***************************************************************** 10/25/07 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 15.251 ***************************************************************** RADBULL IS PRODUCED BY THE ABALONE ALLIANCE CLEARINGHOUSE ***************************************************************** Send News Stories to news@energy-net.org with title on subject line and first line of body NUCLEAR POLICY NUCLEAR REACTORS 1 [NYTr] US claims photos show Syrian nuclear reactor 2 US: Centre Daily: Leads scarce on nuke leak 3 US: NRC: NRC Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards to Meet Nov. 1 4 US: Platts: Crews on alert as fires near San Onofre 5 US: post-gazette: Shippingport nuclear plant seeks license renewal 6 Platts: Ruling on upping capacity at Forsmark's reactors due early 2 7 Platts: Global nuclear power to grow between 447 or 679 gigawatts by 8 Platts: Fennovoima chooses municipalities for enviro impact assessme 9 Guardian Unlimited: French Agree on First Energy Cut Moves 10 Platts: Nuclear energy "indispensable" to meet basic energy needs - 11 US: Platts: Detroit Edison to join Nustart, Constellation Energy to 12 London Times: Nuclear plant clean-up in southern England to be halte 13 US: JN: Cuomo suit seeks to protect nuclear plants, including Indian 14 US: Rutland Herald: FEMA gives drill high marks 15 US: toledoblade.com: Davis-Besse engineers' fate rests with jury 16 US: Salt Lake Tribune: Nuclear power proponents eye Emery County for 17 US: Salt Lake Tribune: Governor says state open to nuclear power 18 US: Salt Lake Tribune: Conflict of interest 19 US: Salt Lake Tribune: Governor minds his ethics, legislators will h 20 Economist.com: Energy sources | The atom and the windmill 21 US: The Nation: Everybody Look What's Going Down 22 Reuters: British Energy's Torness-1 reactor raises output | 23 US: Reuters: FirstEnergy Pa. Beaver Valley 1 reactor exits refuel 24 US: Anderson Independent-Mail: Nuclear power is alternative to our d 25 Hemscott: CEZ bids in 2.2 bln eur nuclear power plant project in Rom 26 Greenpeace UK: Nuclear power: an ailing industry | 27 WNN: Toshiba prepares for nuclear growth worldwide 28 Whitehaven News: D-Day for nuclear industry 29 Whitehaven News: Windscale 57 fire effects not fully realised NUCLEAR SECURITY 30 US: Guardian Unlimited: US Lacks Labs to Test for 'Dirty Bomb' NUCLEAR SAFETY 31 US: ENS: U.S. Army Accused of Hiding Chemical Weapons Information 32 Bulletin Online: The effect of U.S. nuclear testing on the Marshalle 33 AU ABC: 'Medal in mail' disappoints nuclear test subjects - 34 US: Huffington Post: Robert Koehler: A Nation Downwind - 35 US: Guardian Unlimited: US Testing of Radiation Exposure Limited 36 US: Salt Lake Tribune: Review: Blistering political commentary, but 37 US: NAS: Project: Toxicologic and Radiologic Effects from Exposures NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE 38 US: IPS-English AUSTRALIA: 'Uranium For India Not Linked to US Nuke 39 ReviewJournal.com: Limits on waste at Yucca deflected 40 ReviewJournal.com: Gibbons says he was snubbed by Yucca Mountain Sen 41 ReviewJournal.com: Reid's views on warming fire up critics 42 US: Platts: Spot uranium prices strengthen by $2, rise to $80/pound 43 US: Navajo Nation denies further uranium mining on tribal lands 44 RIA Novosti: Russia says Siberian uranium enrichment center open to 45 US: RIA Novosti: Russia has enough uranium for nuclear power plants 46 Reid: Reid Statement on Upcoming Yucca Mountain Hearing 47 US: Gallup: Independent: Uranium legacy outrages Congress 48 US: Daily Sentinel: 100 million gallons of water pumped at Moab clea 49 ReviewJournal.com: RUNAWAY CHLORINE CAR: Rail tanker escape reviewed PEACE 50 AFP: US, Russia at impasse on missile defense - 51 US: Herald News: Atomic bomb testing put sailor in harm's way 52 RIA Novosti: Russia, U.S. call on all countries to join INF Treaty-1 53 Reuters: Putin sticks to guns ahead of EU-Russia summit 54 Reuters: Gates wants to see Russian "movement" on shield | 55 Guardian Unlimited: Nuclear Submarine Commander Removed US DEPT. OF ENERGY 56 www.kansascity.com: Proposed south KC nuclear weapons plant moves fo 57 DOE: George H.W. Bush China-U.S. Relations Conference 58 DOE: Energy Department Issues Draft Request for Proposals for 59 Tri-City Herald: Vit plant subcontractor expects $15 million to $25 60 Knoxville News Sentinel: Spallation gets new director 61 TNJN.com: ORNL partners with UT in efforts to solve energy crisis ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** FULL NEWS STORIES ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** 1 [NYTr] US claims photos show Syrian nuclear reactor Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2007 15:18:25 -0500 (CDT) Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit [The US is still pushing this tale of the "North-Korean-style" building the US claims is/was a nuclear facility, published by ABC, The New York Times, and then The Washington Post. Now there's an ISIS report. Apparently, Israeli mole or no mole, no real evidence is available of any fissionable material, or anything beyond these satellite photos, which mayor may not even be real. Of course the IAEA was totally ignored by the accusers -- Israel and the US. The US is covering its ass by spreading the story but claiming it didn't have enough hard evidence from Israel to participate in the September 6th attack. It just helped with targeting. Shades of Chemical Judy Miller's stories in The New York Times on WMD in Iraq. Depressingly familiar. -NYTr] Previous article: ABC Claims CIA Helped Israel Targeting in Syria (Reuters 10/23/07) http://blythe-systems.com/pipermail/nytr/Week-of-Mon-20071022/070610.html The Independent - Oct 25, 2007 http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americas/article3093815.ece US claims photos show Syrian nuclear reactor By Leonard Doyle in Washington US security experts have published what they believe to be photographs of a secret nuclear facility in Syria, which was bombed by Israeli jets last month. Their analysis of satellite images in an area near the river Euphrates reveals what they say are buildings similar to a North Korean nuclear reactor capable of producing fuel for a nuclear bomb. The experts, David Albright, a former UN weapons inspector, and Paul Brannan, from the Institute for Science and International Security (Isis), believe they have found the site that could have been the target of a night-time Israeli raid on 6 September. The Israelis imposed a news blackout on the raid, which prompted speculation that the attack may have been a dry run for a strike on Iran. In a report released yesterday by Isis, the experts say that commercial satellite imagery of the area shows buildings under construction. The buildings have the same footprint as that of North Korean reactor at Yongbyon, which is capable of producing nuclear material for one bomb a year. Syria admits co-operating with North Korea but says the two countries have no nuclear co-operation. The site is 100 miles from Syria's border with Iraq and close to an airstrip that would allow for easy transportation of personnel. "I'm pretty convinced that Syria was trying to build a nuclear reactor," Mr Albright told The Washington Post yesterday. However the Isis report said the images "raise as many questions as they answer". Isis is an independent research organisation that follows nuclear weapons production around the world. A week ago ABC News reported that Israel had recruited a spy to take ground photographs of the reactor construction from inside the complex. Because the building was already covered with a roof, they say, a spy may have been necessary to take photographs from inside the reactor building. The Washington Post has reported that the North Korean-style reactor is built gradually on site and the roof would hide what was inside the building. The Isis experts suspect that Syria was building a small gas-graphite reactor of about 20-25 megawatts, which is large enough to make about one nuclear weapon's worth of plutonium each year. Israel, which has an estimated 100 nuclear weapons, has remained silent about the bombing raid. Nor has it provided any justification for its raid on a foreign country. Syria flatly denies having a nuclear programme. But secretly building a nuclear reactor would put Syria in violation of the Non-Proliferation Treaty, in which all signatories must reveal such decisions. Syria is reported to be to removing what remains of the site, while the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) is also analysing photographs in an attempt to establish what Syria was up to. The director of the IAEA, Mohamed ElBaradei, is angry at Syria, the Israelis and Western intelligence agencies for failing to pass on information about the alleged secret nuclear programme. "We have said, 'If any of you has the slightest information showing that there was anything linked to nuclear, we would of course be happy to investigate it,'" Mr ElBaradei told Le Monde. "Frankly, I venture to hope that before people decide to bombard and use force, they will come and see us to convey their concerns." Mr ElBaradei also warned that efforts to contain nuclear proliferation were endangered by military action. "The use of force can set things back, but it does not deal with the roots of the problem," he said. B) 2007 Independent News and Media Limited * ================================================================= NY Transfer News Collective * A Service of Blythe Systems Since 1985 - Information for the Rest of Us Our main website: http://www.blythe.org List Archives: http://blythe-systems.com/pipermail/nytr/ Subscribe: http://blythe-systems.com/mailman/listinfo/nytr ================================================================= ***************************************************************** 2 Centre Daily: Leads scarce on nuke leak Thursday, Oct. 25, 2007 PENN STATE BREAZEALE REACTOR Contractor set to re-seal Adam Smeltz - asmeltz@centredaily.com Two weeks since its detection, the water leak at Penn State's Breazeale Nuclear Reactor remains a mystery. * Radiation Science and Engineering Center Workers have yet to determine the exact location and cause. But the leak rate has appeared to slow since half the 71,000-gallon reactor pool was drained last week, university and federal workers said Wednesday. They estimated that 13 to 14 gallons of water are escaping the pool each hour — including some moisture lost through evaporation. An earlier estimate had been closer to 16 gallons an hour. William Dreibelbis, a Penn State manager of health and environmental programs, said the university is negotiating with a contractor who will re-seal the pool walls and help execute a leak-stopping strategy. Work could start as early as next week, said Neil Sheehan, a spokesman for the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Once the contractor seals, reviews and otherwise repairs the drained half, he said, workers will go about doing the same on the other end of the pool. Sheehan estimated that the entire process could last more than two weeks. Cost estimates for the work have not been immediately available for publication. In the meantime, Dreibelbis said, “there is no public health threat.” But the university does want to restore the reactor to service soon, he added. The small, 52-year-old facility, on the University Park campus near University Drive, is one of about 50 research-and test-oriented reactors in the United States. Penn State uses it for research projects and classes. Research there has been on hold since Oct. 9, when staff at the reactor found the water level was dropping faster than usual. They have temporarily shut down the reactor. The reactor itself is kept in the pool. Water there contains radiation just slightly above the drinking-water levels accepted by the federal Environmental Protection Agency, according to the university. Leaked water is thought to be escaping underground, though officials have said it is not dangerous. Diluted and mixed with groundwater supplies, its slight radioactivity would be much diminished and pose no threat, they have said. Groundwater samples have been taken from nearby test wells, Dreibelbis said. He said results were not yet available Wednesday. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission, which licenses the reactor, and the state Department of Environmental Protection are continuing to monitor the situation and the university’s response. It’s not yet clear whether Penn State could face enforcement action from government agencies. But “we don’t believe (the leak) poses any kind of threat to public health and safety,” Sheehan said. As a research device, the reactor carries only a fraction of the power in commercial nuclear operations. A typical commercial power reactor generates about 3,000 megawatts of heat, whereas the Breazeale reactor generates about one megawatt, according to the NRC. Adam Smeltz can be reached at 231-4631. * Copyright 2007 The Centre Daily Times ***************************************************************** 3 NRC: NRC Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards to Meet Nov. 1-3 In Rockville, Md. News Release - 2007-140 - U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs Telephone: 301/415-8200 Washington, DC 20555-0001 E-mail: opa@nrc.gov www.nrc.gov The Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards (ACRS) will hold a public meeting Nov. 1-3 in Rockville, Md., to discuss, among other items, topics of interest to NRC Commissioner Peter B. Lyons. In addition, the committee will be briefed on NRC staff’s implementation of the lessons learned from the review of Early Site Permit (ESP) applications for nuclear power plants, the Vogtle ESP application, ESBWR reactor design certification safety evaluation, and an extended power uprate application for the Susquehanna nuclear power plant. Portions of this meeting may be closed to protect information that is proprietary and are identified in the agenda. The ACRS advises the Commission on licensing and operation of nuclear power plants and related safety issues. The meeting will be held in Room T-2B3 of the agency’s Two White Flint North building, at 11545 Rockville Pike. The session on Thursday will run from 8:30 a.m to 7:15 p.m.; Friday’s session will run from 8:30 a.m. to 7 p.m.; and Saturday’s session will run from 8:30 a.m. to 2 p.m. A complete agenda is available on the NRC’s Web site at: http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/acrs/agenda/2007. NRC news releases are available through a free listserv subscription at the following Web address: http://www.nrc.gov/public-involve/listserver.html. The NRC Home Page at www.nrc.gov also offers a Subscribe to News link in the News & Information menu. E-mail notifications are sent to subscribers when news releases are posted to NRC's Web Site. October 25, 2007 ***************************************************************** 4 Platts: Crews on alert as fires near San Onofre 2007-10-24 Washington (Platts)--24Oct2007 Two brush fires are in the vicinity of San Onofre, and Southern California Edison has built a fire break to protect the station from one of those fires, NRC spokesman Victor Dricks said October 24. He said that one fire is one to two miles away from a warehouse-type structure on the plant site. That facility has been evacuated, but SCE crews remain at the station's two reactors, he said. NRC also has five inspectors at the site, and two inspectors will be in the reactor control rooms at all times to monitor SCE activities, Dricks said. Both San Onofre units are down for maintenance. "The bottom line is that Southern California Edison believes the Camp Pendleton fire," the closest blaze, "doesn't represent a threat to the nuclear power plant," SCE spokesman Jim Alexander said October 24. A preliminary notification of event report NRC issued the same day said that sufficient transmission lines remain available to supply the plant with offsite power but that "the site has experienced intermittent power interruptions on transmission lines to the south." Copyright © 2007 - Platts, All Rights Reserved ***************************************************************** 5 post-gazette: Shippingport nuclear plant seeks license renewal Thursday, October 25, 2007 The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission yesterday said it has accepted for review a 20-year license renewal application for FirstEnergy Corp.'s Beaver Valley nuclear power plant in Shippingport, Beaver County. The license renewals for the 5,800-megawatt power plant would begin in 2016 for Unit 1 and 2026 for Unit 2, when their current licenses end. In reviewing the application, the commission will look at issues related to aging facilities at the 28-year-old power plant, conduct an environmental impact review and hold a public meeting. Once notice of the acceptance is printed in the Federal Register, it will open a 60-day public comment period. A hearing may also be requested. A copy of the application is available at the Beaver Area Memorial Library, 100 College Ave., Beaver. First published on October 25, 2007 at 12:00 am Copyright ©1997 - PG Publishing Co., Inc. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 6 Platts: Ruling on upping capacity at Forsmark's reactors due early 2008 2007-10-23 London (Platts)--23Oct2007 An environmental court is expected to rule early next year on whether capacity at Forsmark's three reactors can be increased by a combined 410 MW electric, plant management said October 22 in a statement. The court finished hearings on the proposed uprate on October 10. Regardless of the decision, Forsmark management has postponed the project because of safety culture problems. If an uprate is approved, it would be completed in 2011, rather than 2010 as originally planned. For more news, request a free trial to Platts Nucleonics Week at http://www.platts.com/Request%20More%20Information/index.xml?story or subscribe now at http://www.platts.com/infostore/product_info.php?cPath=22_41&products_id=67 Copyright © 2007 - Platts, All Rights Reserved ***************************************************************** 7 Platts: Global nuclear power to grow between 447 or 679 gigawatts by 2030 2007-10-24 London (Platts)--24Oct2007 By 2030, global nuclear power will grown from 370 GW in 2006 to either 447 gigawatts or 679 GW, the low and high projections, respectively, according to the International Atomic Energy Agency's latest annual assessment released October 23. Present nuclear power plant expansion is centered in Asia, the IAEA said, home to 15 of the 29 units under construction at the end of 2006. Twenty-six of the last 36 reactors connected to the grid were also in Asia. India currently gets less than 3% of its electricity from nuclear, but at the end of 2006 it had one-quarter of the world's nuclear construction with seven units under construction. Details can be found at www.iaea.org/NewsCenter/PressReleases/2007/prn200719.html. For more news, request a free trial to Platts Nucleonics Week at http://www.platts.com/Request%20More%20Information/index.xml?story or subscribe now at http://www.platts.com/infostore/product_info.php?cPath=22_41&products_id=67 Copyright © 2007 - Platts, All Rights Reserved ***************************************************************** 8 Platts: Fennovoima chooses municipalities for enviro impact assessments 2007-10-24 London (Platts)--24Oct2007 Fennovoima has chosen three municipalities for nuclear plant environmental impact assessments, the Finnish company's management said in a statement October 23. Management said it would decide before the end of the year whether additional municipalities would also be studied. The plan is to have the assessments ready at the beginning of 2009. Finnish consulting company Poeyry Energy Oy will do the assessments. None of the chosen communities have nuclear plants. There is strong public opposition to a plant in one of them, Ruotsinpyhtaeae, although the municipal council voted October 22 to allow Fennovoima to do an assessment there. Fennovoima is a consortium of utilities and energy intensive industry, led by E.On. For more news, request a free trial to Platts Nucleonics Week at http://www.platts.com/Request%20More%20Information/index.xml?story or subscribe now at http://www.platts.com/infostore/product_info.php?cPath=22_41&products_id=67 Copyright © 2007 - Platts, All Rights Reserved ***************************************************************** 9 Guardian Unlimited: French Agree on First Energy Cut Moves Wednesday October 24, 2007 11:16 PM By CHRISTINE OLLIVIER Associated Press Writer PARIS (AP) - France's government agreed Wednesday to reward drivers of cars that use little gasoline, drastically slow road construction and renovate all the country's public buildings to slash energy consumption. The measures emerged from the start of national talks aimed at changing the way the French treat the environment - part of President Nicolas Sarkozy's bid to put the country in the forefront of the fight against global warming. Sarkozy planned to release a final list of 15 to 20 measures at the end of the conference Thursday. The measures are modest compared to those in some other countries, and are aimed largely at allowing France to catch up with its European neighbors, environmental groups said. The talks were tense, as environmental activists, farmers, business executives and government officials faced off at France's powerful new Environment Ministry. Participants failed to reach no consensus on the idea of a ``carbon tax'' and sent the question to Sarkozy to decide. Nor was progress made on the future of nuclear energy in France, which Sarkozy defends and activists oppose. Housing Minister Christine Boutin was booed when she said proposals for improving energy efficiency in housing were too ambitious. But Environment Minister Jean-Louis Borloo, who presided over the talks, later announced measures aimed at halving the electricity used in new buildings as of 2012 and requiring that all public buildings undergo major renovations to improve energy conservation. Borloo also announced a measure introducing discounts for drivers who buy so-called ``virtuous'' cars - those that use little gasoline, such as hybrid or electric-powered vehicles. There will be extra fees for those who buy cars that pollute more. Participants also agreed to limit road construction and push freight onto trains instead of trucks. They pledged to build 1,200 miles of high-speed railways by 2020 and dramatically expand the use of municipal trams nationwide, Borloo said. The group also agreed to reduce the country's total energy consumption by 20 percent and set a goal of providing 20 percent of energy needs from renewable sources - but gave no timeline for either. Activists fear the result of the talks will be measures too weak to seriously reduce France's carbon emissions or have much impact on worldwide efforts to reduce activities that contribute to global warming. Still, Greenpeace campaign director Yannick Jadot said he was ``pleasantly surprised'' at the government's commitment to the talks. ``The green revolution has passed the starting line,'' Jadot said. ``Before France can be in the avant-garde in Europe, it has to catch up to its partners first.'' Sarkozy started his presidency by creating Europe's most powerful environment ministry and berating the United States for its resistance to emissions cuts. At the United Nations, he urged developed countries and other major polluters to commit to a 50 percent reduction in greenhouse gases by 2050. The U.S.