*****************************************************************
11/07/07 ****     RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL)       **** VOL 15.262
*****************************************************************
   RADBULL IS PRODUCED BY THE ABALONE ALLIANCE CLEARINGHOUSE
*****************************************************************
Send News Stories to news@energy-net.org with title on subject
line and first line of body

                         NUCLEAR POLICY
 
1 US: BBC NEWS: French president welcomed by US
2 AFP: China urged to take the lead in wind power - 
3 Reuters: INTERVIEW-IEA says energy outlook gloomiest ever 
 
                         NUCLEAR REACTORS
 
4 BBC NEWS: Nuclear delays hit British Energy
5 US: Baltimore Examiner: Feds return to Peach Bottom - 
6 Energy Publisher: Nuclear power in UK: Is it necessary and viable? 
7 London Times: Shutdowns at British Energy plants may hit price of ga
8 US: baltimore sun: No government subsidies for new nuclear plants --
9 WNN: British decommissioning plans
10 US: Times Argus: Entergy restructures, to spin off new nuclear-only 
11 US: NRC: Nuclear Fuel Services, Inc., Environmental Assessment and F
12 IHT: Nuclear reactor that provides 12 percent of Romania's electrici
13 US: Vermont Public Radio: NRC says Yankee needs to be scrutinized
14 Kommersant Moscow: China Made Nuclear Power Payment for Future Suppl
15 UPI: Russia, China agree on nuclear deals
16 The Guardian: Clean-up of nuclear power stations in disarray 
17 US: Times Union: Nuclear reactor given cyber shape -- 
18 The Telegraph: To Russia, with nuclear reactor love
19 The Telegraph: Cloud on N-panel meet
20 Bulgaria: Brussels Denies Clearing Bulgaria Belene N-Plant Project
 
                          NUCLEAR SECURITY
 
 
                          NUCLEAR SAFETY
 
21 US: Folsom Telegraph: Toxic cleanup plan published for Mather area
22 US: DHHS: advisory committe nominations
23 US: NAS: Project: Beryllium Alloy Exposures in Military Aerospace Ap
 
                         NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE
 
24 Ahmadinejad: 3,000 centrifuges running
25 [epa-impact] Nuclear Fuel Services, Inc., Environmental Assessment
26 AU ABC: Govt nuclear dump plan 'one-sided' - 
27 BBC NEWS: More cash for Sellafield clean-up
28 US: CorpWatch US: Toxins Threaten to Uproot Entire Town
29 London Times: Nuclear clean-up faces cost rise after reprocessing si
30 Science News: Seismic Hazard: Stateline Fault System Is Major Compon
31 US: Burlington Free Press: My Turn: Down the path of destruction
32 The Ely Times: Reid says state's water too valuable to waste on powe
33 ReviewJournal.com: DOE boosts Yucca team
34 Sydney Morning Herald: NT nuke dump to cause cancer: campaigner - 
 
                           PEACE
 
35 US: ENS: Kentucky Starts Criminal Probe of Army Chemical Weapons Dep
36 Xinhua: DPRK reaffirms its denuclearization pledge
37 AFP: US asks SKorea not to ignore rights abuses in North - 
38 Guardian Unlimited: Gates Cautious on North Korean Threat 
39 Guardian Unlimited: US: NKorea's Nuclear Dismantling on Pace 
40 Sydney Morning Herald: Blix warns against arms race - 
 
                        US DEPT. OF ENERGY
 
41 aikenstandard.com: Safety services added into WSRC's SRS bid - 
42 DOE: Range Fuels Biorefinery Groundbreaking
43 DOE: Secretary of Energy to Highlight President Bush�s Energy 
44 DOE: Secretary Bodman Touts Importance of Cellulosic Ethanol at 
45 Ventura County Star: Field Lab site poses dangers, activists say 
46 Knoxville News Sentinel: DOE wants to stretch nuke reactor cleanup 
47 Rocky Mountain News: Workers from top-secret Flats building OK'd for
48 Albuquerque Tribune: University of California seeks legal review of 
49 KNDO/KNDU Tri-Cities: Spokesman Review Editorial Hits B-Reactor Hard
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
                         FULL NEWS STORIES
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
 1 BBC NEWS: French president welcomed by US

Last Updated: Wednesday, 7 November 2007, 07:50 GMT

Mr Sarkozy spoke warmly of French-US relations in a toast to Mr 
Bush

French President Nicolas Sarkozy has been warmly welcomed in 
Washington at the start of his first official visit to the US 
since he was elected.

At a dinner with US President George W Bush at the White House, 
he said differences over Iraq should not weaken the alliance 
between the two countries.

Mr Bush agreed, stressing the many areas in which they work 
together.

He will also present the Legion of Honour, France's highest award,
to several US citizens.


When we have been together, we have won the hardest fights


Nicolas Sarkozy


During the visit, the two presidents are expected to cover topics
such as Iraq, Iran's nuclear ambitions, and global warming.

Mr Sarkozy, who was elected in May and spent the afternoon with Mr
Bush while on holiday in New England in August, is seen as more
pro-American than his predecessor, Jacques Chirac.

'Friends forever'

The BBC's Richard Lister in Washington says a song of friendship set
the tone at the formal dinner at the White House.

Relations between the two countries have been strained since France
opposed the US-led invasion of Iraq in 2003, but Mr Sarkozy
signalled it should not continue to be an obstacle.

He prompted laughter by saying he had come to show he could be a
friend to the US and still win elections in France, underlining his
desire to put relations between Washington and Paris on a new
footing.

Mr Sarkozy met Mr Bush while on holiday in New England in August

"I came to Washington with a very simple message. I want to
reconquer America's heart," he said during a toast to Mr Bush.

"I have come to tell you one thing - that is that France and the
United States are friends, we are allies, always and forever."

Mr Sarkozy also paid homage to US troops who had helped liberate
France during World War II.

"When we have been together, we have won the hardest fights," he
said.

President Bush brushed aside past differences with France and said
their countries were working together to solve conflicts around the
world.

"French and American troops are helping to defend a young democracy
in Afghanistan. Our two nations support the democratic government of
Lebanon," he said.

"We agree that reconciliation and democracy in Iraq are vital to the
future of the Middle East and our two nations condemn violations of
human rights in Darfur, in Burma and around the world."

Weak dollar

Correspondents say the Bush administration increasingly sees
President Sarkozy as its principal ally in efforts to halt Iran's
nuclear programme.

But there will also be some areas of disagreement, they add.

In his address to Congress at 1100 (1600 GMT), Mr Sarkozy is
expected to call for the US to do more to combat global warming and
international poverty.

Addressing business leaders at the start of his visit, the French
leader voiced concern about the weakness of the US dollar.

"A strong economy should have a strong currency. You don't need a
dollar too weak," he said.

*****************************************************************
 2 AFP: China urged to take the lead in wind power - 

by Benjamin Morgan Wed Nov 7, 1:17 AM ET

SHANGHAI (AFP) - Long criticised at home and abroad over the 
destruction of its environment, China has a chance to alter its 
polluting ways by becoming a global leader in wind power, 
industry experts say.

The strong winds that blow through China's arid northern plains
could be harnessed to help reduce the nation's carbon-dioxide
emissions and help lead the fight against pollution, they said.

"With greater policy support to wind energy, China could become one
of the top three wind energy markets in the world by 2020," Li
Junfeng, an alternative energy expert, told reporters in Shanghai.

Li's comments came with the Paris-based International Energy Agency
set to distribute Thursday a major review of China's voracious
energy needs.

China is already the globe's second largest consumer of fossil fuels
after the United States.

According to a Dutch environmental study released in June this year,
it has also quickly caught up with the United States as the world's
biggest emitter of the greenhouse gases that are blamed for global
warming.

But China is also quietly emerging as a global force in renewable
energy technology, and nowhere is this more evident than in the
nation's burgeoning wind market.

China, which ranked 10th two years ago in terms of annual installed
wind mills, now is number five after the United States, Germany,
India and Spain, with rapid industry growth expected to catapult it
to second spot by 2008.

Although the Chinese regulatory environment has often not favoured
the development of wind power, the Asian giant still managed to add
this year 1,300 megawatts of wind power, an amount equal to that of
two average size nuclear power stations.

"Two years ago people thought (wind power) was a joke," Li said.

"Nobody thought it possible to reach a target of 30 million
kilowatts of wind power by 2020," he added, noting that if the
government had lent greater support 20 years ago, wind power could
already be a major component of its energy mix.

Despite production capacity of 2.6 gigawatts last year, that is
still less than one percent of China's energy mix, compared with 70
percent provided by polluting coal.

"Accelerating the development of wind energy should be part of
China's strategy to reduce dependence on coal while meeting its
energy demand," said Yang Ailun, Greenpeace China campaign manager
for climate and energy.

Worldwide, the wind power sector is enjoying a major boom as
countries try to reduce their dependence on increasingly expensive
fossil fuels and cutting down on greenhouse gas emissions to fight
global warming.

Last year, 23 billion dollars worth of new wind generators went
online across the world, lifting total capacity by a quarter to more
than 74 gigawatts, according to industry figures.

In China the annual growth rate of wind power capacity over the last
10 years has averaged 46 percent, and by this year's China's
installed capacity will be five gigawatts, nearly three years ahead
of Beijing's target.

"In many ways China is leading the pack," said Steve Sawyer,
secretary of the Global Wind Energy Council, a Brussels-based forum
which seeks to promote development of the sector.

For one, Chinese lawmakers passed a new law on renewable energy in
2006, which created a fund through mandatory public contributions to
cover the additional costs of wind power, although unstable pricing
remains a major issue.

However if the government were to give wind energy full backing,
capacity could exceed 120 gigawatts by 2020, accounting for up to 10
percent of total installed country capacity.

"The global fight against climate change cannot be won without China
playing a major role," said Sawyer.


Copyright � 2007 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
 3 Reuters: INTERVIEW-IEA says energy outlook gloomiest ever 

Wed Nov 7, 2007 5:06am EST

By Muriel Boselli

PARIS, Nov 7 (Reuters) - The International Energy Agency's World
Energy Outlook unveiled on Wednesday is its bleakest to date, the
author told Reuters in an interview.

Rich countries have failed to take concrete action to increase
energy security and slow down climate change, said Fatih Birol, also
the IEA's chief economist.

"This is the book that provides the most pessimistic outlook," he
said.

"In none of the OECD countries, can I say the effort is satisfactory
to change the trends we are in. This is the reason we have come up
with pessimistic views," Birol added.

He urged developed countries to find urgent ways to ease oil demand
growth, improve energy efficiency and provide an international
framework to address climate change.

"We believe that we are not running out of energy resources, we have
enough money but what we are running out of is time."

The Paris-based agency that acts as energy adviser to 26
industrialised countries said in the outlook that global energy
demand was likely to rise by 50 percent between now and 2030, with
China and India accounting for a hefty 45 percent of this increase.

"The more we sit back and watch the game, the less time we have to
fix the problem," Birol said.

He also warned against rich nations putting the blame for the
drastic projected increase in global energy demand on China and
India and said the agency did not believe the two fast-growing
economies should be condemned.

"To believe China and India are to blame is wrong because these
countries have the right to grow," Birol said. "In India today more
than 400 million people have no access to electricity."

He said that instead of blaming them, developed nations should find
ways to help them avoid repeating the same mistakes made by
industrialised nations.

"China and India are making a lot of efforts and OECD countries
should play a leadership role to those countries."

He said China should use energy more efficiently, make more use of
renewable energy as well as nuclear power.

"For example if China's efficiency standards matched the European
ones for refrigerators and air conditioning, China would by 2015
save electricity equivalent to China's Three Gorges damn," he said.

Birol also called for oil stocks of Chinese, Indian and IEA
countries to be brought together to provide an efficient safety net
in case of a crisis.

"We hope this book will pave the way for us to work more closely and
step up our cooperation efforts with China and India with perhaps
the ultimate call of making them members," he said.

For further coverage of the IEA World Energy Outlook double click on
[ID:nL06399840] (Reporting by Muriel Boselli; Editing by James
Mackenzie)

� Reuters2007All rights reserved
*****************************************************************
 4 BBC NEWS: Nuclear delays hit British Energy

Last Updated: Wednesday, 7 November 2007, 16:47 GMT

Shares in British Energy fell as much as 8% after the company 
failed to say when four of its nuclear reactors would return to 
service.

Last month, the firm took two reactors at Hartlepool and two at 
Heysham out of service following a routine inspection.

In an update, British Energy said it had discovered wire 
corrosion at Heysham 1 Reactor 1.

British Energy said inspections of Heysham 1 Reactor 2 had started,
while inspections would begin at Hartlepool Reactor 2 shortly.

The company said the problem uncovered was a "complex issue" and
added that "a timetable for the return to service of these units can
only be formed when inspections and a full assessment of the
situation have been completed".

British Energy's shares closed down 7% at 514.5 pence.

British Energy Group is the UK's largest producer of electricity. It
operates eight nuclear power stations and one coal-fired power
station.


*****************************************************************
 5 Baltimore Examiner: Feds return to Peach Bottom - 

Examiner.com

Feds return to Peach Bottom

Printer Friendly |Email | Add to My News | Post comments    Font

Filed under: BALTIMORE , Matthew Santoni, Peach Bottom Atomic Power
Station

(Courtesy photo)
An unidentified guard allegedly sleeps while on duty.

Nov 7, 2007 3:00 AM (21 hrs ago) by Matthew Santoni, The Examiner
BALTIMORE (Map, News) -Federal investigators have returned to Peach
Bottom Atomic Power Station to evaluate security lapses after an
investigation found guards had been sleeping on the job.

Nuclear Regulatory Commission investigators arrived Monday to
conduct a follow-up inspection after whistle-blower Kerry Beal
secretly taped his fellow guards dozing on the job over the summer.

Security company Wackenhut lost its contract to guard the Exelon
Corp.-operated plant Nov. 1, and Beal lost his job during the
investigation.

“Essentially, this will determine if there are performance issues
to be addressed, and if Exelon is addressing the root causes
they’ve identified,” said Diane Screnci, an NRC spokeswoman.

The initial NRC probe in September found guards believed it
acceptable to sleep in the “ready room” near the reactor at the
plant, about six miles over the Harford County line in Pennsylvania.

The probe also revealed the ready room did not provide enough
activity for guards to keep them alert; guards could not be observed
or inspected unannounced; management did not effectively convey that
sleeping was unacceptable; and supervisors did not pass along or
address complaints about the sleeping guards.

NRC investigators will likely interview plant employees to see
whether they now feel comfortable reporting problems to their
supervisors, Screnci said.

Samuel Collins, NRC’s administrator for the region including Peach
Bottom, said the four-person inspection team would follow up on the
initial fact-finding mission and ensure that the problems it
identified were being addressed.

“Let me emphasize again that we have zero tolerance for
inattentiveness on the part of any nuclear power plant security
officer,” Collins said.

As part of its response, Exelon posted a supervisor in the ready
room at all times, though Beal told The Examiner on Monday that the
guards often joked about other places to sleep on-site.

Despite the follow-ups, the watchdog group Project for Government
Oversight was not confident that the investigation could produce a
real change in attitude about reporting problems, especially after
Beal lost his job in the transition between Wackenhut security and
an in-house Exelon force, which includes some guards from the former
Wackenhut team.

“It would take a whale of a change — supervisors getting fired
for not reporting what they knew, people above them getting
whacked,” said Peter Stockton, an investigator for POGO. “It
will take a whole lot to build enough confidence so people will feel
like they can come forward.”

msantoni@baltimoreexaminer.com

*****************************************************************
 6 Energy Publisher: Nuclear power in UK: Is it necessary and viable? 

New nuclear is arguably necessary to deliver energy security and 
diversity and to enable carbon emissions targets to be met. 
However, significant investment in new nuclear is unlikely to be 
viable unless the government gives it more support

Wednesday, November 07, 2007
by Malcolm Keay

Politics is said to be the art of making the necessary possible. If
so, it is likely to be what determines the viability of new nuclear
power in this country. New nuclear is arguably necessary � to
deliver energy security and diversity and to enable carbon emissions
targets to be met. However, significant investment in new nuclear is
unlikely to be viable, unless the government gives it more support
as an outcome of the current nuclear review. It will therefore be
for the government to decide whether to make the necessary possible.

Security and diversity

Energy security is usually discussed in terms of the reliability of
imports of primary fuels. But in practice interruptions to energy
supply are usually a result of problems with infrastructure, whether
due to accident, breakdown, industrial action or under-provision,
leading to a lack of capacity to deliver energy as and when
consumers require it. The UK is currently facing a major capacity
challenge in the area of electricity generation due to the planned
retirement of nuclear and coal plant � most of the UK nuclear fleet
is due to retire by around 2020 while a large proportion of existing
coal capacity is expected either to retire or to be restricted to a
limited number of running hours as a result of the lightening of the
requirements under the Large Combustion Plants Directive.

In practice, matters might not be quite as stark as the chart
implies. Some plants will receive lifetime extensions and some may
operate for longer than currently expected.

Nonetheless, the overall picture is accepted by all parties,
including the government: around 25 to 30 GW of coal and nuclear
plant, one third of the UK�s capacity, is due to be taken out of
service by around 2020 or shortly thereafter. This may seem a fair
way off, but it is in fact a tough deadline when it comes to new
nuclear. Even if a decision to build new plant is made in the wake
of the current review, it is only on fairly optimistic assumptions
that it could be brought into service by 2020.

The problem is compounded by what might at first sight seem to be a
partial solution.

The government has a target of 20% of electricity from renewables by
2020, which will require the construction of large amounts of
renewable capacity. (This target is not formally binding and may
well be unrealistic, but the EU has this year agreed, with the
support of the UK, a "binding" target that 20% of all energy should
come from renewables by 2020. The uncertainty about the status of
the target only adds to the unpredictability of the investment
climate.)

What the target means in terms of capacity will depend on the
renewable sources involved, but the Sustainable Development
Commission (SDC) has suggested that about 26 GW of new renewable
capacity might need to be built, on the assumption that the main
source would be wind. While this might seem to fit well with the
loss of 25 to 30 GW of coal and nuclear plant, in fact it makes life
more difficult:

� First, because it adds to uncertainty. Every government renewables
target to date has been missed and many will expect the same to
happen with the 20% target. However, they can also expect the
government to keep ratcheting up support for renewables in a
desperate attempt to get closer to the target, creating an
increasingly distorted and unpredictable power market.

� Second, because the SDC�s 26 GW of renewables is only equivalent
to around 6 GW of firm capacity, due to the intermittent nature of
wind power. So around 20 GW of capacity would still need to be
built, essentially as back-up for the wind. The wind and other
renewable capacity would run when available, limiting in an
unpredictable way the market available for non-renewable sources.

So the intervention in favour of renewables makes the electricity
market much less attractive for other sorts of capacity, yet they
would still be needed in nearly the same quantities. The likely
market response will be to limit the risks by building low capital
cost, low lead-time, gas plant at the latest possible moment. This
might prove a security problem and would undoubtedly reduce
diversity.

In short, the UK is facing a significant security challenge, and
government interventions in the electricity market are so far
increasing, not reducing, the security risk. The UK is very likely
to face a loss of diversity and reliability in its electricity
system, and possibly even capacity shortages, unless steps are taken
to ensure reliable replacements for the nuclear and coal plants
which are due to retire.

Climate change

The problem with climate change is similar � the government is
facing a major challenge and has not (yet) developed the means to
deliver an effective response. This challenge is to a large extent
self-imposed � in its new Climate Bill the governments has set a
goal of reducing CO2 emissions by 60% by 2050, with an interim
target of a 26-32% reduction by 2020. Both targets would be legally
binding. The government�s willingness to make such commitments flies
in the face of its own poor performance. Under the present
administration, CO2 emissions have in fact increased, not declined.
(The UK�s relatively good performance on greenhouse gas emissions
overall is due to two main factors � the dash to gas of the early
1990s, and a significant reduction in non CO2 gases, which now
provide only limited opportunities for further savings). In other
words, all the climate change policies introduced over the last ten
years have done nothing to reduce CO2 emissions, yet the government
seems to believe that it can meet future targets, despite having
nothing new to offer in policy terms.

