performing its main duty, which is the maintenance of international peace and security based on justice. The credibility of the Council has been tarnished and its efficacy in defending the rights of UN Member States has been undermined.” Many nations had lost confidence in the Council, as well as in the major international monetary and banking mechanisms, he said. 2007-09-25 00:00:00.000 ___________________ For more details go to UN News Centre at http://www.un.org/news To listen to news and in-depth programmes from UN Radio go to: http://radio.un.org/ _______________________________ To change your profile or unsubscribe go to: http://www.un.org/apps/news/email/ ***************************************************************** 38 People's Daily: DPRK accuses U.S. of adopting double standards over nuclear issue 07:08, September 26, 2007 The Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK) on Tuesday accused the United States of adopting a discriminatory policy over nuclear issues. "The United States is not fulfilling any commitments under the NPT (Non-Proliferation Treaty), but, taking advantage of the position of nuclear power, is resorting to blackmail and high-handed and arbitrary practices against non-nuclear states," said the leading official newspaper Rodong Sinmun. The DPRK's remarks came on the eve of a new round of six-party talks which will be held on Thursday. The DPRK accused the U.S. of taking harsh measures to try to deny some countries' access to peaceful uses of nuclear technology while turning a blind eye to the nuclear weapons programs of "those countries that share the idea with it and those of its satellite countries." "The U.S. security can be guaranteed by nuclear disarmament, not by a nuclear arms buildup," the newspaper added. Source: Xinhua Copyright by People's Daily Online, All Rights Reserved ***************************************************************** 39 Shreveport Times: Investigation into B-52 munitions mishap continues September 24, 2007 By John Andrew Prime jprime@gannett.com WASHINGTON — Get Secretary of the Air Force Michael Wynne and his top airman, Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. T. Michael Moseley, in a room packed with journalists, and one question was sure to hit them this week at the Air Force Association's Air and Space Conference: What's up with investigation into a mistake in late August that allowed six missiles with nuclear warheads installed to be flown from Minot Air Force Base, N.D., to Barksdale Air Force Base? Aside from a delay in a final report to allow deeper investigation, the Air Force takes the issue very seriously, both leaders told the room full of mostly Washington-based reporters. That's what readers of The Times learned Sept. 15, the day the report originally was due. But Wynne and Moseley also said that the general leading the investigation, Maj. Gen. Douglas Raaberg, director of air and space operations at Air Combat Command, had visited Minot and was at Barksdale Monday. "I also went out just last week and 'walked the process,' all the way through the munitions process, just to assure myself that the munitions transfer process is intact," Wynne said. Wynne and the Air Force have never used the word "nuclear" with regard to this incident, citing long-standing policy. They also have not confirmed details associated with nuclear terminology, including whether the warheads were armed. That's unlikely, though, since that only could happen if the radar-navigators had data connections with the missile and its warhead, and all accounts of the incident depend on the crew being unaware of what the supposedly empty missile fuselages contained. Air Force Times, a fellow Gannett publication, broke the story Sept. 5. Within hours, the commander of the munitions squadron at Minot was relieved of all duties and the crews that loaded the missiles were decertified from such work. Moseley said it's improper for senior leaders to say anything more. "We have an investigation ongoing," he said. "Any discussions of the investigation are inappropriate because we haven't gotten the closure and the details on the people and the activities." Miss a day. Miss a lot. Get all the who, what, when and where delivered to your home. Sign up today for 7-day delivery of The Times and get a FREE gift. Click here to start your subscription. ©The Times September 24, 2007 Copyright ©2007 The Times. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 40 IHT: North Korea accuses US of helping Israel develop nuclear weapons - International Herald Tribune The Associated Press Published: September 25, 2007 SEOUL, South Korea: North Korea accused the United States on Tuesday of actively providing nuclear weapons assistance to Israel while seeking to deprive other countries of the right to peaceful nuclear programs. North Korea's top nuclear negotiator, meanwhile, denied accusations that his country had cooperated with Syria on a secret nuclear project. The United States is "shutting its eyes" to the nuclear programs of its allies while "taking issue with the rights to nuclear activities of other countries for peaceful purposes," North Korea's communist party newspaper Rodong Sinmun said in a commentary carried by the official Korean Central News Agency. "As an illustration, the U.S. has long actively promoted and cooperated with the Israeli nuclear armament plan," the newspaper said. "They decided to provide assistance to Israel's nuclear development program. Then the U.S. dispatched nuclear experts to Israel and transferred highly enriched uranium, the key ingredient for nuclear weapons, to them." North Korea's criticism came amid news reports that Israeli warplanes attacked an installation in northern Syria earlier this month which was allegedly either a joint Syrian-North Korean nuclear project or a shipment of arms for Hezbollah guerrillas in Lebanon. North Korea has flatly denied any nuclear link with Syria, calling the accusation a fabrication by "dishonest forces" who want to obstruct recent progress in North Korean-U.S. relations. "That matter is fabricated by lunatics, so you can ask those lunatics to explain it," North Korea's top nuclear envoy, Kim Kye Gwan, told reporters Tuesday after arriving in Beijing for talks on his country's nuclear weapons program. International negotiations aimed at convincing North Korea to give up its nuclear programs have reported progress in recent months, with the North shutting down its only functioning nuclear reactor in July and pledging to declare and disable all its nuclear facilities by year's end. Copyright © 2007 the International Herald Tribune All rights reserved ***************************************************************** 41 Japan Times: Keep the Arctic free of nuclear weapons japantimes.co.jp Web Wednesday, Sept. 26, 2007 By RAMESH THAKUR WATERLOO, Ontario — As a nonnative speaker of English, I have always been intrigued by the phrase "polar opposites." Fact is, nothing so resembles the North Pole as the South Pole. Based on this polar symmetry, there exist the opportunity and an increasingly urgent need to emulate Antarctica and establish an Arctic nuclear-free zone. Such a step would have significant environmental and conservation benefits, while working to avoid conflict and foster scientific cooperation. Recently there has been a flurry of declarations (for example, by Canada), activities (by Russia) and counter-responses from others that use the Arctic perimeter or its waterways for their navies. Many proposals have been advanced in the past for the creation of nuclear weapons-free zones in central Europe, the Baltics, Middle East, South and East Asia. The only success on paper in the Northern Hemisphere has come for Central Asia, but obstacles remain in the way of its operationalization. By contrast, almost the entire Southern Hemisphere is already covered by such zones: Latin America (1967), the South Pacific (1985), Southeast Asia (1996), Africa (1997), and of course Antarctica (1959). These are all based on multilaterally negotiated treaties among the countries in the zone and protocols whereby the nuclear powers accept their responsibilities vis a vis the regional zones. The zones were crafted to complete a significant gap in the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty whose nonnuclear members were legally permitted to host and base on their soil nuclear weapons owned and operated by foreign allies. All nuclear-free zones prohibit this and so deepen and complement the nonproliferation regime. The Antarctic Treaty goes much further in freezing in perpetuity conflicting territorial claims, prohibiting any militarization and nuclear activity, protecting the continent's fragile ecosystem, guaranteeing scientific cooperation, and instituting a complex system of shared regime management that has actually worked wonderfully well. The motivation behind all such zones is disengagement before the fact: Legal regimes and oversight mechanisms are put in place that prevent disputes and problems from arising in the first place. In Antarctica, many countries have long-standing claims on pieces of its territory, some of which overlap. Many others could make claims based on various legal grounds, haven't actually done so, but have not renounced their claims. Many more reject the idea of Antarctic colonization, arguing that its uninhabited status and critical role in the global ecosystem make it a common heritage of mankind. Several states take part in scientific activities without asserting or rejecting territorial claims. The Antarctic Treaty "froze" the territorial status. Claimant and would-be claimant states did not renounce their rights. They