***************************************************************** 10/26/07 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 15.252 ***************************************************************** RADBULL IS PRODUCED BY THE ABALONE ALLIANCE CLEARINGHOUSE ***************************************************************** Send News Stories to news@energy-net.org with title on subject line and first line of body NUCLEAR POLICY 1 US: UCS: 15 Percent by 2020 National Renewable Electricity Standard NUCLEAR REACTORS 2 Nuclear Power to Explode in India, but China Prefers Coal 3 US: MinutemanMedia Column on Nuclear Power "Revival" 4 US: ReviewJournal.com: Nuclear trade group plans to open office in N 5 AFP: Japan court refuses to stop nuclear plant on quake fear - 6 US: Deseret Morning News: Utah nuclear plant to double up? 7 MDN: Court dismisses suit for shutdown of nuclear plant in 8 Daily Yomiuri: N-power station ruling gives nod to plant safety 9 US: NRC: NRC Announces Opportunity to Request Hearing on License Ren 10 US: KCPW: Huntsman: Nuclear Power an Option for Utah - 11 US: toledoblade.com: Davis-Besse criminal jury to deliberate again t 12 US: NRC: FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company; Beaver Valley Power 13 US: NRC: In the Matter of Alaska Industrial X-Ray, Inc., Anchorage, 14 US: ajc.com: No truce in tri-state water war 15 BOS: Fresh calls for nuclear power station near to Burnham-On-Sea to 16 Reuters: British Energy Hinkley plant running safely-source 17 US: NRC: Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards (ACRS); Meeting of 18 US: Reuters: FirstEnergy Pa. Beaver Valley 1 reactor up to 72 pct | 19 US: Reuters: Exelon Ill. Braidwood 1 reactor exits refuel | 20 US: Reuters: Progress reports rail incident at nuclear plant | U.S. 21 Prague Daily Monitor: EZ bids to build nuclear plant in Romania - 22 Hemscott: Clean-up work at some UK nuclear reactors halted by fundin 23 Mangalorean: Russia can build fast neutron nuclear reactor in India 24 Guardian Unlimited: Japan Court Nixes Nuke Plant Suspension NUCLEAR SECURITY 25 IHT: Radioactive material leaks during transport at Russian nuclear 26 Daily Georgian Times: Radioactive Substance Detained At Border NUCLEAR SAFETY 27 US: [v911t] Leuren Moret, Depleted Uranium, and Strykers in Hawaii 28 US: CBS 3: Chapman Valve Plant to be Demolished | 29 u.tv: Meter readings in Ireland show increased levels of toxins. 30 UPI: Depleted uranium can be detected in urine - 31 US: The Tech: Abnormal Radiation Level Reported 32 AU ABC: Maralinga medallion misses the mark NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE 33 US: Bradenton.com: EPA assumes limited role in Tallevast 34 US: RIA Novosti: Russia to develop new uranium deposit in East Siber 35 Canadian Press: Canada's nuclear industry should take more 36 US: Salt Lake Tribune: 'Legislators fought Goshutes' nuke waste dump 37 US: TBJ: Cars on train carrying nuclear waste derail at Shearon Harr 38 US: PEACOCK REPORT: DOE Step Closer To Building New Uranium Processi 39 US: NRC: Fuel Cycle Safety: One Commissioner’s Perspectives 40 US: Gallup Independent: Navajo gets commitment on uranium contaminat PEACE 41 US: Bismarck Tribune: Don't ever nuance a nuke event 42 RIA Novosti: Russia set to launch 5 ballistic missiles by yearend 43 AFP: Putin warns Europe ahead of Portugal summit - 44 Reuters: Putin scraps with EU over energy 45 DW: EU, Russia Remain Divided Over Key Issues at Summit | Europe | 46 UPI: Outside View: Russia's missile options 47 Guardian Unlimited: Nuclear Submarine Commander Removed 48 Guardian Unlimited: Putin: US Plan Evokes '62 Cuban Crisis US DEPT. OF ENERGY 49 Bellingham Herald: New PNNL contract would restrict private work 50 Tri-City Herald: DOE contract to operate PNNL will disallow private 51 Tri-City Herald: New demolition plan less risky for K East Basin wor 52 Tri-City Herald: Battelle to replace contaminated cars, other items 53 Knoxville News Sentinel: No plans for Tennessee River to quench Ga. ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** FULL NEWS STORIES ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** 1 UCS: 15 Percent by 2020 National Renewable Electricity Standard Would Save Consumers Money and Fight Global Warming, Science Group Says Oct 25, 2007 12:00 AM EDT Group Says Final Energy Bill Must Include Renewable Standard and Increased Fuel Economy WASHINGTON (October 25, 2007)—An energy bill requiring utilities to generate at least 15 percent of their electricity from renewable energy sources would significantly lower consumer electricity and natural gas bills and reduce global warming pollution, according to new analysis released today by the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS). The House passed such a provision, called a renewable electricity standard, in its version of the bill. "With this renewable electricity standard, Congress would give Americans three gifts: lower electric bills, cleaner air, and more homegrown energy," said Marchant Wentworth, Washington representative with UCS's Clean Energy Program. "When you combine this renewables requirement with one that would force automakers to produce more fuel-efficient cars, the bill would represent a big step forward in addressing the threat of global warming." The national renewable electricity standard provision that passed the House would require utilities to supply 15 percent of their power from wind, bioenergy, solar or geothermal power by 2020. States could meet a quarter of their obligation through energy efficiency measures. Currently, about 2.5 percent of the country's power supply comes from non-hydroelectric renewable sources. The UCS analysis found that a 15-percent-by-2020 national renewable electricity standard would: --save consumers $13 billion to $18.1 billion on electricity and natural gas bills by 2020 by reducing demand for fossil fuels and increasing competition in the U.S. energy market; --generate more than a 450 percent increase in the nation's clean energy use over 2005 levels; and --reduce global warming pollution by 126 million metric tons per year by 2020, equal to taking as many as 21 million cars off the road. UCS's analysis uses two scenarios—a higher renewable energy case and a lower renewable energy case—to illustrate the range of the 15-percent-by-2020 standard's benefits, depending on how state and federal regulators choose to implement the requirement. "Under either scenario, the renewable electricity standard would protect the environment and our pocketbooks by making our energy supply cleaner, more reliable and more secure," Wentworth said. In August, the House passed an energy bill that included the 15-percent-by-2020 national renewables standard. The Senate's energy bill, passed in June, did not include a national standard, but the Senate has supported such a policy three times since 2002, most recently in June 2005. Unlike the House version of the bill, the Senate bill includes the first meaningful increase in vehicle fuel economy standards in more than 30 years. Congress will reconcile the two bills in the coming weeks. ### Reporters: Join our notification list to receive breaking news from UCS. General media inquiries can be directed to our media office line at 202-331-5420. If you are calling about a specific issue, contact the appropriate press contact below. Press Contacts: Energy, Food, Scientific Integrity MEGHAN CROSBY Assistant Press Secretary 202-331-6943 mcrosby@ucsusa.org Climate, Global Security, Vehicles, Invasives AARON HUERTAS Assistant Press Secretary 202-331-5458 ahuertas@ucsusa.org Climate, Scientific Integrity LISA NURNBERGER Press Secretary 202-331-6959 lnurnberger@ucsusa.org Energy, Food EMILY ROBINSON Press Secretary 202-331-5427 erobinson@ucsusa.org ELLIOTT NEGIN Media Director 202-331-5439 enegin@ucsusa.org © Union of Concerned Scientists Page Last Revised: 10/25/07 ***************************************************************** 2 Nuclear Power to Explode in India, but China Prefers Coal Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2007 16:25:06 -0500 (CDT) http://www.wired.com/science/planetearth/news/2007/10/nuclear_report Nuclear Power to Explode in India, but China Prefers Coal By Alexis Madrigal To curb greenhouse gas emissions, India is poised to dramatically increase its reliance on nuclear energy -- but there'll be no overall benefit to the planet if China's coal binge continues. A new report by the International Atomic Energy Agency forecasts India will increase nuclear production eight-fold by 2030 to account for 26 percent of its power grid. However, China plans to use nuclear power for only 4 percent of electricity generation by 2030. Globally, the IAEA estimates there'll be drop an overall drop in nuclear energy from around 15 percent in 2006, down to 13 percent in 2030. "The world should be encouraging China to get out of coal into non-greenhouse gas emitting energy production," said Alan McDonald, a nuclear-energy analyst with the IAEA. Coal is a dirty, carbon-dioxide spewing energy source, but like gasoline, it is cheap, scalable and reliable. The Pew Center for Climate Change estimates that coal contributes 20 percent of the total greenhouse gases emitted on earth. Among the green alternatives to coal, nuclear is the only technology with proven capacity. Worldwide, nuclear power generates 370 gigawatts of energy; estimates of global wind capacity are around 74 GW and solar-power capacity at only 1.7 GW. "The other true alternative energies like solar and wind are just not ready to step up and become a major part of the global-energy system in the next 10 to 20 years," said Jeremy Carl, a research fellow in Stanford's Program on Energy and Sustainable Development. "If climate becomes a serious enough consideration, we might end up building a lot of nuclear plants." India plans to increase nuclear-energy production by more than 9 percent a year through 2050. Seven new nuclear reactors are already under construction and more are planned, despite political hurdles that threaten to derail a U.S.-India nuclear fuel pact. While China draws fire for dirty energy production, half of United States power is generated by coal. Atomic energy is only responsible for 16 percent of total electricity generation. Concern over climate change, however, is changing public opinion in the United States. Bisconti Research, which tracks opinion for the industry-backed Nuclear Energy Institute, found that 63 percent of Americans think nuclear should be in the U.S. energy mix, up from 49 percent in 1983. The main factor holding nuclear power back in North America remains up-front costs. "Nuclear power plants are relatively expensive to build and cheap to operate," said McDonald. "They are great if you can wait for a return on your investment." Thirty new nuclear plants are on the drawing board in the United States, but no new nuclear sites have been built in decades. Stanford's Carl pointed out the elephant in the room when it comes to nuclear energy: risk. "All it would take is one dirty bomb event or one Chernobyl to freeze nuclear plant production," he said. ***************************************************************** 3 MinutemanMedia Column on Nuclear Power "Revival" Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2007 06:27:41 -0400 NUCLEAR POWER IS NOT THE ANSWER – by Karl Grossman There’s again a move to “revive” nuclear power. Every decade or so those with a vested interest in this deadly dangerous technology have sought to get the public to swallow the nuclear pill–-and it’s happening again. That promotion has consistently been based on falsehoods. For example, in a heavy push years back–-during a gasoline shortage that included long lines at the pump–-the claim was that if we had nuclear power, somehow this wouldn’t happen again. In fact, only 3 percent of electricity in the United States is generated with oil. Nuclear power has nothing to do with oil and gas. Currently, as the global warming crisis is acknowledged (after years of the vested oil interests denying it) the big pitch is: Nuclear plants don’t emit greenhouse gases and thus don’t contribute to warming.  In reality, the overall nuclear cycle–-which includes uranium mining and milling, enrichment, fuel fabrication and disposal of radioactive waste–-produces greenhouse gas emissions that play a significant part in global warming.  