It is relying on measures (like energy efficiency, combined heat and
power and new renewables) which have not been proven to have a
significant impact, and neglecting those measures for which there is
evidence of effectiveness. Apart from cases of war or industrial
collapse, the two most striking examples of rapid reductions in
emissions over a short period which can be identified from the
historical record are:

� France � where emissions fell by around 100 million tonnes (mt)
between 1979 and 1987 (20% of total French emissions); and

� Sweden � where emissions went down by 20mt between 1979 and 1983,
or 25% of the Swedish total.

These reductions have been sustainable as the following table,
showing emissions across the economy and in particular sectors,
indicates:

The countries with low emissions are not those, such as Denmark,
Germany and the Netherlands, which have adopted the sort of policy
the government is advocating, but countries such as France and
Sweden with high nuclear (and hydro) capacity. They have emissions
per head some 40 to 50% below that of other northern European
countries, due almost entirely to the low level of emissions from
electricity � in other sectors, such as transport, the differences
are minor. Since significant expansion of hydropower is probably not
an option for the UK, that leaves nuclear as the only alternative
with the proven capacity to deliver emissions reductions on the
scale required. There may in future be others (for instance, tidal
power or carbon capture and storage) but they are at present
uncertain. To meet a binding target of the sort the government has
imposed on itself, it will need all the tools available (and will
need to be confident that they can deliver) so it would be
ill-advised to neglect nuclear.

Is nuclear viable?

Furthermore, nuclear appears to be a cost-effective form of carbon
reduction �considerably cheaper than renewables according to the
government�s consultation paper. While such calculations inevitably
depend on the assumptions chosen, the figures suggest that nuclear
can deliver carbon reductions at a cost of around �25per tonne while
for renewables the cost is around 10 times as much, �250 per tonne.
The policy conclusion seems obvious � to meet tight carbon targets
at minimum cost, the government should give nuclear support of the
same sort as it gives to renewables, but at a much lower level.

But this is not the government�s position. Admittedly, it has to be
careful in what it says during the consultation period on the
nuclear review to avoid appearing to pre-empt a decision (though it
never faced similar concerns over renewables); nonetheless, it has
committed itself firmly to the proposition that it will be for
investors to decide whether to build nuclear plant. The government
might have a facilitating role, for example in simplifying planning
procedures and setting up a nuclear waste and decommissioning
regime, but it has made it clear that it does not intend to
subsidise nuclear in the same way as renewables, apart from
recognising the carbon benefit via the European Emissions Trading
Scheme.

It is not clear that nuclear would be viable on this basis, given
the dynamics of investment in a liberalised market. The government
appears to base its position on calculations of the cost of
generation from nuclear, which appears more or less economic. (On
the government�s central gas price scenario, and with no carbon
price, in fact nuclear has a small cost penalty. However, the
government is now making the assumption that a carbon price of at
least �25 needs to be factored into the calculations, making nuclear
appear economic on some scenarios, and especially if gas prices are
high.)

However, it is assessments of risk which drive liberalised markets,
not ex ante calculations of "levelised costs" and simple pence per
kWh comparisons. Risk depends not just on scenarios of possible
price movements but on the dynamics of competitive markets � that
is, on what other generators are doing � and on minimising and
managing risk. In economic terms it is a question of game theory. It
is easy to demonstrate that in conditions of uncertainty, this will
tend to lead to the postponement of investment; to investors
choosing plant which offer flexibility and "optionality"; and to a
preference for "running with the herd" to ensure that even if an
investment choice is not (with hindsight) optimal, it will at least
remain competitive with the rest of the system � in practice, to a
preference for gas. We have seen all these phenomena in liberalised
power markets.

Such markets are therefore problematic, at the best of times, for
nuclear. Nuclear is high capital cost, takes longer to build than
fossil plant and entails not just a higher level of risk but a wider
range of risks. These include:

� market risk arising from electricity price volatility, which
affects all generators, but particularly nuclear, because of its
high fixed costs (as was shown in the UK in the earlier years of
this decade).

� nuclear specific risks, such as planning, decommissioning and
waste management (which are being discussed with the government at
present but have not yet been resolved).

� political risk. Government support for nuclear can easily change
over time, as many European countries have shown (Germany, Sweden,
Spain, Italy, Netherlands etc) raising the risk that plant may not
be allowed to operate for their full life times (or at all). There
is no real consensus on nuclear in the UK at present � for instance,
the Scottish National Party remains opposed and Scotland is an
important player, with a much higher proportion of nuclear
generation than the rest of the UK. Furthermore, political risk may
be completely outside an investor�s control. A nuclear accident
anywhere in the world could change political attitudes overnight (as
happened in the wake of the Chernobyl accident).

� environmental risk. Despite nuclear�s low emissions, the
environmental risk is real. Whatever the government may argue, it is
difficult to rely on any particular level of carbon price,
especially when the successor regime to Kyoto remains to be agreed;
the short experience with emissions trading so far only underlines
the risk of carbon price volatility. The government has actually
increased the uncertainties, because the timescales in its Climate
Bill are not nuclear friendly. As noted, the 2020 deadline would be
quite a stretch for nuclear (while the 2050 target is too far away
for it to be clear whether nuclear would be needed). It would be
easy for an NGO to argue that nuclear would not be of obvious help
in meeting these (binding) targets, and that the government is
therefore obliged to do something else instead, adding to the
already high risk of legal challenge to any nuclear construction
programme.

� construction risk. It is not clear whether nuclear has overcome
the major problems of the past � construction delays and cost
overruns � given that so few nuclear plants have been built in the
OECD recently. Experience with the Olkiluoto plant in Finland, the
only one currently under active construction, suggests that there
may still be problems in this area. The plant is behind schedule and
over budget.

In short, nuclear remains a high cost, high risk option, ill-suited
to a liberalised market. Renewables face similar barriers, but the
government has taken steps to overcome them, knowing that that is
the only way to get renewables built in significant quantities. So
far it has shown no disposition to do so in the case of nuclear,
despite the fact that it is a lower cost and larger scale source of
carbon reductions and that, as with renewables, it is unlikely that
significant quantities will be built without clear government
support.

Nuclear therefore remains on the horns of an uncomfortable dilemma.
It seems to be necessary, but not possible. The government will have
to show political will if it is to resolve this dilemma and produce
a credible long term energy and climate change.

The contents of this article are the author�s sole responsibility.
They do not necessarily represent the views of the Oxford Institute
for Energy Studies or any of its Members, and where this article was
first published.

� Copyright EnerPub, All rights reserved. RSS
*****************************************************************
 7 London Times: Shutdowns at British Energy plants may hit price of gas - 

November 8, 2007

Angela Jameson, Industrial Correspondent

British Energy, the UK’s largest electricity generator,
yesterday confirmed that two of its nuclear reactors would remain
shut for the foreseeable future.

The plants were closed last month when the company discovered a
corroded steel wire in the concrete casing of one of two reactors at
its Hartlepool power station, which supplies 1.5 million homes with
electricity.

British Energy said that it had discovered a similar problem at its
Heysham 1 reactor, confirming fears that the problem was not an
isolated one and would require further inspections, remedial work
and many more months of closures to fix.

News that the reactors are unlikely to be back on line quickly will
put pressure on gas prices, because the UK will have to import more
gas to meet winter peak demand.

It also underlines the problems of Britain’s ageing nuclear
stations at a time when the consultation on whether to build a new
generation of nuclear stations is nearing a conclusion.

British Energy is trying to position itself as the nuclear operator
of first choice for any next generation of reactors. However,
repeated operational problems, which the company has blamed on
decades of underinvestment, have caused some to question whether it
should be allowed to be involved in building new reactors.

The company, which is to report half-year results next week, was
unable to say how long the inspections would take, but analysts
believe that the plants are likely to be shut down until March at
the earliest.

Peter Atherton, an analyst for Citigroup, said: “This is bad
news for British Energy. In our view, it now looks increasingly
likely that the reactors will be down for the rest of winter.”

British Energy called the problems a “legacy issue” and
said that they had been discovered during a routine inspection. It
said: “This is a complex issue and a timetable for the return
to service of these units can only be formed when inspections and a
full assessment of the situation have been completed,” The
company said that it would provide a description of the issue and
how it was being addressed as part of its results presentation next
week.

� Copyright 2007 Times Newspapers Ltd.

the News International Group. News International Limited, 1 Virginia
St, London E98 1XY, is the holding company for the News
International group and is registered in England No 81701. VAT
number GB 243 8054 69.

*****************************************************************
 8 baltimore sun: No government subsidies for new nuclear plants -- 

baltimoresun.com

By Bonnie Raitt and Harvey Wasserman

November 7, 2007

A clause in the landmark energy bill now before Congress could open
the door for massive loan guarantees meant to entice investors to
build nuclear power plants.

This is an extremely important piece of legislation, and we strongly
support its green features, including higher mileage standards for
motor vehicles and a renewable electricity standard.

But as longtime anti-nuclear activists, we believe guaranteeing
loans to build new reactors is exactly wrong for a nation that needs
to solve the global warming crisis while building a sustainable
economy.

That these guarantees are being proposed at all is painful testimony
to the 50-year failure of the "peaceful atom."

When the first commercial reactor opened at Shippingport, Pa., in
1957, Lewis Strauss, the chairman of the Atomic Energy Commission,
promised a technology that would produce electricity "too cheap to
meter."

But a very expensive half-century of time lags and cost overruns has
made a mockery of that promise.

Nor does it seem to be getting better: The first "new generation"
reactor, being built in Finland, is 18 months behind schedule and
$900 million over budget.

When utility executives first balked at building these reactors,
Congress passed the 1957 Price-Anderson Act, making the federal
government the primary insurer against catastrophic accidents. A
study by the Sandia Laboratories around that time said such an
accident could irradiate an area "the size of Pennsylvania." The
industry promised that with improving technology, private insurers
would soon step forward.

But it hasn't happened. And with the increased potential for terror
attacks since 9/11, the industry is now demanding such coverage for
its proposed new reactors, which could stretch taxpayer liability
for decades to come.

Way back when, the industry also assured the public an answer would
soon be found for managing high-level radioactive waste. But as of
today, the still-unlicensed dump at Yucca Mountain, Nev., cannot
open for at least another decade, if at all.

A repository for the waste produced by proposed new reactors remains
unsited, undesigned, unfunded and unnamed. Moving radioactive waste
to Yucca Mountain or any such central repository would expose tens
of millions of Americans on the highways and railroads and in their
homes.

The industry has lately made much of the idea that atomic reactors
might help solve global warming.

But in fact they can do little, if anything, to help.

Rather, the way to solve the climate crisis, and to guarantee a
sustainable economy, is with conservation, increased efficiency and
renewable energy, including wind, solar, biofuels, geothermal, ocean
thermal and a wide range of other rapidly advancing, safe energy
technologies.

Investments in increased efficiency or renewable energy can lead to
much greater energy savings and job creation than investments in
nuclear power. To solve global warming and guarantee us a safe,
reliable energy future, that's where our money needs to go.

Bonnie Raitt and Harvey Wasserman are co-founders of Musicians
United for Safe Energy.

Copyright � 2007, The Baltimore Sun
*****************************************************************
 9 WNN: British decommissioning plans

07 November 2007

About $17.4 billion is to be spent on dismantling old UK nuclear
power and research facilities up to 2011, according to a plan
published today.

The Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA), which was established
in 2005 to oversee an ambitious project to manage the safe long-term
management of the UK's nuclear legacy, has put the plan out for
public consultation until the end of January 2008.

The bulk of the spending will go to clean-up and decommissioning of
the various facilities at the Sellafield and Dounreay sites, which
are to receive $1.174 billion and $309 million in work per year.

The NDA is also managing the ten pioneering Generation-I Magnox
nuclear power plants, spending typically between $62 million and
$124 million on each per year.

Two of the plants, Oldbury and Wylfa, are still operating and
contribute about $350 million per year in revenue from electricity
sales. Similarly, some commercial operations at Sellafield such as
reprocessing of used nuclear fuel generate revenues totalling $1.650
billion per year.

In total the NDA expects to spend $2.82 billion on clean-up in
2008/9 - about half its expenditure of $5.690 billion . It should
receive $2.542 billion in revenue. Monies earned by NDA go to the
government as the ultimate owner of the state-developed facilities,
and the government separately allocates the NDA a budget for
clean-up.

Estimates of figures for the period 2009/10 and 2010/11 figures are
broadly the same overall, with the exception that revenue from
electricity generation will finally cease in 2010 as Wylfa retired.

Further information

Nuclear Decommissioning Authority

WNA's Nuclear Power in the United Kingdom information paper
*****************************************************************
 10 Times Argus: Entergy restructures, to spin off new nuclear-only company

November 07, 2007

By Susan Smallheer Rutland Herald

BRATTLEBORO � The corporate parent of Vermont Yankee nuclear plant
announced Monday that it was spinning off its five unregulated
nuclear plants into a separate company, which would give it more
leverage for future investments in the nuclear power industry.

Entergy Corp., already the country's second largest nuclear power
company, said that it would spin off Vermont Yankee, Pilgrim Nuclear
in Plymouth, Mass., Indian Point Energy Center in Buchanan, N.Y.,
James FitzPatrick plant in Oswego, N.Y., and its latest purchase,
the Palisades plant in Covert, Mich.

According to a release from Entergy, the move will allow the new
nuclear-only company to take on more debt. The new company was
tentatively called SpinCo.

At the same time, Entergy announced that its third-quarter net
income rose 19 percent.

Neil Sheehan, spokesman for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, said
that Entergy had asked federal regulators for permission to create
the new company out of its so-called "merchant plants," which are
not regulated.

Entergy Nuclear, which is based in Jackson, Miss., also owns nuclear
plants in Mississippi, Texas, Arkansas and Louisiana. Those plants
have 2.6 million customers.

Sheehan said Entergy requested that federal regulators approve the
spin-off by the end of the year, something Sheehan said the NRC had
not committed to do at this time.

"We're still reviewing it," he said, noting it wasn't unusual for
large power companies to undergo restructuring.

He said a big question would be whether the new company would have
the financial wherewithal to run the nuclear reactors, and also
provide decommissioning funds, which typically run into the hundreds
of millions of dollars.

According to Chanel Lagarde, a spokesman for Entergy, the creation
of the new company would have to be approved by the NRC, the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, the Securities and Exchange
Commission, as well as utility regulators in New York and Vermont,
specifically the Vermont Public Service Board.

Lagarde said the southern nuclear reactors were utility-owned and
operated, while the plants being spun-off into a separate company
were merchant plants, which are free to sell their power on the open
market or sign contracts for power sales.

According to business and industry news reports about the Entergy
announcement, the change is designed to maximize Entergy's profits,
given the New England power market, which is one of the highest in
the country. According to the U.S. Energy Information
Administration's Web site, New England has an average 16.6 cents per
kilowatt-hour, while the national figure is closer to 10.6 cents.

Robert Williams, spokesman for Entergy Nuclear Vermont Yankee,
referred all comment on the change to Lagarde.

Lagarde said he didn't believe there would be any change in the
day-to-day operation of Vermont Yankee because of the new company.

David O'Brien, commissioner of the Vermont Department of Public
Service, couldn't be reached for comment.

Lagarde said that SpinCo was the name the company was taking for the
time being. "A new name has not been identified," he said.

Entergy would retain 50 percent ownership of the new company, which
according to Reuters, would have debt of $4.5 billion.

Contact Susan Smallheer at susan.smallheer@rutlandherald.com.






       







Discuss this article! 

Topics Replies Author Last Post

No messages.





 











   � 2007 Times Argus
Privacy Policy  | Subscriber Agreement  | Contact Us  | Careers







*****************************************************************
 11 NRC: Nuclear Fuel Services, Inc., Environmental Assessment and Finding 
of No Significant Impact Related to Proposed License Amendment 
Authorizing Increased Possession Limit

FR Doc E7-21861

[Federal Register: November 7, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 215)] 
[Notices] [Page 62880-62883] From the Federal Register Online via 
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr07no07-91]                         

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket No. 70-143]


AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

ACTION: Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kevin M. Ramsey, Fuel Manufacturing 
Branch, Division of Fuel Cycle Safety and Safeguards, Office of Nuclear 
Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 
Mail Stop E-2C40M, Washington, DC 20555-0001, telephone (301) 492-3123 
and e-mail kmr@nrc.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Introduction

    The U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff is considering 
a request to amend Materials License SNM-124, issued to Nuclear Fuel 
Services, Inc. (NFS) (the licensee), to authorize an increase in the 
possession limit of high-enriched uranium (HEU). The NRC has prepared 
an

[[Page 62881]]

Environmental Assessment (EA) in support of this action. Based upon the 
EA, the NRC has concluded that a Finding of No Significant Impact 
(FONSI) is appropriate and, therefore, an Environmental Impact 
Statement (EIS) will not be prepared.

II. Environmental Assessment

Background

    The NFS facility in Erwin, Tennessee is authorized, under License 
SNM-124, to manufacture high-enriched nuclear reactor fuel. In 
addition, NFS is authorized to blend HEU with natural uranium and 
manufacture low-enriched nuclear reactor fuel. License SNM-124 limits 
the amount of HEU that NFS may possess for these operations. On May 15, 
2007, NFS requested a license amendment to increase its possession 
limit of HEU (Ref. 5).

Review Scope

    The purpose of this EA is to assess the environmental impacts of 
the proposed license amendment. It does not approve the request. This 
EA is limited to the proposed possession limit increase and any 
cumulative impacts to existing plant operations. The existing 
conditions and operations at the Erwin facility were evaluated, by the 
NRC, for environmental impacts in a 1999 EA related to the renewal of 
the NFS license (Ref. 1), and a 2002 EA related to the first amendment 
for the Blended Low-Enriched Uranium (BLEU) Project (Ref. 2). The 2002 
EA assessed the impact of the entire BLEU Project, using the 
information available at that time. A 2003 EA (Ref. 3) and a 2004 EA 
(Ref. 4), related to additional BLEU Project amendments confirmed the 
FONSI issued in 2002. This assessment presents information and an 
analysis for determining that the issuance of a FONSI is appropriate 
and that an EIS will not be prepared.

Proposed Action

    The proposed action is to amend NRC Materials License SNM-124, to 
authorize an increase in the possession limit for uranium enriched up 
to 100 weight percent in the uranium-235 isotope (Ref. 5). The proposed 
action is limited to possession and storage only. No changes to 
processing operations are requested, and no construction of new 
facilities are requested.

Need for Proposed Action

    The proposed action is being requested because a larger inventory 
of HEU is needed to support NFS operations. Two factors are driving 
this need. One factor is a request from the U.S. Department of Energy 
(DOE) that NFS establish an inventory of HEU that would allow 
continuous operations for six to twelve months of processes that 
support DOE programs. This would allow NFS to continue operating if an 
increased threat level or other incidents required shipments of HEU to 
be interrupted or curtailed. Another factor is the lower-than-planned 
processing rate at the Blended Low-Enriched Uranium Preparation 
Facility (BPF). BPF operations support commercial programs that are 
separate from DOE programs. Difficulties with BPF equipment and 
operations have caused delays and low processing rates. This has 
created a backlog of material in storage because material is being 
received faster than it is being processed.

Alternatives

    The alternatives available to the NRC are:
    1. Approve the license amendment as described; or
    2. No action (i.e., deny the request).