agreed not to engage in military activities, although the military forces could take part in exploratory and research activities. They agreed to protect the flora and fauna and to make common decisions with respect to the unknown but potentially vast treasure-trove of minerals, with conservation trumping exploitation. On Aug. 24, Canada's Pugwash — the Nobel Peace Prize-winning organization with a proud record of active engagement on nuclear disarmament — called on governments to emulate Antarctica and establish an Arctic nuclear-free zone. The legal regime on the ownership of Arctic seabed resources and transit rights is ambiguous and incomplete. On one hand, there are conflicting principles based on laws of territoriality, exclusive economic zones, continental shelves and historical practices, as well as the United Nations Law of the Sea Convention. On the other hand, scientists have proven to be overly conservative in estimating the rapidity with which the ice cap is shrinking. Accelerated global warming will enable commercial ship navigation through Arctic waters and permit exploitation of seabed resources. Countries with legal claims and economic resources, the material capacity to exploit them and the military capacity to defend them may not be able to resist the temptation to create new facts on the ground now in order to protect their future interests. An AFNZ would be an exemplary means of foreclosing competitive militarization — and perhaps even competitive nuclearization — without treading on the existing status of claims over territory, resources and transit rights. It could reverse the disquieting drift to weaponized nuclearization that seems to be occurring in parallel with global warming. It would reflect, adapt and add to the precedents of all other nuclear-free zones, and to the 1971 Seabed Treaty, which forbids the stationing of nuclear weapons and support facilities on the seabed outside territorial waters. Some 113 countries are already party to nuclear-free zones around the world. Who will take up the slack in the Arctic to educate all relevant countries about the nature of such a zone, convince them of the merits and universal benefits, and persuade them to negotiate a multilateral treaty to establish it? We can but hope that the proponents of aggressive national force projection in the U.S. now acknowledge the folly of using unilateral military might and the wisdom of rules-based regimes in which the net benefits to all outweigh the marginal costs to each. If America doesn't buy into the idea of an AFNZ, the proposal will be a nonstarter. Ramesh Thakur, distinguished fellow at the Center for International Governance Innovation and professor of political science at the University of Waterloo, is the editor of Nuclear Weapons-Free Zones. The Japan Times ***************************************************************** 42 csmonitor.com: Did N. Korea give Syria nuclear aid? Christopher Hill says he hopes for "clarity" on the issue this week. Kyodo News/AP Pyongyang: North Korea's top nuclear envoy Kim Kye Hwan (r.), shakes hands with people before leaving Pyongyang for Beijing, China, for a round of six-nations talks. Korean Central News Agency via Korea News Service/AP The US will press for details in the next round of six-party talks, to be held Thursday in Beijing. By Donald Kirk | Correspondent of The Christian Science Monitor from the September 26, 2007 edition Reporter Donald Kirk says there are some built in hurdles to covering the North Korean nuclear proliferation story. Seoul - The US faces a dilemma going into the next round of six-nation talks on North Korea's nuclear weapons: how firmly to press North Korea for details of proliferation of its nuclear technology to foreign clients. Ahead of the Thursday meeting in Beijing, the issue has assumed critical importance with revelations of an Israeli raid early this month on a Syrian base where North Koreans were suspected of imparting not only know-how but also materiel needed for Syria to develop nuclear warheads. "The US government has some evidence, but they seem to be deciding now is not the right time to talk about it," says Kim Tae Woo, senior research fellow at the Institute of Defense Analyses, affiliated with the South Korean defense ministry. Indeed, US officials have said almost nothing publicly about what was going on at the base near the Turkish border in northern Syria that according to media reports prompted Israel first to send in commandos and then to bomb it. Mr. Kim believes that Syria's goal was to get "the technology for enrichment" of uranium, and that North Korea probably supplied uranium fluoride – the gaseous substance from which emerges the highly enriched uranium needed for nuclear warheads. North Korea's expertise in highly enriched uranium raises another issue for negotiators