-friendly French leader invited former Vice President Al Gore, who shared this year's Nobel Peace Prize for his work highlighting global warming, to speak at the end of the talks Thursday. Guardian Unlimited © Guardian News and Media Limited 2007 ***************************************************************** 10 Platts: Nuclear energy "indispensable" to meet basic energy needs - EP 2007-10-25 London (Platts)--25Oct2007 The European Parliament said nuclear energy is "indispensable" if Europe is to meet basic energy needs, let alone greenhouse gas emission reduction goals, in a report adopted October 24. The "own-initiative" report, authored by German MEP Herbert Reul, said nuclear energy is "indispensable if basic energy needs are to be met in Europe in the medium term." The report also said that "the renunciation of nuclear power will make it impossible to achieve the objectives set regarding reductions in greenhouse gas emissions and the combating of climate change." EC Energy Commissioner Andris Piebalgs agreed. Speaking before the vote, he said, "It will be difficult to achieve our climate change goals without the use of nuclear energy." The report was approved with 509 votes in favor, 153 against and 30 abstentions. For more news, request a free trial to Platts Nucleonics Week at http://www.platts.com/Request%20More%20Information/index.xml?story or subscribe now at http://www.platts.com/infostore/product_info.php?cPath=22_41&products_id=67 Copyright © 2007 - Platts, All Rights Reserved ***************************************************************** 11 Platts: Detroit Edison to join Nustart, Constellation Energy to leave 2007-10-25 London (Platts)--25Oct2007 Detroit Edison is joining Nustart, and Constellation Energy is leaving, the consortium said October 24. NuStart President Marilyn Kray said in a statement that other shifts in the membership will likely occur as utilities' needs change. DTE Edison subsidiary Detroit Edison said it wanted to become a member to collaborate on reactor designs and NRC's licensing review process. It is preparing a combined construction permit-operating license for its Fermi site, and wants to preserve its options, but has decided not to build a new unit at this time. Constellation plans to withdraw from NuStart in December; it recently formed a joint venture with Electricite de France to license, build and operate a fleet of Areva-designed EPRs in the US. EDF International North America, one of 10 energy companies currently part of the consortium, plans to stay, a NuStart spokesman said. Two vendors -- GE-Hitachi Nuclear Energy and Westinghouse -- are NuStart members. For more news, request a free trial to Platts Nucleonics Week at http://www.platts.com/Request%20More%20Information/index.xml?story or subscribe now at http://www.platts.com/infostore/product_info.php?cPath=22_41&products_id=67 Copyright © 2007 - Platts, All Rights Reserved ***************************************************************** 12 London Times: Nuclear plant clean-up in southern England to be halted - October 26, 2007 Christine Buckley, Industrial Editor Clean-up work at all of the defunct nuclear reactors in the South of England is to be halted amid funding problems at the Nuclear Decommissioning Agency, The Times has learnt. In its business plan, to be published next month, the NDA is expected to say that resources will be moved to Sellafield and that clean-up work will be suspended at the Sizewell A, Dungeness A, Hinkley Point A, Bradwell and Berkeley magnox reactors. Unions fear that the move will cost hundreds of jobs and said that it will throw the NDA’s strategy into disarray. The suspension of the clean-up work has raised concerns that commercial confidence in the building of new nuclear stations will be dented. Mike Graham, national officer for Prospect, the union, said: “The NDA strategy is in tatters. There is a complete lack of joined-up thinking and it doesn’t bode well for new build nuclear power in the future.” Jim Watson of Sussex University’s energy group, said: “This feeds the argument that nuclear costs are high and uncertain and likely to keep rising. This has broader implications especially when economics is a key issue of new-build nuclear.” An NDA spokesman would not comment on the details of the business plan but admitted that it was “prioritising spending towards higher hazards”. The NDA’s business plan will be signed off when it has formal notification of its allocation from the Comprehensive Spending Review. Its budget for the next three years has been increased slightly on its previous allocation. However, the organisation’s cashflow has been damaged by problems at the Thorp reprocessing plant at Sellafield. Thorp, which reprocesses fuel on a commercial basis for British Energy and overseas customers, has been out of action for nearly three years. It is due to resume substantial operations only in the new year after beginning tentative processing work to test the systems in the summer. The NDA was hit last year by a spending shortfall, which had to be bolstered by the Department of Trade and Industry, now the Department for Business. Times Online, The Times and The Sunday Times. © Copyright 2007 Times Newspapers Ltd. ***************************************************************** 13 JN: Cuomo suit seeks to protect nuclear plants, including Indian Point from airstrikes Thursday, October 25, 2007 By GREG CLARY JOURNAL NEWS Indian Point and the nation's 102 other nuclear plants need more protection against terrorist attacks from the air, the state attorney general said in legal papers filed yesterday. Andrew Cuomo demanded in a brief in federal court that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission force plants under its control to install earthen berms, steel girders and other on-site protections to lower the odds that a terrorist could fly a jet plane into a nuclear reactor. "It is unconscionable that federal regulators don't require nuclear power plants like Indian Point to defend against airplane attacks by terrorists," Cuomo said. "The Sept. 11th terrorists specifically contemplated attacking nuclear power plants with airplanes, yet the NRC continues to allow the owners of these plants to avoid their responsibility to guard against such attacks." Federal regulators say they're doing no such thing. "The NRC has extensively studied the protection of nuclear power plants from possible aerial attacks since 9/11," said Neil Sheehan, an agency spokesman. "The studies done to date confirm there is a low likelihood that an airplane attack on a nuclear power plant would affect public health and safety, thanks in part to the robustness of the structures," Sheehan said. "Further, the NRC has required plants to develop plans to minimize damage and risk to the public in the event that there was any kind of large fire or explosion on-site." Cuomo and others, including three congressional representatives from the area who want a no-fly zone installed over Indian Point, contend that there should be "relatively inexpensive physical barriers" installed at nuclear plants to defend against air attacks. Cuomo contends in the lawsuit first filed by his office in May that the NRC violated federal law by not requiring such a defense when it updated its regulations in March. NRC officials said a number of law enforcement agencies, including the Department of Homeland Security and the FBI, reviewed the best methods for protecting the nation's infrastructure after the terrorist attacks of 2001. They concluded that the best way to stop future air attacks was before they reached their target. "It is the federal government and military's responsibility to protect the nation against an aircraft attack," Sheehan said. "The NRC believes the best way to do that is to prevent the takeover of a plane in the first place." Sheehan said reinforced cockpit doors, increased presence of federal air marshals, improved screening of passengers and baggage, and better coordination between civilian and military authorities all hold more promise of securing public safety than site-based defenses. Concerns about aircraft terrorism came up last year when a California group challenged the NRC in federal court regarding the impact of an attack on dry-cask storage at the Diablo Canyon nuclear plant in San Luis Obispo County. Indian Point is installing dry-cask storage for its spent fuel, as well. The California group won a 9th District Court case that forced the NRC to conduct an environmental assessment of such an attack, including from the air. The assessment determined that in the worst case, radiological exposure to the public would be less than five rem, the equivalent of what a nuclear worker is limited to in a year. Normal exposure for the average U.S. citizen is about one-third of a rem. Cuomo's legal move yesterday in support of the California group had local supporters, including Nita Lowey, Eliot Engel and John Hall, Democratic congressional representatives pushing for the no-fly zone over the nuclear plant. Another was Westchester County Executive Andrew Spano, who has called for the plant's closing. "I am tired of hearing the NRC response that a plane crashing into the facility poses no threat," Spano said. "No one thought the World Trade Center would collapse, either." Reach Greg Clary at gclary@lohud.com or 914-696-8566. Copyright © 2007 The Journal News, a Gannett Co. Inc. newspaper serving Westchester, Rockland and Putnam Counties in New York. ***************************************************************** 14 Rutland Herald: FEMA gives drill high marks October 25, 2007 By Susan Smallheer Herald Staff VERNON — The federal emergency drill last week that tested surrounding towns and states' ability to respond to an emergency at the Vermont Yankee nuclear plant went well, according to a preliminary report by federal regulators. The Federal Emergency Management Agency said Tuesday there were only minor problems associated with the emergency preparedness drill, including communication between the state and two Vermont towns near the plant, and a communications snafu about the calibration of volunteers' dosimeters, which measure some forms of radiation. While FEMA officials read a general narrative that was full of praise of the response, knowledge, effort and enthusiasm of the towns and officials involved in the drill, it was short on specifics, and FEMA officials refused to elaborate on its assessment to reporters after its formal presentation Tuesday night at the Vernon Elementary School. A more detailed report will come out in 90 days, they said. In all, three states (Vermont, Massachusetts and New Hampshire) and 17 different towns, including five in Vermont, participated in the drill, as well as Entergy Nuclear, the owner of Vermont Yankee. There were 72 evaluators from FEMA and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission at 27 different locations, evaluating staff and volunteers for more than 500 different criteria. Barbara Farr, the head of Vermont Emergency Management, said she was very pleased with the performance of the state emergency operations center, based in Waterbury. Two years ago, Farr said, the state was found to have two "deficiencies" that had to be retested by federal authorities in follow up drills. Farr said that the drill scenario was much more challenging than in past years, and she said that was even more gratifying that the state did well. "I think this exercise pushed us further," she said. But the graded exercise did reveal some problems, particularly in the towns of Guilford and Dummerston. Because the drill scenario showed a radioactive plume heading straight north through Brattleboro to Dummerston, Dummerston town officials wanted to move their emergency command center to the West Dummerston Fire Station. But state officials wanted them to go to the emergency center which had been set up in Keene, N.H. It took some communication before the make-believe move was accomplished, according to Farr and the FEMA officials. There was also a different communications problem with Guilford, which was out of communication with the state center for almost two hours of the five-hour drill because of a radio problem. Two Guilford residents, who did not participate in last Wednesday's emergency drill, attended the informational session and later questioned Farr about the effectiveness of the drill in a real emergency. Karen and Shawn Murphy said that the town is rural and they live far away from the sounds of Yankee's emergency sirens. Likewise, cell phones don't work where they live. The town has set up 14 emergency notification routes, where people will go door-to-door with bull horns to warn residents of a Yankee emergency. Karen Murphy told Farr that Guilford's emergency director had told her he didn't have enough people committed to staff those routes. "Not even close, he told me," she said. "It's on paper, but it's not reality," Karen Murphy told Farr. "I beg to differ," Farr said. Shawn Murphy told Farr "that the one missing ingredient was public input. All I have is a calendar and a tone-alert radio." Entergy Nuclear, the owner of Vermont Yankee, distributes calendars every year in the 10-mile emergency zone with emergency information and instructions for residents. But Farr, fresh from the train derailment emergency in Middlebury earlier this week, said that people respond in times of emergency. "People come out of the woodwork to help. In a true emergency it will work," Farr said. Contact Susan Smallheer at susan.smallheer@rutlandherald.com. © 2007 Rutland Herald ***************************************************************** 15 toledoblade.com: Davis-Besse engineers' fate rests with jury Article published Thursday, October 25, 2007 Trial summaries take hours By TOM HENRY BLADE STAFF WRITER The fate of two engineers accused of leading a cover-up at FirstEnergy Corp.'s Davis-Besse nuclear facility in the fall of 2001 is in the hands of a jury in U.S. District Court in Toledo. Deliberations in the case of David Geisen and Rodney N. Cook began late yesterday afternoon after attorneys spent almost seven hours summarizing testimony and evidence submitted at the trial, which began Oct. 1. Mr. Geisen, now of Wisconsin, was a manager at Davis-Besse. Mr. Cook, a Tennessee contractor, had a long association with the plant. Andrew Siemaszko, now of Texas, was indicted with them as a co-conspirator. He is to be tried later. Mr. Geisen and Mr. Cook are charged with lying to the government. If convicted, they face up to five years in prison and $250,000 fines. The Justice Department's Richard Poole told the jury it's "pretty obvious the kind of facts they concealed and the kind of facts they withheld were what the Nuclear Regulatory Commission was looking for." Letters FirstEnergy produced in response to a nationwide bulletin the NRC issued in August, 2001, were based on data from Mr. Geisen's department. They were written by Mr. Cook. All utilities operating pressurized-water reactors, such as Davis-Besse, were required to shut down or prove they were safe to operate beyond Dec. 31, 2001. The NRC was concerned about a nozzle crack discovered for the first time in the United States, on top of the Oconee 3 reactor in South Carolina. FirstEnergy, which paid a record $33.5 million in fines, was the lone holdout. Officials from the utility talked the NRC into a compromise that allowed FirstEnergy to keep the plant online until Feb. 16, 2002. Nuclear plants generate about $1 million a day in power. Three weeks later, the NRC regretted what it had done. So much acid had leaked out of Davis-Besse's reactor that its vessel head had a six-inch-deep cavity and was about to burst. The Justice Department's Christian Sticken yesterday described a situation that "was barreling toward catastrophe." "There were red lights flashing everywhere," he said. The near-rupture stunned the global nuclear industry, prompting industry reviews as far away as Europe and Japan. Prosecutors claimed that Mr. Geisen and Mr. Cook knew Davis-Besse had too many leaks when FirstEnergy put the plant back into service after its 2000 refueling outage. Mr. Poole cited an Aug. 8, 2001 e-mail from Prasoon Goyal of Toledo, a former Davis-Besse engineer who avoided prosecution by agreeing to testify. Mr. Goyal's e-mail warned colleagues the NRC wanted plant-specific information. "This would create a difficult situation for us when they review our past inspection results," the e-mail stated. Prosecutors said Mr. Cook was contracted by FirstEnergy to craft a deceptive response. "Those serial letters concealed information, as alleged in the indictment. They contained false statements. We submit to you that David Geisen and Rod Cook knew it," Mr. Poole said. Defense attorneys said the government's conspiracy theory is implausible. Neither defendant had anything to gain from keeping Davis-Besse online, they said. Richard Hibey, one of Mr. Geisen's attorneys, accused the government of "importing all of this hindsight" and trying to present it as fact. The defendants followed procedures that were in effect at the time and their actions "should not be perverted into a lie, a cover-up, a covert act," he said. "Why would he abandon his responsibility to science, his family, his employer, and the people [of Ohio] simply to keep Davis-Besse [online] another 45 days?" Mr. Hibey asked. John Conroy, one of Mr. Cook's attorneys, said his client "had no dog in this fight." "He's got 30 years in the business. He was making $150,000 a year. There is nothing in his contract that would have given him a raise, a promotion - anything," Mr. Conroy said. "He had no conceivable motive to do something like this, and every reason not to do so." Contact Tom Henry at: thenry@theblade.com or 419-724-6079. © 2007 The Blade. By using this service, you accept the terms of our privacy statement and our visitor agreement. Please read them. The Toledo Blade Company, 541 N. Superior St., Toledo, OH 43660 , (419) 724-6000 To contact a specific department or an ***************************************************************** 16 Salt Lake Tribune: Nuclear power proponents eye Emery County for two reactors Legislator signs water contract for project Article Last Updated: 10/25/2007 07:06:53 AM MDT A state representative and others pushing to bring nuclear power to Utah are looking to build not one, but two nuclear reactors in the state and are looking at Emery County as the most likely location. Last month, Rep. Aaron Tilton, a Springville Republican and CEO of Transition Power Development LLC, signed a contract to secure the rights to nearly 10 billion gallons of water a year to be used in a nuclear power plant proponents are seeking to get licensed. The contract obtained by The Salt Lake Tribune specifies the Green River in Emery County as the source for the water. Green River Mayor Ed Bentley said he'd heard his city might be the chosen location for a power plant and that the plant might be nuclear. And that's fine with him. "Anything that would provide good-paying jobs would be excellent for our community," he said. The town of 949 people sits along Interstate 70, next to U.S. 6 and adjacent to the Union Pacific rail line and power transmission lines that run along the transportation corridor, Bentley said. Sen. Mike Dmitrich, D-Price, said he, too, has "heard that they've been sniffing around for some ground out there" but didn't know specifics. "I think they've got something in the bag," said Rep. Mike Noel, R-Kanab, who works for the water district that leased its water to Tilton, but he did not know where the company was looking. Tilton, however, says the Emery County reference is mainly a placeholder and the company may seek to take water out of the Green or Colorado rivers anywhere from Flaming Gorge to Lake Powell. "We still don't know basically where the thing is going to go," Tilton said. He added the company has hired experts who are looking at the water, transmission and seismic issues. But whatever site the company settles on, Tilton said, it will be looking to build two nuclear plants, one after the other, side-by-side. Tilton said the operator would have to build the same road, rail spur, reservoir and transmission upgrades to build two power plants as one. "One unit doesn't give you the scale of economy to give the best competitive advantages," he said. Transition Power was set up with the goal of finding a good site, acquiring the land and water rights and doing the geotechnical and environmental studies needed to get an Early Site Permit from the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, said Reed Searle, a partner in the company. Transition Power would then sell its permit or partner with a power company or consortium of utilities that would build the plant, said Searle, who will soon be leaving his post as executive director of the Intermountain Power Agency, which produces coal power, three-fourths of which is shipped to California. Consumers in Utah, Colorado, Nevada and California could potentially purchase power from the plant, Searle said. Tilton and Noel, who heads the Kane County Water Conservancy District, signed the contract Sept. 20 that would transfer rights to 29,600 acre-feet of water, in exchange for payments starting at $100,000 per year and growing to $1 million by the time the plant would come on line. That doesn't mean they "got together and cooked up this deal," said Kanab attorney Ed Robbins, who helped write the document. Rather, he said, the water district board approved the agreement after several months of negotiations and review. An acre-foot equals 325,851 gallons, enough to supply a Utah household for a year but considered enough for two households in Nevada and Arizona, where per-capita use is lower. The Utah nuclear power push and the involvement of Tilton and Noel were first reported two weeks ago by the trade publication SNL Energy. The water comes from an allocation granted in 1965 for the failed Kaiparowits coal-fired power plant proposal. The Kane County water district can hold the rights for 50 years subject to the state engineer's approval of extensions. The last extension granted in 2004 came with the warning that the next possible extension request, scheduled to come before the state engineer next September, would get a more critical look. The contract may be legal between TPD and the water district, but it hasn't gotten necessary approval from the Utah Division of Water Rights, said State Engineer Jerry Olds. "When they actually want to do something, then they'll bring an application to our office," he said. Utah Regional Engineer Boyd Clayton said it's not clear whether the water rights - granted specifically for a location east of Johnson Canyon, halfway between Kanab and Lake Powell - could be used elsewhere. Tilton's company would have to file what's called a change application that the state engineer would approve or deny based on state code, Clayton said. A nuclear plant would take water from the river to cool spent fuel rods in a pool and to feed the reactor, which takes the energy from cold water and returns warm water to the waterway. The cooling tanks are a closed system, that is, the water does not go back to the river. Returning the warm water to the Green River would have an effect on the river's ecosystem, but that hasn't yet been analyzed. Also unknown is what effect the nuclear plant proposal might have on any congressional efforts to declare segments of the river wild and scenic. While Olds said there is no doubt the water is part of Utah's share of the Colorado River and can be used in the state, an extended drought with no end in sight and a warming climate is prompting new looks at the Law of the River that determines how seven Western states have agreed to use it. Tilton's involvement in the project has prompted some critics to question whether he had a conflict of interest that he should have disclosed earlier. The representative, who has been a leading proponent of nuclear power in the Legislature, formed Transition Power in February but did not disclose his involvement until Oct. 12, and had said previously he was not involved in any nuclear projects. ***************************************************************** 17 Salt Lake Tribune: Governor says state open to nuclear power Article Last Updated: 10/25/2007 01:24:09 PM MDT Posted: 1:26 PM- Gov. Jon Huntsman Jr. says the state must be open to nuclear power being produced within its borders, referring to the possibility of two nuclear power plants being built near Green River, in Emery County. "You have to keep the nuclear option on the table because it's a carbon-free source of power," Huntsman said at his monthly KUED-TV news conference. Nuclear power has less impact on global warming because, unlike coal-fire plants, it does not require burning carbon fuels. Huntsman said the issues of cost, environmental impacts, safety and storage of nuke waste will have to be addressed over the 10- to 20-year licensing process. The state will only be peripherally involved in what is a federal process, he said. Last month, Rep. Aaron Tilton, who is chief executive of Transition Power Development, signed a contract for the rights to nearly 10 billion gallons of water a year to be used for nuclear power production, if the plants win licenses. The contract, obtained by The Salt Lake Tribune, specifies the Green River in Emery County as the source for the water. ***************************************************************** 18 Salt Lake Tribune: Conflict of interest Public Forum Letter Article Last Updated: 10/24/2007 06:36:26 PM MDT The Oct. 17 Tribune identified two lawmakers, Reps. Aaron Tilton and Mike Noel, who stand to gain if a nuclear reactor is approved in Utah, yet deny a conflict of interest. Though we need to reduce the impact of coal-fired power stations, and know the dangers of coal mining that have cost nine deaths recently, nuclear power is not the answer. Allowing a nuclear reactor here would mean allowing production and storage of nuclear waste, which could lead to other states dumping their waste here too. Gov. Jon Huntsman has already rejected a waste repository, as well as nuclear power. However, our next governor may not be as strongly opposed. The Utah Legislature should continue to provide incentives for energy savings and alternative power. Rebates for better insulation, more efficient lighting and heating, hybrid and natural gas vehicles, solar water heating, etc., can help us reduce power usage and the need for new power stations, at the same time reducing pollution. Don't let the legislators bypass the governor's mandate. Stop the nuclear lobby in its tracks. We want government that responds to the people, not special interests. Citizens of Kane County, the proposed site, should protest the environmental destruction from nuclear power waste water! Martin Wilcocks Taylorsville ***************************************************************** 19 Salt Lake Tribune: Governor minds his ethics, legislators will have to mind theirs Article Last Updated: 10/25/2007 03:55:06 PM MDT Posted: 3:57 PM- At a press conference today, Gov. Jon Huntsman Jr. backed away from commenting on the Legislature's ethical code, saying he was