Affected Environment

    The affected environment for the proposed action and the 
alternative is the NFS site. The affected environment is identical to 
the affected environment assessed in the 2002 EA that is related to the 
first amendment for the BLEU Project (Ref. 2). A full description of 
the site and its characteristics is given in the 2002 EA. Additional 
information can be found in the 1999 EA related to the renewal of the 
NFS license (Ref. 1). The NFS facility is located in Unicoi County, 
Tennessee, about 32 km (20 mi) southwest of Johnson City, Tennessee. 
The plant is about 0.8 km (0.5 mi) southwest of the Erwin city limits. 
The site occupies about 28 hectares (70 acres). The site is bounded to 
the northwest by the CSX Corporation (CSX) railroad property and the 
Nolichucky River, and by Martin Creek to the northeast. The plant 
elevation is about 9 m (30 ft) above the nearest point on the 
Nolichucky River.
    The area adjacent to the site consists primarily of residential, 
industrial, and commercial areas, with a limited amount of farming to 
the northwest. Privately owned residences are located to the east and 
south of the facility. Tract size is relatively large, leading to a low 
housing density in the areas adjacent to the facility. The CSX railroad 
right-of-way is parallel to the western boundary of the site. 
Industrial development is located adjacent to the railroad on the 
opposite side of the right-of-way. The site is bounded by Martin Creek 
to the north, with privately owned, vacant property and low-density 
residences.

Effluent Releases and Monitoring

    A full description of the effluent monitoring program at the site 
is provided in the 2002 EA, related to the first amendment for the BLEU 
Project (Ref. 2). Additional information is available in the 1999 EA 
related to the renewal of the NFS license (Ref. 1). The NFS Erwin plant 
conducts effluent and environmental monitoring programs to evaluate 
potential public health impacts and comply with the NRC effluent and 
environmental monitoring requirements. The effluent program monitors 
the airborne, liquid, and solid waste streams produced during operation 
of the NFS plant. The environmental program monitors the air, surface 
water, sediment, soil, groundwater, and vegetation in and around the 
NFS plant.
    Airborne, liquid, and solid effluent streams that contain 
radioactive material are generated at the NFS plant and monitored to 
ensure compliance with the NRC regulations in 10 CFR Part 20. Each 
effluent is monitored at or just before the point of release. The 
results of effluent monitoring are reported to the NRC on a semi-annual 
basis, in accordance with 10 CFR 70.59.
    Airborne and liquid effluents are also monitored for 
nonradiological constituents in accordance with State discharge 
permits. For the purpose of this EA, the State of Tennessee is expected 
to set limits on effluents, under its regulatory control, that are 
protective of health and safety and the local environment.

Impacts of Proposed Action

1. Normal Operations
    The proposed action is limited to increasing the authorized amount 
of HEU in storage. No construction of new facilities is proposed and no 
changes to processing operations have been requested. Based on the 
information provided by NFS, the safety controls to be employed for the 
proposed action, appear to be sufficient to ensure that planned 
operations will have no significant impact on the environment.
    Radiological Impacts: The proposed action involves no changes to 
processing operations. No increase is expected in effluent air 
emissions discharged through stacks at the site. In addition, no 
increase is expected in liquid effluents discharged to the sanitary 
sewer. Therefore, the proposed action will have no impact on the total 
annual dose estimate for the maximally exposed individual from all 
planned

[[Page 62882]]

effluents. The dose to workers may increase slightly because more 
radioactive material will be stored at the site. However, occupational 
dose is monitored and controlled in accordance with applicable NRC 
regulations; therefore, no adverse impacts are expected. Surface water 
quality at the NFS site is currently protected by enforcing release 
limits and monitoring programs. No change in surface water impacts is 
expected. The proposed action will not discharge any effluents to the 
groundwater; therefore, no adverse impacts to groundwater are expected.
    The proposed action involves transportation of radioactive feed 
material to the NFS site, which will lead to transportation of 
radioactive products and waste material from the NFS site. All 
transportation will be conducted in accordance with the applicable NRC 
and U.S. Department of Transportation regulations; therefore, no 
adverse impacts from transportation activities are expected.
    Land Use: The proposed action involves storage of radioactive 
material at existing facilities. No new facilities will be constructed; 
therefore, no adverse impact to land use is expected.
    Cultural Resources: The proposed action involves storage of 
radioactive material at existing facilities. The NRC staff considers 
this a type of activity that does not have the potential to affect 
historic properties. No adverse impact to cultural resources is 
expected.
    Biotic Resources: The proposed action will not change current land 
use or effluents at the site. Therefore, the NRC finds that the 
proposed action will not affect any Federally endangered or threatened 
species.
2. Potential Accidents
    The proposed action will not result in any new or modified accident 
sequences. The Integrated Safety Analysis performed by NFS already 
considers all authorized storage locations to be filled to maximum 
capacity with HEU. The NRC finds that the safety controls to be 
employed in the proposed action are sufficient to ensure planned 
activities will be safe.
3. Cumulative Impacts
    The NRC has considered the impacts of the proposed action together 
with the known impacts of the existing facility. After reviewing the 
information provided, the NRC concludes that the cumulative impacts 
represent an insignificant change to the existing conditions in the 
area surrounding the NFS site.

Impacts of No Action Alternative

    Under the no action alternative, NFS would not be able to increase 
its inventory of HEU to support current operations. This would require 
NFS to stop receiving HEU shipments until enough material has been 
processed and removed from the site before another shipment could be 
received. Failure to fulfill its role in government and commercial 
programs could cause NFS's customers to select other alternatives that 
may be less cost effective and incur greater environmental impacts. If 
NFS is unable to fulfill its contractual obligations, customers may 
transfer work to other facilities.

Conclusion

    Based on its review, the NRC has concluded that the environmental 
impacts associated with the proposed action are not significant and, 
therefore, do not warrant denial of the proposed license amendment. The 
NRC has determined that the proposed action, the approval of the 
license amendment as described, is the appropriate alternative for 
selection. Based on an evaluation of the environmental impacts of the 
proposed license amendment, the NRC has determined that the proper 
action is to issue a FONSI.

Agencies and Persons Contacted

    On September 21, 2007, the NRC staff contacted the Deputy Director 
of the Division of Radiological Health at the Tennessee Department of 
Environment and Conservation (TDEC) concerning this EA. On October 1, 
2007, the Deputy Director responded that TDEC reviewed the draft EA and 
had no comments (Ref. 6).
    The NRC staff has determined that the proposed action will not 
affect listed species or critical habitat. Therefore, no consultation 
is required under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act. Likewise, 
the NRC staff has determined that the proposed action is not the type 
of activity that has the potential to cause effects on historic 
properties. Therefore, no consultation is required, under Section 106 
of the National Historic Preservation Act.

References

    1. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, ``Environmental 
Assessment for Renewal of Special Nuclear Material License No. SNM-
124,'' January 1999, ADAMS No. ML031150418
    2. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, ``Environmental 
Assessment for Proposed License Amendments to Special Nuclear 
Material License No. SNM-124 Regarding Downblending and Oxide 
Conversion of Surplus High-Enriched Uranium,'' June 2002, ADAMS No. 
ML021790068.
    3. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, ``Environmental 
Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact for the BLEU 
Preparation Facility,'' September 2003, ADAMS No. ML032390428.
    4. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, ``Environmental 
Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact for the Oxide 
Conversion Building and the Effluent Processing Building at the BLEU 
Complex,'' June 2004, ADAMS No. ML041470176.
    5. Nuclear Fuel Services, ``Amendment Request to Increase the U-
235 Possession Limit for the NFS Site,'' May 15, 2007, ADAMS No. 
ML072550166.
    6. D. Shults, Tennessee Division of Radiological Health, e-mail 
to K. Ramsey, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, ``Consultation 
with Tennessee on EA for NFS Possession Limit Increase,'' October 1, 
2007, ADAMS No. ML072760398.

III. Finding of No Significant Impact

    Pursuant to 10 CFR Part 51, the NRC staff has considered the 
environmental consequences of amending NRC Materials License SNM-124 to 
increase the possession limit for the NFS facility. On the basis of 
this assessment, the Commission has concluded that environmental 
impacts associated with the proposed action would not be significant 
and the Commission is making a finding of no significant impact. 
Accordingly, the preparation of an EIS is not warranted.

IV. Further Information

    Documents related to this action, including the application for 
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 ADAMS accession numbers for 
the documents related to this notice are listed in the references 
above. 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 Public Document Room (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 Rockville, Maryland this 25th day of October, 2007.

[[Page 62883]]

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Peter J. Habighorst,
 Chief, Fuel Manufacturing Branch, Fuel Facility Licensing Directorate, 
Division of Fuel Cycle Safety and Safeguards, Office of Nuclear 
Material Safety and Safeguards.
[FR Doc. E7-21861 Filed 11-6-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590-01-P


*****************************************************************
 12 IHT: Nuclear reactor that provides 12 percent of Romania's electricity
turned off - 

International Herald Tribune

The Associated Press

Published: November 7, 2007

CONSTANTA, Romania: A nuclear reactor in Romania automatically
switched off Wednesday, after it began to produce radioactive
material, officials said.

There was no danger to workers or to people living near the
Cernavoda nuclear plant in eastern Romania, National Nuclear
Electric Company spokeswoman Mihaela Stiopol said, adding that the
environment also was not threatened.

The reactor automatically turned off at about 11 a.m. (0800GMT) for
safety reasons after it began internally producing radioactive
material, she said. The announcement was made several hours later.

Technicians were working to fix the problem, and expected to switch
the reactor back on within some 40 hours, she said. The reactor
provides some 12 percent of Romania's electricity.

Copyright � 2007 the International Herald Tribune All rights reserved
*****************************************************************
 13 Vermont Public Radio: NRC says Yankee needs to be scrutinized

Wednesday November 7, 2007
Ross Sneyd

Colchester, VT

(Host) The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has concluded its
investigation into two problems this summer at the Vermont Yankee
nuclear power plant.

The NRC says both episodes warrant close scrutiny of Vermont
Yankee's operations.

But it says neither compromised the nuclear operations of the plant
and the public's safety was never in danger.

On August 21 a cooling tower at the Vernon plant collapsed. Wooden
timbers in the tower had rotted and failed.

The NRC says Yankee's owner, Entergy Nuclear, needs to do a better
job of inspecting the timbers and other components in the towers.

Regulators say the other incident also didn't compromise safety.

The plant shut down on August 30 after a key turbine valve failed.
Investigation found that the valve hadn't been properly greased.

The NRC says it will pay close attention to both issues in an
upcoming inspection.


� Copyright 2007, VPR

This is the online edition of VPR News. Text versions of VPR news
stories may be updated and they may vary slightly from the broadcast
version.

*****************************************************************
 14 Kommersant Moscow: China Made Nuclear Power Payment for Future Supplies of Crude -

Nov. 07, 2007

Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao closed yesterday the Year of China in 
Russia, which finalized his official visit to the country. Back 
to China, the premier carried contracts with Atomstroiexport and 
Tekhsnabexport for constructing two new units at Tianwan Nuclear 
Plant worth over �4 billion. But even the meeting with President 
Putin didn�t help him clarify the prospects for long-term 
pipeline supplies of crude oil to China.

The agreement for constructing the third and the fourth units at 
Tianwan Nuclear Plant emerged as the biggest contract sealed in 
time of the Moscow visit of Wen Jiabao. Although the parties 
didn't disclose the exact budget of the deal, in Atomstroiexport, 
they count on at least �4 billion.

The first two units of the nuclear plant cost much less to China, it
paid no more than $750 million for each of them. But their launch
was delayed for two years and the negotiations with Atomstroiexport
about eliminating the defects weren�t easy. But despite all
problems, China proved optimistic enough to clinch another
construction deal with Atomstroiexport.

The extension of Tianwan contract had been well-expected actually,
although the forecast had been that Wen Jiabao would exchange it for
other big decisions mostly related to crude oil. But the issue of
any other big contracts wasn�t discussed in the Kremlin and in the
White House yesterday. As a result, China has no answer whether
Russia will ultimately construct a branch of East Siberia-Pacific
Ocean Pipeline up to Chinese border. At the same time, Wen Jiabao
never declared his country�s readiness to buy the crude oil at
prices generating revenues equal to supplies to the West, but
exactly such prices are the proposal of top-ranked bureaucrats of
Russia.

www.kommersant.com

All the Article in Russian as of Nov. 07, 2007

� 1991-2007 ZAO "Kommersant. Publishing House". All rights reserved. 
*****************************************************************
 15 UPI: Russia, China agree on nuclear deals

International Security - Energy - Briefing - UPI.com

Published: Nov. 7, 2007 at 4:08 PM

BEIJING, Nov. 7 (UPI) -- Russia and China have signed a new deal on
nuclear energy cooperation that will increase the number of
Russian-built nuclear plants and fueling centers.

Atomstroyexport, the state-owned nuclear export company, will add
two additional reactors at the Tianwan nuclear power plant in
Jiangsu province, The Moscow Times reports.

The firm built the two 1,000 megawatt reactors at the plant, which
began operation in May and July, respectively, this year. Each
reactor costs about $2 billion and is about a five-year project.

“The Tianwan atomic station has become a glittering example of
mutually beneficial cooperation between China and Russia in the
sphere of nuclear energy,” Atomstroyexport said in a statement.

Tenex, Russia’s state-owned fuel company, will build a
500,000-unit gas centrifuge enrichment facility to make the uranium
needed for the nuclear plants.


� 2007 United Press International. All Rights Reserved.
*****************************************************************
 16 The Guardian: Clean-up of nuclear power stations in disarray 

* Nov 8 2007: Today's paper

Plans to speed up the dismantling of Britain's atomic power stations
were in disarray last night after the Nuclear Decommissioning
Authority admitted it was slowing down the clean-up process owing to
soaring costs and fuel reprocessing problems at Sellafield.

One private clean-up company has already switched staff to a
four-day week. In a separate development, shares in the country's
main nuclear generator, British Energy, dropped 10% after it
discovered more safety problems and could not say when four affected
reactors would be brought back on stream.

The problems will do little to create confidence in the nuclear
industry at a time when the government needs to convince a sceptical
public that new atomic plants might be needed to provide energy
security for the UK.

The NDA said it had been given an �8.5bn budget by the Treasury for
the next three years - an increase of �671m compared with the last
three years - but made clear that this was not enough to deal with a
total clean-up bill that it now estimates at �73bn, 16% higher than
12 months ago.

"So the key strategic challenges now facing us are how do we address
hazard reduction in a pressurised funding environment?" the NDA
asked in its business plan, before saying it would need to
prioritise funds on the most complex and difficult sites, Sellafield
and Dounreay.

The NDA admitted its task was complicated by "logistical issues" at
Sellafield which means it will not be possible to defuel the 11
Magnox stations within the original timetable. "It is likely that
the reprocessing of Magnox spent fuel at Sellafield, which was due
to be completed by around 2012, will not be completed until 2016 or
later," it explained.

The difficulties have been spelled out just a few weeks after the
NDA suspended the planned competition process to put out to private
tender work on several reactors grouped together under a Magnox
South licence. It denied that this was connected to funding problems.

Nick Baldwin, the NDA's interim chairman, denied that it was a
"gloom and doom" scenario facing the agency just two-and-a-half
years after it was established with a mission to increase efficiency
and speed up the national clean-up process.

"Its always possible to look at things with the glass half empty but
we have a success here. We have had been given more money in a very
tough spending round and while we had aspirations to accelerate the
pace of decommissioning we are dealing safely and efficiently with
one of the nation's most challenging issues," he explained.

But the unions expressed anger at a situation which they fear will
lead to hundreds of redundancies and destroy the UK's nuclear skills
base. Mike Graham, general secretary of the biggest nuclear industry
union, Prospect, said: "The NDA's strategy is in tatters. This
revised business plan reflects heavily on the problems but does not
provide any solutions. It strongly promotes the idea of diverting
monies from Magnox decommissioning sites to Sellafield high-hazard
reduction, but does not deal with the consequences of such actions.

"The revised plan leaves Magnox hanging in the balance and risks
losing the confidence of local stakeholders, for which industry has
fought hard. There is no detailed examination of the cost of meeting
the severance terms for employees on the sites where clean-up will
be suspended, or recognition of how overall costs will soar for
every year decommissioning is put on hold."

Meanwhile British Energy said it had discovered a corroded wire in a
reactor at its Heysham 1 plant similar to a problem discovered at a
Hartlepool reactor last month.

* Guardian Unlimited � Guardian News and Media Limited 2007
*****************************************************************
 17 Times Union: Nuclear reactor given cyber shape -- 

Albany NY

RPI supercomputer is part of $3 million effort to develop more
efficient source of atomic energy

 
By BRIAN NEARING, Staff writer
Click byline for more stories by writer.
First published: Wednesday, November 7, 2007
TROY -- Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute is using the world's
seventh most powerful supercomputer on a $3 million
government-funded project to design a more efficient nuclear reactor
to make electricity.


  
The head of the project, engineering physics professor Michael
Podowski, expects nuclear power to expand in the U.S. under efforts
to combat global warming by reducing the number of fossil-fuel-fired
power plants.

RPI will use its massive computing power to create a working model
of a sodium-cooled fast reactor, which is capable of using spent
nuclear waste from earlier reactor models, as well as weapons-grade
nuclear plutonium.

"This could be a reality in 10 or 15 years from now," Podowski said.
"Other people will take it from where we take it. There will
eventually be a design and a pilot reactor on a small scale."

Nuclear reactors produce no emissions of carbon dioxide, a known
greenhouse gas released by burning of oil, coal and natural gas that
is driving global warming.

The issue of nuclear power has caused a schism within the
environmental movement, with most saying storage of long-lived
nuclear waste is too dangerous while a vocal minority argues that
the growing immediate danger of global warming requires a greater
reliance on nuclear power.

About half of U.S. electricity is produced by coal-fired plants. In
New York state, that figure is about 15 percent.

Under the three-year project, Podowski's design team will use both
RPI's Computational Center for Nanotechnology Innovations -- the
world's seventh most powerful supercomputer -- and Brookhaven
National Laboratory's New York Blue, which is the world's fifth most
powerful supercomputer.

"The idea is to design reactors that can use this material and that
are safe," Podowski said. "With this project, we are trying to
improve the understanding of the physics of the system in order to
provide the necessary advancements for the design of new, safer and
better reactors."

Along with Rensselaer and Brookhaven, the partnership includes
researchers from Columbia University and the State University at
Stony Brook. It is being paid for under a grant from the U.S.
Department of Energy.

"Nuclear reactors are safe, but nothing is perfect," Podowski said.
"So the issue is to anticipate what could happen, understand how it
could happen, and then take actions to both prevent it from
happening and, in the extremely unlikely instance of an accident, be
able to mitigate the consequences."

Other members of the design team include RPI professors Kenneth
Jansen, Li Liu and Steven Antal, as well as James Glimm from Stony
Brook; David Keyes from Columbia University; and Lap Cheng and Roman
Samulyak from Brookhaven National Laboratory.

All Times Union materials copyright 1996-2007, Capital Newspapers
Division of The Hearst Corporation, Albany, N.Y.
*****************************************************************
 18 The Telegraph: To Russia, with nuclear reactor love

- Manmohan cuts short trip, but Moscow willing to seal agreement

JYOTI MALHOTRA

Singh, Putin: N-friends?

New Delhi, Nov. 7: Prime Minister Manmohan Singh is cutting short
his two-day trip to Moscow early next week by 12 hours, but Russia
is ready to sign a path-breaking nuclear agreement with India during
this visit.

According to highly placed sources, the two sides will upgrade the
memorandum of intent on nuclear energy co-operation � signed during
the visit of Russian President Vladimir Putin to India in January �
to an inter-governmental agreement.

Anil Kakodkar, the chief of the atomic energy department, will
accompany the Prime Minister to Moscow on November 11.

Over the past couple of years, as India and the US negotiated the
nuclear deal that has now run into hurdles, Kakodkar built himself a
reputation by playing a tough hand. His presence on the Moscow
flight signals he is fully on board the Indo-Russian nuclear pact.