As Michel Lee of the Council on Intelligent Energy & Conservation Policy notes: “The dirty secret is that nuclear power makes a substantial contribution to global warming.” The claim that it doesn’t “is a fiction that has been a prime feature of the nuclear industry’s and Bush administration’s PR campaign.” As a petition being circulated by the Nuclear Information and Resource Service, which numerous environmental and safe-energy groups and thousands of individuals have signed onto, declares: “we do not support construction of new nuclear reactors as a means of addressing the climate crisis. Available renewable energy and energy efficiency technologies are faster, leaner, safer and cleaner strategies for reducing greenhouse emissions than nuclear power.” The last order for a nuclear plant in the United States not subsequently cancelled was in 1973. The 1979 Three Mile Island accident and the 1986 Chernobyl disaster gave the lie to the nuclear establishment’s claim that a catastrophic mishap was extremely unlikely–-despite a PR campaign since then trying to deny the impacts of these events. Fortunately, a majority of Americans remain strongly against nuclear power, realizing how lethal it is. Indeed, a U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission report, “CRAC-2,” projects consequences of a major accident at each the 103 nuclear power plants now operating our country, estimating “peak early fatalities” as high as 100,000, “peak early injuries” even higher, and property damage as much as $300 billion. Post-9/11, with al-Qaeda acknowledging that it has been eyeing U.S. atomic plants, every one is a target–-and a potent nuclear weapon for terrorists. Moreover, “It doesn’t take an accident for a nuclear power plant to release radioactivity into our air, water, and soil. All it takes is the plant’s everyday routine operation, and federal regulations permit these radioactive releases,” stresses Kay Drey of Beyond Nuclear. How would the scores of would-be new nuclear plants be financed? You and other taxpayers would be expected to pay heavily. Some $15 billion in taxpayer subsidies have already been arranged and an energy bill now before Congress authorizes $50 billion more for new nuclear plants. “Renewables Are Ready” is the title of a 1999 book written by two staffers of the Union of Concerned Scientists. Today, they are more than ready. Wind, solar, hydrogen, bio-fuels, geothermal and other safe, clean renewable power can, along with energy efficiency, easily provide the energy we need. The resources are vast. Researchers at Stanford University estimate global wind energy potential at 72,000 gigawatts–-10 times as much electricity as the world now uses. The National Renewable Energy Laboratory says seven U.S. southwest states could provide more than 7,000 gigawatts of solar power––seven times the existing electric capacity in the United States from all sources. And renewable energy technologies are now highly developed–-on the shelf and ready to be widely utilized. But those who push nuclear power would threaten us with losing out lives and money–-unnecessarily. They must be stopped. Karl Grossman, professor of journalism at SUNY/College at Old Westbury (N.Y.), is author of “Cover Up: What You Are Not Supposed to Know About Nuclear Power,” and TV documentaries, including, “The Push to Revive Nuclear Power.” ***************************************************************** 4 ReviewJournal.com: Nuclear trade group plans to open office in Nevada Oct. 26, 2007 Outpost to be site for advocating Yucca Mountain repository By STEVE TETREAULT STEPHENS WASHINGTON BUREAU WASHINGTON -- The Nuclear Energy Institute is moving to open an office in Las Vegas, cementing a beachhead for its advocacy of a nuclear waste repository in the state. The high-profile trade group is seeking space around McCarran International Airport, near where the Nuclear Regulatory Commission has set up a hearing center on Pepper Lane, according to Paul Seidler, a Nevada consultant who joined NEI on Oct. 1 as a senior director to head the office. Seidler said the outpost will serve as an industry center for NRC hearings on the proposed Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository. It also will include a public information area and will provide a base for outreach to Nevadans about the project, he said. "My game plan is just to make sure we are part of the community, able to go to the public and the media and the leadership, and that we are interacting with them on a daily basis," said Seidler, who lives in Henderson. Rep. Shelley Berkley, D-Nev., said she does not plan to roll out a welcome mat. Berkley said the NEI venture foreshadows an industry push to persuade Nevadans that a nuclear waste repository will be safe when most state leaders and some residents believe otherwise. "I hope they sign a short-term lease," she said. "I want them to spend a ton of money, employ as many of my constituents as possible, and then I want them to go away." The nuclear industry's move to boost its presence is an early sign of the heightened activity expected to be generated in Las Vegas if the NRC decides to hold hearings on a Department of Energy application to build a nuclear waste complex at the Yucca site, 100 miles northwest of the city. Scientists, lawyers, business executives, journalists, public relations specialists and activists will attend hearings at the NRC center on the technical aspects of the project. The hearings might turn into mini-trials at times as critics challenge the project. DOE officials have said they plan to file for a construction license by the end of June. The NRC could take up to six months for a preliminary scoping of the application before deciding whether to docket it for in-depth reviews. NEI currently pays a small network of consultants to serve as the industry's eyes and ears in Nevada, including former Gov. Robert List and two former chiefs of staff to former Sen. Paul Laxalt, Ace Robison and Ed Allison. Robison also served as a deputy assistant secretary within the Energy Department. Apart from raising NEI's profile, Seidler, 46, said he does not foresee major changes in strategy. Seidler, a former Yucca project official who has worked as a consultant in the state since the mid-1990s, said he will be joined at the outset by Chris Binzer, a communications specialist. Links powered by inform.com Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal, 1997 - 2007 Stephens Media, LLC Privacy Statement ***************************************************************** 5 AFP: Japan court refuses to stop nuclear plant on quake fear - Friday October 26, 04:04 PM TOKYO (AFP) - A Japanese court on Friday refused to shut down a nuclear power plant, rejecting a plea by residents who fear radiation if a major earthquake strikes. An earthquake in July damaged the world's largest nuclear power plant northwest of Tokyo, which leaked tiny amounts of radiation and remains shut for inspections. Residents near the separate Hamaoka nuclear power plant south of Tokyo filed a lawsuit demanding its suspension, noting that their region was at high risk for earthquakes and voicing fear that it would expose them to radiation. But the Shizuoka District Court ruled that the plant, run by Chubu Electric Power Co., had sufficient safeguards. "The plant has a quake-resistant structure based on carefully considered simulations of big earthquakes," Judge Akira Miyaoka said. The plaintiffs pledged to appeal. "This court decision ignores the danger of setting up and operating nuclear power plants in Japan, a country that experiences lots of quakes," said a lawyer for the plaintiffs. "We'll never bend to this unfair ruling. We pledge to keep fighting until we get the suspension," he said, as seen in television footage which did not give his name. Japan experiences about 20 percent of the world's major earthquakes. The July 16 earthquake which damaged the giant Kashiwazaki-Kariwa plant registered 6.8 on the Richter scale and killed 14 people, although none of the deaths were linked to the nuclear facility. A team from the UN International Atomic Energy Agency inspected the plant and concluded that damage was limited and did not affect the reactors' safety. Save to MyWebEmail storyPrintable view Copyright © 2007 Yahoo!7 Pty Limited. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 6 Deseret Morning News: Utah nuclear plant to double up? Friday, October 26, 2007 2 reactors likely for the planned power project By Joe Bauman and Lisa Riley Roche Deseret Morning News Two reactors are likely for the nuclear power project planned for somewhere in Utah by Transition Power Development, says an owner of the company, Rep. Aaron Tilton, R-Springville. Cost of the two units could reach billions of dollars, and its water would come from the Kane County Water Conservancy District, whose director is Rep. Mike Noel, R-Kanab. The representatives hold important posts on legislative committees dealing with nuclear power and have come under criticism for possible conflicts of interest. On Thursday, Gov. Jon Huntsman Jr. said questions about that issue are up to voters and the Legislature to decide. Asked why two generating units might be built, Tilton said, "You need economies of scale. ... We fully intend to have more than one unit." Asked if more than two units could be built, he said that was possible but planners would need to address questions of water resources and transmission of power. Each unit probably would generate an average of 1,500 mega-watts, he said. Asked for a timeline on the plant's construction, Tilton replied, "It's still a long way out." The place with the greatest need for power generated by the plant, at least as far as its planners have seen so far, is in Utah, he said. PacifiCorp, whose Rocky Mountain Power supplies most of Utah residents' electrical needs, has said it needs to purchase 3,500 megawatts from other areas, he said. That is about 30 percent of its market, and that utility has no plans for new generating units at the present, he added. "Then you have regional needs that have to be considered as well," in Arizona, Nevada and California. If needs there are not met, by 2016 PacifiCorp will need an additional 30 percent or more, he said. When interviewed by the Deseret Morning News on Oct. 15, Tilton discounted an indication in a trade journal that the plant might take its water from the Green River. On Thursday, he reiterated that caution. In the water contract, Transition Power noted Emery County as a point of diversion, Tilton said. But it was only on the document as a sort of placeholder, he added. "Our water right is good for the whole Upper Colorado River Basin." The town of Green River is located on the river of that name, in Emery County. But Tilton said, "We have not confirmed anything with the Emery County Commission or anybody down in Emery County." Transition Power has had preliminary discussions concerning Emery County, but it has had such talks with other locations. The company has the eastern half of Utah under consideration, Tilton added. "We have multiple locations," he said. "We just haven't chosen one." During Huntsman's monthly press conference on KUED Channel 7, the governor said questions of conflicts of interest are "something that voters ultimately need to decide ... the Legislature can do whatever it wants." Asked if alleged conflicts of interest among some lawmakers would prevent the project from getting a fair hearing at the Legislature, Huntsman said, "I can't speak to that issue. This isn't necessarily a Legislature-driven issue. This is more national policy." He said that whatever incentives are created to encourage nuclear power development in the state should be extended to other non-carbon sources of energy, including wind, geothermal, solar and even hydro. "If you're going to do it for one, I would ask that you do it for all of them," Huntsman said. He said any significant progress on a nuclear plant in Utah is at least 10 years to 20 years away. "The only reason that I don't dismiss it outright is because if you're going to take climate change seriously ... you have to keep the nuclear option on the table." Storing radioactive waste generated by a nuclear power plant is a particular concern for the governor, who led the successful fight to stop a high-level waste storage site from being built in Tooele County. Huntsman told the Deseret Morning News last month that he could not support a nuclear plant in Utah until the technology is developed to safely reprocess the plant's radioactive waste on-site. E-mail: bau@desnews.com; lisa@desnews.com ***************************************************************** 7 MDN: Court dismisses suit for shutdown of nuclear plant in earthquake-prone Tokai area - Mainichi Daily News October 27, 2007 | Weather Supporters for the plaintiffs show off banners saying, "Unfair ruling," in front of the Shizuoka District Court on Friday. SHIZUOKA -- A local court on Friday dismissed a class-action lawsuit demanding the shutdown of four nuclear reactors in an area where seismologists predict a major earthquake is likely to occur within the next 30 years. The Shizuoka District Court said that the operator of the Hamaoka Nuclear Power Plant has taken sufficient safety measures to protect the facility from any powerful earthquakes in the region. "There is no problem with Chubu Electric Power Co.'s safety measures," said Presiding Judge Akira Miyaoka in the ruling. "The facility is designed to withstand a major earthquake." The 27 plaintiffs are set to appeal the ruling to a higher court. During hearings, the plaintiffs pointed to the possibility that a more powerful earthquake than experts are predicting may hit the area, and expressed fear that the plant may not withstand such a temblor. They also argued that Chubu Electric Power Co. is capable of supplying enough electric power without the Hamaoka Nuclear Power Plant in Shizuoka Prefecture. They noted that the operator of the plant stopped the plant's No. 1 and 3 reactors in September 2002 after it was revealed that the company covered up cracks in some of their pipes. They added that since the operations of its No. 2 and 4 reactors were suspended for regular inspections at the time, none of the reactors at the plant were in operation. The defendant countered by arguing that it has confirmed that the plant is sufficiently quake-resistant, and that the plaintiffs were only expressing vague concerns over its safety without any scientific backing. The government's Headquarters for Earthquake Research Promotion says there is an 87 percent chance of a magnitude-8 earthquake, hitting near the Hamaoka plant in central Japan over the next 30 years. The plaintiffs launched the suit in July 2003, demanding that the operations of reactors No. 1 to 4 reactors be banned. The No. 5 reactor, which came into service after they took the legal action, is not covered by their suit. Click here for the original Japanese story （Mainichi Japan） October 26, 2007 Copyright (c) 2005 - 2007 THE MAINICHI NEWSPAPERS. All Rights ***************************************************************** 8 Daily Yomiuri: N-power station ruling gives nod to plant safety Editorial : DAILY Friday's ruling allowing Chubu Electric Power Co.'s Hamaoka nuclear power station to remain in operation will surely have cheered officials and workers in the nuclear energy sector. The Shizuoka District Court dismissed a demand by local residents that the electric power company suspend the operations of the Nos. 1, 2, 3 and 4 nuclear reactors at the power station in Omaezaki, Shizuoka Prefecture. The court also rejected a separate request for a temporary injunction to suspend