only responsible for the executive branch's ethics. Rep. Aaron Tilton, who is vice chairman of the House Public Utilities and Technology Committee, is also chief executive of of a company seeking a license to build a nuclear power plant in Utah, possibly near Green River in Emery County. Tilton's company recently signed a contract for water with the Kane County Water District, which is led by fellow GOP Rep. Mike Noel, a nuclear power proponent. Noel also is a member of the House committees with oversight of the Department of Environmental Quality and the Utah Division of Radiation. Environmental watch-dog groups, including the Sierra Club, say the nuke deal represents a serious conflict of interest. But Tilton, who is also a member of Gov. Jon Huntsman Jr.'s Blue Ribbon Advisory Committee on Climate Change, defends his involvement, insisting there is no conflict of interest because he has not voted for any legislation that would have helped his company, Transition Power Development, LLC. Huntsman says how the Legislature manages its ethics "something for the voters to decide." ***************************************************************** 20 Economist.com: Energy sources | The atom and the windmill Thursday October 25th 2007 From The Economist print edition Nuclear power draws nearer as renewables retreat THE timing was impeccable. As the first hints of winter sent temperatures falling this week, British Energy, whose eight nuclear power stations can meet a fifth of Britain's electricity demand, said on October 22nd that it had discovered a technical problem in one of its reactors. Worried that three similar reactors might be similarly afflicted, it decided to shut two of them down and to delay restarting the other, which was offline for maintenance. British Energy shares dived 8% that day and short-term power prices jumped by about 15%. Unplanned outages have been commoner of late. Another of the firm's reactors is also offline due to an “electrical fault”. Last year cracked boiler pipes forced a long shutdown at two other sites. For the nuclear lobby, such technical difficulties highlight the urgency of immediately replacing Britain's doddery old reactors, many of which date from the 1960s and 1970s. Environmentalists, most of whom oppose nuclear power, see things differently. They argue that British Energy's troubles are evidence that nuclear power is an unreliable technology that has no place in a modern energy mix. Unfortunately for greens, ministers seem to agree with the atom-splitters. Impressed by arguments that nuclear energy is a proven source of low-carbon power, and worried about the dependence on foreign fossil fuels caused by the decline of North Sea oil and gas, the government has been preparing the ground for a nuclear revival. An ostentatious public consultation on the issue finished this month, and some official pronouncement is expected in the next few months. Meanwhile EDF Energy, a French company, has pledged to build a plant by 2017, with three more to follow. Environmentalists fret that new nuclear plants will come at the expense of eco-friendly technologies such as wind and wave power. On October 23rd those fears seemed to be confirmed. The Guardian newspaper published extracts from a leaked document suggesting that Gordon Brown was trying to wriggle out of a pledge made by Tony Blair, his predecessor as prime minister, that 20% of European energy consumption would be met from renewable sources by 2020. Civil servants described the target as “expensive” and said that it faced “severe practical difficulties”. That was a diplomatic way to speak of a target that Britain, which gets 2% of its energy from renewables now, has little chance of meeting. Malcolm Wicks, the energy minister, points out that the target is for Europe as a whole, and suggests Britain might manage 10-15% by the deadline. Stung by accusations that it is diluting its trumpeted commitment to greenery, the government details its support of all sorts of expensive schemes. A multi-million-pound competition to build a “clean” coal power plant that would trap and store carbon emissions in depleted oil fields is to be launched in November. Subsidies for renewable energy will be rejigged in the hope of encouraging technologies, such as solar or wave power, that are not yet competitive. But that cuts little ice with experts, most of whom agree that the government is unwilling to spend the money required to give renewables a big boost. “It is wedded to nuclear power,” says Robin Webster of Friends of the Earth, a green group. Yet even if ministers row back on renewables, they may not get the new nuclear plants they want. Decades of decline have left the industry short of engineers. Economics is a problem too. The government insists that any nuclear stations must be built without state aid. But nuclear plants—with their huge capital costs and glacial start-up times—are a dicey proposition in Britain's liberalised electricity market, where prices fluctuate rapidly. Ministers are trying to make planning rules more nuclear-friendly, and hope that tighter carbon-emission limits will help nuclear energy shine by comparison with fossil-fuel plants. But Martin Brough of Oxera, an economics consultancy, thinks that more will be needed, most probably a guaranteed minimum carbon price. That would be tantamount to stifling the markets, and reneging on another energy promise. Copyright © The Economist Newspaper Limited 2007. All rights ***************************************************************** 21 The Nation: Everybody Look What's Going Down BLOG | Posted 10/25/2007 @ 1:05pm There's somethin' happening here, What it is ain't exactly clear. There's a man with a gun over there, tellin' me I gotta beware. I think it's time we stop, hey, what's that sound, everybody look what's going down. --For What It's Worth, Stephen Stills, 1966 It was nearly 30 years ago, in 1979, when Jackson Browne, Graham Nash, Bonnie Raitt and John Hall founded Musicians United for Safe Energy (MUSE) to fight against the use of nuclear power. They organized five exhilarating nights of No Nukes concerts at Madison Square Garden and led a rally of 200,000 people in New York's downtown Battery Park. Their efforts helped to channel public outrage in the wake of the Three Mile Island accident and strengthen opposition to Big Nuclear Energy. Now, as Congress considers $50 billion in new loan guarantees to the nuclear industry over the next two years (it has already received nearly $10 billion from the Bush-Cheney Energy Debacle of 2005), as well as extended federal liability insurance, Raitt, Browne, and Nash have reunited to educate the public and a new generation about "what's going down" and advocate for a saner path. Along with Ben Harper and Keb Mo, the original No Nukes crowd cut a new music video based on Stephen Stills' For What It's Worth that links to a petition against the massive nuclear industry handout. On Monday night, the musicians joined their MUSE co-founder -- now Congressman John Hall-- and performed for lawmakers who will be debating this critical Energy Bill that is intended to set us on a greener course. Tuesday, they were back on Capitol Hill lobbying against a "virtual blank check from taxpayers" to build new nuclear plants. While Big Nuclear is touting a self-proclaimed "nuclear renaissance" and promoting the myth that nuclear energy will solve our climate change crisis, MUSE co-founder and Freepress.org/NukeFree.org editor, Harvey Wasserman, explains the top three reasons to oppose the "Nuclear Bailout" in this video. (A more extensive post by Wasserman on reasons for opposition is here). In a nutshell, after fifty years since the first reactor was built in 1957, nuclear plants can't pay for themselves. Wall Street doesn't want anything to do with them --exorbitant cost overruns and construction problems continue to plague them -- so the industry is looking to Congress to foot the bill. Secondly, the risk of a terrorist attack -- or human error -- at these facilities is so great that the industry can't even get private insurance so, again, it looks to government to limit liability in case of a major accident. Finally, there is no safe way of dealing with high-level nuclear waste. Despite $11 billion public dollars spent on Yucca Mountain, there are still too many unanswered questions about how to safely contain waste that must be isolated for at least tens of thousands of years, if not longer-- according to Jon Block, nuclear energy and climate change project manager at the Union of Concerned Scientists. Block concludes in a recent op-ed that "any glowing description of nuclear power's benefits ignores serious issues of nuclear plant safety, security against sabotage and terrorist attack and waste disposal." As to the notion that new nuclear plants are the answer to the climate crisis, Wasserman notes that greenhouse gasses are created in the mining, milling, and enrichment of uranium fuel; and that "huge plumes of heat" are emitted directly into the air and water by the reactors. But, most importantly, one must completely ignore the devastating risks that these monstrosities pose to the environment, as the Natural Resource Defense Council writes, "The accidental release of radioactivity, whether from a reactor accident, terrorist attack, or slow leakage of radioactive waste into the local environment, poses the risk of catastrophic harm to communities and to vital natural resources, such as underground aquifers used for irrigation and drinking water." Block also sees far better options than the nuclear one: "The most sensible strategy to reduce global warming is to quickly deploy the cleanest, fastest, lowest risk solutions first. Conservation and increased efficiency by energy producers and consumers are the cheapest and quickest measures by far. Likewise, a wide range of renewable energy resources, including wind, solar, geothermal and tidal power, have enormous potential and are inherently safe-and they would encourage economic development." Thirty years after MUSE raised public-consciousness about the atomic madness of the 70's, it's good to see them back on the job fighting an absurd and illogical nuclear bailout in 2007. Like the song still says, "Stop-- everybody look what's going down." Don't accept the latest giveaway to corporate lobbyists, sign the petition today. Copyright © 2007 The Nation ***************************************************************** 22 Reuters: British Energy's Torness-1 reactor raises output | Thu Oct 25, 2007 7:29am EDT LONDON, Oct 25 (Reuters) - British Energy's (BGY.L: Quote, Profile, Research) Torness-1 nuclear power reactor in Scotland was increasing output on Thursday afternoon after restarting in the morning, a spokeswoman for the company said. Data on a website operated by network operator National Grid (NG.L: Quote, Profile, Research) indicated that the plant stopped supplying power to the network around midday. But the spokeswoman said the 625-megawatt reactor was still running at around 110-megawatts and ramping up towards full capacity. "It's still raising load," she said. "It's still operating." © Reuters2007All rights reserved ***************************************************************** 23 Reuters: FirstEnergy Pa. Beaver Valley 1 reactor exits refuel Thu Oct 25, 2007 7:18am EDT NEW YORK, Oct 25 (Reuters) - FirstEnergy Corp's (FE.N: Quote, Profile, Research) 821-megawatt Unit 1 at the Beaver Valley nuclear power station in Pennsylvania exited a refueling outage and ramped up to 29 percent power by early Thursday, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission said in a report. The company shut the unit by Sept. 24. During the outage, FirstEnergy said it would work on the pressurizer, spray lines and safety relief valves, increase the size of the containment sump strainer and replace a reactor coolant pump motor. The unit last shut for refueling from Feb. 13-April 20, 2006. It is on an 18-month refueling cycle. The 1,642 MW Beaver Valley station is located in Shippingport in Beaver County, about 35 miles northwest of Pittsburgh. There are two 821 MW Units 1 and 2 at the station, which entered service in 1976 and 1987. The company is working on increasing the power output of Unit 2 by about 8 percent. Unit 2 continued to operate at full power. Separately, FirstEnergy filed with the NRC in August 2007 to renew the original 40-year operating licenses for both units for another 20 years. It usually takes the NRC about 23 months to make a decision without a hearing and 31 months if the NRC grants a hearing. Continued... ***************************************************************** 24 Anderson Independent-Mail: Nuclear power is alternative to our dependence on oil At present, the United States obtains energy of several types: hydroelectric, nuclear, solar, wind, geothermal wells, coal, oil and natural gas. (The last is the cleanest, safest and most inexhaustible.) But what about solar power, wind power and ethanol? Although space does not permit a point-by-point refutation of these so-called environmentally beneficial solutions, suffice it to say that solar and wind power each demands enormous amounts of land, material and maintenance. Both require enormous storage facilities and/or power production back-up to provide for down times, such as when there are varying wind strengths or heavy clouds. As for ethanol, even in Brazil, which has only 5 percent of the motor vehicles as we have in this country, they are having riots because of the rising cost of food, the devastation of rain forests, the ecological deserts of cane fields. In addition, not only is ethanol subsidized 51 cents per gallon by the government, it would take all of our arable land to provide even 10 percent of our energy requirements. What that would do to the cost of food is completely unacceptable. But regarding nuclear power plants: They are not bombs. They require proper respect, which our society accords them. They are built inside super-strong containment vessels, and designed to “fail safe.” With the exception of Chernobyl, there have been no casualties from nuclear power. France derives 70 percent of her electrical power from nuclear energy. China has 40 nuclear plants on order; India and Japan are following suit. Only in the U.S., because of unrelenting demagoguery from environmental groups determined to stifle all development, and political cowardice, do we continue to rely on coal, oil and gas. We are presently in an undeclared but no less real war, which our adversaries fully intend to continue, no matter what we do. Our access to Mideast oil could be cut off at any moment. But we have the technology now to build nuclear power plants, which are extremely safe, with ample safeguards against attack, sabotage or accident, and the resources to operate them far into the future, with concomitant benefits, such as the ability to exploit hydrogen as an energy source. Nuclear wastes? Europe recycles unused uranium, which is then used to make mixed oxide fuel for refueling. Such a plant was built in Barnwell and Westinghouse at one time planned a MOX plant in Anderson County. President Jimmy Carter, yielding to “green” pressure, blocked this technology. The only viable way to replace our present reliance on fossil fuels in the short-term is nuclear power. We can become totally self-sufficient in energy, in either fossil fuels or nuclear power, but either will take five to ten years, which we may not have. Meanwhile, we must continue to pay uncounted billions to deadly foreign enemies for their oil, money they are using to accomplish our subjugation or destruction. The good news is that of the 104 nuclear power plants we have, 59 have had their operating licenses renewed, 19 are under review, and the rest are planning to apply. Our venal politicians know and understand all of the above, but they choose to ignore our nations potentially catastrophic peril to ensure politically correct support and thus their reelection. Robert F. Devine is a retired nuclear project engineer. Donald E. Rockwell is a retired general engineer with the U.S. Department of Defense. Both are Anderson residents. Posted by archivist (Suggest removal) Answer to: Don't we need uranium to fuel cheap, clean nuclear power? Massachusetts Institute of Technology's (MIT) 2003 study and a 2004 University of Chicago study concurred that nuclear power is much more expensive than natural gas or coal for electrical production (MIT's estimated cost of electricity for coal was 4.2kWh/ natural gas 3.8-5.6 kWh/nuclear power 6.7kWh). The MIT study concluded "The potential impact on the public from safety or waste management failure and the link to nuclear explosives technology are unique to nuclear energy among energy supply options. These characteristics and the fact that nuclear is more costly, make it impossible today to make a credible case for the immediate expanded use of nuclear power." Brice Smith's book "Insurmountable Risks: The Dangers of Using Nuclear Power to Combat Global Climate Change" (http://www.ieer.org/reports/insurmountab...) offers facts, figures, reports, and studies that show uranium and its radiation cannot be an answer to greenhouse gas reduction. In addition, for all the potential dangers nuclear energy will expose us to, it will have little effect on global climate stabilization. Peter Bradford, a former Commissioner of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, reports that, even if we were to triple today's worldwide nuclear capacity, it would only be equivalent to one third of what we can currently do to decrease greenhouse gas omission through energy efficiency and conservation. (See the nuclear power debate between Bradford, Patrick Moore, and Jim Riccio of Greenpeace USA at http://www.nirs.org/videodebate.htm) Dr. Helen Caldicott writes in her book Nuclear Power is Not the Answer on page viii: “Nuclear power is not “clean and green,” as the industry claims, because large amounts of traditional fossil fuels are required to mine and refine the uranium needed to run nuclear power reactors, to construct the massive concrete reactor buildings, and to transport and store the toxic radioactive waste created by the nuclear process. Burning of this fossil fuel emits significant quantities of carbon dioxide (CO2)– the primary “greenhouse gas”- into the atmosphere. In addition, large amounts of the now-banned chlorofluorocarbon (as CFC gas) are emitted during the enrichment of uranium. CFC gas is not only 10,000 10 20,000 times more efficient as an atmospheric heat trapper (“greenhouse gas”) than CO2, but it is a classic “pollutant” and a potent destroyer of the ozone layer.” Posted by TLC (Suggest removal) Archivist: The MIT report (2004) is stale info, gas prices are up three fold from 2004, so nuclear is competitive with gas. Gas also creates greenhouse gases (by-product from burning natural gas: CO2) and North American gas production is in decline and will continue to decline. Hence the LNG terminals being built in the gulf and Mexican west coast. Which one is more safe? The fuel cost represents less than 25% of the cost of nuclear power, so even a 3 fold rise would not have as significant effect as the rise in natural gas prices of late on the cost per Kwh. With enough new nuclear units, we could power the creation of hydrogen as a fuel that would do away with the "fossil fuels", gasoline and diesel, used to mine and refine the uranium, as well as use it for transportion and industry. Europe deals with the spent fuel. They reprocess it, as the article says. It can be reprocessed as only about 5% of it actual gets "burned up" in a fuel run. Reprocessing would provide plenty of fuel and consolidate the nasty stuff into a smaller volume. Where do you think all the spent fuel is stored now? At the plants in dry cask storage. And if certain people would quit blocking Yucca Mountain it would be even more safe. Conservation and energy efficiency need to be pursued, but rising population means rising energy consumption, even if per capita use declines. In the near term, nuclear is part of the solution to solving our energy self sufficiency, addressing global warming from fossil fuels and defunding the Islamic terrorists. I work as a co-owner budget rep for a western nuke unit and go to the plant several times a month. Facts and truth aside, you appear to be among those who want us all shivering in the darkness...... Scripps Newspaper Group — Online ***************************************************************** 25 Hemscott: CEZ bids in 2.2 bln eur nuclear power plant project in Romania | PRAGUE (Thomson Financial) - Czech power group CEZ filed a bid in a tender for the construction of two new units at the Cernavoda nuclear power plant in Romania, the company said. Bidders are vying to build two 720 megawatt units in a joint venture with Romanian state energy group Societatea Nationala Nuclearelectrica (SNN), said CEZ spokeswoman Eva Novakova. CEZ said the estimated value of the project is 2.2 bln eur. jason.hovet@thomson.com +420 222 191 109 jrh/jms COPYRIGHT Copyright Thomson Financial News Limited 2007. All rights reserved. The copying, republication or redistribution of Thomson Financial News Content, including by framing or similar means, is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of Thomson Financial News. Hemscott PLC - Serious Investment Research ***************************************************************** 26 Greenpeace UK: Nuclear power: an ailing industry | Posted by johns on 25 October 2007. By John Sauven, Greenpeace UK executive director. This first appeared on Comment is Free.  