The inter-governmental agreement will use the cover of the ongoing
nuclear energy co-operation at Kudankulam in Tamil Nadu � Russia is
building two 1000MW light water nuclear reactors at the site � to
sell another four reactors to India. Moscow is keen on going ahead
with this agreement despite the cloud over the Indo-US nuclear deal
and, therefore, the existing restrictions imposed by the Nuclear
Suppliers Group (NSG).

Analysts said Putin, aware that the Indian elite were increasingly
veering towards the US, wanted to signal a return to the older
strategic friendship.

The signing of the nuclear agreement will mark a breakthrough in
bilateral relations, recently beset by reports of snubs and protocol
breaches.

From stories about foreign minister Pranab Mukherjee being ?frisked?
at the Moscow airport last month to uncharacteristic changes in
Kremlin banquet timings for the Prime Minister � from dinner to late
lunch � reports have implied that India?s ?special relationship?
with Russia was at risk.

Delhi did not officially deny any of the reports, thus signalling a
cooling down in ties.

It was speculated that Delhi, single-mindedly focused on the Indo-US
deal, was either not interested in Russia or was unhappy over the
long delays in the delivery of spares and new equipment ordered for
its armed forces, such as the aircraft carrier Admiral Gorshkov.

When the Prime Minister decided to cut short his 36-hour visit by
about 12 hours � he was to leave Moscow on the morning of November
13, but will now do so the night before � to many it seemed the
Russian winter had finally invaded bilateral ties.

However, it now appears that the two scientific establishments have
been quietly working towards putting substance in nuclear energy
cooperation.

The Russian side had told India when Putin visited in January, as
the chief guest for Republic Day, that Moscow would only sell the
four additional nuclear reactors for Kudankulam if NSG cleared the
Indo-US deal. But things seem to have now moved on.

So when the inter-governmental agreement on nuclear energy
co-operation is signed on November 12, after official-level talks in
the Kremlin and before a short news conference, Moscow will be
signalling it does not need NSG clearance to do so.

 Copyright � 2006 The Telegraph. All rights reserved. Disclaimer |
*****************************************************************
 19 The Telegraph: Cloud on N-panel meet

Calcutta : Nation

  |  Thursday, November 08, 2007 | Advertise with us


OUR BUREAU

New Delhi, Nov. 7: The UPA-Left panel on the nuclear deal is
unlikely to meet on November 16. Indications are that the next
sitting could be held early next month.

Congress leaders are keen to ensure that the discussions of the
panel, which has met five times with little success, and the nuke
deal itself should not cast a shadow on the November 17 AICC
session, where Rahul Gandhi will be showcased as the future leader
of the party.

Sources said the panel?s meeting on the eve of the session might
leave an air of uncertainty over the proceedings, given the
perception that the Left had said or done nothing to indicate it had
softened its stance.

The Congress leaders also felt it was better to wait for the debate
on the deal in Parliament?s winter session, starting November 15,
before getting the panel to meet again.

If the Left persisted with its criticism of the deal in the House,
the sources said the ?futility? of the panel would become obvious in
public. ?It will reduce the mechanism (the panel) to a farce,? said
a cabinet minister.

But if the Left was restrained and smaller parties such as the CPI
and Forward Bloc, among the stronger critics of the deal, did not
launch personal attacks on Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, it would
make sense to carry on with the meetings of the panel, the sources
said.

CPM general secretary Prakash Karat had said in his recent interview
to The Telegraph that the Left was ?ready (for the panel) to meet
again if it helped arrive at some findings?.

But several leaders in the government and the Congress were of the
view that the committee?s continuance would depend on the outcome
and the tone of the debate in Parliament.

The Prime Minister has already told UPA allies about his displeasure
at the manner in which some of them endorsed the accord in the
cabinet but later questioned it outside after the Left stepped up
its protests.

 Copyright � 2006 The Telegraph. All rights reserved. Disclaimer |
*****************************************************************
 20 Bulgaria: Brussels Denies Clearing Bulgaria Belene N-Plant Project

7 November 2007, Wednesday

The European Commission has not given its greenlight for Bulgaria 
to build a nuclear power plant at Belene. Photo by Parsons E&C 
Bulgaria

The European Commission has not given its greenlight for Bulgaria to
build a nuclear power plant at Belene, a spokesman of EU Energy
Commissioner Andris Piebalgs said on Wednesday.

The spokesman reacted to a statement of Bulgaria's power grid
operator NEK, which claimed the European Commission's
directorate-general for energy and transport has approved its
contract with Russia's Atomstroyexport.

"Since the deal was signed last year, just a month before Bulgaria
joined the EU in January, it needed the express approval of the
European executive to go through," said NEK statement, released on
Tuesday.

Talking to journalists in Brussels Ferran Tarradellas stressed that
the process of approval takes time, but refused to say when a final
decision can be expected.

NEK will own 51% of the company that will build and operate the
plant, with the remaining 49% put for sale in a tender that has
Czech CEZ, German E.ON and RWE, Belgian Electrabel and Italy's Enel
all vying for it.

After the European Commission gives its approval, Bulgaria can apply
for a government-underwritten EUR 300 M loan from the EU's Euratom
agency.

It plans to borrow a similar amount from the European Investment
Bank (EIB), as well, and government officials have earlier claimed
that they have already secured EUR 250 M in funding for the plant
from BNP Paribas.

The total construction costs for the plant, which will feature two
1000 MW third-generation Russian reactors built by Atomstroyexport,
are estimated at EUR 4 B.

Bulgaria decided to unfreeze its plans to build the plant in 2004,
having mothballed them a decade and a half earlier, to compensate
for shutting down four older Soviet reactors at its Kozloduy
facility at the request of the EU.

 novinite.com  Forum  Google  Tourism  Business  MobileBulgaria     

All Rights Reserved � Novinite Ltd., 2001-2007 - Copyright &

Bulgaria news Novinite.com (Sofia News Agency - 
www.sofianewsagency.com) is unique with being a real time news 
provider in English that informs its readers about the latest 
Bulgarian news. The editorial staff also publishes a daily online 
newspaper "Sofia Morning News." Novinite.com (Sofia News Agency - 
www.sofianewsagency.com) and Sofia Morning News publish the 
*****************************************************************
 21 Folsom Telegraph: Toxic cleanup plan published for Mather area

By: Roger Phelps
Tuesday, November 6, 2007

Still working on a contamination problem learned of 10 years ago 
at a rocket-test site near the former Mather Air Force Base, the 
state has a comprehensive cleanup plan on which it invites public 
comment.

Several interim cleanup actions of rocket-fuel residue in water have
already come at the former test site. McDonnell Douglas Corp. and
Aerojet-General Corp. tested rocket engines there between 1956 and
1969. Cleanup of toxic perchlorate and trichloroethene in
groundwater began in 2002 and expanded in 2005 and 2006.

"The principal contaminant is perchlorate," said project manager Ed
Cargile of the state Department of Toxic Substances Control.



Perchlorate is used as an oxidizer in rocket fuel. In humans and
other animals, it can temporarily block the thyroid gland's ability
to absorb iodine from the bloodstream.

Cargile said a significant consideration in the cleanup plan is
minimizing a transfer of contaminants to layers of groundwater that
currently remain comparatively uncontaminated.

"It's a three-layer problem," Cargile said. "The surface to bottom
of a first layer is contaminated, a second layer is not, and then a
deeper layer is contaminated. It's a complication. It's important we
operate any cleanup to not pull down the upper layer into the clear
layer."

Only comparatively little mingling of the layers is occurring
naturally, Cargile said. Use of groundwater has been prohibited for
years in a sizable area around what is now Mather Field.

"n late January and early February 1997, Aerojet detected 
perchlorate in five off-site public drinking water wells west of 
Aerojet and north of Mather," a California Department of Health 
Services report states. When testing by Aerojet showed that Main 
Base well 2 had a level of 120 parts per billion perchlorate, the 
well was taken off-line in March 1997, according to a report from 
the state Department of Health. Mather Main Base well 1 was 
reported to have a perchlorate level of 67 ppb and it was also 
taken off-line in March 1997.

The draft plan proposes to add as many as 22 new extraction wells 
in the test site-base area and nearly 10,000 feet of new 
pipeline. In addition, although Sacramento County well permits 
have been unavailable in the area since pollution was discovered, 
Cargile said, the draft plan proposes land-use covenants to 
prevent use of groundwater.

The state has extended a public comment period, originally to 
have closed Oct. 26, on a Draft Remedial Action Plan, Cargile 
said.

Now, extended public-comment period runs through Nov. 26 on the 
draft plan. The draft plan is available for review at Rancho 
Cordova Public Library, 9845 Folsom Blvd., Rancho Cordova and by 
appointment in the toxics department's file archive, 8800 Cal 
Center Drive, Sacramento. For appointments, call 255-3779.


The Telegraph's Roger Phelps can be reached at 
rogerp@goldcountrymedia.com , or post a comment at 
folsomtelegraph.com

    
Contents of this site are all Copyright � 2007 Gold Country Media.
All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 22 DHHS: advisory committe nominations

FR Doc E7-21824

[Federal Register: November 7, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 215)] 
[Notices] [Page 62856-62857] From the Federal Register Online via 
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr07no07-55]                         

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Solicitation of Nominations for Membership on the Secretary's 
Advisory Committee on Human Research Protections

AGENCY: Department of Health and Human Services, Office of the 
Secretary, Office of Public Health and Science.

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 217a, section 222 of the Public Health 
Service Act, as amended. The Committee is governed by the provisions 
of Public Law 92-463, as amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), which sets 
forth standards for the formation and use of advisory committees.

SUMMARY: The Office for Human Research Protections (OHRP), a program 
office in the Office of Public Health and Science, Department of Health 
and Human Services (HHS), is seeking nominations of qualified 
candidates to be considered for appointment as members of the 
Secretary's Advisory Committee on Human Research Protections (SACHRP). 
SACHRP provides advice and recommendations to the Secretary, HHS, and 
the Assistant Secretary for Health on matters pertaining to the 
continuance and improvement of functions within the authority of HHS 
directed toward protections for human subjects in research. SACHRP was 
established by the Secretary, HHS, on October 1, 2002. OHRP is seeking 
nominations of qualified candidates to fill five positions on the 
Committee membership that will be vacated at scheduled intervals during 
the 2008 calendar year.

DATES: Nominations for membership on the Committee must be received no 
later than December 7, 2007.

ADDRESSES: Nominations should be mailed or delivered to: Dr. Ivor 
Pritchard, Acting Director, Office for Human Research Protections, 
Department of Health and Human Services, 1101 Wootton Parkway, Suite 
200; Rockville, MD 20852. Nominations will not be accepted by e-mail or 
by facsimile.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Kevin Prohaska, Acting Executive 
Director, SACHRP, Office for Human Research Protections, 1101 Wootton 
Parkway, Suite 200, Rockville, MD 20852, telephone: 240-453-8231. A 
copy of the Committee charter and list of the current members can be 
obtained by contacting Dr. Prohaska, accessing the SACHRP Web site at 
http://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/sachrp, or requesting via e-mail at 
sachrp@osophs.dhhs.gov.


SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Committee provides advice on matters 
pertaining to the continuance and improvement of functions within the 
authority of HHS directed toward protections for human subjects in 
research. Specifically, the Committee provides advice relating to the 
responsible conduct of research involving human subjects with 
particular emphasis on special populations such as neonates and 
children, prisoners, the decisionally impaired, pregnant women, embryos 
and fetuses, individuals and populations in international studies, 
investigator conflicts of interest and populations in which there are 
individually identifiable samples, data, or information.
    In addition, the Committee is responsible for reviewing selected 
ongoing work and planned activities of the OHRP and other offices/
agencies within HHS responsible for human subjects protection. These 
evaluations may include, but are not limited to, a review of assurance 
systems, the application of minimal research risk standards, the 
granting of waivers, education programs sponsored by OHRP, and the 
ongoing monitoring and oversight of institutional review boards and the 
institutions that sponsor research.
    Nominations: The Office for Human Research Protections is 
requesting nominations to fill five positions for voting members of 
SACHRP. The five positions will become vacant at scheduled intervals 
during the 2008 calendar year. Nominations of potential candidates for 
consideration are being sought from a wide array of fields, including, 
but not limited to: Public health and medicine, behavioral and social 
sciences, health administration, and biomedical ethics. To qualify for 
consideration of appointment to the Committee, an individual must 
possess demonstrated experience and expertise in any of the several 
disciplines and fields pertinent to human subjects protection and/or 
clinical research.
    The individuals selected for appointment to the Committee can be 
invited to serve a term of up to four years. Committee members receive 
a stipend and reimbursement for per diem and any travel expenses 
incurred for attending Committee meetings and/or conducting other 
business in the interest of the Committee.
    Nominations should be typewritten. The following information should 
be included in the package of material submitted for each individual 
being nominated for consideration: (1) A letter of nomination that 
clearly states the name and affiliation of the nominee, the basis for 
the nomination (i.e., specific attributes which qualify the nominee for 
service in this capacity), and a statement that the nominee is willing 
to serve as a member of the Committee; (2) the nominator's name, 
address and daytime telephone number, and the home and/or work address, 
telephone number, and email address of the individual being nominated; 
and (3) a current copy of the nominee's curriculum vitae. Federal 
employees should not be nominated for consideration of appointment to 
this Committee.
    The Department makes every effort to ensure that the membership of 
HHS Federal advisory committees is fairly balanced in terms of points 
of view represented and the committee's function. Every effort is made 
to ensure that individuals from a broad representation of geographic 
areas, women and men, ethnic and minority groups, and the disabled are 
given consideration for membership on HHS Federal advisory committees. 
Appointment to this Committee shall be made without discrimination on 
the basis of age, race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, 
disability, and

[[Page 62857]]

cultural, religious, or socioeconomic status.
    Documentation must be included in the nomination to indicate that 
the nominated individual is willing to serve as a member of SACHRP. 
Individuals who are selected to be considered for appointment will be 
required to provide detailed information regarding their financial 
holdings, consultancies, and research grants or contracts. Disclosure 
of this information is necessary in order to determine if the selected 
candidate is involved in any activity that may pose a potential 
conflict with the official duties to be performed as a member of 
SACHRP.

    Dated: October 31, 2007.
Ivor A. Pritchard,
Acting Director, Office for Human Research Protections, Acting 
Executive Secretary, Secretary's Advisory Committee on Human Research 
Protections.
[FR Doc. E7-21824 Filed 11-6-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4150-36-P


*****************************************************************
 23 NAS: Project: Beryllium Alloy Exposures in Military Aerospace Applications

Project Title:

PIN: BEST-K-05-03-A        

Major Unit:

 Division on Earth and Life Studies

Sub Unit: Board on Environmental Studies and Toxicology

RSO: Martel, Susan

Subject/Focus Area: 

Project Scope
An ad hoc committee under the oversight of the standing Committee on
Toxicology (COT) will conduct this study. In its first report, the
committee will provide an independent review of the toxicologic,
epidemiologic, and other relevant data on beryllium. The committee
will also review carcinogenic and non-carcinogenic effects. In its
second report, the committee will estimate chronic inhalation
exposure levels for military personnel and civilian contractor
workers that are unlikely to produce adverse health effects. The
committee will provide carcinogenic risk estimates for various
inhalation exposure levels. The committee will consider genetic
susceptibility among worker subpopulations. If sufficient data are
available, the committee will evaluate whether beryllium-alloy
exposure levels should be different than those of other forms of
beryllium because of differences in particle size. The committee
will identify specific tests for workers surveillance and
biomonitoring. The committee will also comment on the utility of the
beryllium lymphocyte proliferation test (BeLPT). Specifically the
committee will determine (1) the value of the borderline or a true
positive test in predicting CBD, (2) its utility in worker's
surveillance, (3) further follow up tests for workers with positive
BeLPT (thin slice CT bronchoscopy, biopsy, etc.), (4) the likelihood
of developing CBD after a true positive test, and (5) a standardized
methodology to achieve consistent test results from different
laboratories. The committee will evaluate whether there are more
suitable tests that would have more accuracy as screening or
surveillance tools. The committee will also identify data gaps
relevant to risk assessment of beryllium alloys and make
recommendations for further research.

The project is sponsored by the U.S. Air Force.

Start date: September 29, 2006.

The first report will be issued in 12 months, and the final report
in approximately 24 months.

Project duration: 24 months
 
Provide FEEDBACK on this project.

Contact the Public Access Records Office to make an inquiry or to
schedule an appointment to view project materials available to the
public.
 
Committee Membership

Meetings
 Meeting 1 - 02/05/2007
 Meeting 2 - 04/05/2007


Reports
Reports having no URL can be seen
at the Public Access Records Office

 Health Effects of Beryllium Exposure: A Literature Review

 Email: info@nas.edu
*****************************************************************
 24 Ahmadinejad: 3,000 centrifuges running
 
Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2007 09:54:10 -0600 (CST)

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1192380756670&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

Nov 7, 2007 11:00

Ahmadinejad: 3,000 centrifuges running
By ASSOCIATED PRESS
BIRJAND, Iran

Iran has achieved a landmark, with 3,000 centrifuges fully working in its
controversial uranium enrichment program, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad
announced Wednesday.

Iran's nuclear enrichment facility in Natanz.
Photo: AP [file]

"We have now reached 3,000 machines," Ahmadinejad told thousands of
Iranians gathered in Birjand, in eastern Iran, in a show of defiance of
international demands to halt the program believed to be masking the
country's nuclear arms efforts.

Ahmadinejad has in the past claimed that Iran succeeded in installing the
3,000 centrifuges at its uranium enrichment facility at Natanz. But
Wednesday's claim was his first official statement that the plant is now
fully operating all those centrifuges.

When Iran first announced launching the 3,000 centrifuges in April, the UN
nuclear watchdog agency, the International Atomic Energy Agency, said
Teheran had only 328 centrifuges up and running at Natanz's underground
facility.
RELATED

    * Mofaz: 2008 is decisive for stopping Iran's nuclear drive
    * Prodi: 'Iran can have peaceful nuclear program'

In a recent report, drawn up by IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradei, the agency
put the number of centrifuges working in Natanz at close to 2,000, with
another 650 being tested.

Uranium gas, spun in linked centrifuges, can result in either low-enriched
fuel suitable to generate power in a nuclear reactor, or the weapons-grade
material that forms the fissile core of nuclear warheads.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad delivers a speech.
Photo: AP

The US and some of its Western allies believe Iran is using its civilian
nuclear program as a cover for weapons' development. Teheran denies this,
insisting its nuclear program is geared toward generating electricity, not
a nuclear bomb.

US experts say 3,000 centrifuges are in theory enough to produce a nuclear
weapon, perhaps as soon as within a year.

Iran says it plans to expand its enrichment program to up to 54,000
centrifuges at Natanz in central Iran - which would amount to the level of
industrial-scale uranium enrichment.
Two rounds of UN Security Council sanctions have failed to persuade Iran
to halt the enrichment.

Ahmadinejad on Wednesday reiterated his rejection of any suspension of
Iran's enrichment activities, or even a compromise over how Teheran will
proceed beyond the 3,000 centrifuges.

"They say they've swallowed (bitterly accepted) these 3,000 and want to
reach an agreement with us on what to do, at what speed, how many
(centrifuges) a day or week," Ahmadinejad said of latest Western
pressures.

"Our response is: 'Who are you to make comments about the Iranian nation
.. do we ask you how many machines you have,"' Ahmadinejad added.
He also said he had bluntly refused a recent offer to negotiate with the
United States over Iran's nuclear activities.

"I, as your representative, told those who brought the message that we
didn't ask for talks ... If talks are to be held, it is the Iranian nation
that has to set conditions, not the arrogant and the criminals,"
Ahmadinejad said.

"The world must know that this nation will not give up one iota of its
nuclear rights ... if they think they can get concessions from this
nation, they are badly mistaken," he concluded.