the plant's operations. The lawsuit centered on whether nuclear reactors could safely withstand a powerful earthquake. In a similar lawsuit in March 2006, the Kanazawa District Court ordered the suspension of operations at the No. 2 reactor of Hokuriku Electric Power Co.'s Shika nuclear power plant in Ishikawa Prefecture. The court said the reactor had "problems" with its earthquake resistance. The latest ruling, on the other hand, gave more weight to the fact that the nuclear power plant was designed and operated in accordance with regulations set under laws and ordinances. We think the court made a practical judgment that was in line with a 1992 Supreme Court ruling over the Ikata nuclear power station in Ehime Prefecture. === Waiting for the big one The Hamaoka nuclear power station is in a focus area that seismologists predict will bear the brunt of a major Tokai region earthquake, which is expected to have a magnitude of about 8 on the Richter scale. During the court battle, the plaintiffs asserted that an earthquake more powerful than was assumed when the plant was designed could strike the area. They also said they were worried that the aging pipes and other parts could compromise the plant's safety. The ruling said the nuclear plant is not required to stand up to "every possible situation that could be assumed--even under scenarios that can be plausible only in abstract terms." The ruling was fully in favor of Chubu Electric Power's assertions that the Hamaoka plant was safe and went on to dismiss the plaintiffs' claim. The court also made a judgment on a matter that the government has not yet been able to assess. Last year, the government revised the guidelines for screening plant designs in a bid to beef up earthquake resistance and the safety of nuclear power plants. Like other plants across the nation, the Hamaoka plant has been inspected again in line with the guidelines. It awaits a final judgment from the government over its safety, but the court said data gathered during inspections "meets the requirements of the revised guidelines." The plaintiffs said they plan to appeal the ruling. The court's judgment, on the whole, spoke volumes of its conviction that earthquake-resistance measures taken by Chubu Electric were sufficient. By the same token, the electric power company must shoulder the heavy responsibility of taking steps to guarantee the plant can withstand an earthquake. === Inspections must be sped up Nuclear plants across the nation are jumping through hoops to meet the requirements of the revised guidelines. No plant has yet to complete the inspections, so all electric power companies must expedite their inspection processes. In July, the Niigata Prefecture Chuetsu Offshore Earthquake damaged the Kashiwazaki-Kariwa nuclear plant of Tokyo Electric Power Co. Although the safety of the nuclear reactors was never jeopardized, a small fire broke out in a transformer facility, fanning public fears about the earthquake resistance of nuclear plants. Nuclear energy accounts for more than 30 percent of the nation's electricity generation and is indispensable for ensuring Japan's energy security. But public sentiment has turned against nuclear power generation after doubts were raised about the earthquake resistance of nuclear power plants this summer. Based on the experience of the Niigata Prefecture Chuetsu Offshore Earthquake, electric power companies must rebuild a crisis control system that can cope with a major earthquake. They also must explain in a clear, simple manner about the safety measures implemented at their plants to prevent damage during earthquakes. (From The Yomiuri Shimbun, Oct. 27, 2007) ) © The Yomiuri Shimbun. ***************************************************************** 9 NRC: NRC Announces Opportunity to Request Hearing on License Renewal Application for Beaver Valley Nuclear Plant News Release - 2007-141 - 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 today announced the opportunity to request a hearing on an application to renew the operating licenses for the Beaver Valley nuclear power plant, Units 1 and 2, for an additional 20 years. The Beaver Valley plant has two pressurized water reactors located about 17 miles west of McCandless, Pa. The plant owner, First Energy Nuclear Operating Co., submitted the renewal application Aug. 28. The current operating licenses for Beaver Valley expire Jan. 29, 2016, for Unit 1 and May 27, 2027, for Unit 2. The NRC staff has determined that the application contains sufficient information for the agency to formally “docket,” or file, the application and begin its technical review. Docketing the application does not preclude requesting additional information as the review proceeds; nor does it indicate whether the Commission will renew the licenses. The Beaver Valley application for license renewal is posted on the NRC Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/reactors/operating/licensing/renewal/applications/b valley.html. An NRC review schedule for Beaver Valley will also be posted soon. License renewal reviews typically take 22 months with no hearing, or 30 months with a hearing. A notice of opportunity to request a hearing was published Oct. 26 in the Federal Register. The deadline for requesting a hearing is 60 days after publication of the notice. Petitions may be filed by anyone whose interest may be affected by the license renewal and who wishes to participate as a party in the proceeding. Background information regarding the hearing process was provided by NRC staff to members of the public during a public information session conducted yesterday near Beaver Valley. A request for hearing and a petition for leave to intervene must be filed with the Secretary of the Commission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C. 20555-0001, Attention: Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff. Requests may also be submitted by facsimile to (301) 415-1101 or e-mail to HEARINGDOCKET@nrc.gov. A copy should also be submitted to the NRC Office of General Counsel, by facsimile to (301) 415-3725 or e-mail to OGCMailCenter@nrc.gov.             Information about the license renewal process can be found on the NRC Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/reactors/operating/licensing/renewal.html NRC news releases are available through a free listserv subscription at the following Web address: http://www.nrc.gov/public-involve/listserver.html. The NRC Home Page at www.nrc.gov also offers a Subscribe to News link in the News & Information menu. E-mail notifications are sent to subscribers when news releases are posted to NRC's Web Site. October 26, 2007 ***************************************************************** 10 KCPW: Huntsman: Nuclear Power an Option for Utah - Oct 26, 2007 by Julie Rose (KCPW News) Governor Jon Huntsman has long opposed nuclear waste storage in Utah, but now says nuclear power is an option the state must consider in the face of global warming. However, he says state officials should give the same incentives to other carbon-free energy sources like wind, solar and water: "If you're willing to give a break to a plant of any kind that has a carbon free technology, have it based on operations when it comes online and begins to produce electricity," says Huntsman. "If you're gonna do it for one, you ought to do it for all of them. There are a lot of carbon-free technologies we ought to be looking at." Two Utah lawmakers who sit on committees that oversee energy policy for the state are involved in plans to build a nuclear plant in Utah. Huntsman estimates any such development is at least a decade away. As for the potential conflict of interest those lawmakers have in pursuing nuclear energy, Huntsman says he's powerless: "That's something the voters ultimately need to decide," says Huntsman. "We hold the executive branch to a fairly high standard. The legislature can do whatever it wants. I won't venture into what's best for the legislature - their leaders can do whatever their comfortable with. I'm responsible for the executive branch and will speak out for the executive branch." Legislators involved in the nuclear plans say they have not yet participated in any vote that might represent a conflict of interest. Huntsman says he will ask his Blue Ribbon Advisory Council on Climate Change to shape his policy on building a nuclear plant in Utah. 1. Brittiny Morgan said: Utah get ready to spend billions in tax dollars- the proposal is to do this with the green River, a tributary of the Colorado, primary water source for much of the Southwest. So we will be sued by San Diego, Los Angeles, Las Vegas and Phoenix and then when they're bdone, possibly even Mexico. Open your wallets, Utah! This time your elected officials have the ability to cost you more that you ever dreamed our state could spend. Copyright © 2006 KCPW ***************************************************************** 11 toledoblade.com: Davis-Besse criminal jury to deliberate again today Article published Friday, October 26, 2007 The jury in the Davis-Besse criminal trial adjourned last night after more than seven hours of deliberations. It is to reconvene at 8:30 a.m. today. Evidence in the trial in U.S. District Court in Toledo took a little more than three weeks to present. Former engineers David Geisen and Rodney N. Cook were indicted in 2006 on multiple counts of withholding information about the FirstEnergy Corp. nuclear plant along Lake Erie, 30 miles east of Toledo. Another engineer, Andrew Siemaszko, whom the government indicted as a co-conspirator, is to be tried later. If convicted, they face maximum sentences of five years in prison and $250,000 fines. © 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 ***************************************************************** 12 NRC: FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company; Beaver Valley Power Station, Units 1 and 2; Notice of Acceptance for Docketing of the Application and Notice of Opportunity for Hearing Regarding Renewal of Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-66 and NPF-73 for an Additional 20- Year Period FR Doc E7-21086 [Federal Register: October 26, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 207)] [Notices] [Page 60916-60918] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr26oc07-118] [[Page 60916]] NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket Nos. 50-334 and 50-412] The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or the Commission) is considering an application for the renewal of Operating License Nos. DPR-66 and NPF-73, which authorize FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company (FENOC), to operate Beaver Valley Power Station, Units 1 and 2, respectively, at 2900 megawatts thermal for each unit. The renewed licenses would authorize the applicant to operate Beaver Valley Power Station, Units 1 and 2, for an additional 20 years beyond the period specified in the current licenses. The current operating licenses for Beaver Valley Power Station, Units 1 and 2, expire on January 29, 2016, and May 27, 2026, respectively. FENOC submitted the application dated August 27, 2007, pursuant to Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations CFR part 54 (10 CFR part 54), to renew Operating License Nos. DPR-66 and NPF-73 for Beaver Valley Power Station, Units 1 and 2, respectively. A Notice of Receipt and Availability of the license renewal application (LRA) was published in the Federal Register on September 24, 2007 (72 FR 54301). The Commission's staff has determined that FENOC has submitted sufficient information in accordance with 10 CFR 54.19, 54.21, 54.22, 54.23, 51.45, and 51.53(c) to enable the staff to undertake a review of the application, and the application is therefore acceptable for docketing. The current Docket Nos. 50-334 and 50-412 for Operating License Nos. DPR-66 and NPF-73, respectively, will be retained. The determination to accept the license renewal application for docketing does not constitute a determination that a renewed license should be issued, and does not preclude the NRC staff from requesting additional information as the review proceeds. Before issuance of each requested renewed license, the NRC will have made the findings required by the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (the Act), as amended, and the Commission's rules and regulations. In accordance with 10 CFR 54.29, the NRC may issue a renewed license on the basis of its review if it finds that actions have been identified and have been or will be taken with respect to: (1) Managing the effects of aging during the period of extended operation on the functionality of structures and components that have been identified as requiring aging management review; and (2) time-limited aging analyses that have been identified as requiring review, such that there is reasonable assurance that the activities authorized by the renewed license will continue to be conducted in accordance with the current licensing basis (CLB), and that any changes made to the plant's CLB comply with the Act and the Commission's regulations. Additionally, in accordance with 10 CFR 51.95(c), the NRC will prepare an environmental impact statement that is a supplement to the Commission's NUREG-1437, ``Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Power Plants,'' dated May 1996. In considering the LRA, the Commission must find that the applicable requirements of Subpart A of 10 CFR part 51 have been satisfied. Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.26, and as part of the environmental scoping process, the staff intends to hold a public scoping meeting. Detailed information regarding the environmental scoping meeting will be the subject of a separate Federal Register notice. Within 60 days after the date of publication of this Federal Register Notice, any person whose interest may be affected by this proceeding and who wishes to participate as a party in the proceeding must file a written request for a hearing or a petition for leave to intervene with respect to the renewal of the license. Requests for a hearing or petitions for leave to intervene must be filed in accordance with the Commission's ``Rules of Practice for Domestic Licensing Proceedings'' in 10 CFR part 2. Interested persons should consult a current copy of 10 CFR 2.309, which is available at the Commission's Public Document Room (PDR), located at One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland 20852 and is accessible from the NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) Public Electronic Reading Room on the Internet at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. Persons who do not have access to ADAMS or who encounter problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS should contact the NRC's PDR reference staff by telephone at 1- 800-397-4209 or 301-415-4737, or by e-mail at pdr@nrc.gov. If a request for a hearing/petition for leave to intervene is filed within the 60- day period, the Commission or a presiding officer designated by the Commission or by the Chief Administrative Judge of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel will rule on the request and/or petition; and the Secretary or the Chief Administrative Judge of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel will issue a notice of a hearing or an appropriate order. In the event that no request for a hearing or petition for leave to intervene is filed within the 60-day period, the NRC may, upon completion of its evaluations and upon making the findings required under 10 CFR parts 51 and 54, renew the license without further notice. As required by 10 CFR 2.309, a petition for leave to intervene shall set forth with particularity the interest of the petitioner in the proceeding, and how that interest may be affected by the results of the proceeding, taking into consideration the limited scope of matters that may be considered pursuant to 10 CFR parts 51 and 54. The petition must specifically explain the reasons why intervention should be permitted with particular reference to the following factors: (1) The nature of the requestor's/petitioner's right under the Act to be made a party to the proceeding; (2) the nature and extent of the requestor's/ petitioner's property, financial, or other interest in the proceeding; and (3) the possible effect of any decision or order which may be entered in the proceeding on the requestor's/petitioner's interest. The petition must also set forth the specific contentions which the petitioner/requestor seeks to have litigated in the proceeding. Each contention must consist of a specific statement of the issue of law or fact to be raised or controverted. In addition, the requestor/petitioner shall provide a brief explanation of the bases of each contention and a concise statement of the alleged facts or the expert opinion that supports the contention on which the requestor/ petitioner intends to rely in proving the contention at the hearing. The requestor/petitioner must also provide references to those specific sources and documents of which the requestor/petitioner is aware and on which the requestor/petitioner intends to rely to establish those facts or expert opinion. The requestor/petitioner must provide sufficient information to show that a genuine dispute exists with the applicant on a material issue of law or fact.\1\ Contentions shall be limited to [[Page 60917]] matters within the scope of the action under consideration. The contention must be one that, if proven, would entitle the requestor/ petitioner to relief. A requestor/petitioner who fails to satisfy these requirements with respect to at least one contention will not be permitted to participate as a party. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\ To the extent that the application contains attachments and supporting documents that are not publicly available because they are asserted to contain safeguards or proprietary information, petitioners desiring access to this information should contact the applicant or applicant's counsel to discuss the need for a protective order. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Commission requests that each contention be given a separate numeric or alpha designation within one of the following groups: (1) Technical (primarily related to safety concerns); (2) environmental; or (3) miscellaneous. As specified in 10 CFR 2.309, if two or more requestors/petitioners seek to co-sponsor a contention or propose substantially the same contention, the requestors/petitioners will be required to jointly designate a representative who shall have the authority to act for the requestors/petitioners with respect to that contention. Those permitted to intervene become parties to the proceeding, subject to any limitations in the order granting leave to intervene, and have the opportunity to participate fully in the conduct of the hearing. A request for hearing or a petition for leave to intervene must be filed in accordance with the NRC E-Filing rule, which the NRC promulgated in August 2007, 72 FR 49, 139 (August 28, 2007). The E- filing process requires participants to submit and serve documents over the internet or in some cases to mail copies on electronic storage media. Participants may not submit paper copies of their filings unless they seek a waiver in accordance with the procedures described below. To comply with the procedural requirements of E-Filing, at least five (5) days prior to the filing deadline, the petitioner/requestor must contact the Office of the Secretary by e-mail at HEARINGDOCKET@NRC.GOV, or by calling (301) 415-1677, to request: (1) A digital ID certificate, which allows the participant (or the counsel or representative) to digital sign documents and access the E-Submittal server for any proceeding in which it is participating; and/or (2) creation of an electronic docket for the proceeding (even in instances in which the requestor/petitioner (or it's council or representative) already holds an NRC-issued digital ID certificate). Each requestor/ petitioner will need to download the Workplace Forms ViewerTM to access the Electronic Information Exchange (EIE), a component of the E-Filing system. The Workplace Forms ViewerTM is free and is available at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals/install-viewer.html. Information about applying for a digital ID certificate is available on NRC's public Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals/apply-certificates.html. Once a requestor/petitioner has obtained a digital ID certificate, had a docket created, and downloaded the EIE viewer, it can then submit a request for hearing or petition for leave to intervene. Submissions should be in Portable Document Format (PDF) in accordance with NRC guidance available on the NRC public Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html. A filing is considered complete at the time the filer submits its documents through EIE. To be timely, an electronic filing must be submitted to the EIE system no later than 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on the due date. Upon receipt of a transmission, the E-Filing system time-stamps the document and sends the submitter an e-mail notice confirming receipt of the document. The EIE system also distributes an e-mail notice that provides access to the document to the NRC Office of the General Counsel and any others who have advised the Office of the Secretary that they wish to participate in the proceeding, so that the filer need not serve the documents on those participants separately. Therefore, applicants and other participants (or their counsel or representatives) must apply for and receive a digital ID certificate before a hearing request/petition to intervene is filed so that they can obtain access to the document via the E-Filing system. A person filing electronically may seek assistance through the ``Contact Us'' link located on the NRC Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html or by calling the NRC technical help line, which is available between 8:30 a.m. and 4:15 p.m., Eastern Time, Monday through Friday. The help line number is (800) 397-4209 or locally, (301) 415-4737. Participants who believe that they have a good cause for not submitting documents electronically must file a motion, in accordance with 10 CFR 2.302(g), with their initial paper filing requesting authorization to continue to submit documents in paper format. Such filings must be submitted by: (1) First class mail addressed to the Office of the Secretary of the Commission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attention: Rulemaking and Adjudication Staff; or (2) courier, express mail, or expedited delivery service to the Office of the Secretary, Sixteenth Floor, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Maryland 20852, Attention: Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff. Participants filing a document in this manner are responsible for serving the document on all other participants. Filing is considered complete by first-class mail as of the time of deposit in the mail, or by courier, express mail or expedited delivery service upon depositing the document with the provider of the service. Non-timely requests and/or petitions and contentions will not be entertained absent a determination by the Commission, the presiding officer, or the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel that the petition and/or request should be granted and/or the contentions should be admitted based on a balancing of the factors specified in 10 CFR 2.309(c)(1)(i)-(viii). To be timely, filings must be submitted no later than 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on the due date. Documents submitted in adjudicatory proceedings will appear in NRC's electronic hearing docket which is available to the public at http://ehd.nrc.gov/EHD_Proceeding/home.asp, unless excluded pursuant to an order of the Commission, an Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel, or a Presiding Officer. Participants are requested not to include personal privacy information, such as social security numbers, home addresses, or home phone numbers in their filings. With respect to copyrighted works, except for limited excerpts that serve the purpose of the adjudicatory filings and would constitute a Fair Use application, participants are requested not to include copyrighted materials in their submission. Detailed information about the license renewal process can be found under the Nuclear Reactors icon at http://www.nrc.gov/reactors/operating/licensing/renewal.html on the NRC's Web site. Copies of the application to renew the operating licenses for Beaver Valley Power Station, Units 1 and 2, are available for public inspection at the Commission's PDR, located at One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland 20852-2738, and at http://www.nrc.gov/reactors/operating/licensing/renewal/applications.html , the NRC's Web site while the application is under review. The application may be accessed in ADAMS through the NRC's Public Electronic Reading Room on the Internet at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html under ADAMS Accession Number ML072430913. As stated above, persons who do not have access to ADAMS or who encounter problems in [[Page 60918]] accessing the documents located in ADAMS may contact the NRC PDR Reference staff by telephone at 1-800-397-4209 or 301-415-4737, or by e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov. The NRC staff has verified that a copy of the LRA is also available to local residents near Beaver Valley Power Station, Units 1 and 2, at the Beaver Area Memorial Library, 100 College Avenue, Beaver, Pennsylvania 15009, and the Beaver County Library System, 1 Campus Drive, Monaca, Pennsylvania 15061. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 22nd day of October, 2007. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Louise Lund, Acting Director, Division of License Renewal, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. [FR Doc. E7-21086 Filed 10-25-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P ***************************************************************** 13 NRC: In the Matter of Alaska Industrial X-Ray, Inc., Anchorage, AK; Order Suspending Licensed Activities (Effective Immediately) FR Doc E7-21117 [Federal Register: October 26, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 207)] [Notices] [Page 60913-60915] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr26oc07-117] NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket No. 030-10346; License No. 50-16084-01; EA-07-261] I Alaska Industrial X-Ray, Inc., (AIX or Licensee) is the holder of NRC License No. 50-16084-01 issued by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or Commission) pursuant to 10 CFR Part 34. The license authorizes the Licensee to conduct industrial radiography at temporary job sites anywhere in the United States where the NRC maintains jurisdiction for regulating licensed material. The license was issued on October 24, 1990, was most recently renewed on March 13, 2001, and is due to expire on March 31, 2011. II On June 4, 2007, the NRC's Office of Investigation (OI) initiated an investigation into AIX's activities at a facility, not owned by AIX, located in Anchorage, Alaska. This off-site facility is owned by an AIX client, and AIX has been performing radiography at that location since the 1990s. Based on information obtained during the investigation, serious concerns were identified concerning the AIX senior managers' oversight of licensed activities and AIX's ability to protect the public health and safety. Specifically, AIX radiographers, including the company Radiation Safety Officer, knowingly conducted radiography activities without the two individuals required by 10 CFR 34.41(a) (sometimes called the 2-person rule). This occurred on numerous instances over a period of up to three years and presented unnecessary risk to the public health and safety. In the 1990s, AIX constructed a