It really comes as no surprise to see the Financial Times has today reported that Gordon Brown's plans for more nuclear power stations appear to be in total disarray. Government rhetoric has long masked the fact that the ailing, subsidy-gobbling nuclear industry should have been put out of its misery years ago. Any claim, however laughable, that the government possessed a shred of credibility on this issue was firmly dealt with by the High Court earlier this year. The Court ruled that the earlier self-styled 'consultation' on nuclear power was "unlawful", "manifestly unfair" and "seriously flawed". Since then, the Department for Business, Entrprise and Regulatory Reform (DBERR) has carried out another consultation but that too is being widely criticised as misleading the public over radioactive waste, economics and the role of nuclear power within the climate debate. And now, still desperate to pander to the nuclear industry, the government appears to be planning to wreck a European deal to generate 20 per cent of our energy (not just electricity but heat and transport also) from renewables in order to accommodate its nuclear aspirations. This is the crux of it. As the government masquerades its support for nuclear power as a genuine solution for tackling climate change, the real reason has suddenly become clear. Gordon Brown is desperately trying to safeguard an ideological obsession with market mechanisms, over and above any other way of driving the necessary change. That's not just unfortunate; it also risks actively undermining the real solutions which are needed. Arguing that achieving the EU renewables targets is undesirable because it might threaten the price of carbon in the European Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) is frankly perverse and astonishingly short-sighted. As the leaked document revealed, "meeting the 20 per cent renewables target crucially undermines the scheme's [ETS] credibility... and reduces the incentives to invest in other carbon technologies like nuclear power". Far from helping stop climate change, nuclear power remains the single biggest obstacle to a clean energy future. It's not just over renewables and ETS that the government's thinking is left wanting. If you take into account the inherent and unsolved problem of dealing with radioactive waste, the shortage of a skilled nuclear workforce necessary for safety and the fact that nuclear could only, at best, reduce 4 per cent of CO2 emissions in 20 years time then it is clear there is much more to wreck the nuclear agenda. Nuclear waste remains dangerous for hundreds of thousands of years - yet Brown's government is still attempting to fudge this hugely dangerous issue. There still isn't any solution to dealing with radioactive waste. As well as the fact that 'deep geological disposal' - which basically translates as putting it all in a big hole in the ground - remains technically uncertain and ethically questionable, there are many unanswered questions. It will no doubt prove nigh-on impossible to identify a "willing community", who "volunteers" for such a facility in their neighbourhood, and there are concerns about how such a partnership might work in practice. The most recent reports would also seem to show that, even behind closed doors, the government is at a possible impasse. The Treasury is resisting plans to invite communities to come forward to bid for the right to house the waste, amid fears that only one will come forward and hold them to ransom - the ever enthusiastic Cumbrian council of Copeland - home to the troubled Sellafield plant - and this area was considered unsuitable. This key issue could further ruin any plans to create more new waste and stop them dead in their tracks. Efforts to build more nuclear reactors are being severely undermined further still by the simple fact that the required technical staff to ensure safety do not exist. Attempts to recruit have failed and many of the existing staff are fast approaching retirement, leaving just five inspectors to undertake the work of forty. This means that any proposal to give the green light to nuclear has to be put on hold. So with the plans for 'new build' haemorrhaging, it is all the more disturbing that the government's imprudent and bloody minded approach should threaten to kill any meaningful development of new technologies that really would effectively tackle climate change. If Britain continues with its current focus it will miss the opportunity presented by the vital EU renewable energy deal and face a massive struggle in the longer term. Instead, the government should embrace the targets Tony Blair helped to establish and set out a strategic vision for British energy generation with an ambitious policy framework and clear commitments to decisive action. Brown's priority must be on creating certainty for investors in new technologies, giving them the necessary confidence to begin an urgent shift to renewables, and leaving this antiquated nuclear power in the last century where it belongs. ***************************************************************** 27 WNN: Toshiba prepares for nuclear growth worldwide 25 October 2007 Toshiba will construct a new nuclear power engineering facility in Japan. The announcement came as the company began the process of pursuing design certification for its 4S reactor in the USA. The new nuclear power engineering facility will be built at the Isogo Nuclear Engineering Centre (IEC) in Yokohama, Toshiba's main engineering centre for its nuclear power business. Construction of the facility is scheduled to begin in February 2008, with completion set by March 2009. With the addition of the new facility, more than 3000 people will be employed at IEC. Toshiba said the new facility would be equipped with state-of-the-art engineering tools, including advanced computer-aided design (CAD), high-speed massively parallel processing computers and highly secure information networks. The facility will be earthquake-resistant and designed to withstand quakes of up to magnitude 6.8 on the Richter scale. The IEC facility was built in 1982 and has since been Toshiba's core facility for promoting nuclear power plant engineering work for boiling water reactors (BWRs), fast breeder reactors (FBRs) and the nuclear fuel cycle. The company said that the new facility will "underpin Toshiba's continuing efforts to enhance engineering support for its domestic and overseas nuclear power plant business." Meanwhile, in the USA, Toshiba has held its first meeting with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) regarding obtaining design certification of its Super-Safe, Small & Simple ('4S') nuclear power reactor. The licence is required to sell and construct the reactor in the USA. At the 23 October pre-application meeting, Toshiba and the NRC discussed the scope, schedule and resource requirements for a potential pre-application review and subsequent design approval review. At the meeting, NRC staff were given an overall introduction to the 4S reactor design and its safety features. Further pre-application meetings with NRC are scheduled in the next few months. Toshiba is using its Westinghouse subsidiary as liaison with the NRC. Toshiba said it expects the pre-application review to take approximately two years and that it expects to formally submit the application for design approval in 2009. The company anticipates a construction and operating licence (COL) application to be submitted in about 2012. Super-safe small and simple... The 4S design has been jointly developed by Toshiba and Japan's Central Research Institute of Electric Power Industry (CRIEPI). The 4S 'nuclear battery' system uses sodium as coolant (with electromagnetic pumps) and has passive safety features, notably negative temperature and void reactivity. There are two versions of the 4S design: one producing 10 MWe, the other 50 MWe. The whole reactor unit would be factory-built, transported to site, installed below ground level, and would drive a steam cycle. It is capable of three decades of continuous operation without refuelling. After 30 years the nuclear fuel would be allowed to cool for a year, then it would be removed and shipped for storage or disposal. The design has gained considerable support in Alaska and toward the end of 2004 the town of Galena granted initial approval for Toshiba to build a 4S reactor in that remote location. The 4S design is sufficiently similar to Prism - General Electric's modular 150 MWe liquid metal-cooled inherently-safe reactor - which went part-way through NRC approval process for it to have good prospects of licensing. Further information Toshiba WNA's Small Nuclear Power Reactors information paper ***************************************************************** 28 Whitehaven News: D-Day for nuclear industry Published on 25/10/2007 A LEAKED document has given December 17 as the D-day for the UK’s nuclear industry. That is when the Government will release its Energy White Paper on two key issues: whether to build a set of new nuclear reactors and what to do about the mountain of nuclear waste for disposal. This week the Financial Times reported that leaked documents suggest that the Treasury is resisting plans to invite councils to bid for the right to house the waste because it fears that only one council – Copeland – will apply. This lack of competition would leave it able to demand extra funding of more than ÂŁ1billion. MP Jamie Reed told The Whitehaven News: “It is far too early to talk about conditions of acceptance which the local community might be minded to agree to. There is absolutely nothing to suggest the local community would want to agree to accept the waste anyway. This is a long game. “I have asked Copeland Borough Council to enter into discussions with government to explore these issues entirely without prejudice.” On Saturday the Copeland Labour Party General Management Committee (GMC) raised concerns over how the Sellafield site will be run following a possible US multinational takeover. One of those at the private meeting said: “The US bidders for Sellafield have far more lawyers than the NDA and the fear was that they will run rings around the NDA.” Last week Copeland’s planning panel also said it wanted to see an â€acceptable community package’ from Sellafield before it would recommend approval for a new vault for low-level waste at Drigg. View this story and the latest newspaper in full digital reproduction, just like the printed copy at www.whitehaven-news.co.uk/digitalcopy ***************************************************************** 29 Whitehaven News: Windscale 57 fire effects not fully realised Published on 25/10/2007 A RECENT study claims the cancer effects of the 1957 Windscale fire had been under estimated. The study was carried out by John Garland, formerly of the UK Atomic Energy Authority, and Richard Wakeford, a visiting professor at the University of Manchester, suggests the contamination of the environment may have been much higher. The team carried out a re-analysis of data taken from environmental monitoring of air, grass and vegetation and combined this with computer models that revealed how the radioactive cloud would have spread from the reactor with the meteorological conditions at that time. They confirmed radioactive iodine and caesium were released, as well as polonium and a very small amount of plutonium, but found that the levels would have been higher than previously thought. John Garland said: "The reassessments showed that there was roughly twice the amount than was initially assessed." This would have also impacted the numbers of cancers that the accident would have caused, said the authors. Previously, it was thought that the radiation would have eventually led to about 200 cases of cancer, but the new contamination figures suggest it could have caused about 240. After learning of the way the accident figures were underestimated, The Irish Minister for Foreign Affairs Dermot Ahern has said the Irish government is still demanding the permanent closure of Sellafield, 50 years after what was then the world's worst nuclear accident. Minister Ahern described the recent report which said the amount of material released in the fire was double the original estimate as 'very disturbing'. Although most experts now say the radioactive plume was blown across England not everyone agrees and there are concerns, particularly in Co Louth, that the fire and ongoing emissions from Sellafield have damaged people's health. The minister, who represents Co Louth, said Sellafield represents a 'significant threat' to the people of the north-east. He raised the matter earlier in the week with the British Foreign Secretary, David Miliband, and he said he would continue to press every British minister he meets. View this story and the latest newspaper in full digital reproduction, just like the printed copy at www.whitehaven-news.co.uk/digitalcopy ***************************************************************** 30 Guardian Unlimited: US Lacks Labs to Test for 'Dirty Bomb' Thursday October 25, 2007 5:16 AM By EILEEN SULLIVAN Associated Press Writer WASHINGTON (AP) - The U.S. has a shortage of laboratories to test the thousands of people who might be exposed to radiation if a ``dirty bomb'' detonated in a major city, according to a recent congressional investigation. The federal government established 15 disaster scenarios for federal, state and local officials to plan for, including one in which a dirty bomb goes off in a major downtown area and potentially exposes 100,000 people to radioactive materials. A dirty bomb would contain some radioactive material that could cause contamination over a limited area but not create actual nuclear explosions. Should this happen in real life, the nation would not be able to quickly conduct tests for these people, because there are few labs capable of doing so in the country; and the tests available only address six of the 13 radiological isotopes that would likely be used in a dirty bomb, according to the report prepared for the House Committee on Science and Technology. Instead, it would take four years to complete all these tests, according to the report to be released Thursday. ``I had hoped since the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, that our government had smart people lying awake at 3 o'clock in the morning, trying to think through everything that terrorists could be dreaming of, every kind of attack they could be dreaming of, and trying to think of ways to prevent it and to respond to it if it does happen,'' said Rep. Brad Miller, D-N.C. ``Learning how poorly prepared we are for a dirty bomb, a radiological attack, makes me think that that's not happened.'' Miller is chairman of the subcommittee holding a hearing on the report's findings. The report acknowledges that this type of dirty-bomb scenario would probably not cause massive casualties, but Miller said four years is too long to wait for results of whether people are contaminated. ``I can't imagine a parent, who is told that their child can be tested for cesium in two-and-a-half more years, is going to be reassured to hear that their child probably won't die,'' Miller said. The report on radioactive testing offered this example of the deficient lab capabilities in the U.S.: When a former Russian KGB agent was poisoned with polonium-210 last year, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention identified 160 U.S. citizens who were staying at the same hotel where the Russian was poisoned or eating at the same restaurant and were potentially exposed. But the CDC found only one laboratory in the U.S. that was qualified and able to conduct analysis for exposure to the radioactive material. Ultimately, 31 samples were tested, and it took seven days to test each one. The Energy Department has labs capable of doing a polonium analysis, but those labs do not meet legal standards for testing set by CDC. According to the report: ``The public outcry for detailed clinical health assessments confirming their lack of radiological contamination is likely to be tremendous.'' Similarly, officials recently said the nation is ill-equipped to quickly track down the make and origin of nuclear materials. If terrorists use such a radioactive device to attack the U.S., people would immediately want to know who is responsible, and it could take months to analyze and identify nuclear material, counterproliferation officials said earlier this month. Guardian Unlimited © Guardian News and Media Limited 2007 ***************************************************************** 31 ENS: U.S. Army Accused of Hiding Chemical Weapons Information "Environment News Service (ENS) Citizen groups trying to stop the U.S. Army from shipping waste from deadly VX nerve agent from Indiana across eight states to Port Arthur, Texas say sources who wish to remain anonymous told the groups that the Army had withheld crucial information from the public and a federal judge during a hearing on the shipments last July. Based on this information, the groups have taken legal action again to challenge the process, which they claim is illegal and poses serious safety and health hazards. In the motion for summary judgment filed today, groups state that the Army "intentionally withheld critical evidence" from the public and the federal judge in Indiana who heard their arguments last July. The Army ships the VX nerve agent hydrolysate from Newport, Indiana to Port Arthur, Texas to be incinerated as part of the destruction of all U.S. chemical weapons under an international treaty. On April 5, 2007, the Army signed a $49 million contract with Veolia Environmental Services of Lombard, Illinois to provide final treatment of the caustic wastewater at its plant in Port Arthur, Texas. After U.S. District Judge Larry McKinney denied the groups' request for a preliminary injunction to stop the VX hydrolysate, VXH, shipments, the groups were given an "inside tip" that extensive efforts had been made to identify viable on-site alternatives to the transportation option and that the Army had kept secret the data resulting from those efforts. "Withholding information about these activities undermines the very cornerstone of the National Environmental Policy Act, a federal law requiring open review of alternatives for actions undertaken by the federal government that could have environmental consequences," said Craig Williams, director of the Chemical Weapons Working Group based in Berea. According to today's filing, not only were three alternatives identified as viable, one was actually chosen as the contingency plan should VXH shipment to a DuPont facility in New Jersey be unsuccessful, which it turned out to be. Opposition due to public health and environmental impact concerns blocked the DuPont proposal. The groups' motion states, "After the DuPont option failed, the federal defendants abandoned, in secret, the on-site VXH treatment contingency option that had been selected in secret and for which preparations had been made in secret (and paid for by the federal defendants)." The motion claims that the undisclosed steps taken by the Army to implement a viable on-site treatment option went so far as to even include preparing environmental permit applications and drafting a NEPA analysis - yet none of this information was made public nor provided to the court. "It's obvious to us that the Army and their contractors did not want the public or the court to be aware of how far their on-site treatment selection had progressed in order to make their clandestine signing of a contract with an incinerator company almost a thousand miles away appear to be the only workable option," said Williams. The motion also claims that there was no public notice, review or comment on the decision to ship the waste to Texas. The groups also claim that the shipments violate U.S. law prohibiting interstate transportation of chemical weapons. They allege that there are higher VX concentrations in the waste than expected due to valve failures, piping configurations and holding tank design flaws at the Newport, Indiana treatment facility. The Army failed to consider matters of environmental justice in its decision, the groups claim, saying that the Army failed to provide adequate monitoring or response capability for VX agent releases. Mick Harrison, attorney for plaintiffs, said, "The new evidence presented in this motion shows, disturbingly, that the Army made a conscious choice to disregard the clear Congressional mandate that the public be meaningfully involved in the analysis federal agencies are required to conduct under NEPA of alternative courses of action and their environmental consequences. The Army, however, is not above the law." Although some of these points were raised during the preliminary injunction hearing in July in which the judge ruled in favor of the Army, the plaintiffs believe that the new information including on-site treatment capabilities, along with additional arguments on the merits of the claims, will result in a favorable finding during this procedure. Meanwhile, plaintiffs have been insisting the EPA review the methods used by the Army to determine the toxicity of the VXH waste being sent to Port Arthur for incineration, claiming that the current methods are not in compliance with EPA requirements. If the EPA does not do an investigation thorough enough to satisfy them, plaintiffs in this case say they will consider bringing suit to force that issue as well. Copyright Environment News Service (ENS) 2007. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 32 Bulletin Online: The effect of U.S. nuclear testing on the Marshallese By Hugh Gusterson | 25 October 2007 What do you owe another country when you explode 67 nuclear weapons on its territory, wreaking havoc upon the health and environment of its people? Not much according to the Bush administration. Between 1946 and 1958, the United States used the Marshall Islands--a U.N. Trust Territory administered by the United States--as nuclear proving grounds, especially for weapons considered too big to test in the continental United States. The largest of these weapons was the 1954 Bravo shot (at 15 megatons about 1,000 times the strength of the Hiroshima bomb). These tests forced the relocation of all the inhabitants of the Bikini and Enewetak atolls and spread plumes of radioactivity across the entire cluster of 33 atolls. They released 6.3 billion curies of radioactive iodine-131 alone--42 times the amount released by atmospheric nuclear testing in Nevada. The National Cancer Institute has predicted a 9 percent increase in cancers for the Marshallese as a result of nuclear testing in the Pacific. Since the Marshallese number about 55,000, roughly 500 extra cancers are expected. The anthropologist Holly Barker, who has devoted her life to helping the Marshallese deal with the aftermath of nuclear abuse, reports an epidemic of birth defects, cancer, mental retardation, thyroid disorders, and suicides among the local population. U.S. officials should be forced to read her account of a Marshallese mother watching one son die shortly after birth as his skin peeled off and nursing her second, missing the back of his skull, gently holding his brain in as he ate. The Marshallese lack the basic medical infrastructure to deal with this disaster. In Barker's words, "There is no oncologist in the Marshall Islands, no chemotherapy, no cancer registry, and no nationwide screening program for early detection of cancer." In the early 1990s, Barker worked her way through thousands of pages of documents declassified when Hazel O'Leary was energy secretary. According to Barker, the documents show that U.S. officials hid from the Marshallese the full extent of their contamination while subjecting many to painful medical tests designed more to generate information for U.S. nuclear experts than to provide medical care for those sickened by U.S. nuclear testing. The full story is told in Barker’s book Bravo for the Marshallese and Dennis O'Rourke's documentary . So far the Marshall Islanders have received scant compensation for their suffering. In 1986 when the Marshall Islands signed the Compact of Free Association with the United States, they gave Washington the right to use their atoll at Kwajalein for target practice for intercontinental ballistic missiles launched from California. In return for this and past suffering, they received a paltry $150 million to pay damages through a Nuclear Claims Tribunal. That fund has now been exhausted. The United States also agreed to fund medical treatment for residents of four of the 33 atolls (Enewetak, Bikini, Utrik, and Rongelap). These four atolls were the closest to the Bravo test. Clinging to the fiction that residents of the other 29 atolls were not affected by 67 nuclear weapons detonated in their neighborhood, despite ample evidence to the contrary, the U.S. program does not reach beyond the four chosen atolls. Perversely, those from the atolls that were most damaged consider themselves lucky, since they at least get U.S.-subsidized health care. This care, provided at a rate that has not been adjusted for inflation since 1986, is funded at a risible $7 per patient per month. The Senate is now considering Senate Bill 1756, which would increase U.S. funding for the Marshallese from the paltry to the merely pitiful. This legislation contains four provisions. First, it would place a nuclear waste site on the Marshall Islands under Energy oversight. Second, it would mandate a National Academy of Sciences study of the nonradiogenic health effects of nuclear testing on the Marshallese--the effects of forced relocation, changed diet, and so on. Third, the amount of money available to fund health care would double to about $2 million a year and be indexed to inflation. Finally, Marshallese who cleaned contaminated sites under U.S. supervision would be compensated for consequent illnesses just like the U.S. Energy workers who also cleaned these sites. At present, although Marshallese fight in Iraq wearing U.S. uniforms, Washington says they are not eligible for the same compensation as Energy workers because they are not U.S. citizens. Now they're American, now they're not. Although the bill's provisions are laughably modest, the Bush administration opposes this legislation. We can afford more than $130 billion a year for the Iraq War, but not $2 million a year to provide rudimentary medical care to innocents we have harmed. On September 25, I dropped by a Senate hearing on the bill. The lawyer for the Marshallese, Jonathan Weisgall, was eloquent and impassioned. The man in a suit sent by the administration spoke in a gray monotone about intricate bureaucratic regulations and processes that made the Marshallese request impossible to fulfill. New Mexico Democratic Sen. Jeff Bingaman, who chaired the meeting, mispronounced the name of the president of the Marshall Islands and seemed mostly to be going through the motions. The only other senator who bothered to show up, Lisa Murkowski (a Republican from Alaska), actually showed a lively interest in the plight of the people dying today from the weapons we tested two generations ago. The Marshallese do not have armies of lobbyists (though they did briefly hire Jack Abramoff); they cannot sway the outcome of a presidential election; they do not make big campaign contributions; their embassy is a modest house that many Washington lobbyists would find inadequate for their families; and they die conveniently out of sight. But surely we can find a little extra change to set right what we did wrong. © 2007 Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists Remote Address: 206.130.124.74 · Server: www.thebulletin.org ***************************************************************** 33 AU ABC: 'Medal in mail' disappoints nuclear test subjects - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation) Updated October 25, 2007 22:29:00 A commemorative medallion sent in the mail has disappointed some of the Australians who participated in British nuclear testing programs in the 1950s and 60s. Medallions have been posted to about 5,000 soldiers and civilians who participated in the program at sites including Maralinga in South Australia. Terry Toon from the Atomic Ex-Servicemen Association spent 11 months at Maralinga, and says the people he served with want greater recognition of the dangerous operation. The Veterans Affairs Minister Bruce Bilson says that is not the normal practice under the military awards system. "The medallion in the mail is a nation conveying its appreciation for people's contribution to the British nuclear test program," he said. "That's beyond the government's decision to provide white card or condition-specific private health cover for those that have cancer." ***************************************************************** 34 Huffington Post: Robert Koehler: A Nation Downwind - Posted October 25, 2007 | 03:21 PM (EST) "Please, dear God, don't let us have killed John Wayne." -- unidentified government official, 1980 Mary Dickson's new play, Exposed, is a sacrament of grief and anger that doesn't stop at the edge of the stage or end with the actors' bows. Be careful. It gets under the skin and into