Iran says it is fully within its rights to pursue the enrichment to
produce fuel under the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty.
*****************************************************************
 25 [epa-impact] Nuclear Fuel Services, Inc., Environmental Assessment
 
Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2007 11:49:10 -0500

http://www.epa.gov/EPA-IMPACT/2007/November/Day-07/  
=======================================================================

[Federal Register: November 7, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 215)]
[Notices]              
[Page 62880-62883]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr07no07-91]                        

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 70-143]

Nuclear Fuel Services, Inc., Environmental Assessment and Finding
of No Significant Impact Related to Proposed License Amendment
Authorizing Increased Possession Limit

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kevin M. Ramsey, Fuel Manufacturing
Branch, Division of Fuel Cycle Safety and Safeguards, Office of Nuclear
Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Mail Stop E-2C40M, Washington, DC 20555-0001, telephone (301) 492-3123
and e-mail <A HREF="mailto:kmr@nrc.gov">kmr@nrc.gov</A>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Introduction

    The U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff is considering
a request to amend Materials License SNM-124, issued to Nuclear Fuel
Services, Inc. (NFS) (the licensee), to authorize an increase in the
possession limit of high-enriched uranium (HEU). The NRC has prepared an

[[Page 62881]]

Environmental Assessment (EA) in support of this action. Based upon the
EA, the NRC has concluded that a Finding of No Significant Impact
(FONSI) is appropriate and, therefore, an Environmental Impact
Statement (EIS) will not be prepared.

II. Environmental Assessment

Background

    The NFS facility in Erwin, Tennessee is authorized, under License
SNM-124, to manufacture high-enriched nuclear reactor fuel. In
addition, NFS is authorized to blend HEU with natural uranium and
manufacture low-enriched nuclear reactor fuel. License SNM-124 limits
the amount of HEU that NFS may possess for these operations. On May 15,
2007, NFS requested a license amendment to increase its possession
limit of HEU (Ref. 5).

Review Scope

    The purpose of this EA is to assess the environmental impacts of
the proposed license amendment. It does not approve the request. This
EA is limited to the proposed possession limit increase and any
cumulative impacts to existing plant operations. The existing
conditions and operations at the Erwin facility were evaluated, by the
NRC, for environmental impacts in a 1999 EA related to the renewal of
the NFS license (Ref. 1), and a 2002 EA related to the first amendment
for the Blended Low-Enriched Uranium (BLEU) Project (Ref. 2). The 2002
EA assessed the impact of the entire BLEU Project, using the
information available at that time. A 2003 EA (Ref. 3) and a 2004 EA
(Ref. 4), related to additional BLEU Project amendments confirmed the
FONSI issued in 2002. This assessment presents information and an
analysis for determining that the issuance of a FONSI is appropriate
and that an EIS will not be prepared.

Proposed Action

    The proposed action is to amend NRC Materials License SNM-124, to
authorize an increase in the possession limit for uranium enriched up
to 100 weight percent in the uranium-235 isotope (Ref. 5). The proposed
action is limited to possession and storage only. No changes to
processing operations are requested, and no construction of new
facilities are requested.

Need for Proposed Action

    The proposed action is being requested because a larger inventory
of HEU is needed to support NFS operations. Two factors are driving
this need. One factor is a request from the U.S. Department of Energy
(DOE) that NFS establish an inventory of HEU that would allow
continuous operations for six to twelve months of processes that
support DOE programs. This would allow NFS to continue operating if an
increased threat level or other incidents required shipments of HEU to
be interrupted or curtailed. Another factor is the lower-than-planned
processing rate at the Blended Low-Enriched Uranium Preparation
Facility (BPF). BPF operations support commercial programs that are
separate from DOE programs. Difficulties with BPF equipment and
operations have caused delays and low processing rates. This has
created a backlog of material in storage because material is being
received faster than it is being processed.

Alternatives

    The alternatives available to the NRC are:
    1. Approve the license amendment as described; or
    2. No action (i.e., deny the request).

Affected Environment

    The affected environment for the proposed action and the
alternative is the NFS site. The affected environment is identical to
the affected environment assessed in the 2002 EA that is related to the
first amendment for the BLEU Project (Ref. 2). A full description of
the site and its characteristics is given in the 2002 EA. Additional
information can be found in the 1999 EA related to the renewal of the
NFS license (Ref. 1). The NFS facility is located in Unicoi County,
Tennessee, about 32 km (20 mi) southwest of Johnson City, Tennessee.
The plant is about 0.8 km (0.5 mi) southwest of the Erwin city limits.
The site occupies about 28 hectares (70 acres). The site is bounded to
the northwest by the CSX Corporation (CSX) railroad property and the
Nolichucky River, and by Martin Creek to the northeast. The plant
elevation is about 9 m (30 ft) above the nearest point on the
Nolichucky River.
    The area adjacent to the site consists primarily of residential,
industrial, and commercial areas, with a limited amount of farming to
the northwest. Privately owned residences are located to the east and
south of the facility. Tract size is relatively large, leading to a low
housing density in the areas adjacent to the facility. The CSX railroad
right-of-way is parallel to the western boundary of the site.
Industrial development is located adjacent to the railroad on the
opposite side of the right-of-way. The site is bounded by Martin Creek
to the north, with privately owned, vacant property and low-density
residences.

Effluent Releases and Monitoring

    A full description of the effluent monitoring program at the site
is provided in the 2002 EA, related to the first amendment for the BLEU
Project (Ref. 2). Additional information is available in the 1999 EA
related to the renewal of the NFS license (Ref. 1). The NFS Erwin plant
conducts effluent and environmental monitoring programs to evaluate
potential public health impacts and comply with the NRC effluent and
environmental monitoring requirements. The effluent program monitors
the airborne, liquid, and solid waste streams produced during operation
of the NFS plant. The environmental program monitors the air, surface
water, sediment, soil, groundwater, and vegetation in and around the
NFS plant.
    Airborne, liquid, and solid effluent streams that contain
radioactive material are generated at the NFS plant and monitored to
ensure compliance with the NRC regulations in 10 CFR Part 20. Each
effluent is monitored at or just before the point of release. The
results of effluent monitoring are reported to the NRC on a semi-annual
basis, in accordance with 10 CFR 70.59.
    Airborne and liquid effluents are also monitored for
nonradiological constituents in accordance with State discharge
permits. For the purpose of this EA, the State of Tennessee is expected
to set limits on effluents, under its regulatory control, that are
protective of health and safety and the local environment.

Impacts of Proposed Action

1. Normal Operations
    The proposed action is limited to increasing the authorized amount
of HEU in storage. No construction of new facilities is proposed and no
changes to processing operations have been requested. Based on the
information provided by NFS, the safety controls to be employed for the
proposed action, appear to be sufficient to ensure that planned
operations will have no significant impact on the environment.
    Radiological Impacts: The proposed action involves no changes to
processing operations. No increase is expected in effluent air
emissions discharged through stacks at the site. In addition, no
increase is expected in liquid effluents discharged to the sanitary
sewer. Therefore, the proposed action will have no impact on the total
annual dose estimate for the maximally exposed individual from all planned

[[Page 62882]]

effluents. The dose to workers may increase slightly because more
radioactive material will be stored at the site. However, occupational
dose is monitored and controlled in accordance with applicable NRC
regulations; therefore, no adverse impacts are expected. Surface water
quality at the NFS site is currently protected by enforcing release
limits and monitoring programs. No change in surface water impacts is
expected. The proposed action will not discharge any effluents to the
groundwater; therefore, no adverse impacts to groundwater are expected.
    The proposed action involves transportation of radioactive feed
material to the NFS site, which will lead to transportation of
radioactive products and waste material from the NFS site. All
transportation will be conducted in accordance with the applicable NRC
and U.S. Department of Transportation regulations; therefore, no
adverse impacts from transportation activities are expected.
    Land Use: The proposed action involves storage of radioactive
material at existing facilities. No new facilities will be constructed;
therefore, no adverse impact to land use is expected.
    Cultural Resources: The proposed action involves storage of
radioactive material at existing facilities. The NRC staff considers
this a type of activity that does not have the potential to affect
historic properties. No adverse impact to cultural resources is expected.
    Biotic Resources: The proposed action will not change current land
use or effluents at the site. Therefore, the NRC finds that the proposed
action will not affect any Federally endangered or threatened species.
2. Potential Accidents
    The proposed action will not result in any new or modified accident
sequences. The Integrated Safety Analysis performed by NFS already
considers all authorized storage locations to be filled to maximum
capacity with HEU. The NRC finds that the safety controls to be
employed in the proposed action are sufficient to ensure planned
activities will be safe.
3. Cumulative Impacts
    The NRC has considered the impacts of the proposed action together
with the known impacts of the existing facility. After reviewing the
information provided, the NRC concludes that the cumulative impacts
represent an insignificant change to the existing conditions in the
area surrounding the NFS site.

Impacts of No Action Alternative

    Under the no action alternative, NFS would not be able to increase
its inventory of HEU to support current operations. This would require
NFS to stop receiving HEU shipments until enough material has been
processed and removed from the site before another shipment could be
received. Failure to fulfill its role in government and commercial
programs could cause NFS's customers to select other alternatives that
may be less cost effective and incur greater environmental impacts. If
NFS is unable to fulfill its contractual obligations, customers may
transfer work to other facilities.

Conclusion

    Based on its review, the NRC has concluded that the environmental
impacts associated with the proposed action are not significant and,
therefore, do not warrant denial of the proposed license amendment. The
NRC has determined that the proposed action, the approval of the
license amendment as described, is the appropriate alternative for
selection. Based on an evaluation of the environmental impacts of the
proposed license amendment, the NRC has determined that the proper
action is to issue a FONSI.

Agencies and Persons Contacted

    On September 21, 2007, the NRC staff contacted the Deputy Director
of the Division of Radiological Health at the Tennessee Department of
Environment and Conservation (TDEC) concerning this EA. On October 1,
2007, the Deputy Director responded that TDEC reviewed the draft EA and
had no comments (Ref. 6).
    The NRC staff has determined that the proposed action will not
affect listed species or critical habitat. Therefore, no consultation
is required under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act. Likewise,
the NRC staff has determined that the proposed action is not the type
of activity that has the potential to cause effects on historic
properties. Therefore, no consultation is required, under Section 106
of the National Historic Preservation Act.

References

    1. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, ``Environmental
Assessment for Renewal of Special Nuclear Material License No. SNM-
124,'' January 1999, ADAMS No. ML031150418
    2. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, ``Environmental Assessment
for Proposed License Amendments to Special Nuclear Material License
No. SNM-124 Regarding Downblending and Oxide Conversion of Surplus
High-Enriched Uranium,'' June 2002, ADAMS No. ML021790068.
    3. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, ``Environmental
Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact for the BLEU
Preparation Facility,'' September 2003, ADAMS No. ML032390428.
    4. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, ``Environmental
Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact for the Oxide
Conversion Building and the Effluent Processing Building at the BLEU
Complex,'' June 2004, ADAMS No. ML041470176.
    5. Nuclear Fuel Services, ``Amendment Request to Increase the U-
235 Possession Limit for the NFS Site,'' May 15, 2007, ADAMS No.
ML072550166.
    6. D. Shults, Tennessee Division of Radiological Health, e-mail
to K. Ramsey, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, ``Consultation
with Tennessee on EA for NFS Possession Limit Increase,'' October 1,
2007, ADAMS No. ML072760398.

III. Finding of No Significant Impact

    Pursuant to 10 CFR Part 51, the NRC staff has considered the
environmental consequences of amending NRC Materials License SNM-124 to
increase the possession limit for the NFS facility. On the basis of
this assessment, the Commission has concluded that environmental
impacts associated with the proposed action would not be significant
and the Commission is making a finding of no significant impact.
Accordingly, the preparation of an EIS is not warranted.

IV. Further Information

    Documents related to this action, including the application for
amendment and supporting documentation, are available electronically at
the NRC's Electronic Reading Room at <A HREF="http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html">http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/
adams.html</A>. 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 ADAMS accession numbers for
the documents related to this notice are listed in the references
above. 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 <A HREF="mailto:pdr@nrc.gov">pdr@nrc.gov</A>.
    These documents may also be viewed electronically on the public
computers located at the NRC's Public Document Room (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 Rockville, Maryland this 25th day of October, 2007.

[[Page 62883]]

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Peter J. Habighorst,
Chief, Fuel Manufacturing Branch, Fuel Facility Licensing Directorate,
Division of Fuel Cycle Safety and Safeguards, Office of Nuclear
Material Safety and Safeguards.
[FR Doc. E7-21861 Filed 11-6-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P

------------------------------------------

http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-IMPACT/index.html
Comments: http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/comments.htm
Search: http://epa.gov/fedreg/search.htm
EPA's Federal Register: http://epa.gov/fedreg/

------------------------------------------
You are currently subscribed to epa-impact as: NEWS@energy-net.org

To unsubscribe, send a blank email to leave-epa-impact-485116N@lists.epa.gov
OR:
Use the listserver's web interface at https://lists.epa.gov/read/all_forums/ to manage your subscription.

For problems with this list, contact epa-impact-Owner@lists.epa.gov
------------------------------------------
*****************************************************************
 26 AU ABC: Govt nuclear dump plan 'one-sided' - 

ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

Posted November 8, 2007 08:49:00

Anti-nuclear campaigners say traditional owners need to hear both
sides of the argument about building a nuclear dump at Muckaty
station, near Tennant Creek in the Northern Territory.

The Federal Government is considering the site for a nuclear waste
facility and the Northern Land Council supports the site's
selection, saying traditional Ngapa landowners also welcome it.

But anti-nuclear campaigners say they will be trying to give the
public access to information about the waste dump proposal at a
meeting in Tennant Creek today.

The Arid Lands Environment Centre says the Federal Government and
the Northern Land Council have presented a one-sided proposal to
Muckaty's traditional owners.

Nuclear campaigner Dr Jim Green says their request to hold a public
debate was denied, so they will be presenting their concerns this
afternoon at Tennant Creek Training Centre.

"The main reasons for that concern are the Government's track record
of mismanaging nuclear projects and the worst example of that is the
Maralinga nuclear test site in South Australia," he said.

"There is literally tonnes of plutonium-contaminated debris buried
in shallow unlined pits in totally unsuitable geology."

A spokesman for Federal Science Minister Julie Bishop says the site
assessment process will be completed by early next year.

*****************************************************************
 27 BBC NEWS: More cash for Sellafield clean-up

Last Updated: Wednesday, 7 November 2007, 14:42 GMT

Sellafield has suffered operational difficulties

More cash will be needed to scrap the Sellafield nuclear
reprocessing complex in Cumbria, the Nuclear Decommissioning
Authority (NDA) has revealed.

The authority says ongoing "operational difficulties" mean it will
take longer than expected to make safe old-style Magnox facilities
at the site.

The NDA is to spend �8.5bn over the next three years - an increase
of �671m on the previous three-year period.

The figures are revealed in the NDA's draft three-year plan.

Chief executive Dr Ian Roxburgh said: "In line with our strategy,
our priority is hazard reduction and we will be focused on the sites
that require the most work.

'High-level hazards'

"This means that the majority of funds over the next three years
will be focused on Sellafield and Dounreay, whilst safety remains
the absolute priority across all our sites.

"It is increasingly clear that due to operational difficulties at
Sellafield, the timescales for defuelling the Magnox stations will
need to be re-assessed and we will need to work through the
implications of this with our stakeholders."

Barry Snelson, managing director at Sellafield, said: "We have
received a higher level of funding than in previous years, and this
will allow us to maintain our focus on reducing the high-level
hazards on our sites.

"While this will mean a reduction in the rate of growth at
Sellafield, it clearly affirms our strategy of putting cleanup of
the highest hazards as our first priority.

"We will need to increase the timescales associated with our
clean-up plan but, on the plus side this should help deliver a
longer, more stable work schedule rather than peaks and troughs."


* BBC Copyright Notice
*****************************************************************
 28 CorpWatch US: Toxins Threaten to Uproot Entire Town

by Mark Weisenmiller, IPS News

November 5th, 2007
 
The quiet village of Tallevast in Florida's Manatee County traces
its roots back to the 1890s, when a community of shacks was built
there for African-American labourers who worked tapping sap from the
local pine forests to make turpentine and grew sugarcane, celery and
strawberries in the fields.

Today, Tallevast is home to about 250 people, many of them
descendants of the former slaves who founded the town. But those
families now face a bitter choice.

For 25 years, from 1961 to 1996, the American Beryllium Company ran
a plant in Tallevast that made parts for nuclear reactors and
weapons. Because beryllium has a low density and is stronger than
steel, the metallic chemical compound is often used by aerospace
industry companies. With the end of the Cold War, the need to
produce such materials subsided and the plant was closed in 1996.

Unbeknownst to residents, an underground leak had released beryllium
into water wells in the village. And when the defence company
Lockheed Martin Corp. bought the plant and discovered the problem in
2000, it failed to inform the people of Tallevast for another three
years.

Residents cite anecdotal information on cancer, miscarriages, nose
bleeds and other health conditions, but no one has yet carried out a
scientific survey to document the illnesses. The Environmental
Protection Agency says that beryllium is a probable human carcinogen.

According to members of a local group called Family Oriented
Community United Strong, or FOCUS, Tallevast is a prime example of
environmental racism, or the deliberate targeting of low-income and
minority communities for hazardous waste.

"Now there's an underground plume of toxins that is under all of
Tallevast and about 200 acres," said Laura Ward, president of FOCUS.

Tallevast's representative in the Florida State Legislature, Bill
Galvano, thinks the whole town should be moved to a new site. Last
week, Galvano sent Lockheed a proposal suggesting that the company
pay for most of the relocation costs, to a new site selected by
Tallevast residents. In exchange, Galvano is asking the town's
residents to drop their lawsuit against Lockheed filed in 2005,
claiming charges of property damage and mental anguish.

"There's a willingess to help (from the state government) but once
everybody gets lawyers, that slows things up," Galvano told IPS.

"Everybody takes sides; I know how it works since I'm a lawyer
myself. I'm not saying that the residents don't have a right to
bring a lawsuit since they believe they were put in harm's way.
That's their right and that's why we have a court system. I'm just
saying that I truly believe that if everybody got together and
talked about it, we could resolve this," he said.

FOCUS members, however, are still furious and demanding action.

"There should have been an environmental evaluation done (before the
plant opened in 1961). They (Lockheed) assumed that we wouldn't make
a fuss because we're in a poor black community. They were wrong,"
Wanda Washington, vice president of FOCUS, told IPS.

"We're happy with his (Galvano's) attempts to come to the table. We
have made a couple of trips to Tallahassee (the state's capital, to
speak with legislators) and I haven't heard anything back from the
governor. It's hard to get our information out of the county. The
local and state governments are trying to downplay it," Ward added.

This past summer, a state agency reported that people who had drunk
water from Tallevast's contaminated wells have an elevated risk of
developing kidney cancer, leukemia, liver cancer or lymphoma. The
contaminated wells have been capped and many of the villagers now
use municipal water.

Under state law, Lockheed Martin, as the current owner of the plant,
must deal with the beryllium pollution under the direct supervision
of the state of Florida. The company has offered its own
10-million-dollar Remedial Action Plan, but a full-scale clean-up is
not expected to begin for at least another 10 months.

"We've implemented a house-selling programme (for Tallevast
residents), where they can get fair market value for their houses,
in case some people decide to leave the area. We don't administer
this, it's done by an independent party," Gail Rymer, director of
environmental communications at Lockheed, told IPS.

"The key point is the community is safe and they're not being
exposed to any contaminants and they will continue to be safe, once
the groundwater cleansing system we're working on is finished.
They're on a public water system, so they're in no danger," Rymer
asserted.