facility that was referred to as a ``vault'' at its client's facility. AIX applied to the NRC to have the ``vault'' approved as a Permanent Radiographic Installation as described in 10 CFR 34.33. Radiography conducted in an authorized permanent radiographic installation could be conducted with a single radiographer; otherwise, 10 CFR 34.41(a) requires, in part, that at least two qualified individuals be present during radiography. However, the NRC never approved the ``vault'' as a Permanent Radiographic Installation because of serious deficiencies in the design and requested further information from AIX. One of the design deficiencies was that the ``vault'' had very little shielding on most of the front of the vault; the shielding consisted of a lead-lined steel frame gate that was only about 3\1/2\ feet tall and an industrial tarp that was pulled across the front. As such, AIX estimated radiation exposures 20 feet in front of the ``vault'' exceeded many hundred times the NRC's 2 mR/hr limit. In addition, the NRC believes there was access to the roof of the facility, which was made of \3/4\ inch plywood (very limited shielding material), resulting in dose rates in excess of the NRC's 2 mR/hr limit. The licensing action was closed in 2002 after AIX did not make the structural changes necessary to obtain approval. The investigation revealed that on numerous occasions over a period of up to three years, AIX would send two qualified individuals to the off-site facility to perform radiography, and that AIX would commence radiography in compliance with 10 CFR 34.41(a). [[Page 60914]] However, AIX radiographers, including the company radiation safety officer, admitted that eventually, one individual would return to the company's shop (located several miles away) to develop film; while the remaining radiographer continued with radiography operations, without the second qualified individual, unnecessarily endangering the public health and safety. In addition, one radiographer admitted to performing radiography activities without the second qualified individual, at a second facility owned by the licensee, several times over the past year, also in violation of 10 CFR 34.41(a). The company president stated he had ``an inkling of what was going on'' and that he ``suspected it.'' All individuals interviewed justified the violation due to the additional safeguards that had been installed at the ``vault'' which AIX had attempted to gain NRC approval as a Permanent Radiographic Installation. However, as noted above, the ``vault'' was not approved by the NRC and was therefore not adequate to ensure the protection of the public health and safety; without NRC approval of this facility the licensee is required to follow 10 CFR 34.41(a). Use of two qualified persons observing radiographic operations provides a high level of assurance that members of the public will be prevented from entering the restricted area during those operations and risk receiving radiation exposure well in excess of regulatory limits. Also, the requirement of two individuals can further protect against high doses to either of the qualified persons in circumstances whereby one of them becomes incapacitated during radiographic source exposure. The NRC notes that enforcement action was taken against AIX on April 25, 2001 (EA-01-015) for a willful failure to follow 10 CFR 34.41(a), while conducting radiography at the same off-site facility. During an OI investigation in 2000, a radiographer admitted he did not always follow the 2-person rule on limited occasions at this same ``vault'' that AIX had constructed. At the time of the predecisional enforcement conference, AIX was trying to get the ``vault'' approved as a Permanent Radiographic Installation. The company president and the company radiation safety officer attended the predecisional enforcement conference with AIX on March 13, 2001. A central issue was that the ``vault'' was not approved as a permanent radiographic installation, and so the radiographer's actions were in violation of 10 CFR 34.41(a). The NRC's April 25, 2001, letter also made this point, and a Notice of Violation was issued to AIX for the violation of 10 CFR 34.41(a). AIX's corrective actions were provided by letters dated February 25, 2001, and March 12, 2001. The NRC is continuing its review of the information obtained through the investigation. However, based on the information gathered thus far, the NRC has serious concerns about the potential safety consequences inherent in not complying with regulatory requirements during radiography activities. Such activities are among the most risk- significant activities conducted by material licensees and, in the absence of appropriate controls, may lead to significant radiation exposures to individuals. The deficiencies in the design of the ``vault'' raised numerous questions and did not meet NRC requirements for designation as a Permanent Radiographic Installation. As such, the NRC is concerned that a member of the public could unknowingly be exposed as a result of AIX's failures to follow the 2-person rule. In addition, the NRC has found that AIX radiographers, including the radiation safety officer, have violated 10 CFR 34.41(a) on numerous instances for a period of up to three years, and that the company president, who at a minimum suspected violations were occurring, did not take appropriate actions to stop them. In addition, the NRC had previously issued an escalated enforcement action to AIX for a willful violation of the same regulation at the same location. This conduct undermines the trust the NRC had placed in AIX's senior officials. III Consequently, in light of the above, I lack the requisite reasonable assurance that the Licensee's current operations can be conducted under License No. 50-16084-01 in compliance with the Commission's requirements and that the health and safety of the public, including the Licensee's employees, will be protected. Therefore, the public, health, safety and interest require that License No. 50-16084- 01 be suspended in part and that licensed material be placed in locked, safe storage, pending further review of the information in this case. Furthermore, pursuant to 10 CFR 2.202, I find that the significance of the violation and conduct described above is such that the public health, safety and interest require that this Order be immediately effective. IV Accordingly, pursuant to Sections 81, 161b, 161i, 182 and 186 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, and the Commission's regulations in 10 CFR 2.202 and 10 CFR part 34, it is hereby ordered, effective immediately, that: A. The authority to perform radiographic operations under License No. 50-16084-01 is hereby suspended pending further notice by the NRC. The Licensee shall cease all radiographic operations and return all byproduct material possessed under this license to locked, safe storage at the Licensee's facilities. All other requirements of the License and applicable Commission requirements, including those in 10 CFR part 20 remain in effect. B. Within 24 hours following issuance of this Order, the Licensee shall contact Mr. Leonard Wert, Director, Division of Nuclear Materials Safety, NRC Region IV, or his designee, through the NRC Operations Center at telephone number (301) 816-5100, and advise him of the current location, physical status, and storage arrangements of licensed material. A written response documenting this information shall be submitted, under oath or affirmation, to the Regional Administrator, U.S. NRC Region IV, 611 Ryan Plaza Drive, Suite 400, Arlington, Texas 76011 within seven days of the date of this Order. C. If the Licensee removes licensed material from locked storage, the Licensee shall notify NRC Region IV no less than 48 hours before removal of the licensed material. This notice shall be provided to Mr. Leonard Wert, Director, Division of Nuclear Materials Safety, or his designee, at telephone number (817) 860-8106. D. The Licensee shall not receive any NRC-licensed material while this Order is in effect. E. All records related to licensed activities shall be maintained in their current form and must not be altered in any way. F. Within 60 days of the date of this Order, the Licensee shall provide, in writing, specific actions that are acceptable to the NRC and that provide adequate assurance by independent means that the Licensee, if it conducts radiography activities, will comply with NRC regulations. The Regional Administrator, Region IV, may, in writing, relax or rescind this order upon demonstration by the Licensee of good cause. V In accordance with 10 CFR 2.202, the Licensee must, and any other person adversely affected by this Order may, submit an answer to this Order within 20 days of its issuance. In addition, the Licensee and any other person adversely affected by this Order may request a hearing on this Order within 20 days of its issuance. Where good cause is [[Page 60915]] shown, consideration will be given to extending the time to answer or request a hearing. A request for extension of time must be directed to the Director, Office of Enforcement, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, and include a statement of good cause for the extension. A request for a hearing must be filed in accordance with the NRC E- Filing rule, which the NRC promulgated in August, 2007, 72 FR 49,139 (Aug. 28, 2007). The E-Filing process requires participants to submit and serve documents over the Internet or, in some cases, to mail copies on electronic optical storage media. Participants may not submit paper copies of their filings unless they seek a waiver in accordance with the procedures described below. To comply with the procedural requirements associated with E- Filing, at least five (5) days prior to the filing deadline the requestor must contact the Office of the Secretary by e-mail at HEARINGDOCKET@NRC.GOV, or by calling (301) 415-1677, to request (1) a digital ID certificate, which allows the participant (or its counsel or representative) to digitally sign documents and access the E-Submittal server for any NRC proceeding in which it is participating; and/or (2) creation of an electronic docket for the proceeding (even in instances when the requestor (or its counsel or representative) already holds an NRC-issued digital ID certificate). Each requestor will need to download the Workplace Forms Viewer\TM\ to access the Electronic Information Exchange (EIE), a component of the E-Filing system. The Workplace Forms Viewer\TM\ is free and is available at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals/install-viewer.html. Information about applying for a digital ID certificate also is available on NRC's public Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals/apply-certificates.html . Once a requestor has obtained a digital ID certificate, had a docket created, and downloaded the EIE viewer, it can then submit a request for a hearing through EIE. Submissions should be in Portable Document Format (PDF) in accordance with NRC guidance available on the NRC public Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html. A filing is considered complete at the time the filer submits its document through EIE. To be timely, electronic filings must be submitted to the EIE system no later than 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on the due date. Upon receipt of a transmission, the E-Filing system time- stamps the document and sends the submitter an e-mail notice confirming receipt of the document. The EIE system also distributes an e-mail notice that provides access to the document to the NRC Office of the General Counsel and any others who have advised the Office of the Secretary that they wish to participate in the proceeding, so that the filer need not serve the document on those participants separately. Therefore, any others who wish to participate in the proceeding (or their counsel or representative) must apply for and receive a digital ID certificate before a hearing request is filed so that they may obtain access to the document via the E-Filing system. A person filing electronically may seek assistance through the ``Contact Us'' link located on the NRC Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html or by calling the NRC technical help line, which is available between 8:30 a.m. and 4:15 p.m., Eastern Time, Monday through Friday. The help line number is (800) 397-4209 or locally, (301) 415-4737. Participants who believe that they have good cause for not submitting documents electronically must file a motion, in accordance with 10 CFR 2.302(g), with their initial paper filing requesting authorization to continue to submit documents in paper format. Such filings must be submitted by (1) first class mail addressed to the Office of the Secretary of the Commission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attention: Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff; or (2) courier, express mail, or expedited delivery service to the Office of the Secretary, Sixteenth Floor, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville, Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852, Attention: Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff. Participants filing a document in this manner are responsible for serving the document on all other participants. Filing is considered complete by first-class mail as of the time of deposit in the mail, or by courier, express mail, or expedited delivery service upon depositing the document with the provider of the service. Documents submitted in adjudicatory proceedings will appear in NRC's electronic hearing docket which is available to the public at http://ehd.nrc.gov/EHD_Proceeding/home.asp, unless excluded pursuant to an order of the Commission, an Atomic Safety and Licensing Board, or a Presiding Officer. Participants are requested not to include personal privacy information, such as social security numbers, home addresses, or home phone numbers in their filings. With respect to copyrighted works, except for limited excerpts that serve the purpose of the adjudicatory filings and would constitute a Fair Use application, Participants are requested not to include copyrighted materials in their works. If a person other than the Licensee requests a hearing, that person shall set forth with particularity the manner in which his interest is adversely affected by this Order and shall address the criteria set forth in 10 CFR 2.309(d). If a hearing is requested by a Licensee or a person whose interest is adversely affected, the Commission will issue an Order designating the time and place of any hearings. If a hearing is held, the issue to be considered at such hearing shall be whether this Order should be sustained. Pursuant to 10 CFR 2.202(c)(2)(i), the Licensee, or any other person adversely affected by this Order, may, in addition to demanding a hearing, at the time the answer is filed or sooner, move the presiding officer to set aside the immediate effectiveness of the Order on the ground that the Order, including the need for immediate effectiveness, is not based on adequate evidence but on mere suspicion, unfounded allegations, or error. In the absence of any request for hearing, or written approval of an extension of time in which to request a hearing, the provisions specified in Section IV above shall be final 20 days from the date of this Order without further order or proceedings. If an extension of time for requesting a hearing has been approved, the provisions specified in Section IV shall be final when the extension expires if a hearing request has not been received. An answer or a request for hearing shall not stay the immediate effectiveness of this order. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Dated this 19th day of October, 2007. Martin J. Virgilio, Deputy Executive Director for Materials, Waste, Research, State, Tribal, and Compliance Programs and Compliance Programs, Office of the Executive Director for Operations. [FR Doc. E7-21117 Filed 10-25-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P ***************************************************************** 14 ajc.com: No truce in tri-state water war UPDATED: 10:13 a.m. October 26, 2007 Georgia, Florida and Alabama spar over state's drought-stricken Lanier, but agree to face-to-face talks By BOB KEMPER in Washington, STACY SHELTON in Atlanta The Atlanta Journal-Constitution After a week of public fighting over the drought-depleted waters of Lake Lanier and the Chattahoochee River, Gov. Sonny Perdue and his counterparts in Alabama and Florida have agreed to a face-to-face talk Thursday in Washington. The three states began fighting over Lake Lanier and the Chattahoochee in 1990, when Alabama and Florida filed federal lawsuits to stop metro Atlanta from taking any more water. Those cases are still active today, in a U.S. District Court in Jacksonville. With the drought worsening, Georgia began a campaign of pressuring the federal government to reduce the amount of water released to Florida from Lanier, metro Atlanta's main water source. Perdue asked a federal judge to intervene, and made a personal plea to President Bush to order the corps to reduce its releases. Alabama Gov. Bob Riley and Florida Gov. Charlie Crist wrote their own letters to Bush this week, asking the president not to get involved. Today, emissaries from the White House will meet separately with Perdue and Riley. The governors are meeting in their own offices with U.S. Secretary of the Interior Dirk Kempthorne and James Connaughton, chairman of the White House Council on Environmental Quality, to discuss Perdue's request to keep more water in Lanier and Riley's opposition. Crist's office would not discuss his schedule. Last week, state officials estimated Lanier had 81 days of stored water left before metro Atlanta's supplies are jeopardized. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, which operates Lanier and four other federal reservoirs on the Chattahoochee, estimated 113 days, although the lake has another 169 days' worth of water available in what's called the "dead pool," or inactive storage, below the dam's hydropower turbines and main gates. Accessing that water would require repiping major water systems, including those in Cobb, DeKalb and Fulton counties and the city of Atlanta. In the past week, the corps has been releasing an average of 1.2 billion gallons of water a day from Lanier to send downstream. That's more than four times the amount flowing into Lanier from its rivers and streams, including the Chattahoochee and Chestatee rivers. For months, streams across the Southeast have been flowing at or near their record lows. Perdue on Saturday declared 85 Georgia counties in a state of emergency and requested a federal emergency declaration that would trigger federal relief such as funding and other assistance, from additional security to emergency water supplies. Lanier is by far the largest federal reservoir on the Chattahoochee, and the only one that has any significant stored water left. And Lanier's water is needed for downstream communities, including LaGrange and Columbus, and for a paper mill and a nuclear plant in Alabama. But the amount of the releases is largely being driven by a small coal-fired power plant in Florida — which has an antiquated intake system — and to protect two mussel species listed under the Endangered Species Act. Southern Co.'s CEO, chairman and president David Ratcliffe wrote a letter to all three governors saying that Gulf Power's Plant Scholz may be able to operate with less water. As for the mussels, Perdue has asked Bush to temporarily lift restrictions of the Endangered Species Act, and there is a chance that Georgia could eventually prevail. There's a provision in the act that allows some requirements to be lifted in specific cases, said U.S. Fish and Wildlife spokeswoman Valerie Fellows. The president would have to declare an emergency situation in which human life and property are at risk. That has happened just three times since the act was passed in 1973. The White House said Thursday that Perdue's request for disaster relief is now under review by federal agencies, though it was unclear when recommendations on those issues would be sent to the president. "We certainly understand the importance of the situation and we want to make sure everybody gets the water they need," said Kristen Hellmer, spokeswoman for the White House Council on Environmental Quality, the organization handling requests for drought relief. Sen. Saxby Chambliss (R-Ga.) hand-delivered a letter to President Bush on Tuesday advising the president that the entire Georgia congressional delegation was supporting Perdue's requests for federal relief. Perdue's request is still in the earliest stages of a federal review, said a FEMA official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because FEMA rules prohibit detailed public disclosure of ongoing investigations. It is now being reviewed by the Atlanta regional office of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, which must make a recommendation on whether a disaster declaration is warranted to FEMA's Washington headquarters, which, in turn, will make a recommendation to the president. Some disasters, like tornadoes and floods, can be declared immediately. Others take weeks, the official said. © 2007 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution | Customer care | ***************************************************************** 15 BOS: Fresh calls for nuclear power station near to Burnham-On-Sea to close Burnham-On-Sea Published: October 26, 2007 Anti-nuclear campaigners have this week backed calls by a top nuclear consultant for the immediate closure of Hinkley Point power station, near Burnham-On-Sea. The calls on Friday (October 26th) came after a regulator's report stated that Hinkley's reactor core support system is 'potentially unsafe'. Key structural engineering components supporting Hinkley's cracked reactor core have been discovered to be more prone to failure than previously assumed, say the campaigners, and this "could affect the safety of the reactor, both in normal operation and in an emergency." The Nuclear Installations Inspectorate last week issued a notice stating "the effects of irradiation embrittlement on core restraint components are more severe than previously assumed... they may be degraded to the extent there may be a significant number of latent failures, which may affect the function of the support system in normal operation and faults... potentially undermining the safety case for the graphite core." The latest development comes on top of boiler tube problems discovered at Hinkley last September, which shut the twin reactors until late May. The news has prompted calls for Hinkley's closure from nuclear expert John Large of Large Associates, who said: "The Hinkley Point and Hunterston reactors were permitted to continue operating, albeit at a derated output, with an acknowledged weakened core and doubtful boiler tube integrity only because the restraint tank garter system was then believed to be intact and capable of functioning under abnormal core pressure surges." "Now we are informed that this last line of core integrity defence has weakened over the years and there is uncertainty over how effectively it would function under adverse conditions. This is a most unsatisfactory approach to defence in depth and all four Hinkley and Hunterston reactors should be immediately closed until the longer term nuclear safety case has been demonstrated to be adequate." Jim Duffy, spokesman for Stop Hinkley, said: "Common sense says one problem at the heart of an ancient reactor is bad enough, two is very worrying, three is begging for trouble. Hinkley are playing down this discovery perhaps to keep their shares from collapsing any further after this week's tumble when half of their reactors were off-line. But safety should come first. Let's see this reactor shut for good, right now." British Energy has denied that the issues raised are a cause for concern. Burnham-On-Sea News ***************************************************************** 16 Reuters: British Energy Hinkley plant running safely-source Fri Oct 26, 2007 10:28am BST LONDON, Oct 26 (Reuters) - British Energy's (BGY.L: Quote, Profile, Research) Hinkley Point nuclear power station is operating to plan, and talk of a fault that has hit the group's share price refers to distortions that are well within safety margins, a source said on Friday. The rumours, which knocked over 3 percent off the shares on Friday, stem from a routine quarterly report for the local community near Hinkley Point in southwest England by Britain's Nuclear Installations Inspectorate (NII), said a source close to the company. "This issue is not new," the source added. "British Energy inspections show the Hinkley graphite core is intact and show no significant distortion." "The distortion of the core that does exist is well within safety margins. It does not in any way compromise safety, and British Energy would not continue to operate Hinkley Point if there was any risk, nor would the NII allow the company to." © Reuters2007All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 17 NRC: Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards (ACRS); Meeting of the ESBWR Subcommittee; Notice of Meeting FR Doc 07-5335 [Federal Register: October 26, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 207)] [Notices] [Page 60918] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr26oc07-119] NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION The ACRS Subcommittee on ESBWR will hold a meeting on November 15, 2007, Room T-2B3, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland. The entire meeting will be open to public attendance, with the exception of a portion that may be closed to discuss unclassified safeguards and proprietary information pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(3) and (4). The agenda for the subject meeting shall be as follows: Thursday, November 15, 2007--8:30 a.m. until the conclusion of business. The Subcommittee will review and discuss the Draft Safety Evaluation with Open Items for several chapters of the ESBWR Design Certification and make a recommendation to the full Committee. The Subcommittee will hear presentations by and hold discussions with representatives of the NRC staff, GE-Hitachi Nuclear Energy Americas LLC, and other interested persons regarding this matter. The Subcommittee will gather information, analyze relevant issues and facts, and formulate proposed positions and actions, as appropriate, for deliberation by the full Committee. Members of the public desiring to provide oral statements and/or written comments should notify the Designated Federal Officer, Mr. Charles G. Hammer (telephone 301/415-7363) five days prior to the meeting, if possible, so that appropriate arrangements can be made. Electronic recordings will be permitted only during those portions of the meeting that are open to the public. Detailed procedures for the conduct of and participation in ACRS meetings were published in the Federal Register on September 26, 2007 (72 FR 54695). Further information regarding this meeting can be obtained by contacting the Designated Federal Officer between 6:45 a.m. and 3:30 p.m. (ET). Persons planning to attend this meeting are urged to contact the above named individual at least two working days prior to the meeting to be advised of any potential changes to the agenda. Dated: October 23, 2007. Cayetano Santos, Chief, Reactor Safety Branch. [FR Doc. 07-5335 Filed 10-24-07; 10:24 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P ***************************************************************** 18 Reuters: FirstEnergy Pa. Beaver Valley 1 reactor up to 72 pct | Fri Oct 26, 2007 8:07am EDT NEW YORK, Oct 26 (Reuters) - FirstEnergy Corp's (FE.N: Quote, Profile, Research) 849-megawatt Unit 1 at the Beaver Valley nuclear power station in Pennsylvania ramped up to 72 percent power by early Friday, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission said in a report. On Thursday, the unit exited a refueling outage and ramped up to 29 percent power. 