to consider at the upcoming six-party talks: the exact status of North Korea's highly enriched uranium program. The chief US envoy, Christopher Hill, says he hopes for "clarity" on the issue at this week's six-party talks at which North Korea's envoy, Kim Kye Hwan, is to list in detail all aspects of his country's nuclear program. A top North Korean official acknowledged the existence of the program to a delegation to Pyongyang led by Mr. Hill's predecessor, James Kelly, in October 2002, but North Korea since then has denied anything to do with enriched uranium. North Korea-Syria connection This week, North Korea may get around the issue of highly enriched uranium, according to analysts here, by admitting that it received advice, and perhaps some centrifuges, from Pakistan in the days when the Pakistan nuclear program was run by the since-disgraced physicist A.Q. Khan. North Korea can then say it never did anything more to develop warheads with uranium and the Pakistan relationship was short-lived and no longer exists. North Korea may have more difficulty, however, explaining what was going on at the Syrian base. "The Israelis must have had pretty good evidence," says Robyn Lim, professor of international relations at Nanzan University in Nagoya, Japan. "The US had to have been told in advance of the raid, and the Turks would have to have known in advance as well." But why would North Korea have a team at the Syrian base while six-party talks are about to resume? "The connection with Syria is ongoing business," says Mr. Kim of the Institute of Defense Analyses. "It's not something that can be disconnected. The US must have been aware of that information for a long time." Indeed, Syria maintains strong relations with North Korea. A Syrian delegation visited Pyongyang last week. "There's no doubt Syria has long been interested in the enrichment of uranium," says Kim. "The Syrian delegation in Pyongyang was probably talking about both nukes and missiles." Professor Lim, a former Australian intelligence analyst, says while North Korea will "pretend to come clean" at the talks, the presumption is the North continues to export missiles to Middle Eastern countries and may well have also been selling nuclear secrets. She sees North Korea as participating in the talks for the sake of the enormous aid that's promised if the North convinces the US, South Korea, China, Russia, and Japan that it has abandoned its nuclear program. "The talks are designed just to keep enough aid flowing to prop up the regime," she says. N. Korea could react Analysts doubt, however, that the six-party talks will fail despite the issues of proliferation and highly enriched uranium. North Korea has already shut down its five-megawatt reactor at its nuclear complex at Yongbyon where it's believed to have made up to a dozen warheads, including one that it detonated last October in its only nuclear test to date. Mr. Hill "will have no other option" but to raise the issue of proliferation in the talks, says Kim Song Han, a professor at Korea University. Nonetheless, he says, the priority will be to make North Korea disable its Yongbyon facilities, which made warheads with plutonium at their core. "If the US pushes North Korea to be more detailed," Professor Kim says, "North Korea will react very harshly." This week's talks will help set the stage for next week's North-South Korean summit in Pyongyang at which South Korea's President Roh Moo Hyun is to meet North Korean leader Kim Jong Il. Mr. Roh says he wants to pursue a "peace system" with North Korea while talking only briefly about the nuclear issue since it's already "being resolved." Kim predicts North Korea will go through with disablement of its facilities at Yongbyon but remains "pessimistic" about dismantlement - the final stage - and is not certain if inspectors will ever see facilities elsewhere, including the site of the underground nuclear test. csmonitor.com | Copyright © 2007 The Christian Science Monitor. ***************************************************************** 43 Guardian Unlimited: North Korea denies Syria nuclear link Mark Tran and agencies Tuesday September 25, 2007 North Korea today dismissed reports that it was providing nuclear material for Syria as allegations "fabricated by lunatics". Pyongyang's forceful denial followed an attack by Israeli warplanes in northern Syria earlier this month. The strike was allegedly on either a joint Syrian-North Korean nuclear project or a shipment of arms for Hizbullah guerrillas in Lebanon. "That matter is fabricated by lunatics, so you can ask those lunatics to explain it," North Korea's top nuclear envoy, Kim Kye Gwan, told reporters as he arrived in Beijing for the latest round of talks on Pyongyang's nuclear weapons programme. Envoys from the two Koreas, China, the US, Japan and Russia are scheduled to