Ward and Washington disagree. "We're still at a point where Lockheed
is still doing evaluations to effectively clean the community. We
don't want to be exposed to the contamination...What happens if
there's still contamination in the water (after the remediation)?"
asked Ward.

"Our property values are down. We have some new residents in the
community who have bought homes that are on properties with the
capped wells and were never told about it. It (the clean-up of the
toxins in the water) will never be done in my lifetime or my
children's lifetime or maybe even my grandchildren's lifetimes. We
definitely think that this is a case of environmental racism," said
Washington.

Similar problems have been documented nationwide. In March, Dr.
Robert D. Bullard, director of the Environmental Justice Resource
Centre at Clark Atlanta University, and colleagues published "Toxic
Wastes and Race at Twenty: 1987-2007," which followed up on a
landmark investigative report issued in 1987 by the UCC Justice and
Witness Ministries.

The 2007 report found that of the more than 9 million people
estimated to live within 1.8 miles of the nation's 413 commercial
waste facilities, more than 5.1 million are people of colour.

Other research has confirmed similar disparities. A 2000 study by
the Dallas Morning News and the University of Texas-Dallas found
that almost half of the nearly 2 million federally-subsidised
apartments for low-income people were within about a mile of
factories releasing toxic emissions.

A 2001 report by the Latino Policy Forum determined that 68 percent
of African Americans live within 30 miles of coal-fired power
plants, compared to 56 percent of whites. And a 2005 Associated
Press investigation found that blacks are 79 percent more likely
than whites to live in areas most at health risk from industrial air
pollution.

Last month, the Environmental Protection Agency awarded 1 million
dollars in small grants to improve the environment in low-income
communities, an EPA spokesperson told IPS. Twenty community-based
organisations are receiving 50,000-dollar grants each for projects
aimed at addressing such environmental and public health issues as
exposure to toxins, farm workers pesticide protection, indoor air
quality, drinking water contamination, and pollution from shipping
ports.

However, the agency's overall record is spotty on environmental
justice issues. According to an audit last year by the EPA's
internal watchdog, 60 percent of programme and regional office
directors were not conducting environmental justice reviews of their
policies and activities.

"We haven't heard anything from anybody there in the agency (since
that September 2006 report)," said Luke Cole, director of the Centre
for Race, Poverty, and the Environment, in San Francisco, California.

"My sense is that everybody there and also in the entire [George W.]
Bush administration is just hunkering down and waiting until Mr.
Bush's term ends so that they can pass off all of their
environmental-related problems along to the next president, whoever
he or she may be. So it's status quo until a new president is
elected next year," he told IPS.

1611 Telegraph Avenue., #720 � Oakland, CA 94612 USA � 510-271-8080 De
sign by Tumis.com � Powered by RadicalDesigns.org
*****************************************************************
 29 London Times: Nuclear clean-up faces cost rise after reprocessing site problems -

November 8, 2007

Christine Buckley, Industrial Editor

The cost of nuclear clean-up operations is to rise further amid
increased problems at Sellafield, Britain&rsquo;s main reprocessing
site.

The Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA) yesterday confirmed that
resources would be shifted from other clean-up operations to
Sellafield and Dounreay to combat high-hazard waste more
effectively, as reported in The Times last month.

However, the NDA has angered unions by not detailing how much would
be diverted and what the consequences would be for jobs at the
defunct Magnox reactors, including Sizewell A, Dungeness A and
Hinkley Point A. Yesterday the NDA opened a three-month consultation
on its business plan for the next three years.

The NDA was created more than two years ago to oversee the nuclear
clean-up programme as the Government prepared the ground for the
break-up and sale of nuclear industry still in state ownership.

Mike Graham, national officer for Prospect, the trade union, said:
&ldquo;The NDA&rsquo;s strategy is in tatters. This revised business
plan reflects heavily on the problems, but does not provide any
solutions for the way forward. It strongly promotes the idea of
diverting monies from Magnox decommissioning sites to Sellafield
high-hazard reduction, but does not deal with the consequences of
such actions.&rdquo;

Ian Roxburgh, the NDA&rsquo;s chief executive, said: &ldquo;In line
with our strategy, our priority is hazard reduction and we will be
focused on the sites that require most work. This means the majority
of funds over the next three years will be focused on Sellafield and
Dounreay.

&ldquo;It is increasingly clear that due to operational difficulties
at Sellafield, the timescales for defuelling the Magnox stations
will need to be reassessed.&rdquo;

Some of the waste stored at Sellafield, which was formerly called
Wind-scale, has been there since the 1940s when it was produced as
part of Britain&rsquo;s nuclear research programme. A spokesman said
yesterday that the NDA was still not sure what exactly is in some of
the storage ponds and silos.

The NDA is to build replacement storage facilities at Sellafield
because it says that the current indoor and outdoor ponds and silos
are too old.

The clean-up authority&rsquo;s budget for the next three years is
�8.5 billion, an increase of �671 million on the previous three
years&rsquo; allocation. However, the NDA would only detail the next
financial year&rsquo;s allocation because it said that spending
beyond that would depend on the final outcome of its draft business
plan. The plan is out to consultation until the end of January.

The NDA&rsquo;s budget has been badly hit by the closure of the
Thorp reprocessing centre at Sellafield. Thorp, which reprocesses
fuel from British Energy and overseas commercial customers, has been
out of action for nearly two years. It is now undertaking limited
work in preparation for a full start-up next year.

*****************************************************************
 30 Science News: Seismic Hazard: Stateline Fault System Is Major Component Of Eastern
California Shear Zone

ScienceDaily (Nov. 6, 2007) ? The 200-km (125 miles)-long 
Stateline fault system is a right-lateral strike-slip fault zone 
with clear Late Quaternary surface ruptures extending along the 
California-Nevada state line, from Primm, Nevada area along 
Interstate 15 to the Amargosa Valley.


The fault passes within 40 km of the Las Vegas strip, 10 km of the
town center of Pahrump, Nevada, and appears to end near the town of
Amargosa Valley, Nevada (about 40 km west-southwest of the site of
the proposed high-level nuclear waste repository at Yucca Mountain).


This fault has long been considered inactive and of only minor
importance to the tectonic pattern of eastern California and
southwestern Nevada, whereas fault systems like the Death Valley,
Panamint Valley, and Owens Valley have received much more attention.


New research focused on the Stateline fault system is beginning to
change how we view this fault zone. Guest et al. present geologic
data that establishes the minimum offset on the southern segment of
the fault system to be 30 � 4 km over the last 13 million years.


This implies a minimum average slip rate for the southern segment of
the fault system of 2.3 � 0.35 mm/yr. This is twice the slip rate
estimated from geodetic monitoring in the region, and therefore the
fault is either in a transient period of slow slip or has been
abandoned as activity in the eastern California shear zone has
migrated west.


The magnitude of accumulated offset, evidence for Late Quaternary
slip, and rapid long-term slip rate indicate that the Stateline
fault system is a major component of the Eastern California shear
zone. Given its proximity to population centers and important
infrastructure in southern Nevada, the fault warrants close scrutiny
in seismic hazards analyses of the region.

Adapted from materials provided by Geological Society of America.
Need to cite this story in your essay, paper, or report? Use one of
the following formats:

APA

MLA


All Earthquake Fault Lines Not Equal (Jul. 3, 2001) ? While most
scientists assume that both sides of a geologic fault move equal
distances during an earthquake, National Science Foundation
(NSF)-funded researchers at Pennsylvania State University and ...  >
read more

Eastern California Shear Zone Puzzles Seismologists (Oct. 19, 2005)
? Residents and seismologists in Northern California focus on the
San Andreas Fault, but a Penn State researcher thinks more questions
should be asked about the Eastern California Shear Zone, a fault ...
 > read more

Structure, Deformation, and Strength of the Loma Prieta Fault In
California (Sep. 28, 2007) ? Researchers analyzes over a thousand
aftershocks of the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake, which occurred along
the San Andreas Fault system in northern California. It determines
details of the fault ...  > read more

Earthquake Studies: Fault Moving Faster Than Believed (Nov. 14,
2001) ? Scientists at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena,
Calif., and the University of California, Los Angeles, have
concluded that earthquake fault zones in California's eastern Mojave

Copyright � 1995-2007 ScienceDaily LLC  &mdash;  All rights reserved
 &mdash;  Contact: editor@sciencedaily.com

*****************************************************************
 31 Burlington Free Press: My Turn: Down the path of destruction

 Opinion

  burlingtonfreepress.com  |  Burlington, Vermont
 
Wednesday, November 7, 2007
 

Published: Wednesday, November 7, 2007
By Jane Newton

I wonder how many people understand that the process of "enrichment
of uranium" does not lead directly to the production of nuclear
weapons. In fact, it may not lead there at all. It is the process by
which fuel rods for our nuclear reactors are produced, without which
Vermont Yankee and all the others would have to shut down.

The enrichment process does produce radioactive material that is
used by the U.S. military as "depleted uranium" (still 60 percent
radioactive), which, because of its denseness is used to coat
artillery shells and protect tanks, and which, when it explodes
spreads radioactive material into the air, the water, the dirt, the
children, and the lungs of anyone unfortunate enough to be wherever
we have been fighting wars since 1991.

But enrichment does not necessarily lead to nuclear bombs. Nuclear
bombs, among other materials, requires plutonium, which is found,
along with other deadly products, in the spent fuel rods or the tons
of toxic waste for which there is no safe storage.

So, when we are told that Iran is "enriching uranium" and therefore
is sure to be making bombs, it is just part of the lies and the
attempts to frighten us into believing that we must bomb one more
country that isn't threatened us now, but possesses large amounts of
oil.

I ask, who are we to take the moral high ground when it comes to
anything nuclear? We have dozens of dangerous old nuclear power
plants. We are planning to build new ones, and we are selling
nuclear power to chosen countries like India. We are the only
country that has used atomic bombs. With waste from nuclear reactors
and weapons that spread radioactive dust all over, we are making the
world a radioactive wasteland for our children for untold
generations to come. In bunkers all over the world, in the oceans in
submarines, and maybe by now in space, we have 10,000 nuclear
warheads with 6,000 of them ready to go.

Any country that dared to launch a nuclear weapon at the U.S. would
be immediately turned into dust. On the other hand, any country that
we threaten with military action would surely be driven toward
having a nuclear weapon of their own, since having one seems to be
the only way to keep the United States from attacking them and
causing untold death and destruction.

Someone said that splitting the atom was the worst thing that man
has ever done. The United States, (with madmen at the helm), not
Iran or North Korea, and, in my opinion, not God, is leading the
world down the path toward complete destruction. I am sick at heart
for the children.

Jane Newton lives in South Londonderry

     Copyright �2007 Burlingtonfreepress.com All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 32 The Ely Times: Reid says state's water too valuable to waste on power

elynews.com :: News: 

Wednesday, November 07, 2007

By RUDY HERNDON Ely Times Reporter

But in his latest argument against coal-fired power generation,
Nevada's senior U.S. senator is paying close attention to the
adverse impacts that conventional facilities may be having on the
state's �already scarce� water resources.

�Water is a precious resource and our state doesn't have enough of
it to spend on future polluting coal plants,� Reid said in a
statement. �Not only would coal power plants further deplete our
water supply, they could also directly pollute our water resources
and contribute to global warming.�

�We have a moral obligation to our future generations to be good
stewards of Nevada's water resources today,� he said.

Reid's comments prefaced a newly released study detailing the
impacts that coal-fired facilities have on the state's most precious
resource.

The report highlights the impacts that fossil fuel plants can have
on groundwater resources and streams, �especially in basins where
water is already stretched to the limit.�

According to the study, Nevada's gas and coal-fired power plants
withdrew 14 billion gallons of water in 2000.

If those figures are correct, conventional power plants statewide
use less than half as much water as the Southern Nevada Water
Authority (SNWA) is hoping to export each year from Snake and Spring
valleys.

That calculation was not lost on critics of the SNWA's groundwater
development project, who seized upon Reid's �moral obligation�
statement.

�If that's how he feels, he should tell Las Vegas to pull back,�
Border Inn owner Denys Koyle said last week.

Former White Pine County Commissioner Gary Perea said he believes
that Reid's position regarding groundwater usage is inconsistent.

�What he's saying and what he's doing are two different things,�
Perea said.

Reid had an opportunity to do the right thing by providing money for
additional studies of the region's groundwater resources. But when
the time came to include that funding in the White Pine County lands
bill, the senator did not follow through, Perea said.

Reid has gone on record in opposition to funding for a second Basin
and Range Carbonate Aquifer System Study (BARCASS), telling the Ely
Times that there were ulterior motives behind the support for
further study.

�The second study is being pushed by the State of Utah because they
want the water,� Reid said Aug. 22.

When asked to clarify the senator's position regarding the SNWA
pipeline, Reid spokesperson Jon Summers said the Nevada State
Engineer and multiple federal agencies are working to evaluate and
mitigate the impacts that the project could have on the environment.
Others should be following their example by taking a closer look at
coal-fired power plants, he said:

�Shouldn't we do the same when it comes to power generation?
Shouldn't we find the best way to meet our state's resource needs
while also making smart choices that protect the health of our
communities and our environment?� Summers asked.

According to the study, coal-fired facilities use almost 800 gallons
of water to produce a single megawatt-hour of electricity. That's
slightly less than nuclear plants use, but it's more than any other
source of generation requires. In Nevada, coal-power plants withdraw
and consume an average 0.6 gallons of water for each kilowatt-hour
generated.

The study goes on to note that two of the three power projects under
development in Eastern Nevada would use a combined total of 3.4
billion gallons of water per year.

That figure is less than one-fourth the 16.51 billion gallons that
the water authority is seeking to export each year from Snake Valley.

In comparison, White Pine Energy Station project developer LS Power
is proposing to use a maximum of about 1.62 billion gallons annually
-- less than one-tenth the amount that the SNWA hopes to eventually
export each year from Spring Valley alone.

If both phases of Sierra Pacific Resources' Ely Energy Center are
completed, that facility would use more than three times as much
water as the White Pine Energy Station. Sierra Pacific is seeking
the additional water for its wet scrubber system, which is designed
to remove pollutants from the facility's airborne emissions.

Copyright � 2007, The Ely Times
*****************************************************************
 33 ReviewJournal.com: DOE boosts Yucca team

Nov. 07, 2007

Second major legal firm hired for waste project

By STEVE TETREAULT STEPHENS WASHINGTON BUREAU

WASHINGTON -- With work piling up toward a June deadline, the
Department of Energy has hired a second major law firm at a
potential cost of $109 million to handle legal matters for the Yucca
Mountain Project.

Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP was awarded a contract Sept. 26 to
prepare and defend a formal license application for the government
to build the Nevada nuclear waste site, DOE officials confirmed.

One attorney said it has the potential to become the richest legal
contract ever for a nuclear project, and signals a new level in the
Energy Department's resolve to complete the project.

It also began raising questions as to whether Nevada should beef up
its own legal resources as it fights plans to bury high-level
nuclear waste 100 miles northwest of Las Vegas.

"That certainly is a bit more money than we were planning to spend
or have available to spend, but despite that I feel very confident
about our chances," said Bob Loux, director of Nevada's Agency for
Nuclear Projects.

The state has been budgeting between $2 million and $3 million
annually for legal help, and had been looking to increase that
amount after DOE enters a critical licensing phase of the Yucca
project in summer 2008.

The Energy Department and Morgan, Lewis signed for an initial
contract period that runs through Dec. 31, 2011, for $47.7 million,
with five succeeding one-year options, according to information
supplied by DOE.

If carried to the full term, the company could earn up to $108.89
million. DOE authorized an initial payment of $400,000.

Morgan, Lewis, which describes itself as one of the world's largest
law firms and has a thriving nuclear practice, becomes the second
big firm working for the Energy Department on the Yucca project.

Hunton & Williams, LLP already is on the job. The firm based in
Richmond, Va., was hired in 2004 on a five-year contract paying $45
million.

Legal sources said for the amounts being paid to the firms, about 30
lawyers or more could be assigned to the Yucca project, in addition
to Energy Department in-house counsel.

By contrast, the state of Nevada is represented by a three-person
firm, Egan, Fitzpatrick & Malsch, plus resources within the state
attorney general's office.

DOE officials declined to supply a copy of the Morgan, Lewis
contract pending review of a request filed under the Freedom of
Information Act.

Besides providing more specifics of the work arrangements, the
contract also would be expected to detail how DOE and Morgan, Lewis
might be handling potential conflicts of interest.

Morgan, Lewis, one of only a handful of major law firms with nuclear
expertise, represents more than a dozen utilities in separate
nuclear waste lawsuits against the Energy Department.

Now Morgan, Lewis is working for DOE as well. Lawyers consulted
Tuesday said it is probable but not known for certain that
safeguards against conflict of interest were written into the
contract.

Defending the contract, a DOE official who spoke on the condition of
not being identified said the department approached three firms for
the job and demanded "very strict and very specific requirements" to
avoid conflicts.

Morgan, Lewis has erected a "Chinese wall" between its litigation
practice that represents utilities, and the nuclear regulatory
practice that is working for DOE, the official said.

"There are different attorneys and the file systems are segregated
and they even have different locations and different computer
systems," the official said.

Morgan, Lewis did not comment Tuesday on its arrangements or the
contract in general.

Joseph Egan, Nevada's lead outside counsel, said the Morgan, Lewis
contract could become the richest payday for lawyers working on a
nuclear energy matter.

"I am not aware of anything that even comes close," Egan said,
except perhaps for the DOE contract awarded to Hunton & Williams
three years ago.

Rep. Shelley Berkley, D-Nev., said she has asked the Energy
Department to detail the contract, saying it sends "red flags"
concerning potential conflicts of interest.

"In the past, DOE has said that law firms handling cases for nuclear
power plant operators should not be allowed to also represent the
Energy Department during the licensing process for Yucca Mountain,"
Berkley said.

"I would hope that the prohibition on these potential conflicts of
interest is still in place and that those who entered into this
contract are not actively involved in such litigation," Berkley said.

Berkley added she was "staggered by the sheer dollar amount
contained in this contract."

Part of the job for the attorneys is harmonizing the Energy
Department's planned 7,000-page repository application with federal
laws and technical regulations.

Another part consists of defending the application in
courtroom-style hearings before the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

DOE sources said it became clear the department needed more lawyers
for the undertaking, and that Morgan, Lewis was perceived as having
more current nuclear licensing experience than Hunton & Williams.

Contact Stephens Washington Bureau Chief Steve Tetreault at
stetreault@stephensmedia.com or (202) 783-1760.

Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal, 1997 - 2007
Stephens Media, LLC   Privacy Statement
*****************************************************************
 34 Sydney Morning Herald: NT nuke dump to cause cancer: campaigner - 

www.smh.com.au

November 7, 2007 - 3:44PM

People living on or near land selected for a nuclear waste dump in
the Northern Territory risk cancer and genetic diseases, while their
children could be deformed, says a prominent anti-nuclear campaigner.

Paediatrician Helen Caldicott, author of Nuclear Power is Not the
Answer, has warned against building a waste facility at Muckaty
Station, about 120km north of Tennant Creek.

The Northern Land Council offered up part of land for a radioactive
materials repository in May in exchange for $12 million from the
government.

The nomination was accepted by the commonwealth and the site is
currently undergoing assessment before a decision is made next year.

Dr Caldicott, who is in Tennant Creek to speak at a public meeting
about the proposed dump on Thursday, said exposure to nuclear waste
could have long term health impacts.

"Storing radioactive waste at Muckaty would expose inhabitants and
surrounding people to radioactive material in water and food," she
said in a statement released by the Arid Lands Environment Centre
(ALEC).

"This would put them at risk of developing cancer and their kids at
risk of developing congenital deformities, as well as exposing
future generations to high level cancers and genetic disease."

Meeting organiser Natalie Wasley, from the ALEC, said there was a
lot of opposition to the dump.

"Most people I have spoken with in Tennant have said they do not
feel they were adequately consulted or informed about the federal
government proposal," she said.