the marrow, but that's the whole point. When I saw it this past weekend in Salt Lake City, where its world-premiere run is sold out, the author and some of the real-life characters the play is based on joined the cast onstage afterward and engaged with the audience -- almost no one left, by the way, and those who did left crying -- in a fervid discussion of the subject matter: the 928 above- and below-ground nuclear blasts set off at the Nevada Test Site, near Las Vegas, between 1951 and 1992; the devastating effect these tests, many of them very dirty, had on the downwind population; and the government secrecy and lies, as it pursued the Cold War, that kept the public falsely reassured that the fallout that dusted the landscape afterward was perfectly harmless. Like I say, I couldn't tell when the play stopped, as art met life in this interchange and the personal stories of the audience members -- "I've had cancer seven times . . . three of my children died of cancer" -- mingled with the storyline of Exposed. Dickson, a native of Salt Lake City, an "accidental playwright," as the Salt Lake Tribune described her, has woven three separate stories into this devastating drama that deserves a national audience. The first is personal: her own bout with thyroid cancer when she was in her late 20s; her sister, Ann Dickson DeBirk's, losing battle with lupus (she died in 2001 at age 46); Dickson's dawning realization that both of them are "downwinders"; and her resulting activism, in outraged collaboration with other downwinders, that culminated in early 2007 in the government's cancellation of the proposed subnuclear test blast known as Divine Strake. The second story, based on hearing transcripts and Dickson's own interviews, is told in the voices of the downwinders: "The sheep had burns on their lips and faces from eating grass covered with fallout. . . . Their wool came off in my hands. The government says they died of malnutrition. Hell, they thought we was all dumb sheep herders. But these sheep ate that fallout . . . (and) we sold that wool." "In 1959, I noticed a hunk of hair and scalp in my brush -- I was never well after that. I buy my life now, one month at a time." "I watched my classmates get sick and die of leukemia. I remember, as a kid, we were given a roll of dimes by a government spokesman who came to our school. He said call us if you see a Russian fighter plane. They were keeping fear alive." Howard Hughes, who felt the walls of his Las Vegas mansion shake and viscerally detested the testing, shows up. So does the cast of The Conqueror, or at least its memory. The movie, shot in 1955 in the desert near St. George, Utah -- in fallout-saturated soil, which permeated the set -- was directed by Dick Powell and starred John Wayne, Susan Hayward and Agnes Moorehead, all of whom later died of cancer. As of the mid-'80s, 91 of 220 cast members had contracted cancer and 46 had died of it. A 1980 People magazine story on these deaths elicited the above quote about Wayne, the icon, and in Exposed, as a government official utters it, we hear the cynicism with stabbing clarity. The play's third storyline, personified by two anonymous feds in pinstripes, is gleaned from Atomic Energy Commission transcripts and other sources. The secret high-level debates and public BS wind through the other two stories. At one point, as Ann is dying, as the tension is building unbearably, the whole cast, including the G-men, suddenly start singing Bert the Turtle's song, "Duck and Cover," the official civil defense ditty that most baby boomers will surely remember (if you don't, check it out here). The grim seriousness temporarily collapses into nonsense. The effect is astonishing: This is really the level of awareness we had in the 1950s. And then it's half a century later. The downwinders have seen countless loved ones die. Many of them have been keeping cancer charts, and marking off the names of their neighbors one by one. When Divine Strake is proposed, they're prepared; they flood the hearings in overwhelming numbers and the government, its power-point disinformation show defeated, cancels the test. The storylines converge in a cacophony of irreconcilable differences, each character shouting his or her point of view. Then there's silence, and the play ends with a reading of the names of the downwinder dead. After each show, new names are added. The air in the theater reverberated with the reading of those names and, after the discussion, as I left, I was tingling with a sense of outrage, temporary victory and the meaning of participatory democracy. - - - Robert Koehler, an award-winning, Chicago-based journalist, is an editor at Tribune Media Services and nationally syndicated writer. You can respond to this column at bkoehler@tribune.com or visit his Web site at commonwonders.com. © 2007 TRIBUNE MEDIA SERVICES, INC. * Copyright © 2007 HuffingtonPost.com, Inc. | ***************************************************************** 35 Guardian Unlimited: US Testing of Radiation Exposure Limited Thursday October 25, 2007 4:46 PM By EILEEN SULLIVAN Associated Press Writer WASHINGTON (AP) - The U.S. has a shortage of laboratories to test the thousands of people who might be exposed to radiation if a ``dirty bomb'' detonated in a major city, according to a congressional report released Thursday. If a dirty bomb goes off in a major downtown area and potentially exposes 100,000 people to radioactive materials, it could take four years to complete the necessary testing, according to the report prepared for the House Committee on Science and Technology. A dirty bomb is a device that contains some radioactive material that could contaminate a limited area but would not create actual nuclear explosions. Should this happen in real life in a big city, the nation would not be able to quickly conduct the necessary tests, because there are few labs capable of doing so in the country. Also, the tests available only address six of the 13 radiological isotopes that would likely be used in a dirty bomb, according to the report. The Environmental Protection Agency estimates this scenario would produce 350,000 samples to be tested. With the EPA's current lab capacity, it would take two years to complete the testing, said Dana Tulis of the EPA's office of emergency management. ``We are likely headed for a radiological Katrina if terrorists do succeed in detonating a dirty bomb in an American city,'' said Rep. Brad Miller, D-N.C., chairman of the subcommittee holding a hearing on the issue. The report acknowledges that this type of dirty-bomb scenario would probably not cause massive casualties, but Miller said four years is too long to wait for results of whether people need medical treatment. ``I can't imagine a parent, who is told that their child can be tested for cesium in two-and-a-half more years, is going to be reassured to hear that their child probably won't die,'' Miller said in an interview Wednesday. Miller said there have been some efforts to address this gap, but the bureaucratic response has been frustrating. The Homeland Security Department in 2005 created a consortium of laboratory networks to address this issue. ``We have some significant shortfalls when it comes to the radiological area,'' said John Vitko Jr., director of the chemical and biological division at the Homeland Security Department's science and technology directorate. ``Clearly we need to improve in that area.'' The report on radioactive testing offered this example of the deficient lab capabilities in the U.S.: When a former Russian KGB agent was poisoned with polonium-210 last year, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention identified 160 U.S. citizens who were staying at the same hotel where the Russian was poisoned or eating at the same restaurant and were potentially exposed. But the CDC found only one laboratory in the U.S. that was qualified and able to conduct analysis for exposure to the radioactive material. Ultimately, 31 samples were tested, and it took seven days to test each one. The Energy Department has labs capable of doing a polonium analysis, but those labs do not meet legal standards for testing set by CDC. The environmental tests are key, because they direct decision-makers in the recovery effort - when it is safe to move back into a building, for instance, said John Griggs who heads the EPA's monitoring and analytical services branch. ``The lack of data I think is going to result in heightened public concern and panic and the demand for answers,'' Griggs said. Similarly, officials recently said the nation is ill-equipped to quickly track down the make and origin of nuclear materials. If terrorists use such a radioactive device to attack the U.S., people would immediately want to know who is responsible, and it could take months to analyze and identify nuclear material, counterproliferation officials said earlier this month. Guardian Unlimited © Guardian News and Media Limited 2007 ***************************************************************** 36 Salt Lake Tribune: Review: Blistering political commentary, but ineffective theater Article Last Updated: 10/24/2007 05:52:53 PM MDT Actresses Joyce Cohen, left, and Teri Cowan perform in "Exposed," a new play by Mary Dickson, of Salt Lake City. Mary Dickson's docudrama "Exposed" makes a compelling argument that radioactive fallout from nuclear weapons testing in Nevada, foisted upon the nation by a Cold War-obsessed government, caused cancers and other diseases in a generation of unwitting Americans. As a political statement, "Exposed" is devastating. As a piece of theater, it's flawed. Dickson based her play on actual people, including herself, and recent events in Nevada and Utah. Many of her lines are lifted verbatim from government documents, interviews and personal conversations. This lends the play a reality and immediacy that is at once potent and uncomfortable. As audience members, we feel almost too close to the subject to gain any perspective. Maybe Dickson is, too. The Plan-B Theatre Company production progresses on three interwoven, parallel tracks: One charts the tender relationship between Dickson, recovering in Salt Lake City from thyroid cancer, and her older sister Ann, who contracts a terminal form of lupus. Another recounts Dickson's interviews with a handful of "downwinders" about their debilitating health problems, while the third reconstructs government decision-making and propaganda behind the bomb tests. The action unfolds on a simple, evocative stage containing a table and chairs flanked by two low platforms. The centerpiece of Randy Rasmussen's set design is a chaotic jumble of chairs, girders and rods that rises up a rear wall and then spreads across the ceiling toward the audience like a mushrooming blast. Projected above the stage are supertitles, such as "December 1950, The Pentagon," that effectively anchor each scene in time and place. As directed by Jerry Rapier, the actors deliver many of their lines toward the audience, reinforcing their power as tragic testimony. But Rapier undercuts the 90-minute play by pacing it too briskly. He rushes from talky scene to scene, leaving us little time to absorb their impact and the play little room to breathe. This is not the fault of the six-member cast, which imbues Dickson's lines with passion and nuance. Joyce Cohen, one of Utah's finest actresses, convincingly charts Dickson's evolution from blithe cancer patient to crusading activist. When a distraught Mary returns home from Ann's funeral and says, "Now she won't suffer. But she never should have gotten sick in the first place!" Cohen bites off the line with startling ferocity. Other standouts include Jason Tatom as an oily government official ("Of course, there is always some risk [with weapons testing], but we all have to make sacrifices. Communism is on the march!") and Kirt Bateman and Teresa Sanderson, who squeeze poignancy from their brief portrayals of multiple downwinders. Bateman, who employs vocal inflections to play nine different characters, is especially versatile. By showing how a bellicose, secretive government manipulates its citizens through fear, Dickson draws convincing parallels with the current war in Iraq. She also fashions some moving scenes around her sister, played by Teri Cowan. The play's emotional climax comes three-fourths of the way through, with Ann's death, but Dickson tacks on six more years of history to trace the recent furor over Divine Strake. "Exposed's" chief problem may be its lack of subtlety. Mary and Ann bask in warm light onstage, while the government officials in their sinister dark suits speak under harsh glare or lurk in the shadows. Dickson also makes her point in the first 10 minutes, then bludgeons us with it. A less direct approach would have been more effective. As the world premiere of a Utah-bred play about an important and relevant issue, "Exposed" deserves to be considered an event. By suggesting that the American government may have knowingly poisoned millions of its own people, it raises disturbing questions that will provoke its audience, as good art does. But it feels less like theater than a call to arms. griggs@sltrib.com Exposed * WHERE: Rose Wagner Performing Arts Center, 138 W. 300 South, Salt Lake City * WHEN: through Nov. 4; all performances sold out except a 4 p.m. matinee on Nov. 3. * TICKETS: $18 at 801-355-ARTS or www.arttix.org. * RUNNING TIME: 90 minutes without intermission * BOTTOM LINE: This documentary-style drama, which probes the human consequences of America's nuclear history, plays like activism, not art. ***************************************************************** 37 NAS: Project: Toxicologic and Radiologic Effects from Exposures to Depleted Uranium During and After Combat Project Title: PIN: BEST-K-04-02-A Major Unit: Division on Earth and Life Studies Sub Unit: Board on Environmental Studies and Toxicology RSO: Gustavson, Karl Subject/Focus Area: Project Scope A subcommittee of the National Academies' Committee on Toxicology, in collaboration with the Board on Radiation Effects Research, will review toxicological (including reproductive toxicity), radiological, epidemiological, and toxicokinetic data on depleted uranium (DU). In its first report, the committee will assess the Army's Capstone report on toxicological and radiological risks to soldiers, from exposures to depleted uranium. In its second report, the committee will assess the health risk to clean-up workers, and civilian residents who reoccupy the area where the combat took place. The potential health effects from exposure to Transuranics (TRUs) and Fission Products (FP) released in the armor will also be reviewed. The NRC will also review effects of DU on the environment. Health hazard and environmental reports, prepared by organizations such World Health Organization (WHO), the United Nations Environmental Programme (for the post-conflict Balkans), the International Atomic Energy Commission (IAEC), the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR), and the United Kingdom Royal Society, will also be considered. Relevant data deficiencies will be identified, and recommendations for future research will be made. The project is sponsored by the Department of the Army, USDOD The approximate start date for the project is July 1, 2004. A report will be issued at the end of the project in approximately 24 months. Note: The project duration has been extended. The report is expected to be issued in fall 2007. 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 - 03/14/2005 Meeting 2 - 08/02/2005 Meeting 3 - 11/15/2005 Meeting 4 - 02/27/2007 Reports Reports having no URL can be seen at the Public Access Records Office Email: info@nas.edu ***************************************************************** 38 IPS-English AUSTRALIA: 'Uranium For India Not Linked to US Nuke Deal' Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2007 16:07:05 -0700 Stephen de Tarczynski MELBOURNE, Oct 25 (IPS) - Despite Australia's agreement to provide uranium to India being put on ice as a consequence of the stalled nuclear deal between the United States and India, analysts say Australia is not just following the U.S. lead. ”Australia was waiting not only on that agreement between the Americans and the Indians but for the additional safeguards and approvals that would follow it,” says Robert Ayson, director of studies at the Australian National University's Strategic and Defence Studies Centre. In August, Australian Prime Minister John Howard announced his government's controversial decision to allow uranium exports to India. This decision was at odds with Australia's hitherto policy of not supplying uranium to countries which have not signed up to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), of which India is one. But with India's coalition government struggling to ratify the nuclear cooperation agreement between itself and the U.S. -- the successful completion of which being a pre-condition for Australia to sell uranium to India -- Australia's own agreement with India has subsequently stalled. ”It's not a matter of following the U.S. lead,” a spokesman for Australia's foreign minister, Alexander Downer, told IPS, pointing out that other stipulations were also required for Australia to export uranium to India. Aside from the Indo-U.S. nuclear cooperation agreement, Australia also requires a safeguards agreement between India and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA); an additional protocol on strengthened safeguards to be concluded by India; for the Nuclear Suppliers' Group (NSG) to enable international civil nuclear supply to India; and for ”satisfactory progress” to be made by India in its commitment to place designated civil nuclear facilities under IAEA safeguards. Rory Medcalf, director of the International Security program at the Lowy Institute for International Policy, a Sydney-based think tank, says that while one interpretation of the stalled uranium export agreement could be that Australia is following the U.S. lead, there is more to it. ”I think it's not so much about the bilateral relationship with the U.S., it's about the fact that Australia is not going to move on its own on this issue,” says Medcalf. ”I don't think decisions on (Australia's) India policy are made purely on the basis of whatever the U.S. is doing. It's just that on this particular uranium issue it would have been really quite extraordinary or quite bizarre for Australia to break ranks with the rest of the western world and suddenly start supplying uranium to India before others started to move,” he says. Medcalf argues that Australia is not the only country which can be perceived to be following the U.S. lead. ”If you look at the movement internationally on this issue, a lot of countries -- especially a lot of the western European countries, for example -- which have, like Australia, been very careful not to have nuclear commerce with India, were beginning to shift their positions as a result of the U.S., if you like, pushing through a change in the non-proliferation order,” Medcalf told IPS. The move by the U.S. to bring India back into the nuclear fold signalled an end to India's status as a nuclear pariah. ”The establishment of the Nuclear Suppliers' Group (in response to India's 1974 testing of a nuclear bomb) and the sanctions on India that this is all about reversing were driven by the U.S. in the ‘70s,” says Medcalf. ”They wouldn't have happened if the U.S. hadn't pushed them. So, we also followed the U.S. on that occasion, (but] in quite a different direction,” he adds. Medcalf views as problematic the perception of Australia's relationship with India as being reliant on both countries' U.S. ties. ”It is a relationship that has been seen to have been tied to our relationship with the U.S. and it doesn't look like we're making a lot of progress in developing a truly independent relationship with India,” he says. Medcalf says that India's perception of Australia's position as subservient to the U.S. on this issue -- which Medcalf describes as ”understandable” but ”inaccurate” -- is seen negatively by India. ”The funny thing about this is that it was seen as a negative from India's point of view in the past because the U.S. was seen to be basically isolating India.” With Australia opening the way for uranium exports to India, Medcalf explains that Australia is again viewed as following the U.S. ”It's a hard thing to shake off and difficult to see how we can shake it off,” he says. Ayson argues that the Australian and the U.S. governments see the world in similar, but not identical, ways. ”The Bush administration and the Howard government do see the world fairly similarly, but that's not because the Howard government just follows in an automatic way,” he says. ”It's more like they've got a parallel sense of interests rather than the sense that, automatically, Canberra will follow where Washington will go,” argues Ayson. Ayson told IPS that both the U.S. and Australia, separately, see good relations with India as being in their respective national interests. ”I think that the Howard government feels that India is a rising great power in Asia,” he says. Australia, while signifying its support of India as a rising power by deciding to sell uranium to India, was wary of undermining its international standing, argues Ayson. In order to keep its reputation intact, Australia looked ”to use the American agreement with India as a kind of quasi-NPT, almost a bilateral NPT,” says Ayson, arguing that Australia wanted multilateral support for India's civilian nuclear program to give its own position more legitimacy. According to Ayson, Australia's willingness to supply India with uranium is based more on Asia's ”geopolitical reality” than economics. For both the U.S. and Australian governments, ”encouraging an active India in Asian politics, particularly at a time when you've got a rising China, particularly at a time when you've also got concerns about how the future balance of power in the region will play out, well that's actually in our interest,” he says. ***** + INDIA/US: Nuke Deal on Pause (http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=39624) + ASIA PACIFIC: War Games Muddy APEC Summit (http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=39177) + AUSTRALIA: 'Uranium Sales May Fuel Asian Arms Race' (http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=39020) + Nuclear Ambitions -More IPS Coverage (http://www.ipsnews.net/new_focus/nuclear/index.asp) (END/IPS/AP/WD/IP/NU/IF/DV/NR/ST/RDR/07) = 10250825 ORP009 NNNN ***************************************************************** 39 ReviewJournal.com: Limits on waste at Yucca deflected Oct. 25, 2007 STEPHENS WASHINGTON BUREAU WASHINGTON -- The Nuclear Regulatory Commission on Wednesday denied a Nevada request for limits on how much nuclear waste the government should be allowed to store above ground at Yucca Mountain awaiting burial. The NRC said it is too early to get into the details of how the Department of Energy is designing a nuclear waste repository for the Yucca site. DOE plans to lay out its blueprints when it applies to the NRC next summer for a construction license. "The issues raised by the petition are best addressed during the agency's review of the application, when a final design will be available," the NRC said in a notice posted in the Federal Register. The Energy Department is designing concrete pads where highly radioactive used nuclear fuel from utility plants would be "cooled" over time in concrete and steel casks until they reach desired temperatures for burial within the mountain. Nevada officials protested the pads are being designed to hold an unacceptably large amount of waste, possibly 21,000 tons. Nuclear waste would be sent to Yucca Mountain much faster than DOE could possibly move it underground, they said. If problems develop with the underground repository, the dangerous material could remain above-ground indefinitely, increasing risks from plane crashes, missile strikes or earthquakes, state officials charged. It is one of a number of issues where Nevada and the Energy Department are expected eventually to clash either through lawsuits or during NRC license hearings. "I am assuming we will revisit this issue when DOE submits its license application," said Bob Loux, executive director of the Nevada Agency for Nuclear Projects. Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal, 1997 - 2007 ***************************************************************** 40 ReviewJournal.com: Gibbons says he was snubbed by Yucca Mountain Senate panel Oct. 25, 2007 By STEVE TETREAULT STEPHENS WASHINGTON BUREAU Gov. Jim Gibbons Wasn't invited to Senate hearing WASHINGTON -- Gov. Jim Gibbons charged Wednesday that he was snubbed by a U.S. Senate committee inviting witnesses to testify next week at a hearing on Yucca Mountain. The Democratic-controlled panel passed over the Republican governor, according to his aides and other sources in Washington. Instead, Catherine Cortez Masto, the attorney general and a Democrat, was invited to present the state's views on the nuclear waste repository at the Oct. 31 hearing. "I was deeply concerned that I have not been invited to testify on behalf of the people of Nevada," Gibbons said in a letter sent Wednesday to Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., chairwoman of the Environment and Public Works Committee. "For Nevada, the fight against Yucca Mountain has always been a bipartisan one," Gibbons wrote. Neither Boxer nor committee aides could be reached on Wednesday night. Gibbons aides in the past week called staffers for Boxer and for Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., expressing interest in having the governor testify at the hearing, which falls on Nevada's statehood anniversary, according to Melissa Subbotin, Gibbons spokeswoman. "There is absolutely no reason why Governor Gibbons should not have been asked to participate in the hearing," Subbotin said. "He has remained at the forefront of the fight against the Yucca Mountain Project." Reid suggested participants to Boxer and believed that Cortez Masto would be a strong witness, his spokesman Jon Summers said. The hearing will focus on upcoming repository license issues and Nevada's ongoing legal fights against the project, Summers said, so "it was thought (Cortez Masto) would be an appropriate pick" as the state's chief attorney. Summers insisted there was no partisan motive to invite Cortez Masto and not Gibbons. He noted Sen. John Ensign will take part as a Nevada Republican elected statewide. Gibbons could have been invited by Republican senators if they chose, Summers added. The Yucca Mountain hearing has gained an elevated profile as the first one on the topic sponsored by Senate Democrats since they took control of the Senate this year. Among the senators expected to participate is Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., who has said she would kill the project if elected president. Politics is threatening to overtake the hearing, said Rep. Jon Porter, R-Nev. "This is just disappointing and a slap in the face to Nevadans not to invite the governor who has fought against Yucca Mountain his whole career," Porter said. "It appears to me this is a dog and pony show," Porter said. "This is not about personalities, it is about the future of our state." The witness list has not been made public yet but it is said to include Reid, Ensign, Cortez Masto, Sen. Jim DeMint, R-S.C., representatives from the Department of Energy, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the Environmental Protection Agency, the head of the National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners, and an environmental spokesman. Contact Stephens Washington Bureau chief Steve Tetreault at STetreault@ stephensmedia.com or (202) 783-1760. Links powered by inform.com Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal, 1997 - 2007 ***************************************************************** 41 ReviewJournal.com: Reid's views on warming fire up critics Oct. 25, 2007 By STEVE TETREAULT STEPHENS WASHINGTON BUREAU WASHINGTON -- Sen. Harry Reid this week linked the California wildfires to global warming and in the process lit a small political fire himself. Several conservative bloggers and the leader of the Nevada Republican party seized on remarks the Senate majority leader made Tuesday while talking about energy and funding for suppression of fires. "As you know, one reason that we have the fires burning in Southern California is global warming," Reid told reporters. "One reason the Colorado Basin is going dry is because of global warming." Asked a few minutes later what he meant, Reid said that when it came to the fires, global warming "is part of it, and everybody -- I think most everyone recognizes that." "There are a lot of issues that are -- we've had droughts in places we've never had droughts before," Reid said, according to a transcript. Critics charged Reid was politicizing the fires to score points on global warming, an issue that still has pockets of debate on its severity and impact. "Rather than debating global warming in the middle of a national disaster, Senator Reid should use his position to help provide relief to the communities in Southern California," said Sue Lowden, Nevada Republican Party chairwoman. Reid spokesman Jon Summers said that critics were closing their eyes to the issue and that their criticism was "boilerplate." "The effects of global warming have certainly contributed to the severity of the fires we have seen across the West, whether at Tahoe or the ones burning across California," Summers said. "That was his point, and that is what most people don't dispute, except the Nevada Republican Party." At an event Wednesday, Reid said his point was that the Bush administration has underfunded fire suppression despite clear needs. "We shouldn't have to fight with the president every time," Reid said. "We've had these wildfires in the West now for a number of years, and we need more money." Contact Stephens Washington Bureau chief Steve Tetreault at STetreault@stephensmedia.com or 202-783-1760. Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal, 1997 - 2007 ***************************************************************** 42 Platts: Spot uranium prices strengthen by $2, rise to $80/pound U3O8 2007-10-23 Washington (Platts)--23Oct2007 The spot price of uranium has risen by $2 to $80/pound U3O8, price reporting firms TradeTech and Ux Consulting said, adding that both buyers and sellers are cautiously testing the market. That caution was reflected in smaller volumes being traded. One deal announced by broker New York Nuclear on October 19 was for 20,000 pounds U3O8 for delivery in November at a price of $79/lb. That deal, New York Nuclear said, was concluded off the company's UraniumOnLine trading system. Sellers are starting to appear more bullish, with some expecting the spot price will again approach triple digits by the end of the year. And while buyers see upward pressure on prices, they appear to believe that the price rise will be slower, staying under $90 by the end of the year, analysts said. Separately, the US Department of Energy has asked for expressions of interest in the purchase of 250 metric tons of surplus, off-specification low-enriched uranium the government owns. The enriched uranium is derived from the processing and down-blending of high-enriched uranium metals, oxides, and fuel elements at DOE's Savannah River site. Because of certain contaminants, the uranium, after processing, would not meet current commercial standards for fuel used in nuclear reactors. Interested firms, which could blend the uranium with other supply to lower the level of contaminants, are to reply to DOE by November 19. Platts Nuclear Fuel price range for the week ending October 26 is $78 to $85/pound. --Mike Knapik, newsdesk@platts.com Copyright © 2007 - Platts, All Rights Reserved ***************************************************************** 43 Navajo Nation denies further uranium mining on tribal lands Platts 2007-10-23 Washington (Platts)--23Oct2007 The Navajo Nation will not agree to any further uranium mining on or near tribal lands until the federal government cleans up radioactive contamination left after decades of uranium mining and milling during the Cold War, the chairman of the Resources Committee of the Navajo Council said October 23. George Arthur was part of a panel that told the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform about the land and water contamination spread over the Navajo Nation -- 27,000 square miles in Utah, Arizona and New Mexico. Panelists recounted routine exposure, from childhood, to uranium concentrates, and illnesses including cancer and kidney disease, which they said resulted from the exposures. It appeared from lawmakers' statements and questions that the committee is considering action to prompt a cleanup of the Navajo lands. Copyright © 2007 - Platts, All Rights Reserved ***************************************************************** 44 RIA Novosti: Russia says Siberian uranium enrichment center open to all 12:37 | 25/ 10/ 2007 ANGARSK, October 25 (RIA Novosti) - Any country interested in secure uranium deliveries for energy generation is welcome to join a project to build an international uranium enrichment center in east Siberia, a first deputy prime minister said on Thursday. The center, part of Moscow's non-proliferation initiative to create a network of enrichment centers under the UN nuclear watchdog's supervision, will be based at a chemical plant in Angarsk. The center will also be responsible for the disposal of nuclear waste. "So far we have only cooperated with our Kazakh partners in this field," Sergei Ivanov said. Russia and its ex-Soviet neighbor Kazakhstan, which holds 15% of the world's uranium reserves, signed documents in October 2006 to establish their first joint venture to enrich uranium, intended to begin in 2013. Ivanov said a board of directors had already been formed and a general director appointed for the relevant open joint stock company. The Russian-Kazakh agreement and founding documents envision the participation of other countries as well. "This is only a beginning, and we still have to do a lot, the more so considering that other countries have shown interest [in the project]," he said. Ukraine's Fuel and Energy Ministry said in June that the country intended to join the project in the near future. Ivanov said that due to the depletion of hydrocarbon reserves, the world is increasingly looking to nuclear energy as an alternative. He added that oil and gas supplies were highly contingent on military and political situations, which have been unstable of late in the main producing regions. "And the trend is not improving," Ivanov added. Many countries have adjusted their power generation programs, increasing their overall use of nuclear energy. "The amount of nuclear power generation in Russia is not great, only 15% , with 80% in France and 30% in Germany, but Russia will build two nuclear power units annually in order to increase its share to 27% by 2030," the first deputy prime minister said. Russia currently accounts for 40% of the world's enrichment facilities, he added. Russian President Vladimir Putin first raised the idea of joint nuclear enrichment centers early last year, in a bid to calm tensions over Iran's controversial nuclear program. The president said the centers would give countries transparent access to civilian nuclear technology without provoking international fears that enriched uranium could be used for covert weapons programs. Ivanov said fuel for nuclear power plants was a market product and any country represented in the International Atomic Energy Agency that was also signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty had the right to buy it. "But this is only in theory," Ivanov said. "Due to a variety of political reasons, a country may be denied access to uranium." RIA Novosti ***************************************************************** 45 RIA Novosti: Russia has enough uranium for nuclear power plants - minister 18:52 | 25/ 10/ 2007 MOSCOW, October 25 (RIA Novosti) - Russia's natural resources minister said Thursday Russia will have sufficient uranium reserves for the construction of new nuclear power plants in the country. Last week Russian First Deputy Prime Minister Sergei Ivanov said the construction of nuclear power plants was one of the top priorities for the Russian nuclear energy system, adding that Russian specialists were currently constructing five nuclear power units in Russia and seven abroad. Minister Yuri Trutnev said that "We will cope with the task of providing the required quantities of uranium," adding "unfortunately Russia lost a significant part of its uranium reserves following the collapse of the Soviet Union." But the minister said Russia has every possibility of replenishing its uranium stock from existing deposits and from those, which are currently being developed. "In addition, we can work not just in Russia," the minister said. "We must work in other countries as well." Sergei Ivanov also said last week that this year the federal budget had allocated 18 billion rubles ( $722 million) for the development of the nuclear energy sector, and intends to spend 51 billion rubles ($2 billion) and 90 billion rubles ($3.6 billion) in 2008 and 2009, respectively. A 2006 report, Uranium 2005, jointly compiled by the OECD, the Nuclear Energy Agency (NEA) and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), placed Russia ninth on the list of countries possessing the largest reserves of uranium ore, with 172,000 tons (over 3% of global supplies). RIA Novosti ***************************************************************** 46 Reid: Reid Statement on Upcoming Yucca Mountain Hearing US Senator Harry Reid for Nevada October 17, 2007 Washington, DC— U.S. Senator Harry Reid of Nevada made the following statement on the announcement by the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works that it has scheduled an oversight hearing on the proposed Yucca Mountain nuclear waste dump. “This is the most important issue facing the state of Nevada. That’s why I’ve been working with the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works to schedule this hearing for the last few months. I am confident that the information that comes out of the hearing will shine a bright spotlight on the problems associated with this dangerous plan to transport 77,000 tons of nuclear waste across the country and turn Nevada into the nation’s nuclear dumping ground.” The hearing is scheduled for October 31. Additional details about the hearing, including the list of witnesses, will be announced on October 24. Reno Bruce R. Thompson Courthouse & Federal Bldg 400 S. Virginia St, Suite 902 Reno, NV 89501 Phone: 775-686-5750 Fax: 775-686-5757 Las Vegas Lloyd D. George Building 333 Las Vegas Boulevard South, Suite 8016 Las Vegas, NV 89101 Phone: 702-388-5020 Fax: 702-388-5030 Carson City 600 East William St, #302 Carson City, NV 89701 Phone: 775-882-REID (7343) Fax: 775-883-1980 Washington, DC 528 Hart Senate Office Bldg Washington, DC 20510 Phone: 202-224-3542 Fax: 202-224-7327 Toll Free for Nevadans: 1-866-SEN-REID (736-7343) ***************************************************************** 47 Gallup: Independent: Uranium legacy outrages Congress ; Waxman: 'The primary responsibility for this tragedy rests with the federal government' October 24, 2007: Everytt Begay walks past a row of signs leaning against a fence that keeps people out of the proposed mining site in Crownpoint. More than 30 protestors showed up at the site to voice their concerns to officials from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Hydro Resources Incorporated. [Photo by Brian Leddy/Independent] By Kathy Helms Diné Bureau WINDOW ROCK ? A picture may be worth a thousand words, but the sound of an instrument used to detect radioactive contamination, clicking away over a soil sample from Tuba City, set a federal oversight committee on its ear Wednesday during a hearing in Washington. Chairman Henry Waxman?s Committee on Oversight and Government Reform heard from a Navajo Nation delegation about the health and environmental impacts of uranium contamination during a four-hour hearing. Several congressional leaders expressed outrage at the federal government for allowing such conditions to remain unchecked on Navajoland for so many years, saying they were ?ashamed? and ?embarrassed.? They offered apologies to the Navajo people. Their eyes were opened as they listened to George Arthur and Phil Harrison of the Navajo Resources Committee; Stephen B. Etsitty of Navajo Environmental Protection Agency; Doug Brugge, associate professor at Tufts University School of Medicine; Larry King and Edith Hood of Churchrock; and Ray Manygoats of Tuba City. Waxman?s committee has held a series of hearings throughout the year, focusing on programs or agencies that once were effective but are now broken or dysfunctional. ?This morning we are looking at an instance where the government has never worked effectively. It?s been a bipartisan failure for over 40 years. It?s also a modern American tragedy,? he said. ?The primary responsibility for this tragedy rests with the federal government, which holds the Navajo lands in trust for the tribe. Our government leased the lands for uranium mining, purchased the uranium yellowcake produced from the mines to supply our nuclear weapons stockpile, and then allowed the operators of the mines and mills to walk away without cleaning up the resulting contamination,? Waxman said. ?Over the years, open-pit mines filled with rain, and Navajos used the resulting pools for drinking water and to water their herds. Mill tailings and chunks of uranium ore were used to build foundations, floors, and walls for some Navajo homes. Families lived in these radioactive structures for decades,? Waxman said. ?When the U.S. EPA took readings at one mine site, the radium levels were over 270 times the EPA standard. That was last year,? he said. Reservation stories The Navajo delegation brought Waxman?s words to life with a few stories of their own. Resources? Chairman Arthur said the Navajo Reservation has served, ?in the words of a government study, as an ?energy colony? for the United States ... The Department of the Interior has been in the pocket of the uranium industry, favoring its interests and breaching its trust duties to Navajo mineral owners. ?We are still undergoing what appears to be a never-ending federal experiment to see how much devastation can be endured by a people and a society from exposure to radiation in the air, in the water, in mines, and on the surface of the land. We no longer are willing to be the subjects of that ongoing experiment,? Arthur said. ?I myself was present in Shiprock, the largest community on the Navajo Nation, in the late 1970s when federal officials decided to simply pile up all the radioactive mill tailings on land near the center of town, with no lining under the wastes and a lot of rocks on top to limit erosion. In what other town would the government allow this to occur and remain?? In Tuba City, an open dump and unlined mill tailings site pose an immediate threat to the main aquifer in the western Navajo area. ?The government has devoted the money needed to remove similar tailings from a rural area near Moab. Are those people or their water resources more valuable than Navajos?? he asked. Navajo EPA?s Etsitty said the legacy from past uranium activities lingers ?due to the current slow pace of cleanup and the poor quality of remediation of known contaminated sites.? Five former uranium processing sites have been cleaned up by the U.S. government, he said, ?meaning that the radioactive mill tailings were capped with clay and rock and left in place at or adjacent to the former mill site.? However, none of them were lined, he said. ?As we gather mounting evidence that these unlined landfills seep uranium waste into our groundwater, we watch the federal government dig up and properly remediate a similar site located near Moab, Utah, which is outside of the Navajo Nation borders. Why is this not happening on the Navajo reservation?? he asked. Radioactive soil Because statistics alone do not tell the full story, Etsitty demonstrated, using a sample of radioactive soil shipped from the Rare Metals site in Tuba City, ?a site that we call Highway 160,? he said. ?I have in front of me an instrument (Ludlum 19) that the Navajo Superfund uses to detect radioactive contaminants. ?This particular device detects gamma radiation. Gamma radiation is all throughout the cosmos and the atmosphere ... The sample that I have before me is covered, and as we get closer to it, you?ll hear the detection device starting to recognize the gamma radiation from the source,? he said. There were a few audible beeps as Etsitty moved closer to the sample, which was 30 times above background level. ?I?ll remove the cover and just let the device tell you what?s going on,? he said. The instrument began to beep furiously. ?The sounds that you have heard are just a small demonstration to show that Navajo families are, oftentimes, living within a few hundred yards of materials that we?re told we shouldn?t be exposed to for more than an hour. But we have Navajo residents that have been living in these areas sometimes more than 40 or 50 years,? he said. Dr. Brugge told the committee, ?There has been too little research on the health impacts of uranium mining in Navajo communities. One study under way, for example, will mostly assess kidney disease, and not birth defects, cancer or neurological problems. ?Today, as we begin the public process of addressing community exposures, I can only hope that the path is far shorter than the one traveled by the uranium miners and their families.? Churchrock spill Larry King, a former uranium miner, described the foul odor and yellowish color of the fluids associated with the Churchrock spill. ?I remember that an elderly woman was burned on her feet from the acid in the fluid when she waded into the stream while herding her sheep. ?Many years later, when waterlines were being installed in the bed of the Puerco, I noticed the same odor and color in a layer about 8 feet below the stream bed. To this day, I don?t believe that contamination from the spill has gone away,? he said. Edith Hood, who worked at Quivera, also known as the Kerr-McGee mine, was diagnosed with lymphoma in the summer of 2006. She talked about living on Red Water Pond Road, sandwiched between two abandoned mines, where she can still see equipment and ?vent bags sticking out of the earth.? ?These places are still contaminated. I know because I learned how to survey the ground for radiation when our community got involved in a monitoring program in my area four years ago. I know because the government people told us it was,? she said. ?My father has pulmonary fibrosis. My mother was diagnosed with stomach cancer. My grandmother and grandfather died of lung cancer. Many of my family members and neighbors are sick, but we don?t know what from. Today, there is talk of opening new mines. How can they open new mines when we haven?t even addressed the health impacts and environmental damage of the old ones?? she asked. Resources? Harrison of Red Valley grew up in uranium mining camps, watching children playing on waste piles and drinking mine water, which also was used to mix infant formula. ?My little brother, Herman James Harrison, died of a stomach ailment at the age of 6 months. He drank the uranium-contaminated water. ?My father died of lung cancer in 1971 at the age of 46. My cousin?s father, also a mine worker, died of lung cancer at the age of 42. All of my brothers and sisters have thyroid problems and disorders. They didn?t work in the mines but they grew up in places around contamination. ?I have scarring on my left lung. In 1999 my kidneys failed and I was on dialysis until 2001 when I received a kidney transplant from my sister. My story is not unusual,? he said. Yellowcake grill Ray Manygoats of Tuba City told how his family cooked their meals on a grill his father brought from Rare Metals. The grill had been used to sift yellowcake. ?We would play in the yellowcake sand at the mill, jumping and rolling around in it. We also found many small metal balls at the mill. The balls were used to crush and process the uranium. We played marbles with them and had contests to see how far we could throw them.? Manygoats has had surgery three times to remove growths from his eyes. His father had breathing problems, he said. ?Many of my sisters and brothers also have had problems with their eyes. I lost my mother to lung cancer and stomach cancer ... Another family member, Lucille, was never able to grow her hair and always wore a wig all her life. ?Today I still live in the same area, the land of my family. The mill is no longer operating, but the waste from the mill is everywhere,? he said. Harrison told the committee, ?It?s been about 25 years since the last mines closed. My people shouldn?t have to wait another 25 years for the federal government to accept a responsibility that it should have accepted many years ago.? Wednesday October 24, 2007 Selected Stories: First 200 Days; Mendoza getting the ball rolling Uranium legacy outrages Congress; Waxman: 'The primary responsibility for this tragedy rests with the federal government' Boo-tiful; Halloween means ‘Fright Night’ in Grants Indian country proud of Red Sox’s Ellsbury Please send the Gallup Independent feedback on this website and the paper in general. Send questions or comments to gallpind@cia-g.com ***************************************************************** 48 Daily Sentinel: 100 million gallons of water pumped at Moab cleanup site By GARY HARMON Thursday, October 25, 2007 An effort to clean up a 16 million ton pile of uranium mill tailings along the Colorado River near Moab, Utah, hit a milestone Wednesday with the removal of 100 million gallons of contaminated groundwater. In the meantime, the U.S. Energy Department is pumping contaminated groundwater out of the pile at the rate of 250 million gallons a year. Up with that groundwater came 450,000 pound of ammonia and 1,900 pounds of uranium. That ammonia and uranium were prevented from reaching the river, a major step in protecting it and downstream consumers, said Don Metzler, project director for the Energy Department. The water is being pumped from the pile using a 40-well system that extracts water from a shallow aquifer before its contaminants can leach into the river. Contaminants that escape the pumping system are of such small quantities as to pose no threat to aquatic life or humans, according to the Energy Department. Metzler said he considered trying