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 1,681 MW Beaver Valley station is located in Shippingport in Beaver County, about 35 miles northwest of Pittsburgh. There are two units at the station, including the 849 MW Unit 1 and the 832 MW Unit 2, 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. Continued... ***************************************************************** 19 Reuters: Exelon Ill. Braidwood 1 reactor exits refuel | Fri Oct 26, 2007 8:15am EDT NEW YORK, Oct 26 (Reuters) - Exelon Corp's (EXC.N: Quote, Profile, Research) 1,178-megawatt Unit 1 at the Braidwood nuclear power station in Illinois exited a refueling outage and ramped up to 30 percent power by early Friday, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission said in a report. The company shut the unit on Sept. 30 for the refueling. The unit last shut for refueling from April 16-May 4, 2006. It is on an 18-month refueling cycle, The 2,330 MW Braidwood station, which entered service in 1988, is located in Braceville in Will County, about 60 miles southwest of Chicago. There are two units at the station, Unit 1 and the 1,152 MW Unit 2. Unit 2 continued to operate at full power. One MW powers about 800 homes in Illinois. Exelon, of Chicago, owns and operates more than 38,000 MW of generating capacity, markets energy commodities, and transmits and distributes electricity (5.4 million) and natural gas (480,000) to customers in Illinois and Pennsylvania. © Reuters2007All rights reserved ***************************************************************** 20 Reuters: Progress reports rail incident at nuclear plant | U.S. Fri Oct 26, 2007 1:40pm EDT HOUSTON (Reuters) - Progress Energy said on Friday it notified local law enforcement and nuclear regulators of an incident involving a rail car used to accompany a shipping container carrying spent nuclear fuel on the property of its Harris nuclear facility in North Carolina. Wheels of a caboose and part of an empty flatbed car came off the train tracks while accompanying a spent fuel shipping container on the plant property, Progress said. No injuries occurred and all rail cars remained upright and sustained no damage, Progress said in a statement. Wheels of the rail car carrying the shipping container remained on the tracks, fully upright. The public was not in danger, Progress said. There was no damage or impact to the shipping container which was moved safely into its storage location, according to the company. The Harris reactor, which went into service in 1987, is located in Wake County, about 20 miles southwest of Raleigh. Officials reported that the rail cars came off the tracks after a miscommunication about whether the track was prepared for the train's movement. A spokeswoman declined further comment, citing security reasons. © Reuters2007All rights reserved ***************************************************************** 21 Prague Daily Monitor: EZ bids to build nuclear plant in Romania - By CTK / Published 26 October 2007 Prague, Oct 25 (CTK) - The Czech power producer CEZ placed a bid Thursday in a tender for the construction and operation of two units at the nuclear power plant Cernavoda in Romania, CEZ spokeswoman Eva Novakova told CTK. The project worth some EUR2.2bn (about Kc60bn) counts on the construction of two units with installed capacity of 720 megawatts. "Details of the bid will not be disclosed," said Novakova. The selected bidders will set up a joint venture with the state-run energy company Societatea Nationala Nuclearelectrica that will complete the construction of the third and fourth units at the nuclear power plant. The units could possibly be put into operation in 2014 to 2015 after about a five-year construction period. The CEZ group has been operating in Romania since 2005, when it acquired a majority stake in the distributing company Electrica Oltenia. This year, CEZ has participated in a tender for modernisation of a 535 MW power plant with a possible construction of new resources in Galati and in a tender for construction of a new 400-500 MW gas or black-coal unit in Borzesti. Last week, CEZ made a non-binding bid for a minority share in a planned nuclear power plant in Belene in Bulgaria. The state-run CEZ is the most profitable company in the Czech Republic. The group's consolidated net earnings stood at Kc28.8bn last year. A 22-percent growth in net earnings to Kc35.1bn is projected for this year. This story is from the Czech News Agency (CTK). The Prague Daily Monitor and Monitor CE are not responsible for its content. Copyright 2007 by the Czech News Agency (CTK). All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 22 Hemscott: Clean-up work at some UK nuclear reactors halted by funding problems - report LONDON (Thomson Financial) - 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 (NDA), The Times newspaper reported, quoting the NDA's business plan. In the business plan, due 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, the article said. The NDA had this month already increased its cost estimate for cleaning all of the UK's closed nuclear stations by 16 pct to 73 bln stg. It has also failed to drum up interest from the private sector in cleaning up the southern Magnox stations, it said. monicca.egoy@thomson.com mbe/slj COPYRIGHT Copyright Thomson Financial News Limited 2007. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 23 Mangalorean: Russia can build fast neutron nuclear reactor in India Moscow, Oct 26 (RIA Novosti) A Russian nuclear official said his country could launch cooperation with India in building fast neutron nuclear reactors for power plants if sanctions against India are removed. India has never been party to the 1968 Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, and has been under US, Japanese and European sanctions since 1998, when it detonated atomic devices. "Joint work to build nuclear power plants equipped with fast neutron reactors is one of our perspective projects. India is taking its first steps in this work, and Russia is the world leader in this field," the spokesperson for the Federal Agency for Nuclear Power said Wednesday. The Beloyarsk nuclear power plant in Russia's Urals has operated with a fast neutron reactor for more than 20 years. "Russia and India have wide prospects for atomic cooperation. India has long since started producing heavy-water reactors for nuclear power plants, and can build 600 MW power units of this kind. But the country is not yet building PWRs (pressurised water reactors), which are similar to Russian VVER reactors, so we have good opportunities for cooperation in this field," the official said. He said uranium enrichment was underdeveloped in India and Russia could offer such services for the Indian nuclear power sector. However, the spokesperson said cooperation is currently possible only on the Kudankulam nuclear power plant that Russia is helping India to build as restrictions on nuclear supplies remain in place. Atomstroyexport, Russia's nuclear power equipment and service export monopoly, has been building the Kudankulam plant in the southern province of Tamil Nadu since 2002 in line with a 1988 agreement between India and the erstwhile Soviet Union and another signed ten years later. The plant is designed to have a capacity of 2,000 MW. In January, Russian Nuclear Power Agency chief Sergei Kiriyenko called for lifting the restrictions. "Russia believes that India has an unimpeachable reputation in the nuclear non-proliferation sphere, and therefore we are going to push for an end to corresponding sanctions against India," he said at the time. IANS ***************************************************************** 24 Guardian Unlimited: Japan Court Nixes Nuke Plant Suspension Friday October 26, 2007 8:01 PM TOKYO (AP) - A court Friday refused to suspend the operations of a nuclear power plant, ruling against a group of citizens who said the facility would pose a danger if a major earthquake strikes, officials said. The Shizuoka District Court found that four reactors at Hamaoka Nuclear Power Station could remain in operation because their earthquake resistance and other safeguards are sufficient, court spokesman Masahiko Handa said. He refused to elaborate. The 27 plaintiffs - residents of the plant's home of Shizuoka and four nearby prefectures in central Japan - filed the lawsuit in 2003, demanding that Chubu Electric Power Co. suspend Hamaoka's No. 1-4 reactors. Some 1,800 people from across the country also filed for a temporary injunction against the plant's operations. Plaintiffs have said the reactors could pose a serious danger to residents and the environment in case of a magnitude-9 quake. They also said the aging of the plant and its corroding equipment puts them at higher risk. Experts have said a major quake is due in Shizuoka - about 95 miles west of Tokyo and one of Japan's most earthquake prone regions. Tokyo also has a 90 percent chance of being hit by a major quake in the next 50 years, officials say. Chubu Electric said Hamaoka's reactors are designed to easily withstand a magnitude 8.4 quake. ``We intend to continue working for further improvement in the safety and reliability'' at the plant, company President Toshio Mita said in a statement. In July, a reactor at the Kashiwazaki-Kariwa nuclear power plant in northern Niigata prefecture suffered radioactive leaks and other malfunctions during a magnitude-6.8 quake that killed 11 people and injured morrgoing repairs and a series of tests. Preliminary studies of the surrounding area have shown that a fault line may extend near the plant. The government has since said it planned to overhaul earthquake safety standards at plants across the nation. Japan relies heavily on its nuclear program, which supplies about 30 percent of its electricity. The country plans to build another 11 reactors by 2017, eventually boosting nuclear power's share of electricity production to 40 percent. Anti-nuclear activists criticized Friday's ruling as ``completely superficial,'' saying it was insufficient to protect the life and health of residents. ``It is essential to consider the worst-case scenario for accidents, which could conceivably occur and to take measures to avoid such accidents,'' the Citizens' Nuclear information Center said in a statement. Guardian Unlimited © Guardian News and Media Limited 2007 ***************************************************************** 25 IHT: Radioactive material leaks during transport at Russian nuclear facility, nobody hurt: plant - International Herald Tribune The Associated Press Published: October 26, 2007 MOSCOW: A small amount of radioactive material leaked while being transported across the grounds of Russia's main nuclear waste processing plant, the facility's management said in a statement Friday. The leak occurred Thursday on a service road during routine transportation from one part of the Mayak facility to another, it said. An unspecified problem with a hermetically-sealed valve on a cistern containing the material caused the spillage of liquid medium-grade radioactive waste. No one was injured, and personnel at the nuclear facility, located in the Chelyabinsk region in the Ural mountains, have begun to decontaminate the area, the company said. Mayak also said that the no personnel or vehicles leaving the compound were exposed to radiation as a result of the leakage. It said radiation levels in the area were within the norm. Copyright © 2007 the International Herald Tribune All rights reserved ***************************************************************** 26 Daily Georgian Times: Radioactive Substance Detained At Border 27.10.2007 09:30:07 Radioactive Substance Detained At Border Georgian Border Guards and officers from the Special Operative Center of the MIA Adjara Main Office have detained a citizen of Armenia on the basis of operative information. Prime-News was told at the Border Police that the suspect was attempting to smuggle 2, 04 grams of radioactive substance “Lovresium†(LAV-103) over the border, hiding it in a special golden container. Tsereteli: Law On Iodized Salt Has Nothing To Do With Increase Of Price On Salt Giorgi Tsereteli, Chairman of the parliamentary committee on health care and social affairs, reckons that the law on iodized salt has nothing to do with increase of price on salt. Saakashvili To Open Sighnaghi Museum On Saturday Mikheil Saakashvili, president of Georgia, will open Sighnaghi Museum of Georgian National Museum on Saturday. Parliament To Adopt Changes To State Budget 2007 Today The Parliament of Georgia will adopt changes to the state budget 2007, which have been introduced for the third time, at the plenary session today. Zurab Noghaideli To Visit Georgian-Ossetian Conflict Zone On Friday Z urab Noghaideli, Prime Minister of Georgia, will visit the Georgian-Ossetian conflict zone on October 26.Prime-News was told at the administration of the government of Georgia that Zurab Noghaideli would inspect the works conducted for the gasification of the villages Avnevi and Nuli. Davit Chantladze To Visit Samtskhe-Javakheti Region On Friday Davit Chantladze, Minister of Environment Protection and Natural Resources of Georgia,will arrive in Samtskhe-Javakheti region on Friday and together with Goga Khachidze, President’s Envoy in Samtskhe-Javakheti region, Georgian, Abkhaz Senior Officials Resume Contacts In an attempt at conciliation, Tbilisi has agreed to release seven Abkhaz militiamen after talks in Sokhumi on October 25. Main news 2007.10.26 16:32 The first georgian newspaper in english, founded in 1993. 2002-2007 Georgian Times Media Holding All Rights Reserved. 