meet from Thursday to set out a timetable for dismantling Pyongyang's nuclear weapons programme. Under an agreement reached in February, the five countries agreed to provide North Korea with 1m tons of heavy fuel oil, or the monetary equivalent in other aid. In return, Pyongyang agreed to shut down its main nuclear reactor at Yongbyon - which it did in July - and to then reveal details of its nuclear programmes, with full disarmament as the ultimate goal. "The closure of Yongbyon wasn't the key to this dispute. It was the prelude to resolving the key issues," Zhang Liangui of the Central Party School in Beijing, the main training site for Communist party officials, told Reuters. "The key will be whether North Korea will agree to revealing its nuclear weapons in the declaration and how it will explain its uranium enrichment activities." Speculation about possible nuclear links between North Korea and Syria has clouded the latest talks in Beijing. The North today sought to turn the tables by accusing the US of helping Israel with its nuclear programme. Its Communist party newspaper, Rodong Sinmun, accused the US of "shutting its eyes" to the nuclear programmes of its allies while "taking issue with the rights to nuclear activities of other countries for peaceful purposes". The paper cited US help for Israel's nuclear weapons programme as an example. "The US has long actively promoted and cooperated with the Israeli nuclear armament plan," it said. "They decided to provide assistance to Israel's nuclear development programme. Then the US dispatched nuclear experts to Israel and transferred highly enriched uranium, the key ingredient for nuclear weapons, to them." Israel is widely believed to be a nuclear power, but its government has never formally confirmed or denied that it has nuclear weapons. Timeline North Korea and nuclear weapons - 1991-2007 Related articles 09.02.2007: Washington poised for climbdown as Korea nuclear talks near deal 23.01.2007: US claims credit as North Korea softens line on nuclear talks Interactive guides The 2006 North Korean nuclear test How the Korean peninsular divided Related special reports North and South Korea China Japan United States News guide 20.12.2001: North Korea Useful sites North Korea virtual library CIA factbook: North Korea UN security council UN nuclear non-proliferation treaty NK news - database of North Korean propaganda North Korea Database North Korea Zone Guardian Unlimited © Guardian News and Media Limited 2007 ***************************************************************** 44 Rocky Mountain News: Flats workers appeal aid ruling, blast government * Read workers' appeal letter By Laura Frank, Rocky Mountain News September 25, 2007 Government officials didn't follow the law and made serious errors in denying immediate medical and financial aid to most former Rocky Flats workers with certain cancers, worker representatives said this week. In a stinging letter to the U.S. Health Secretary, the former nuclear weapons plant workers formally appealed last month's denial of aid to most workers with radiation-related cancers. The workers said government scientists ignored the law by taking more than the allowed 180 days to decide whether to recommend immediate help for the ill. The original aid petition asked that Rocky Flats workers receive a special status reserved for those whose radiation doses can't be calculated because records are missing or incomplete. The special status, which allows immediate aid, covers only a small portion of more than 20,000 people who worked at the now-demolished weapons plant during half a century. The rest must now try to individually prove that their ailments are related to workplace exposures, a process that can take years. The Rocky Mountain News reported this year that one in 10 Flats workers who ultimately were approved for help died before the process was completed. The workers said in their letter to Health Secretary Michael Leavitt that officials tried for more than two years to find a way to deny the Rocky Flats petition. The workers say officials at the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, or NIOSH, wanted to prove they could use Flats records to determine worker exposures. If most ill workers automatically qualified for aid, NIOSH would no longer need government workers to analyze invididual cases, jeopardizing their entire program. As evidence, the workers cited internal e-mails from U.S. assistant secretary of labor Shelby Hallmark questioning whether the program analyzing individual workers is needed. The Rocky reported on those internal documents in March. The appeal letter said, "Our workers died while NIOSH desperately dabbled in science under the threat that its program would be eliminated, spelling an end to the multi-million dollar business." The letter added that the