to capture the uranium and sell it to help defray the costs of the cleanup, which will exceed $120 million. Even though it’s a simple process to remove the uranium from the water, Metzler said it wasn’t worth the costs of handling, packaging and shipping. “It got complicated,” he said. The uranium will be buried with the rest of the pile in an engineered cell to be constructed at Crescent Junction, he said. • Gary Harmon can be reached via e-mail at gharmon@gjds.com Copyright 2007 Grand Junction Newspapers, Inc. All rights reserved. - The Daily Sentinel - Our Partners ***************************************************************** 49 ReviewJournal.com: RUNAWAY CHLORINE CAR: Rail tanker escape reviewed Oct. 25, 2007 State PUC questions safety protocols By LISA KIM BACH REVIEW-JOURNAL The runaway chlorine tanker that bisected Las Vegas on Aug. 29 has the Public Utilities Commission of Nevada looking at broader railroad safety issues. At a Wednesday meeting, Director of Regulatory Operations Kirby Lampley suggested that the commission consider asking the Legislature to fund an additional railroad inspector position. The commission now has four. A fifth inspector, Lampley said, could take up the responsibility of inspecting switches, which allow trains to change tracks, and crossing guards. No action was taken on Lampley's suggestion because the commission agenda listed the tanker incident as a discussion item only. The incident in Las Vegas involving a loaded tanker with the potential to set off Clark County's worst-case disaster scenario was set in motion by a switching mistake. However, investigators for the commission found that it was human error, not mechanical failure, that began the near-disastrous chain of events. That fact was a prominent one to Commissioner Sam Thompson, who wanted to know what measures have been taken to prevent human error from sending another runaway car shooting across Las Vegas. "That type of human mistake could occur again," Thompson said. Commission Manager of Safety and Quality Assurance Grant Siwinski outlined the new safety measures enacted by Union Pacific at the Arden train yard for Thompson. All tracks exiting Arden to the north have been blocked by a braked anchor car. If a tanker escapes control of yard staff, Siwinski said, the runaway would not be able to roll free of the yard. Communication also was a major issue during the 19-minute episode that saw the tanker travel 20 miles from south to north. While yard staff immediately informed Union Pacific dispatch of the runaway car, police weren't contacted by the railroad company until about eight minutes into the incident. Thompson asked whether railroad employees have been told to call local police immediately in emergency situations and Siwinski said yes. "The railroad understands that incidents like this need to be reported to local police," Siwinski said. Commission investigators were the first ones to reach Arden yard after the tanker incident occurred. They are working together with the Federal Railroad Administration and Union Pacific on identifying how the tanker escaped yard control. Siwinski said a final report has not yet been completed. He did say the conductor of the three-person crew handling the chlorine car took full responsibility for the incident because the conductor had failed to inspect and manually align the switch that would have kept the car from accessing a track that exited the yard. Other errors also were made, Siwinski said. Miscommunication between the yard and Union Pacific dispatch in Omaha, Neb., also contributed to the escape of the tanker from the yard. Better training and awareness of the regulations on the part of Union Pacific staff might have prevented the entire incident, Siwinski said. The tanker incident and the potential of a chlorine gas leak sent shudders through municipal, county and federal leadership, whose members have worked with Union Pacific to revise safety and response protocols. In 2006, the University of Nevada, Las Vegas Institute for Security Studies conducted a vulnerability assessment of the state and found that the most deadly disaster the state could face was a chlorine gas accident. The report found that a massive leak could kill up to 91,000 people if a loaded tanker vented its contents in a densely populated area. Contact reporter Lisa Kim Bach at lbach@reviewjournal.com or (702) 383-0287. Links powered by inform.com Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal, 1997 - 2007 Stephens Media, LLC Privacy Statement ***************************************************************** 50 AFP: US, Russia at impasse on missile defense - Friday October 26, 10:02 AM WASHINGTON (AFP) - The United States and Russia hit an impasse on missile defense in Europe Thursday with the US defense secretary saying Washington has gone as far as it can to placate Moscow. US Defense Secretary Robert Gates' comments came after Moscow rejected US concessions on its plans for missile interceptors in Poland and a radar in the Czech Republic, which included a delay in making them operational until an Iranian missile threat is proven. "I guess my view is I think we've leaned about as far forward as we can. We've offered a lot. And my view is, now I want to see some movement on their part," Gates told reporters as he flew back from Europe. He said the US proposals "represent a very forward-leaning posture in terms of partnering with the Russians." "And I think the question is whether the Russians are serious about partnering with us, or whether this is merely a pose to try and stop us from going forward with the Czech Republic and Poland," he said. Earlier, Russian Defense Minister Viktor Serdyukov said the US proposals were not enough to satisfy Russian concerns. "All that has been proposed to us does not satisfy us, our position remains the same," the ITAR-TASS and Interfax news agency quoted Serdyukov as saying at a meeting of NATO defence ministers in the Netherlands. Gates' tougher tone came amid rising US tensions with Iran and a warning by President George W. Bush on Tuesday that missile defenses were urgently needed to defend Europe against the Iranian threat. "The need for missile defense in Europe is real, and I believe it is urgent," Bush said, in a speech at the National Defense University that was interpreted as being at odds with Gates' more conciliatory approach. During a visit to Moscow earlier this month, Gates and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice presented the Russians with ideas for a regional missile defense scheme that would include Russia as well as NATO. They proposed posting Russian liaison officers at US missile defense sites as well as at the radar site in the Czech Republic if Prague agreed. Gates went further during a trip to Prague on Tuesday and said the United States would delay making the European site fully operational until there was "definitive proof of the threat." He said Russian leaders have made clear that they recognize that Iran poses a security threat, but differ with Washington on how long it will take them to develop progressively longer range missiles. A senior US defense official, who briefed reporters in Washington this week, said the US side had offered to tie the activation of the system to a common understanding with the Russians of what would constitute a proven Iranian threat. "What we are saying is we're prepared to sit down with Russia and discuss what we would both regard as indications of increasing capability" of Iran's missiles, the official said. "We would set out what the milestones would be so we're not dealing with competing projections," he said. Gates and US defense officials have said Russian President Vladimir Putin was intrigued enough by the proposals to agree to experts meetings and a follow-on round of talks at the level of defense and foreign ministers. Although Serdyukov appeared to pour cold water on the US ideas at a briefing with Russian media, he was quoted as saying that Washington was "beginning to better understand our concerns." Russia sees the US missile defense plans as a military encroachment in its former sphere of influence that could be turned against Russia's own nuclear deterrence. The United States, which is still negotiating with Poland and the Czech Republic for access to their territory, insists that the planned missile defenses are no match for Russia's nuclear arsenal and are aimed at a looming Iranian missile threat. Copyright © 2007 Yahoo! All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 51 Herald News: Atomic bomb testing put sailor in harm's way HeraldNewsOnline.com Member of the Sun-Times News Group October 25, 2007 U.S. Navy veteran Robert J. Bernico, of Crest Hill, is attending his first reunion with shipmates of the USS Furse at the 17th annual gathering in Nashville, Tenn., which started Wednesday and ends Sunday. In making this trip, Robert was hoping to meet up with some of the sailors he worked with. He never knew the reunions existed until his daughter researched and found out that his outfit had been meeting for the past 16 years. Robert's career in the Navy got under way while he was stationed on Bikini Atoll in the Marshall Islands during World War II. While aboard the USS Furse, he was called "The Captain's Talker," which entailed maintaining the ship's log and records. Later in his career, Robert was promoted to petty officer third class. "I joined the armed forces to further help take care of six siblings," he said. Atomic testing The USS Furse was in the Pacific Ocean after the war, when they tested atomic bombs during Operation Crossroads, a series of nuclear weapon tests conducted by the United States in 1946. During that time, the United States had 90 ships that were captured from the Germans and Japanese, and also some old ships that were ready to be decommissioned, about 220 ships in all. "The participant ships were painted orange so they could be identified," Robert said. "These ships had many animals on them and were stationed in the middle of the observer ships, which were circling around them. The USS Furse was in the first row of observer ships at that time." Robert recalls that one day the captain ordered all personnel on deck to the starboard side of the ship while the bombs were being tested. And before the bombs went off, the men were told to turn their backs and cover their eyes. He said the enlisted men had no protection whatsoever from the explosions' fallout, but the officers wore protective eyewear. "The men were scared and really worried because they didn't know what to expect," Robert said. "The first bomb was dropped from a plane via parachute and exploded 520 feet above the water. This was on July 1, 1946, and was called Able Day. The second bomb did a lot more damage. It destroyed most of the orange ships and the sailors could see the burned hulls," Robert said. At the time of the second bomb test, the men could feel the heat from the bomb almost immediately, and the fallout from the bombs traveled 500 miles away from the area, he said. The Furse was one of two destroyers accompanying the Shangri-La, an aircraft carrier. When the planes had accidents, the pilots would eject and the sailors would have to go into the contaminated water to get them. "After the bombings, none of us were decontaminated or even told to take a shower," Robert said. "After these tests, the ship was sent to Mare Island (Calif.), where lifeboats, ropes and other equipment aboard tested positive for contamination. And every sailor was only required to take a blood test," he said. "We later headed back to the states to San Francisco Bay to repair the ship, and landed there for a month or two," Robert said. Robert said it was later revealed that photographs were taken during the testing and sent to all the officers, but the enlisted men were not supposed to see them. It was later suspected that the USS Furse was a test ship to find out how humans reacted to radiation exposure, Robert said. Shortly after being discharged, the Navy sent letters to Robert and his shipmates to find out if they had any negative effects from the radiation exposure while on the USS Furse. Leaving the Navy Robert was honorably discharged from the Navy on Oct. 20, 1947, after serving 18 months in the South Pacific. Robert's dad, Henry J. Bernico, served in the Army and his brother, George, served in the Navy with the Seabees. Match made in the military The story about how Robert met his wife is as interesting as the account of his military career. Robert met a man named David Lilyquist while serving in the Navy. David gave Robert his sister's address and told him to write her, so he did. When he went on leave in January 1947, he brought an engagement ring though he had never met Lillian. When he finally did meet her, he asked her to marry him. They were wed Jan. 6, 1947. The couple has seven children -- Kathie, Barbara, Mary, Lorie, Bob, Steve and Dan -- 20 grandchildren and 12 great-grandchildren. Other military news • U.S. Marine Lance Cpl. Nick Gabor, of Plainfield, son of Marypat and Terry Gabor, is stationed in Fallujah, Iraq. This is his second deployment. His first deployment was to Okinawa, Japan, for seven months in 2006. He will be in Fallujah until May. • U.S. Army National Guard Pvt. Nicholas E. Grassano, nephew of Tommaso Grassano of Romeoville, graduated from basic combat training at Fort Jackson in Columbia, S.C. • U.S. Army Reserves Pfc. James D. Johnson, son of Dean and Danica Johnson of Joliet, graduated from combat training at Fort Knox, Ky. • U.S. Navy Reserves Seaman Joseph R. Rappold, son of Virginia G. and Richard W. Rappold of Frankfort, recently completed basic training at Great Lakes Naval Base. • U.S. Army Pvt. Rose M. Schultz, daughter of Brenda Schultz of Beecher, graduated from basic combat training at Fort Jackson in Columbia, S.C. Honoring veterans In honor of Veterans Day on Nov. 11, The Herald News would like to salute our troops and veterans. To do so, we are asking that you send pictures of servicemen and women who are serving, have served or have fallen. Include their rank, name, branch of service, your name and hometown. We also ask that you limit each tribute to a paragraph. The deadline is Nov. 2 to be included in our special Veterans Day issue. Your support would be greatly appreciated. If you have any questions, call Jean Edwards, staff writer, at (815) 729-6049 or e-mail jedwards@scn1.com heraldnewsonline.com: Feedback | Contact Us | About Us | Advertise © Copyright 2007 Digital Chicago, Inc. | Terms of Use • Privacy ***************************************************************** 52 RIA Novosti: Russia, U.S. call on all countries to join INF Treaty-1 22:01 | 25/ 10/ 2007 NEW YORK, October 25 (RIA Novosti) - Russia and the United States have called on all countries to join the bilateral Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, the two countries said Thursday in a joint statement at the UN. The former Soviet Union and the U.S. signed the INF Treaty on December 8, 1987. The agreement came into force in June 1988 and does not have a specific duration. Moscow and Washington said in the statement they were both concerned by the rapid expansion of intermediate-range ballistic missiles round the world as more and more countries obtain the technology for their production. The two countries called on other states to consider giving this important non-proliferation pact a global status as a method of increasing international stability and security. Two weeks ago Russian President Vladimir Putin said Russia could pull out of the U.S.-Russian arms reductions treaty, unless it was expanded to impose restrictions on other countries as well. The INF treaty banned nuclear and conventional ground-launched ballistic and cruise missiles with ranges of 500 to 5,500 kilometers (300 to 3,400 miles). By the treaty's deadline of June 1, 1991, a total of 2,692 weapons had been destroyed, 846 by the U.S. and 1,846 by the Soviet Union. The treaty strongly favored the U.S., as many treaty provisions, such as counting Soviet RSD-10 Pioneer (NATO reporting name SS-20) multiple independently targetable reentry vehicle (MIRV) missiles as equivalent to single-warhead Pershing II systems, allowed NATO to regain strategic nuclear superiority over Russia in Europe. RIA Novosti ***************************************************************** 53 Reuters: Putin sticks to guns ahead of EU-Russia summit Thu Oct 25, 2007 9:22pm BST By Oleg Shchedrov LISBON (Reuters) - Russian President Vladimir Putin hopes for a productive summit with the European Union on Friday despite his opposing views on how to deal with Iran and Kosovo. His assertive foreign policy and disagreements on several basic economic issues have alarmed the West and complicated Russian-EU relations. "I expect a friendly atmosphere created by our hosts today will translate into a similar atmosphere of the Russia-EU summit tomorrow and will help a productive work," he said after meeting President Anibal Cavaco Silva, whose country hosts the summit. Energy disagreements, aggravated by a row over Russia's ban on the import of Polish meat, have prevented Moscow and the EU from starting talks on a new partnership and cooperation agreement replacing the old deal which expires in December. The summit in Mafra outside Lisbon will also have to deal with Europe's support for Moscow's accession to the World Trade Organisation, which is complicated by rows over Russia's export duties on timber. It will also have to deal with the EU's new energy policy, which Moscow fears could threaten plans of its gas giant Gazprom to buy into European distribution networks. Putin made clear he did not think relations with the EU were that bad, saying: "On many (international) issues our positions are close." Playing down suggestions of some sharp divisions, he added: "I do not think relations with Europe are in a regrettable shape. There are simply issues on which we disagree." Continued... ***************************************************************** 54 Reuters: Gates wants to see Russian "movement" on shield | Thu Oct 25, 2007 4:06pm EDT By Kristin Roberts OVER THE NORTH SEA, Oct 25 (Reuters) - The United States has gone as far as it can to win Russia's cooperation on a missile shield in Europe, U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates said on Thursday after offering to put the system in a stand-by mode. "I think we've leaned about as far forward as we can," Gates told reporters on a U.S. military aircraft en route to Washington. "We've offered a lot and my view is now I want to see some movement on their part." Washington wants to place missile defence assets in the Czech Republic and Poland as part of a shield to defend against missiles from "rogue states" such as Iran and North Korea. But Moscow says the system threatens Russian security. Gates on Tuesday said the United States had proposed to build the sites but place them in a stand-by mode pending proof of a missile threat. He said that was offered to the Russians in a bid to ease Moscow's opposition and encourage its cooperation. He also said Washington offered to give Russia some presence at the sites, to promote transparency. "I think the question is whether the Russians are serious about partnering with us, or whether this is merely a pose to try and stop us from going forward with the Czech Republic and Poland," Gates said. The controversial U.S. plans to place missile defence assets in eastern Europe, former Soviet-allied territory, has helped drive a cooling in relations between Moscow and Washington this year. Russian officials say the American plan would lead to an arms race. President Vladimir Putin also has called for a rebuilding of the Russian military after years of neglect in the 1990s. He said the country would build new nuclear weapons and modernize its warplanes. Already, Russia has resumed long-range bomber flights to U.S.- and NATO-patrolled areas. While the United States says its missile defence system is no threat to Russia, Moscow argues otherwise. Russian generals say the shield would allow the United States to scan Russia's territory as far as the Urals, and would give the Pentagon the capability to shoot down Russian ballistic missiles soon after launch. Putin has offered the United States joint use of a Russia-leased radar station in Azerbaijan as an alternative to the missile shield in Europe. U.S. officials view that as a possible addition to its plans, not a substitute. © Reuters2007All rights reserved ***************************************************************** 55 Guardian Unlimited: Nuclear Submarine Commander Removed Friday October 26, 2007 1:01 AM By CHELSEA J. CARTER Associated Press Writer LOS ANGELES (AP) - The commanding officer of the nuclear-powered submarine USS Hampton was relieved of his duty Thursday because of a loss of confidence in his leadership, the Navy said Thursday. Cmdr. Michael B. Portland was relieved of duty after a U.S. Navy investigation found the ship failed to do daily safety checks on its nuclear reactor for a month and falsified records to cover up the omission. ``His oversight of the crew's performance did not identify these issues'' without an outside inspection, Navy Lt. Alli Myrick, a public affairs officer, told The Associated Press. It appears from a preliminary investigation on the Hampton that sailors in Submarine Squadron 11 had skipped the required analysis of the chemical and radiological properties of the submarine's reactor for more than a month, even though a daily check is required. Portland will be reassigned, Myrick said. Guardian Unlimited © Guardian News and Media Limited 2007 ***************************************************************** 56 www.kansascity.com: Proposed south KC nuclear weapons plant moves forward Posted on Wed, Oct. 24, 2007 10:15 PM By KEVIN COLLISON The Kansas City Star Plans to build a $500 million nuclear weapons parts plant in south Kansas City — and preserve at least 2,000 jobs in the area — on Wednesday won a pivotal endorsement. The federal Office of Management and Budget has accepted the plan to build a new plant near the former Richards-Gebaur Memorial Airport and sent it to Congress for final review, said Brad Scott, regional administrator for the General Services Administration. “This is a significant hurdle having the OMB sign off on the package,” Scott said. “It’s an important step, but we believe we have all the support we need … We’re elated.” The local congressional delegation and GSA officials have been working since early last year on a plan to keep the nuclear weapons facility in Kansas City. The plant is currently housed in a sprawling complex at the Bannister Federal Complex originally built in 1943 to manufacture engines for fighter aircraft. After World War II, the facility evolved to become a major facility where non-nuclear parts for nuclear weapons were manufactured. At the height of the Cold War in the 1980s, more than 8,000 people worked there. In recent years, however, that work force has dwindled to 2,600 people and there had been active consideration to close the plant and relocate its work to other weapons facilities around the nation. In April, the GSA announced it had obtained preliminary approval for a plan to build a new facility near Richards-Gebaur, northwest of Missouri 150 and Botts Road. The plant would be operated by Honeywell Federal Manufacturing & Technologies, which has the contract to manufacture the weapons parts for the National Nuclear Security Administration. The new facility would occupy a 185-acre campus and include buildings totaling up to 1.5 million square feet, according to the GSA. For the first time, the plant would generate local property taxes because it will be privately owned. The current facility at Bannister is on tax-exempt, government-owned property. Kansas City development officials have estimated the plant could generate about $7 million annually in property taxes when fully operational. If Congress approves the plan, construction would begin in late 2008 or early 2009 with completion in fall 2010. The plant would not be fully occupied until 2012. In the meantime, the approval from OMB will allow the GSA to begin seeking a developer for the project. Within the next few weeks, the agency and the nuclear security administration will begin the first phase of a two-step competition to award the development contract. The government expects to enter into an initial lease of 20 years. “This project will attract national competition,” Scott said. “Since first announcing our plans last spring, we’ve been contacted by several major development companies seeking information.” One important contract already has been signed with a local company. Honeywell has retained Burns & McDonnell to design the technical specifications for the facility and supervise the relocation of all equipment and material from the old Bannister plant. About 50 employees from the engineering firm are at work at Bannister. “We’ve been designing all layout and infrastructure for all production and administrative areas of the new facility,” said Roger Dick, a spokesman for Burns & McDonnell. The weapons plant project has strong bipartisan support from the Missouri congressional delegation. The plant’s payroll last year was $193 million, and the plant operators purchased $41.9 million in goods from Missouri businesses and $15 million from Kansas merchants. Sen. Kit