Jim Green from the Beyond Nuclear Initiative, who will also address
the meeting, said the government could not be trusted to clean up
its mess.

"In theory a nuclear dump could be safe but we don't live in theory,
we live in Australia where the federal government has a disgraceful
record of mismanaging nuclear projects," he said.

"At the Maralinga nuclear test site, the government left tonnes of
plutonium-contaminated waste buried in shallow, unlined pits.

"The federal government cannot be trusted to tell the truth, and it
cannot be trusted to safely build and operate a nuclear dump in the
Barkly."

The proposed 1.5sq km site will be considered along with three
commonwealth defence sites, including Harts Range and Mount Everard
near Alice Springs and Fishers Ridge near Katherine.

� 2007 AAP

Copyright � 2007. The Sydney Morning Herald.
*****************************************************************
 35 ENS: Kentucky Starts Criminal Probe of Army Chemical Weapons Depot

Environment News Service (ENS)

FRANKFORT, Kentucky The Kentucky Department of Environmental
Protection has cited a U.S. Army chemical weapons facility for
improper storage, testing and training. Some of the violations may
be prosecuted as crimes, according to a state inspection report.

The October 31 Site Inspection Report details notices of violations
issued against the Blue Grass Army Depot, located outside of
Richmond, 30 miles south of Lexington.

The depot stores more than 500 tons of chemical warfare agents,
including lethal nerve gas, in storage units called igloos. Blue
Grass is one of eight Army facilities where agents are being
destroyed under the international Chemical Weapons Treaty.

As a result of the inspection, the state has referred evidence of
activities at the Blue Grass Army Depot "considered of a potentially
criminal nature" to the criminal investigations branch of the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, as well as to the Kentucky
Environmental and Public Protection Cabinet�s Office of the
Inspector General.

The three most serious issues are allegations of a cover-up of an
employee's exposure to harmful levels of chemical agent,
inconsistencies in monitoring log signatures, and the demotion of an
employee who refused to sign off on a standard operating procedure.

The review addressed 40 allegations of improper procedures at the
depot. The complainants wished to remain anonymous.

Violations verified by the Kentucky DEP inspectors include not
testing spills from rockets containing agent that are stored inside
the igloos. They found improper storage practices which crush the
shells of rockets and cause leaks, and failure to ensure that
employees are properly trained to prevent release of chemical
warfare agents.

Army Spokesman Dave Easter said the violations were basically "an
administrative issue."

The Blue Grass Army Depot is also the subject of a federal criminal
grand jury probe as well as whistleblower complaints that have been
lodged by chemists, security agents and technicians.

In addition, Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility,
PEER, a national association of workers in natural resources
agencies, claims that "Blue Grass staff may have been exposed to
nerve agent but never notified or monitored."

"Managers 'scrub' or falsify monitoring reports, and in some
instances turn off monitoring equipment to mask problems," PEER
alleges, and adds that "The base routinely transfers or blackballs
whistleblowers."

"This report appears to vindicate the whistleblowers even while
leaving many very troubling questions unresolved," said PEER
Executive Director Jeff Ruch, an attorney whose organization is
representing depot whistleblowers. "People who report problems do
not stay long at Blue Grass."

Ruch says some of the issues that were beyond the scope of Kentucky
DEP�s review and so were left unaddressed, are "even more
disturbing."

They include "the absence of procedures to tell whether chemical
agents are in the wastewater that is flushed from the igloos" and
reconfiguration of air monitors inside the igloos "to be
ineffective."

Craig Williams, director of the nonprofit Chemical Weapons Working
Group based in Berea, Kentucky, said he is troubled by the number of
criminal allegations that have been referred for further
investigation.

 Copyright Environment News Service (ENS) 2007. All rights reserved.

                                   
*****************************************************************
 36 Xinhua: DPRK reaffirms its denuclearization pledge

www.chinaview.cn 2007-11-07 20:36:08   Print

    PYONGYANG, Nov. 7 (Xinhua) -- The Democratic People's Republic
of Korea(DPRK) on Wednesday reaffirmed that it will keep its promise
on denuclearization.

    "It is the consistent stand of the DPRK to denuclearize the
Korean Peninsula. It remains unchanged in its sincere efforts to
achieve this aim," the official Korean Central News Agency (KCNA)
said in a statement.

    The comment came after John Bolton, former U.S. ambassador to
the United Nations, urged Republican lawmakers to oppose the Bush
administration's recent agreement with the DPRK to end its nuclear
programs.

    Since leaving the State Department late last year, Bolton has
publicly rebuked the Bush administration on the agreement with DPRK,
arguing that it is making a huge mistake by trusting Pyongyang to
fulfill its promises.

    "What he (Bolton) uttered is no more than a shrill cry intended
to tarnish the image of the DPRK, well known to have kept its
promise and faith," the KCNA said.

    "Earnest talks are now under way between the DPRK and the U.S.
in various fields including bilateral working-level talks," it said.

    "U.S. conservative hard-liners are keen to have the above-said
agreement scrapped and deter the U.S. administration from
implementing it," the KCNA said, adding that "this is a clear
indication that they do not wish to see the denuclearization of the
Korean Peninsula but only pursue a stand-off."

    The DPRK agreed to disable all existing nuclear facilities and
provide a declaration of all its nuclear programs by the end of this
year, according to a joint document released on Oct. 3 when the
second phase of the sixth round of the six-party talks ended in
Beijing.

    The United States would lead the disablement and provide initial
funding, according to the document.

    The six parties -- China, the DPRK, the United States, South
Korea, Russia and Japan -- signed a landmark agreement on Feb. 13
that required the DPRK to declare all nuclear programs and disable
all existing nuclear facilities, while the other parties must
provide a total of 1 million tons of heavy fuel oil or equivalent
aid to the country.

Editor: Song Shutao

*****************************************************************
 37 AFP: US asks SKorea not to ignore rights abuses in North - 

Wed Nov 7, 6:09 PM ET

WASHINGTON (AFP) - The United States has urged South Korea to 
take into account human rights abuses in North Korea in its 
diplomacy with the hardline communist neighbor even as Pyongyang 
disables its nuclear arsenal.

Seoul, which pursues a "sunshine policy" of engagement with
Pyongyang, for the first time last year voted for a UN resolution
condemning the North's rights abuses, a move which angered the
communist regime.

"This was a key development, and we hope South Korea will continue
to take into account issues of human rights and governance when
formulating policy toward its neighbor," said deputy US special
envoy for human rights in North Korea Christian Whiton.

Under its engagement policy, South Korea marked the completion of
the first phase of a joint industrial zone at the sprawling Kaesong
complex in North Korea last month.

Critics say the park effectively funnels money to prop up the regime
of Kim Jong-Il, which keeps tight control on every aspect of North
Koreans' lives.

Last week, in the UN General Assembly's human rights committee, a
resolution criticizing North Korea's rights abuses was tabled and as
in past years, it was proposed by the European Union.

"These resolutions have passed with good margins in years past, and
we hope to see support grow again this year," Whiton said in remarks
at the Transatlantic Institute in Brussels on Tuesday. His speech
was released in Washington Wednesday.

Last year's UN resolution, passed 91-21 with 60 abstentions,
expressed serious concern at reports of "torture, public executions,
extrajudicial and arbitrary detention, the absence of due process
and the rule of law, the imposition of the death penalty for
political reasons, the existence of a large number of prison camps
and the extensive use of forced labor" in North Korea.

Pyongyang called South Korea's support for the resolution
"treacherous" and warned that ties could be strained.

Whiton noted that "with North Korea, there is so much attention paid
to nuclear issue that often human rights gets only a passing
mention."

North Korea this week began the key process of disabling its nuclear
programs under the supervision of a US team of experts.

The North, which staged its first nuclear test in October 2006, has
agreed with five negotiating partners to declare and disable all its
programs by year-end in return for energy aid and major diplomatic
benefits.

If it goes on next year to dismantle the plants and give up its
plutonium stockpile and nuclear weapons, it can expect normalized
relations with Washington and a peace pact to replace the armistice
which ended the 1950-1953 Korean War.

Copyright � 2007 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
 38 Guardian Unlimited: Gates Cautious on North Korean Threat 

Wednesday November 7, 2007 11:16 AM

By LOLITA C. BALDOR Associated Press Writer

SEOUL, South Korea (AP) - The threat from North Korea has not 
been reduced despite its move this week to begin disabling its 
nuclear facilities, the South Korean defense minister said 
Wednesday as he wrapped up meetings with Defense Secretary Robert 
Gates.

  Gates was more cautious in his assessment of the threat, 
however, saying that North Korea has a long way to go on its road 
to de-nuclearization.

 ``The North Korean nuclear and conventional threat remains the 
focal point of our alliance's deterrent and defensive posture,'' 
Gates told reporters at a news conference after a day of meetings 
between defense and military leaders from South Korea and the 
U.S. ``We are started on a path (to de-nuclearization), but we 
are far from reaching our destination.''

     Gates' South Korean hosts were far more critical about their 
communist neighbor to the North.

    ``Although it's true that North Korea has begun the process 
of disabling its nuclear program, we cannot say that the threat 
from North Korea has reduced tangibly or discernibly,'' said 
South Korean Minister of National Defense Kim Jang-soo. ``We 
don't have any intelligence to indicate coming to that sort of 
conclusion.''

  Kim said that conclusion is also bolstered by the fact that it 
is certain that ``North Korea is continuing to pursue the 
acquisition of asymmetrical weapons.''

  Gates met later with South Korean President Roh Moo-hyun and 
then flew to Tokyo where he arrived in the early evening in 
preparation for talks Thursday with Japanese officials. The 
defense secretary did not talk to reporters after his meeting 
with Roh and there was no immediate word from aides as to the 
substance of the meeting.

 Gates' more diplomatic tone underscores the sensitive nature of 
the six-nation talks leading to the start this week of North 
Korea's work to disable three major facilities at the main 
Yongbyon nuclear complex. And they reflect the U.S. desires to 
encourage North Korea's de-nuclearization.

   The meetings also come in the run-up to elections in South 
Korea next month. Gates was met with protesters at the hotel 
Tuesday, representing a faction who would like to see the U.S. 
more quickly transfer military bases to the South Koreans and 
give Seoul more responsibility for its own defense.

  Gates also declined to assess the likelihood of North Korea 
being taken off the U.S. list of states that sponsor terrorism, 
once it disables its nuclear facilities. He would say only that 
the North will come off the list only after it meets specific 
criteria.

  Sung Kim, the State Department's top expert on Korea, said 
Tuesday that North Korean officials were being ``very 
cooperative'' and that work on disablement had begun at Yongbyon, 
60 miles north of Pyongyang. That includes a 5-megawatt reactor 
that can generate plutonium for bombs, and nuclear fuel 
fabrication and reprocessing plants.

   North Korea conducted its first nuclear test in October of 
last year. In exchange for disabling the facilities, North Korea 
would receive economic aid and political concessions.

   Gates visit to South Korea is the second stop in a 
three-country swing through the region. He was in China earlier 
this week, and will go next to Japan.

 During the defense meetings here, Gates also told Kim that, 
``after more than 50 years, U.S. commitment to the defense of the 
Republic of Korea is firm and unwavering.''

  He added that while efforts to improve the alliance are 
improving, ``we still have a lot more work to do.''

  ``It is my expectation that we will continue to play a role in 
the security of the peninsula for a long time, including past 
2012,'' Gates said.

 So far, 23 of the U.S. camps - vestiges of the 1950-53 Korean 
War - have been transferred as part of a broader plan to have 
Seoul take over its own wartime command by 2012. There are 40 
more to go.

  The number of U.S. troops in Korea - which was about 37,500 
three years ago - has dipped to 28,000 and will end up at about 
25,000 when the consolidation is complete. The South Korean 
military numbers about 680,000.

                                 ---

                             On the Net:

            Defense Department: http://www.defenselink.mil

Guardian Unlimited � Guardian News and Media Limited 2007
*****************************************************************
 39 Guardian Unlimited: US: NKorea's Nuclear Dismantling on Pace 

Thursday November 8, 2007 1:16 AM

By ANNE GEARAN AP Diplomatic Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) - Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and her 
South Korean counterpart expressed confidence Wednesday that 
North Korea is cooperating in shelving a nuclear reactor.

  Putting it out of commission is an important part of the 
secretive communist nation's bargain to give up nuclear weapons.

 ``So far so good,'' Rice said when asked about the scope and 
pace of North Korea's cooperation to disable major facilities at 
North Korea's main Yongbyon nuclear complex.

  Work to make the facilities unusable is the most tangible step 
so far toward what the United States and other nations bargaining 
with the North say will be the complete removal of nuclear 
weapons from the Korean peninsula.

  ``We have common assessments that disablement activities on 
North Korea nuclear program is going in the right direction and 
right pace,'' South Korean Foreign Minister Song Min-soon said 
after meetings with Rice at the State Department.

 The upbeat assessment appeared to differ from that of South 
Korea's defense minister earlier Wednesday. Speaking in Seoul, 
Kim Jang-soo said that while North Korea had begun disabling its 
nuclear program, ``we cannot say that the threat from North Korea 
has reduced tangibly or discernibly.''

   Kim spoke after meeting with Pentagon chief Robert Gates, 
whose cautious optimism matched Rice's.

    The Bush administration has accused North Korea of cheating 
on previous nuclear deals. Also, there is broad skepticism in 
Congress and elsewhere that North Korea really plans to drop out 
of the nuclear club it joined with its widely condemned test of a 
nuclear device last year.

       ``Reports from the field are thus far good,'' Rice said.

 The larger test of North Korean will come soon, when work turns 
from disabling the nuclear facilities to actually dismantling 
them.

    Rice and Song sounded eager to move quickly once this phase 
is complete.

    ``We believe that there should not be any hiatus,'' Song 
said.

  U.S. officials say North Korea is cooperating with U.S. experts 
to disable nuclear weapons-making facilities. That includes a 
5-megawatt reactor that can generate plutonium for bombs, and 
nuclear fuel fabrication and reprocessing plants.

    The U.S. and other countries have declined to detail how 
North Korea's nuclear weapons facilities will be disabled, only 
saying that about 10 technical measures will be taken to do so.

     The main U.S. envoy to arms talks with the North, Assistant 
Secretary of State Christopher Hill, has said the experts will 
ensure it would take at least a year for the reactor to be 
restarted.

  North Korea shut down its sole operational reactor at Yongbyon 
in July and promised to disable it by year's end in exchange for 
energy aid and political concessions from the other countries 
involved in six-way talks on its nuclear program: the U.S., 
China, Japan, South Korea and Russia.

   Washington hopes future talks will yield an agreement for 
North Korea to dismantle the facility entirely, and also wants 
the nuclear bombs believed built to be confiscated.

  The country conducted its first nuclear test detonation in 
October 2006; experts estimate it has enough weapons-grade 
plutonium to make about a dozen bombs.

Guardian Unlimited � Guardian News and Media Limited 2007
*****************************************************************
 40 Sydney Morning Herald: Blix warns against arms race - 

www.smh.com.au

November 7, 2007 - 7:39PM

Former United Nations weapons inspector Hans Blix warned in Sydney
tonight against an "incipient arms race" sparked by the tendency to
turn away from international arms treaties.

The Swedish-born former law professor, who warned against the
invasion of Iraq after his inspectors found no evidence of weapons
of mass destruction, received the Sydney Peace Prize at a ceremony
in Sydney's Town Hall tonight.

The award was bestowed on him for his "principled and courageous
opposition to proponents of war in Iraq, for life-long advocacy of
humanitarian law and non-violence and for leadership of disarmament
programs", the Sydney Peace Foundation said.

Dr Blix told an audience mostly of peace activists he was optimistic
lasting peace could be found, with globalisation - and the economic
and political interdependence it engendered - the likely catalyst.

"Whether we like it or not, the accelerating interdependence of
nations forces us to cooperate," Mr Blix said.

"Viruses like avian flu travel ... [and] must be stopped by common
efforts.

"We have a common atmosphere - and we must jointly tackle the threat
of global warming.

"We all need food, fresh water and fuels.

"For this, we must cooperate to husband the resources of the world.

"If we accept the necessity to cooperate in all these matters, must
we not also accept the necessity of cooperating to eliminate war,
violence and weapons of mass destruction?"

Despite his optimism, Mr Blix said he was concerned about the
erosion of international disarmament since the late 1990s.

The disarmament process had stagnated, the Comprehensive Test Ban
Treaty was rejected by the US Senate and ignored by North Korea,
while the world had begun to turn its back on the Non Proliferation
Treaty, he said.

He agreed with former UN Secretary General Kofi Annan, who said the
world was now "sleep walking" into a new arms race.

"We must wake up to a second inconvenient truth - new build-ups of
arms," he said.

Of most concern, Dr Blix said, was the UK deciding to continue its
Trident nuclear submarine program, the US government's enthusiasm
for "new standard" nuclear weapons, Iran's uranium enrichment
program, and the escalating militarisation of China and Russia.

"If all states had adhered to and fully implemented their
commitments we would now live in a world free of nuclear weapons,"
he said.

"As there are four more nuclear weapon states than in 1970 and still
tens of thousands of nuclear weapons, the treaty has evidently not -
yet - achieved its aims.

"Some even warn about a possible collapse of the treaty and a
'cascade' of states developing nuclear weapons."

He said the "current incipient arms races do not seem to be in line
with the trend to interdependence and integration".

"Today, deterrent is not needed between the big powers and the
continued arsenals may be an incentive for others, including
terrorists, to acquire such weapons.

"Cooperative foreign, security and economic policies may be the most
important means to reach that result and to promote peace."

Mr Blix said the United Nations, neglected during the term of the
Bush administration, was the organisation best able to facilitate
such co-operation.

AAP

Copyright � 2007. The Sydney Morning Herald.
*****************************************************************
 41 aikenstandard.com: Safety services added into WSRC's SRS bid - 

Josh Voorhees
  Wednesday, November 7, 2007 

By JOSH VOORHEES Staff writer

The consulting and expertise being provided to the Savannah River
Site by the nation's leading nuclear safety management company would
likely be a thing of the past if the Washington Savannah River
Company does not win the upcoming operations contract for the site,
company officials said Tuesday.

WSRC, the current primary contractor at SRS and a subsidiary of
Washington Group International, is one of two companies bidding for
the five-year, $4-billion management and operations (M&O) contract
for the site.

The consulting work of Washington Safety Management Solutions ? an
Aiken-based off-shoot of WGI ? was prominently featured in WSRC's
bid for the soon-to-be decided contract, company officials said
during a Tuesday afternoon visit to the Aiken Standard.

As part of the bidding process, WSRC's competitor for the new
contract, Savannah River Nuclear Solutions, was required to provide
alternative safety plans that did not include WSMS.

The services offered by WSMS are "exclusive to the Washington
Group's bid," said Preston Rahe Jr., president of WGI's energy and
environment business unit and former president of WSMS.

Rahe and others formed WSMS in 1997 when it appeared layoffs at SRS
would threaten the jobs of nearly 60 percent of safety analysts and
engineers at the site.

"We had all this safety capability that was going to be lost," Rahe
said. "We approached the department about spinning off and offering
our services to the rest of the (DOE) complex."

As part of the spin-off, WSMS was granted exclusive rights to do
safety management work at SRS at cost for the duration of WGI's time
as the primary contractor at the site.

The expertise gained at the site allowed the management company to
expand its workload to the rest of the DOE complex and to grow from
around 120 employees at its inception to nearly 650, officials said.
With an M&O contract decision expected in the next several months,
company officials said their operations have grown to such a degree
where the loss of SRS work would not pose a serious threat to WSMS's
growth.

The site "would lose more than we do," said WSMS President Jim
Little. "We would have no problems putting our employees to work
elsewhere; they are in high demand ... The site is no longer our
biggest customer."