program has become a "jobs program at the expense of the workers and the taxpayers." A three-member panel appointed by the health secretary is expected to hear the appeal. Scripps Newspaper Group — Online © 2007 The E.W. Scripps Co. ***************************************************************** 45 Oak Ridger: $6.7 million kick-starts DOE BioEnergy Science Center - Story last updated at 12:26 am on 9/25/2007 Orbach The Department of Energy's new BioEnergy Science Center, which is to be located at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory, will receive its first funding of $6.7 million. According to information provided by ORNL, “The Fiscal Year 2007 funds put the BioEnergy Science Center on a fast track to begin research on development of plant-derived biofuels.” The center is one of three nationwide and is part of a $375 million federal investment in basic research on biofuels. The money comes in addition to $125 million in planned funding over five years for the new center that the Department had announced in June, ORNL reported. The new funding will shorten the timeline for hiring new staff and purchasing equipment and will jump-start research programs planned by the center's partners, who include: * The University of Tennessee; * ORNL; * Georgia Tech; * The University of Georgia; * The Department of Energy's National Renewable Energy Laboratory; * ArborGen; * Dartmouth College; * Verenium Corp.; * Mascoma Corp.; and * The Samuel Roberts Noble Foundation. "Biofuels represent one of the most promising alternative energy sources," DOE Under Secretary for Science Raymond L. Orbach stated in an ORNL news release. "Making them cost-effective will require transformational breakthroughs in basic science. “This early infusion of funds will enable the BioEnergy Science Center to get under way immediately on the urgent quest for the breakthroughs our nation needs to usher in a new biofuels economy." Martin Keller, director of the BioEnergy Science Center, said scientists at the facility will work on modification of plant cell walls for easier breakdown into simple sugars that can then be processed into biofuels. "This award will help us quickly get to the business of developing ways to economically make transportation fuel from plants such as switchgrass and poplar trees," Keller remarked. "We are anxious to begin the research." Researchers also will focus on development of consolidated bioprocessing using a single microorganism or group of organisms to break down plant matter through a one-step conversion method. With construction nearly complete, the Tennessee government-funded Joint Institute for Biological Sciences at Oak Ridge National Laboratory will serve as home base for the BioEnergy Science Center. The new building will be occupied by December with operations fully under way in January 2008. BioEnergy Science Center partners Mascoma and the University of Tennessee are also developing a state-funded, $40 million bioethanol pilot plant, which has been sited about in Monroe County. The plant will be built and operated by Mascoma, with construction scheduled to begin by the end of this year. Plans call for the facility to be operational in 2009. The DOE Office of Science program in Biological and Environmental Research is in the process of establishing three such basic science research centers in bioenergy this year. A second center, under the leadership of Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, will be located near Berkeley, Calif., while a third center, run by the University of Wisconsin-Madison in partnership with Michigan State University, will be based in Madison, Wis. ORNL is managed by UT-Battelle for the Department of Energy. ; 2004 The Oak Ridger | Conditions of Use ***************************************************************** 46 KOB.com: Senators fight efforts to cut spending at N.M. labs Posted at: 09/25/2007 05:18:25 PM By: The Associated Press WASHINGTON (AP) - New Mexico's U.S. senators say legislation to keep the federal government running through mid-November would give New Mexico's two national laboratories a short-term reprieve from automatic budget cuts. Democrat Jeff Bingaman and Republican Pete Domenici have been fighting efforts to cut spending at the Department of Energy's nuclear weapons complex. That includes Los Alamos and Sandia national laboratories. Earlier this month, the labs began planning for a worst-case scenario that could include layoffs. Legislation filed today would keep the government running until Congress and President Bush can work out differences. The new federal fiscal year starts Monday, but none of the annual spending bills has been passed into law. (Copyright 2007 by The Associated Press. 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: *****************************************************************