Bond of Missouri released a statement that described the plant as a tremendous asset to Kansas City and said the new plant should allow future growth. Other congressional representatives issuing statements of support were Sen. Claire McCaskill and Reps. Emanuel Cleaver, Sam Graves and Ike Skelton. Scott has said no plans could be made for the current Bannister plant before 2012. The nuclear security administration, by law, must ensure the old plant site is in satisfactory environmental condition. Scott said the property would then be disposed of through a formal process that would first make it available for government uses, and then seek private developers. To reach Kevin Collison, call 816-234-4289 or send e-mail to kcollison@kcstar.com. * About www.kansascity.com | ***************************************************************** 57 DOE: George H.W. Bush China-U.S. Relations Conference October 24, 2007 Remarks as Prepared for Secretary Bodman Thank you. I appreciate the opportunity to be here with you this afternoon. Thank you, Rick & Ed for that generous introduction usually one person is more than sufficient to do the job of introducing me. I’d also like to extend my thanks to Texas A&M University, The Chinese People's Association for Friendship with Foreign Countries, the George Bush Presidential Library Foundation and the George Bush School of Government and Public Service for their support and sponsorship of this very important conference. The relationship between the United States and the People’s Republic of China is critical for both our countries. As two of the world’s largest economies and two of the largest energy consumers we face similar challenges because of the projected increase in global energy demand. It is my belief that we can and should find ways to confront these challenges together. The United States and the People’s Republic of China are not competing, one against the other, for increasingly scarce energy resources. The projected rise in global energy demand presents common problems for all nations. And these problems require global solutions. We believe the answer lies in the development of energy alternatives and new technologies. We need to make America more energy efficient. We need to make America less dependent on imported energy, particularly that which comes from politically unstable areas of the world. And so, through the President’s 20 in 10 plan to reduce projected gasoline consumption by 20 percent in 10 years, through his Advanced Energy Initiative and in other ways, we are taking steps to diversify America’s energy supplies and energy suppliers. It is also true that a dramatic rise in energy demand has within it the potential to increase global tensions. In the United States we believe we need to plan for this by taking steps to become more energy secure. President Bush asked me to make this a central focus of my tenure at the Department. It took America a long time to create the energy problems now on its horizon; we’re not going to overcome them in the blink of an eye. And this means our need for improved energy security is also a national security concern. In my view, we are not the only nation that has reached this conclusion. Fortunately, I believe the United States and China both recognize this. As the old saying goes, where some people see problems, others see opportunities. We both recognize that increased energy security, continued economic prosperity and national security are inextricably intertwined. The need to enhance our energy security presents an opportunity for us to work together, with a common purpose, toward common goals. At the end of the day no country not the United States, not the People’s Republic of China can pursue its own energy security without, in my judgment, considering the global context. Access to secure, reliable and affordable energy sources are fundamental to both of our countries and to the world. I think we have the responsibility to do what we can, to act globally as well as in our traditional spheres of influence, to work together to bring stability and security to the world’s energy future. And when you consider the projected changes in the world energy market over the next several decades, I think it is in our best interests to do so. For example, global energy consumption will increase by close to 50 percent by 2030 with 70 percent of that growth coming from the world’s emerging economies; 30 percent of that growth will come from China alone. The demand for electricity is expected to rise by more than 100 percent over the next 25 years even though, today, 1.6 billion people around the world today do not have access to it. And the International Energy Agency estimates that the investment needed to meet projected demand growth is more than $20 trillion between now and 2030 with 60 percent of that investment coming in the power sector and 40 percent in oil and gas; This is just one part of the global “New Energy Reality.” The large Asian economies all have legitimate energy needs. But, whether they are developed, for example South Korea’s and Japan’s, or those like India’s and China’s, that are still developing those economies must come to terms with the need for greater global energy efficiency, the need for environmentally responsible energy production and the need for new energy technologies. We are doing this in the United States and we welcome the opportunity to help other nations, including China, do this too. It is my belief that the United States and China, because of our relative positions in the global market, can lead the world toward a shared, secure energy future that includes traditional energy sources as well as clean, renewable and alternative sources of energy. And, because of changing world conditions, our countries must find ways to work together to confront resource nationalism, limited access and infrastructure constraints that effectively limit production to something less than what the world requires and what the world will require. And all of this must be done in a manner that accounts for global climate change and, as a result, a carbon-constrained future. The United States is making a sustained strategic investment to surmount these challenges. To that end, we approach China as a potential partner, a partner that can help us resolve the global energy issues that we collectively face. And we are doing this in a number of ways, multi-lateral and bi-lateral, with, I must add, encouraging results. China has joined with us and what are now five other nations Australia, India, Japan, South Korea and Canada in an Asia-Pacific Partnership on Clean Development (APP). The purpose of the APP is to allow member countries to develop and accelerate deployment of cleaner, more efficient energy technologies to address pollution reduction, energy security, and climate change concerns in ways that reduce poverty and promote economic development. At the most recent APP meeting, which occurred last week, the member nations endorsed task force work plans with 110 projects and approved 18 new flagship projects that exemplify the partnership’s focus and commitment. In part because of the APP, we’ve seen U.S. companies take the lead in bringing combined heat and power and distributed generation technologies to China. Through the partnership, Solar Turbines producing 35 megawatts of clean energy were installed in China’s Shanxi province in less than a year’s time. This represents some progress, but we must do more. And we are cooperating on securing the expansion of clean, safe nuclear power throughout Asia and the world. Expanding the availability of nuclear power is a critical part of any attempt to meet projected global demands for electricity in an environmentally responsible way. As one positive sign, the Chinese opted last December to buy several new nuclear reactors from Westinghouse. This is, I believe, a portent that our new strategic relationship on energy is of benefit to both countries. China is making nuclear power a critical part of its energy future; it will be a major player in the world civilian nuclear power market. We, the United States, are ready to assist them with our technologies and our experts to help bring this about. That, in my judgment, is a good deal for both countries. But it is only part of the total picture. Again, there is much more to do. Through President Bush’s Global Nuclear Energy Partnership (GNEP) we have launched an international framework for sharing nuclear power with the developing world. This framework will allow for a greater global reliance on civilian nuclear power to produce the electricity needed to meet the expected growth in demand. And it does it in a way that safeguards against proliferation of materials and deals responsibly with spent fuel. China, along with Japan, France, Russia and the United States, is a founding member of the GNEP partnership. GNEP represents the future of global nuclear power cooperation. At the second GNEP ministerial in Vienna, Austria, we tripled the size of the partnership from the original five to 16. The partners were joined by 19 observing nations and we expect several of those countries to join the partnership soon. The need to find ways to share nuclear power with the rest of the world in a responsible way means we must address the issue of North Korea’s nuclear program. China is working with us here as well. China has also joined us in the International Partnership for the Hydrogen Economy, the Carbon Sequestration Leadership Forum, the GenIV International Forum, and the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor or ITER. All of these efforts are intended to help us find ways to solve the shared problems our combined energy future presents. Equally important are our bi-lateral efforts, including the U.S.-China Energy Policy Dialogue, established in May 2004, and the Strategic Economic Dialogue, which began in December 2006. These efforts have allowed us to strengthen and deepen our energy relationship. There is also the U.S.-China Oil and Gas Industry Forum, begun in 1998, which serves to facilitate opportunities for government and industry leaders from both our countries to talk about our oil and gas-related energy needs. And these efforts are, as I said a moment ago, bearing fruit. Last year I went to Asia for five-party talks with the world’s largest energy consumers: Japan, South Korea, India and China. One of the items up for discussion was the need for each nation to establish its own Strategic Petroleum Reserve to protect against supply disruptions. And, partially because of these talks, I believe China has embraced this idea and is now moving in the right direction and we will continue to support them in this effort. We’ve also found a way to cooperate on energy issues related to the 2008 Beijing Summer Olympic Games. In January 2004 our two countries signed a protocol to promote the use of U.S. clean energy technologies to improve Beijing’s environmental standards by the time the games begin. This includes the development of a renewable hydrogen facility that will provide fuel for a fleet of five hydrogen natural gas buses that will be cost-shared by the Department of Energy, U.S. industry and the Chinese government. Our two countries have established a working framework for future cooperation, but there is still a lot left to discuss, both where energy issues are concerned and on environmental issues related to energy. I believe we are well on our way to the strategic partnership that, in my judgment, is in our best interests. But there is still much to be done. We must find ways to work together to confront issues like resource nationalism, pollution and market transparency that I mentioned earlier. As far as the latter in concerned though, I do want to note that China is one of 96 countries participating in the International Energy Forum’s Joint Oil Data Initiative (JODI). We welcome their membership in this effort to create a more transparent world oil market by providing, comprehensive oil data to the international JODI database. But we must continually be mindful of the energy-related environmental challenges ahead. As China’s economy continues to grow, so will its energy consumption. China is projected to use 11 percent more energy than the United States by 2030 making it the world’s single largest energy consumer. That same year, China’s CO2 emissions are projected to account for 26 percent of the world’s total and will exceed those of the United States’ by 41 percent. If China wishes to demonstrate its responsiveness to world concerns, this would be a good place to do it and the United States is ready and willing to assist in providing access to clean energy technologies. Indeed we have the opportunity to share expertise, to share science and to share in our commitment to finding ways to develop energy solutions that allow for economic growth with minimal environmental damage. We have the opportunity for China to partner with us, for example, in a push for a worldwide reduction or removal of tariffs on clean energy technologies through the World Trade Organization and the Doha round of trade talks. We have much to do and many challenges ahead of us. The areas where our two countries are now working together put us on the right road to a stronger partnership; a partnership that will help us overcome our common energy obstacles and achieve energy security. But more than that, I believe it will take us to a brighter future, for our countries and for our children. And that, I believe, is our most important goal. Thank you. Location: Washington, D.C. Media contact(s): Andy Beck, (202) 586-4940 North Carolina State University U.S. Department of Energy | 1000 Independence Ave., SW | Washington, DC 20585 1-800-dial-DOE | f/202-586-4403 ***************************************************************** 58 DOE: Energy Department Issues Draft Request for Proposals for Operation of its Pacific Northwest National Laboratory in Washington October 25, 2007 WASHINGTON, DC – The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) today issued a draft Request for Proposals (RFP) for prospective contractors who are interested in competing on a full and open basis to manage and operate DOE’s Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL). PNNL is a world-class multi-program national laboratory located in Richland, Washington, whose mission is to deliver science-based solutions for the nation’s energy, environmental, and security needs. The draft RFP’s Statement of Work highlights the type of work being performed at PNNL and allows firms to determine if they have the comprehensive knowledge, skills, and capability to meet the overall requirements to provide the intellectual leadership and management of PNNL. DOE expects to award the new performance-based contract in the fall of 2008, which will be followed by a transition period of up to 90 days. The PNNL contract will be a performance-based, cost-plus-award-fee management and operating contract. The current PNNL contract expires on September 30, 2008; however, the contract contains an option that may extend the contract for up to one additional year, to allow for the competition process. The draft RFP will be open for comments or questions for 45 days through December 10, 2007. All comments or questions related to the draft RFP should be submitted and will be answered through the DOE Industry Interactive Procurement System. The procurement is being handled by the Office of Science’s Integrated Support Center in Oak Ridge, Tennessee, whose point of contact can be reached at pnnlseb@oro.doe.gov for further information. Learn additional information about the PNNL RFP process. Since the mid-1990s, DOE has competed the management and operating (M&O) contracts for its national laboratories to ensure that the taxpayers' investment in the DOE lab complex is allocated wisely and effectively. The PNNL contract competition will ensure the continued sound management of the laboratory facilities and solidify the long-term viability of this world-class lab, integral to America's scientific competitiveness and security. This competition is the first since PNNL’s establishment. PNNL is currently operated under two contracts: the M&O contract and a parallel contract, known as a use permit. DOE will not continue the separate use permit contract beyond the expiration of DOE’s current contract with Battelle Memorial Institute to manage DOE’s Pacific Northwest National Laboratory. Under the terms and conditions of the use permit contract, Battelle is able to use Laboratory and other resources to pursue work for its own benefit and in direct competition with the private sector. In order to ensure that laboratory resources are dedicated to the public benefit and governmental purposes, this separate contract will not be available to the successor contractor as a result of this competition. DOE’s decision is based generally on the need to foster competition through a “level playing field” and to better align the new PNNL contract with every other DOE management and operating contract. Through the existing Work for Others Program, non-DOE entities will continue to have access to specialized or unique PNNL capabilities. PNNL is one of DOE’s 17 world-class national laboratories, and performs research for several DOE program offices – including the Office of Science – as well as government agencies, universities, and industry, to deliver breakthrough science and technology. PNNL solves complex problems in energy, national security, life sciences and the environment by advancing the understanding of physics, chemistry, biology and computation. PNNL currently has approximately 4,200 staff members and a 2006 fiscal year business volume of $750 million. The draft RFP will be available on DOE’s Industry Interactive Procurement System and/or FedBizOpps. Media contact(s): Jeff Sherwood, (202) 586-4940 Walter Perry, (865) 576-0885 U.S. Department of Energy | 1000 Independence Ave., SW | Washington, DC 20585 1-800-dial-DOE | f/202-586-4403 ***************************************************************** 59 Tri-City Herald: Vit plant subcontractor expects $15 million to $25 million boost Published Thursday, October 25th, 2007 By Annette Cary, Herald staff writer Washington Group International is expecting a boost of $15 million to $35 million for its work at the Hanford vitrification plant since April 2003 when the contract for constructing and testing the plant is renegotiated. It discussed the vitrification plant in its announcement of third quarter financial results. Washington Group is the main subcontractor for Bechtel National at Hanford's vitrification plant and has 50 percent participation in the project. Because of changes in the project, including a need to verify that the earthquake standards were adequate, DOE must renegotiate its contract with Bechtel. Bechtel National had the potential to earn $200 million for completing the project at a cost of $5 billion, but changes to the project and cost increases have driven its price tag to $12.2 billion. Formal contract negotiations have not begun between DOE and Bechtel. However, Washington Group appears to indicate they could happen soon. It told shareholders that on completion of negotiations, it could recognize an adjustment to earnings later this year "or in subsequent periods." Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman approved earthquake standards for the vitrification plant in August, clearing the way for construction to resume on two key buildings that will handle high-level radioactive waste. Construction resumed on the High Level Waste Facility in September after being on hold for 20 months, and construction is expected to resume on the Pretreatment Facility as early as next month. Washington Group reevaluated the probable fees to be earned on the original contract as well as the percentage of completion on the original contract scope based on the authorization to resume all construction activities. As a result, it recognized additional earnings related to work performed since April 2003 estimated to be $10.4 million pretax, or $6.2 million after tax. Of that, about $1.4 million pretax, or $800,000 after tax, was related to work performed during the 2007 third quarter. In other Washington Group news, it has scheduled a meeting of stockholders Tuesday to vote on the proposed merger with URS Corp. © 2007 Tri-City Herald, Associated Press & Other Wire Services ***************************************************************** 60 Knoxville News Sentinel: Spallation gets new director British physicist has been serving role on interim basis since midsummer By Frank Munger (Contact) Thursday, October 25, 2007 OAK RIDGE - Ian Anderson, a 54-year-old physicist, on Wednesday was named director of the Spallation Neutron Source and associate lab director for neutron sciences at Oak Ridge National Laboratory. Anderson has been serving in that role on an interim basis since midsummer, when Thom Mason - the former SNS chief - was named director of ORNL. The British scientist came to Oak Ridge five years ago as director of the experimental facilities division, overseeing the development of research instruments for the SNS and creating a new system for scientific users. In a telephone interview, Anderson said he never envisioned becoming SNS director when he accepted the Oak Ridge job. But he said he had lots of ideas and wanted to see them implemented. In addition to running the Spallation Neutron Source, a $1.4 billion science center that became operational in April 2006, Anderson will oversee the High Flux Isotope Reactor - another key research facility at ORNL. "We want to develop new science," Anderson said Wednesday, noting that one of his goals is to better integrate the research operations at the SNS and HFIR with the rest of the laboratory. A new state-funded Joint Institute for Neutron Sciences is expected to be ready by late 2008, and Anderson said the plan is to use it as "an incubator for new science directions." The institute will provide research space and support for users from around the globe, as well as solidify ORNL's relationships with universities. Before coming to Oak Ridge, Anderson was head of the Neutron Optics Laboratory at the Institut Laue-Langevin in Grenoble, France. The Spallation Neutron Source has already established world records for production of neutrons for materials research, and the facility is still nowhere near its full power. Peak operational capabilities are not expected for at least another year, although some significant science results have been achieved with early experiments. The SNS and the High Flux Isotope Reactor, combined with the capabilities at a new nanoscience center adjacent to the SNS, have made Oak Ridge the world's leading destination for scientists who want to use neutrons for materials research. The penetrating neutrons are used as tools to better understand the properties and structure of different materials. That knowledge enables researchers to restructure those materials at a nano level and ultimately achieve the desired characteristics. Senior writer Frank Munger may be reached at 342-6329. © 2007, Knoxville News Sentinel Co. ***************************************************************** 61 TNJN.com: ORNL partners with UT in efforts to solve energy crisis The news web site of the School of Journalism and Electronic Media | University of Tennessee, Knoxville TNJN/Letsinger, Kristen Dr. Thom Mason speaks about the energy crisis to UT enginerring students and faculty. By Kristen Letsinger published: October 24 2007 07:59 PM updated:: October 25 2007 12:06 Director of Oak Ridge National Laboratory said UT and ORNL are working together to try to find a solution to the world's energy crisis at a lecture Wednesday. Dr. Thom Mason spoke as part of the College of Engineering Distinguished Lecturer Series. "Energy has moved to the top of the international policy agenda," Mason said. "We have a more complex problem now." According to Mason, the heart of the problem is the world's use of energy, specifically fossil fuels. The burning of fossil fuels leads to CO2 emissions, and America is currently leading the world in CO2 emissions. Mason said the only solution is to use less oil and find other sources of energy. Energy has moved to the top of the international policy agenda, we have a more complex problem now. Dr. Thom Mason, director of ORNL "ORNL is uniquely positioned to deliver science and technology for energy," said Mason. ORNL is partnering with UT to research alternative energy sources. ORNL also offers opportunities for students to get involved in this research, Mason said. ORNL is researching the use of ethanol and other substances to help find a solution to the energy crisis. Mason said even with continued research, this is not a problem that will be solved in the next four or eight years. Editor: Shannon Petrie Editor: Karley Hudson Copyright 2006,2007 The Tennessee Journalist University of Tennessee School of Journalism and Electronic Media | College of Communication and Information Knoxville, TN 37996-0333 | 865.974.5155 | tnjn@utk.edu ***************************************************************** NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 this material is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. For more information go to: *****************************************************************