While WSMS conducts 20 percent of its workload for SRS, they do
about twice that at a federal site in Oak Ridge, Tenn. The company
also does work at a number of other sites across the DOE complex, as
well as for NASA, the military and in the growing commercial nuclear
industry.

"If (the work) is hazardous, complex and the stakes are high, then
it is right in our sweet spot," said Little, adding that he expects
continued growth in the nuclear industry to result in continued
growth for WSMS, possibly to a total of 1,000 employees in the next
several years.

"The nuclear renaissance is real," he said. "Any problems in the
nuclear industry aren't technical, they are political. I haven't
seen many technical challenges that we haven't been able to solve."

If WSRC were to fail to win the M&O contract, it would represent a
change in management at the site for the first time in almost two
decades and only the second time in the site's history. Any change
in management would occur during a 90-day transition period after
the contract is awarded.

While such a change might signal an adjustment to future plans at
the site, ultimately things would remain relatively the same for the
sites' employees in the short-term with compensation and benefit
packages staying the same as they are currently ? terms mandated by
DOE.

WSRC has been the prime contractor at the site since taking over
from DuPont in 1989. Its most recent contract was set to expire in
2006; however, the department extended its duration to make the
bidding process more competitive.

In 2005, the department decided to split the operating contract into
two separate contracts ? one for the M&O and one for high level
liquid waste (LW). The LW bidding process is running roughly three
months behind the M&O contract and will be awarded after the M&O
contact is decided. WGI has made its intentions clear that it is
seeking to be awarded both contracts. It is unknown how many bids
were submitted for the LW contract.

Proposals for both contracts are being evaluated on a long list of
criteria, including proposed key personnel; organization and
management structure; technical approach to the various missions at
SRS, including the National Laboratory; environment, safety and
health; and past performance and relevant experience.

Department of Energy policy is to not comment on the specifics of
the bidding until a decision has been made.

*****************************************************************
 42 DOE: Range Fuels Biorefinery Groundbreaking

November 6, 2007

Remarks as Prepared for Secretary Bodman

Thank you.  And let me say how much it means to have my old friend
Vinodh here to introduce me.  You are a true pioneer in this
industry.

I also want to thank Mitch for asking me to be here.  It's good to
see Tom Dorr from the U.S. Department of Agriculture, our partner in
so much of the federal government's biomass research and development
and deployment efforts.

Gov. Perdue, as always, it's great to be in Georgia and to see the
progress occurring here under your leadership.  I want to reaffirm
our support for governors and state legislators who exhibit the kind
of leadership you�ve shown in developing America's new energy future.

In order to maximize the market penetration of ethanol, the
Department will be proactive in making available to you and other
states our biomass and state energy program resources to remove
regulatory impediments and modernize state regulations.

Today marks the beginning of a new phase of our effort to make
America more energy secure.

In January 2007 President Bush put an aggressive plan before the
American people to lessen the U.S. transportation sector�s reliance
on foreign oil.  That plan, the President�s Twenty in Ten initiative
is expected to generate a reduction in the projected demand for
gasoline by 20 percent over the next 10 years.

Under Twenty in Ten, automobile manufacturers would be required to
produce vehicles more fuel efficient than today�s and the volume of
renewable and alternative fuels used by the transportation sector
would increase to 35 billion gallons a year by 2017.

The Energy Policy Act of 2005 authorized the Department of Energy to
support the construction of six transformational, commercial scale
biorefineries to help produce those fuels.  These biorefineries will
demonstrate the commercial viability of biofuels derived from
feedstocks that are not part of the food supply.

The funding the Department of Energy is providing leverages over
$1.2 billion in total investment.  These six sites differ in their
location and in the feed stocks that they will use, but they will
all help us move toward the day when biofuels made from cellulosic
ethanol can be made in nearly every part of the country.

The production of cost-competitive cellulosic ethanol is important
to America�s energy future.  These biorefineries are being
constructed to make them operationally energy efficient using
designs that are easy to replicate.  The simple fact is we will need
many more of them as time goes on.

Cost competitive, energy responsible cellulosic ethanol made from
switchgrass or from forestry waste like sawdust and wood chips
requires a more complex refining process; but it�s worth the
investment.  Cellulosic ethanol contains more net energy and emits
significantly fewer greenhouse gasses than ethanol made from corn.

If we are serious about meeting America�s future energy needs in
ways that foster economic growth, keep living standards high and
protect the environment, we must increase the production of new and
diverse forms of alternative fuels.

Together, the Department of Energy and Range Fuels are blending
science and technology in order to reduce America�s dependence on
foreign oil.  The biorefinery soon to stand on this site is the
result of President Bush�s initiatives to expand the use of
homegrown alternative fuels, protect the environment, and enhance
the nation�s energy security.

The first two phases of the Range Fuels project, in which the
Department of Energy is playing a cost-sharing role, is projected to
process 1000 tons per day of wastewood to produce about 30 million
gallons of biofuels and chemicals. As someone who trained to be a
chemical engineer, and who later found himself running a chemical
company, I can tell you that�s an impressive number.

This project, and the other five we are bringing online, is part of
President Bush's Advanced Energy Initiative that will change the way
America powers its homes, its businesses and our transportation
sector.  We selected Range Fuels as one of our partners in this
effort because we really believe that they are the cream of the
crop.  And so it is a real pleasure for me to be here with you today
for the ground breaking.

Thank you.

Location: Soperton, Georgia

Media contact(s): Andy Beck, (202) 586-4940 

 U.S. Department of Energy | 1000 Independence Ave., SW | 
Washington, DC 20585 1-800-dial-DOE | f/202-586-4403
*****************************************************************
 43 DOE: Secretary of Energy to Highlight President Bush�s Energy 
Initiatives at the the Washington Post Company Energy Conference

November 6, 2007

WASHINGTON, DC � On Thursday, November 8, 2007, U.S. Department of
Energy (DOE) Secretary Samuel W. Bodman will deliver remarks at the
Washington Post Company Energy Conference presented by AREVA and
highlight President Bush�s initiatives to increase the use of
advanced clean energy technologies, promote greater energy
efficiency and expand the availability of renewable and alternative
fuels to fundamentally change the way we power American homes,
businesses and vehicles.

*NOTE � Members of the press should confirm attendance with Carlos
Silva at silvac@washpost.com or (202) 334-6936.


WHO: U.S. Secretary of Energy Samuel W. Bodman
WHAT: Remarks at the Washington Post Company Energy Conference
Presented by AREVA
Media availability to immediately follow
WHEN: Thursday, November 8, 2007
1:10PM EDT
WHERE: The Washington Post
Auditorium
1150 15th Street NW
Washington, DC


Media contact(s): Megan Barnett, (202) 586-4940 

 U.S. Department of Energy | 1000 Independence Ave., SW | 
Washington, DC 20585 1-800-dial-DOE | f/202-586-4403
y
*****************************************************************
 44 DOE: Secretary Bodman Touts Importance of Cellulosic Ethanol at 
Georgia Biorefinery Groundbreaking

November 6, 2007

SOPERTON, GA - U.S. Secretary of Energy Samuel W. Bodman today
attended a groundbreaking ceremony for Range Fuels' biorefinery -
one of the nation�s first commercial-scale cellulosic ethanol
biorefineries � and made the following statement.

�Together, the Department of Energy and private sector pioneers,
such as Range Fuels, are blending science and technology to advance
the President's goal of reducing our dependence on foreign oil,�
U.S. Secretary of Energy Samuel W. Bodman said.  �The production of
cost-competitive cellulosic ethanol is a significant part of
America's energy future. This new facility, one of six commercial
scale biorefineries to be constructed with the Department of
Energy's support, will expand the use of home-grown alternative
fuels - protecting the environment and enhancing the nation's energy
security.�

The six biorefinery projects selected to receive DOE funding to
accelerate the production of biofuels also furthers the President�s
Twenty in Ten Plan, which aims to increase the use of clean,
renewable fuels in the transportation sector to the equivalent of 35
billion gallons of ethanol a year by 2017.  When fully operational,
these biorefineries are expected to produce more than 130 million
gallons of cellulosic ethanol per year.  Funding for these projects
is also an integral part of the President�s Biofuels Initiative that
will lead to the wide-scale use of non-food based biomass, such as
agricultural waste, trees, forest residues, and perennial grasses in
the production of transportation fuels, electricity, and other
products, by 2012.

Read the press release on the six biorefinery projects the
Department of Energy selected in February.  Learn additional
information on DOE investments to help accelerate the production of
cellulosic ethanol on the Biomass Program website.

Media contact(s): Megan Barnett, (202) 586-4940 

 U.S. Department of Energy | 1000 Independence Ave., SW | 
Washington, DC 20585 1-800-dial-DOE | f/202-586-4403
*****************************************************************
 45 Ventura County Star: Field Lab site poses dangers, activists say 

: Simi Valley : 

They discuss issue with class at college

By Dawn Witlin Correspondent Wednesday, November 7, 2007

Nuclear critics spoke to a group of chemistry students at Oxnard
College on Tuesday, telling them there is a social responsibility
that must be tied to a former rocket engine and nuclear test site in
the hills south of Simi Valley.

The Santa Susana Field Laboratory was the site of a research reactor
that had a partial meltdown and leaked for 14 days from July 12-26,
1959.

The reactor, part of an experimental government research study,
proved to be a costly experiment as radiation escaped into the
atmosphere, according to researchers and activists.

The Field Laboratory, formerly operated in part by Rocketdyne and
others, has been owned in recent years by the Boeing Co., which this
year reached an agreement to clean up the site and turn it over to
the state.

"We have to think about the fact that it is going to affect us for
centuries, for generations and generations," said Christina Walsh,
executive director of the activist group CleanUpRocketdyne.org. "I
lived in this area (and) I didn't know anything about it. In 2001, I
saw a flier and went to a meeting and ... I learned what had
happened."

The session with Oxnard College students also included Atomic
Mirror, a group that works to "reveal the consequences of the
nuclear age," according to its Web site.

The session was designed as a discussion of the health and
environmental effects of the Santa Susana Field Lab accident and
efforts to clean up the site.

In October 2006, a state-funded study concluded the partial meltdown
of the sodium-cooled nuclear reactor in 1959 probably caused
hundreds of cases of cancer.

Boeing has strenuously rejected the conclusions of the study,
calling its claims "flawed, without scientific merit, and a great
disservice to our employees and the community."

Post-accident measurements showed radiation was not released into
the environment, according to a letter Boeing sent to the group that
conducted the study.

At Oxnard College, Walsh and documentary filmmaker John C. Luker II
said they toured the outskirts of the facility, where they said
contaminants were discovered in ground water and wastes were stored
improperly.

"When I learned of this I knew I had to be on the other side of the
camera lens, so to speak," Luker said. "If you take anything away
from this presentation, it should be that one person's voice really
can make a difference."

After the presentation, Oxnard College student Leticia Garcia said
she was considering working with the activists when she graduates.

"I go hiking a lot in the area and I've actually seen people
drinking water from streams," said Garcia, 22. "It's scary because
people don't even know about it. I'm an environmental studies major,
so maybe I can work with them in the future."

Scripps Newspaper Group � Online
� 2007 The E.W. Scripps Co.
*****************************************************************
 46 Knoxville News Sentinel: DOE wants to stretch nuke reactor cleanup 

By Frank Munger (Contact)

Wednesday, November 7, 2007

State and federal regulators want the Department of Energy and its
contractors to move forward with the cleanup of the Molten Salt
Reactor - an experimental nuclear facility that's been sitting idle
for nearly 40 years.

DOE is already out of compliance with a previously negotiated
cleanup agreement. The current status is what's known as an
"informal dispute."

The federal agency could face fines and penalties for the delays,
but more likely there will be a modified agreement that establishes
new timetables. The question is, When will that work be completed?

"We expect to renegotiate an acceptable time frame for the salt
removal," said John Owsley, the state's environmental oversight
chief in Oak Ridge.

Owsley was referring to the tons of radioactive salts in the
basement of the reactor building, where the fuel mixture has been
stored in tanks since reactor operations ceased in 1969.

The immediate priority for Bechtel Jacobs Co., DOE's cleanup
manager, is on removal of the uranium-233, the fissile material in
the fuel mix. The U-233 is being chemically extracted and shipped to
a secure site at Oak Ridge National Laboratory. Security is required
because the material could be used by terrorists to fabricate a
nuclear bomb.

The Oak Ridge project, of course, has been delayed on multiple
occasions for multiple reasons, and the uranium removal restarted
there recently for the first time in a year and half.

There doesn't seem to be much of a dispute about the uranium
removal, which should be completed some time in 2008. The technical
challenges are great, and there seems to be a general recognition
that the work needs to proceed carefully and cautiously and, most of
all, safely.

However, there are significant differences about plans for salt
removal.

After the uranium is extracted and put into safekeeping, DOE wants
to put the cleanup project on hold until 2012 or thereabouts.

The Department of Energy has said it's unclear at this point where
the highly radioactive fuels salts would be shipped for disposal.
One possibility is the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant in New Mexico,
but officials said they don't know if the materials would meet the
acceptance criteria at WIPP.

John Shewairy of DOE's Oak Ridge office said the uncertainty about
waste disposal is a reason not to rush forward with the salt removal.

"We don't have a disposition path yet," he said.

The Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation and the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency have denied requests for an
extension - so far.

In a Sept. 28 letter to DOE, Jeffrey Crane of EPA's Superfund
Division said the environmental agency "expects DOE to continue
remedial actions described in the (previous agreement) without
excessive delays for waste-disposal determination and procurement
activities."

Some observers have suggested that it could cost a heck of a lot
more money to do the work five years from now instead of moving
ahead straight on.

Shewairy didn't necessarily concur with that thought. In fact, he
stated just the opposite.

"It has been DOE's experience that processing waste without first
knowing where it is going to end up can be very problematic. Cost
growth, double handling and repackaging of very hazardous materials
are just a few of the problems that can result," the DOE spokesman
said.

He did not provide any cost statistics to back up this line of
reasoning.

There are, of course, plenty of examples of waste projects that got
delayed and ended up costing oodles of taxpayer money.

What appeared to be a relatively simple pond-sludge removal and
solidification project in the 1980s turned into a long-running
nightmare that extended well into the 1990s and cost more than $200
million to complete.

There's no reason to think Molten Salt will follow that model, but
the risks are much higher with the high-hazard materials there, and
every one will feel a bit better when that stuff is out of there and
sent somewhere for keeps.

The sooner the better.

Senior writer Frank Munger covers the Department of Energy for the
News Sentinel. He may be reached at 865-342-6329 or at
munger@knews.com. This column is also available in the opinion
section of knoxnews.com.

� 2007, Knoxville News Sentinel Co.

*****************************************************************
 47 Rocky Mountain News: Workers from top-secret Flats building OK'd for compensation

By Laura Frank, Rocky Mountain News

November 7, 2007

More than 800 people who worked in the top-secret Building 881 in
the early years of the Rocky Flats nuclear weapons site will now
qualify for automatic compensation if they develop radiation-related
cancer.

U.S. Labor Department officials said Tuesday that they should not
have been left off the list of people who could qualify for
streamlined aid.

That means people such as widow Marlene Shannon could get immediate
help. "I'm glad for everyone else, too," said Shannon, whose husband
worked in Building 881 and died of a cancer with known links to
radiation.

It is not clear why Building 881 was left off the list initially. It
was one of the site's largest buildings and was repeatedly brought
up to officials as a site for potential neutron radiation, a type of
radiation that would qualify workers for automatic aid.

The government ruled this year that Rocky Flats workers who might
have been exposed to neutron radiation between 1952 and 1966 should
get automatic compensation.

Shelby Hallmark, program director for the Labor Department, blamed
Health and Human Services Department officials for leaving Building
881 off the original list of nine buildings whose workers could get
streamlined aid. Officials there could not be reached for comment.

The Labor Department issued the list of eligible Rocky Flats
buildings Oct. 15. On Oct. 25, advocates for the ill workers
complained to Labor officials about Building 881 being left off the
list. On Oct. 31, a Labor Department official sent word to the
Denver office that Building 881 would be added to the list.

Hallmark said it was a misunderstanding that kept Labor officials
from disclosing the decision this week when the Rocky Mountain News
asked about the status of Building 881.

� 2007 The E.W. Scripps Co.
Privacy Policy | User Agreement
*****************************************************************
 48 Albuquerque Tribune: University of California seeks legal review of $3M lab fine 

By Associated Press

Wednesday, November 7, 2007

LOS ALAMOS ? The University of California is protesting a $3 million
fine over a security breach at Los Alamos National Laboratory in
which classified documents were found during a drug raid at a
trailer home.

University spokesman Chris Harrington said the school filed a notice
of its intent to seek judicial review of the fine because it wants
to protect its legal rights.

"It is important to note that the university has not decided to
appeal the decision," he said.

John Broehm, a spokesman for the Department of Energy's National
Nuclear Security Administration, said the agency does not comment on
pending legal issues, but he said the fine is the largest it has
ever issued.

The fine came after authorities found more than 1,000 pages of lab
documents at the home of a former employee of a subcontractor. The
documents were found during an October 2006 police raid aimed at
another person living there.

The university has denied violating Energy Department requirements
and said it was not responsible because a subcontractor's employee,
not a university employee, committed the breach. The school also
noted it was not the lab manager at the time.

NNSA said the university was responsible for "structural management
deficiencies."

The University of California ran the lab for the DOE until June
2006, when a consortium that includes the university took over. The
DOE issued a $300,000 fine against that operator, Los Alamos
National Security LLC. The lab has already paid the fine, spokesman
Kevin Roark said.

The university was assessed a larger fine because investigators
determined the security deficiencies that led to the incident were
established during its tenure. Investigators also said the new
managers did nothing to correct problems.

"The significance or gravity of the security breach is a central
factor in proposing" the high penalty, the notice said.

The notice, issued in September, called for UC to respond within 30
days.

The university and the DOE have been discussing the notice, and UC's
filing allows those talks to continue, Harrington said.

He said he could not comment on the discussions. According to a
letter from a lawyer for the university to the DOE they have been
ongoing for several weeks.

The University of California committed five security-related
violations and Los Alamos National Security committed seven,
according to a letter from the NNSA.

Jessica Quintana, a then-22-year-old archivist for a lab
subcontractor, took 1,219 pages of documents and a dozen computer
data devices from the lab to her home ----- including 1,001 pages
and four computer data devices classified as secret, the notice of
violation said.

Quintana pleaded guilty in May to a single misdemeanor count of
negligent handling of classified documents.

UC "failed to correct a known vulnerability" by not adequately
overseeing the archiving of classified material by Quintana and did
not have physical checks to keep material from being taken out of
the "vault-type room" where scanning was done, the notice of
violation said.

The U.S. House earlier this year slashed $300 million from Los
Alamos' $2.2 billion budget, signaling exasperation over repeated
security problems.

Scripps Newspaper Group � Online
� 2007 The E.W. Scripps Co.
*****************************************************************
 49 KNDO/KNDU Tri-Cities: Spokesman Review Editorial Hits B-Reactor Hard

, Yakima, WA | 

RICHLAND, Wash.- A Spokane newspaper editorial criticizes the effort
to preserve Hanford's historic B Reactor as a museum.

Here's the short of the article.  It questions the museum effort,
instead telling people to question the ethical and moral questions
surrounding the reactor because it produced the plutonium used in
the bomb dropped on Nagasaki.

KNDU spoke with historians who say this isn't even something we
should be arguing about.

"It's important to study and debate, even people who disagree that
it ever should have been built," said Hanford Historian Michele
Gerber. 

The editorial also says the government can't even afford to keep it
open.  It notes a National Parks site in western Washington that is
closing because of funding needs.

Read the whole editorial here:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Hanford/message/2534.

 All content � Copyright 2000 - 2007 WorldNow and KNDO/KNDU. 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: 
<http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml> 
    
*****************************************************************