12 Kikodze St. Tbilisi. Georgia Georgian Times Phone: +995 32 93 44 05 Fax: +995 32 93 49 63 ***************************************************************** 27 [v911t] Leuren Moret, Depleted Uranium, and Strykers in Hawaii Resent-Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2007 23:44:32 -0500 (CDT) REQUEST WIDESPREAD DISTRIBUTION. PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD ENDS OCTOBER 30 Leuren Moret, Depleted Uranium, and Strykers In Hawaii By Cathy Garger Oct 26, 2007, 17:26 How do we cultivate the 'aina (land), these magnificent island ecosystems, while maintaining their inherent natural wealth in perpetuity? Hopefully we will make righteous choices. Alternative-Hawaii With the widespread public knowledge of the history of US nuclear bomb testing in Americas relatively recent past, the fact that radioactive munitions have been used on military bases and nuclear test sites throughout the nation since the 1940s may come as no surprise to most Americans. What has been kept hidden, however, is the use of dangerous, lethal biological, chemical and radioactive materials, in the open air, on the tropical islands of Hawaiian Paradise. As any fifth grader knows, the Japanese bombed the US Naval Pacific Fleet in Pearl Harbor, Hawaii, on December 7, 1941. What the public did not know about the Hawaiian Islands - until recently - is that formerly-classified, clandestine, and illegal Depleted Uranium has been used there. These are the same munitions that the US uses on the enemy in the Middle East and that the United Nations considers a weapon of indiscriminate effect. Radiation Levels and Leuren Moret In April, 2007, internationally reknown radiation expert, environmentalist, and geoscientist, Leuren Moret, was invited by activists in Hawaii to come and bring her expertise - and Geiger counter - with her. During her stay, Ms. Moret spoke with Hawaiians, educating around the issue of uranium munitions as a lethal, toxic, and radioactive poison. The elevated radiation readings Moret and citizen activists recorded were carried by ABC-TV news on April 29 and 30, 2007. Moret brought international attention to the militarys use of Depleted Uranium in Hawaii when she exposed high environmental radiation readings levels there. Use of radioactive materials even in weapons training and testing- and are prohibited in the U.S. without Nuclear Regulatory Commission involvement. In a recent interview, I asked Ms. Moret how it felt to discover high radiation readings in Hawaii? STORY CONTINUED: http://axisoflogic.com/artman/publish/article_25396.shtml Help the US become Radiation Free by 2033! www.radiation.org Cathy Garger www.mytown.ca/garger __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ***************************************************************** 28 CBS 3: Chapman Valve Plant to be Demolished | Story Updated: Oct 25, 2007 at 9:20 PM EDT By Liz Tufts Residents in Indian Orchard are looking forward to some demolition. A plant that once used radioactive materials is set to be leveled, but is the land safe enough for new development? "It's an eye soar and I'm glad they are tearing it down," says Gloria Mitchell. Gloria Mitchell calls herself a lifelong resident of Indian Orchard. Her father worked at the former Chapman Valve Plant in the 19-40's--a plant that milled uranium for nuclear weapons. But it closed in the 1980's and soon after former workers fell sick after they say they had been exposed to radioactive materials. Since then the neighborhood has been on edge. "Many families from Indian Orchard that have been effected by the uranium. With the contamination issues of the past, we just want it gone out of the neighborhood," says Indian Orchard resident, Susan Craven. And the City agrees. The finally got the go ahead, and the 1-point-3 million dollars needed clear the 12-acre sight. Although the building is known for radioactive materials, the city is more concerned about another hazard, asbestos. "Since that time the U.S. Navy has come through and has decontaminated the site. The entire building itself contains a lot of asbestos, even some of the exterior," says David Panagore, Chief Development Officer. Asbestos removal will begin next week, and the total project will completed by late winter, making the site ready for new development. An old chapter soon gone, but a new one filled with more opportunities and relief for Indian Orchard. "We want to see something nice and bright, instead of kind of dark green. Make it a productive part of the city once again, " adds Craven. Is there something more you would like us to know about this story? Do you have a news tip to share with CBS 3 Springfield News? Email us at news@cbs3springfield.com Copyright © 2007 Meredith Broadcasting One Monarch Place, Springfield, MA 01144-7012 (413) 736-4333 CBS ***************************************************************** 29 u.tv: Meter readings in Ireland show increased levels of toxins. Tests called for FRIDAY 26/10/2007 08:20:52 Tests for cancerous radioactive pollution should be carried out in Northern Ireland, an MLA has told the Assembly. Daithi McKay (Sinn Fein, North Antrim) warned of tumour and birth defect risks 50 years after a fire at Sellafield`s Windscale Piles reactor in Cumbria released a vast toxic cloud. It is still the West`s worst nuclear disaster and meter readings in the Republic of Ireland have shown increased levels of toxins. Mr McKay said: "Sellafield remains a significant threat to people on this island, especially those living in the north east, and ministers as well as members from this Assembly should press the British government on this issue at every opportunity. "Irish people have been living with the consequences of the fire at Sellafield for many years with particularly high rates of cancer and birth defects in Co Louth and also in south Down." Mr McKay was speaking during a debate on a motion calling on the UK government to end operations at Sellafield. Members voted in favour of an SDLP amendment which also called on the Department of Health to release all information held on the matter. Copyright © 2007 UTV Internet and the UTV plc Group. All rights ***************************************************************** 30 UPI: Depleted uranium can be detected in urine - UPI.com Published: 26, 2007 at 12:43 AM LEICESTER, England, Oct. 26 (UPI) -- A British study found traces of depleted uranium in urine 20 years after exposure even when the concentration was at the low end of the normal range. University of Leicester geologist Randall R. Parrish developed a new method to detect depleted uranium in individuals, using MC-ICP mass spectrometry capable of detecting an individual’s exposure to depleted uranium up to 20 years after the event. "We developed this method and applied it to individuals, either known or likely to have had a depleted uranium aerosol inhalation exposure, and to a large voluntary cohort of 1991 Gulf conflict veterans to assess depleted uranium exposure screening reliability and accumulate data on exposure," Parrish said in a statement. "Our method ... shows that the occurrence of depleted uranium in 1991 Gulf Conflict veterans is likely to be uncommon to rare, but if a significant inhalation exposure occurred then it can be detected in urine for decades to come." Parrish is scheduled to present his findings Sunday in Denver at the 119th annual meeting of the Geological Society of America at the Colorado Convention Center. © 2007 United Press International. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 31 The Tech: Abnormal Radiation Level Reported Last Published: October 26, 2007 Tech file photo—Ricardo Ramirez The control room of the MIT nuclear reactor is shown in this Tech file photo. MIT's Nuclear Reactor Laboratory Reports High Readings for One Worker By Joyce Kwan NEWS EDITOR The MIT Nuclear Reactor Laboratory is currently being inspected by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission after a worker was exposed to unusually high levels of radiation. After a regulatory check that occurs every three months, a worker’s dosimeter, a pen-like device used to measure radiation exposure, had an accumulated reading of about 4 rem of radiation. The NRC annual occupational limit for radiation exposure is 5 rem per year, according to an NRC press release. Typically, readings of 0.5 rem or less are expected. Readings for all other workers were normal for the same time period, July to September 2007, according to an MIT press release. "Although this atypical reading was below the federal safety limits, the Institute voluntarily notified its own safety officials and the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission," the MIT press release states. MIT reported the readings on Oct. 17, according to the NRC press release. Claude R. Canizares, associate provost and vice president for research, said that it is not known if the anomalous reading is accurate, but authorities are acting on the assumption that it is. The situation is not considered very serious, but its cause needs to be determined, Canizares said. The situation "poses no danger to public health and safety or to the environment," according to the MIT press release. The worker’s exposure to radiation will not surpass the allowed dose for the year, Pamela D. Serfes, executive director of the MIT News Office, told the Boston Globe. The worker, described by Serfes as an operator, has suffered no ill consequences. According to the NRC press release, the NRC will review how the laboratory implements its radiation protection program in addition to looking for factors that may have caused the anomalous reading. The NRC expects the inspection to take two to three weeks. A public report is issued approximately 30 days after completion of the inspection. The average American citizen receives approximately 0.36 rem per year from the environment, medical X-rays, and other day-to-day sources, according to an NRC fact sheet. About 50 rem can decrease the red blood cell count. Licensed to operate in 1958 by the Atomic Energy Commission, NRC’s predecessor, the MIT Nuclear Reactor Laboratory conducts research in the fields of nuclear energy systems, nuclear science, nuclear medicine, and radiation science and technology. The Tech • 84 Massachusetts Avenue • Suite 483 • Cambridge, Mass. 02139-4300 p: 617.253.1541 • f: 617.258.8226 • Contact Us Copyright © 1881-2007 The Tech ***************************************************************** 32 AU ABC: Maralinga medallion misses the mark PM - Friday, 26 October , 2007 18:42:00 Reporter: Lindy Kerin MARK COLVIN: Australian soldiers who served at nuclear test sites more than five decades ago are less than impressed with the medallion they've just received from the Federal Government. The medallions have been arriving in the post, without any ceremony and without any more concrete recognition of what they've been through. Many of the survivors are angry that they've got a medallion rather than a medal, and that they're not getting the same health care entitlements as others who served in hazardous circumstances. Lindy Kerin reports. LINDY KERIN: During the British Nuclear Test Program in the 1950s and '60s, as many as 11,000 Australian soldiers and civilians were exposed to atomic blasts. Brisbane man Robert Fowler was 19 when he was sent to Maralinga in South Australia's outback, the most well known testing site. ROBERT FOWLER: When the tests were being carried up, you were told to get on this truck, you'd drive to the site, off the truck, virtually line up, not regimentally but just a rough line. Face this way, briefing then, at the given time you were told to turn and they would count down, and then you're certainly close enough to see a flash and feel the pants, the clothes, whip around you, you know. LINDY KERIN: Mr Fowler says at the time he and his army mates didn't question their role in the operation. ROBERT FOWLER: But on reflection now, I do feel we were guinea pigs because the Brits were very - they wouldn't test them in their own country. LINDY KERIN: For years, members of the defence force have been lobbying governments to formally acknowledge the dangers the soldiers faced during the testing program. Now, five decades on, about 5,000 Australian soldiers and civilians will receive a medallion honouring their service. Terry Toon from the Atomic Ex-servicemen Association also served at Maralinga. He says in military terms, a medallion isn't ranked as highly as a medal, and he's not happy about receiving the token in the mail. TERRY TOON: Not really, but whatever they give you, you take. All the fellows wanted a service medal; New Zealand gave their fellows two medals for their duties out in the Pacific with the bomb testing. The only reason that the Minister gave us this medallion was after he heard about the Labor Party conference agreeing to implement the Clarke review recommendations, and that gives us hazardous service for our involvement. LINDY KERIN: The Clarke review in 2003 also recommended that soldiers from the test sites be given a gold card, which entitles them to free health care. Chips Ross from the Atomic Ex-servicemen Association is outraged that the Federal Government is still refusing to adopt the recommendations. CHIPS ROSS: I'd like Mr Howard to answer a couple of things. One, why he doesn't call it a hazardous operations and get it over and done with and let these blokes get on a pension. They want the gold card; the gold card will look after them and their families. I mean, they've all got cancer; they're all paying for it. LINDY KERIN: But Veteran Affairs Minister Bruce Bilson says the gold card is unwarranted. BRUCE BILSON: The vast majority of people involved in the nuclear test program don't have cancers that are related to radiation exposure. What the Government's done in responding positively to that finding is to make sure that even if the cancer is caused from other factors, the treatment is available because I know many have been concerned. LINDY KERIN: Mr Bilson has also justified the decision to award a medallion rather than a medal. BRUCE BILSON: It's important to remember that it wasn't only military people involved. There were quite a number of public servants, civilian contractors and the like, and the medallion in the mail is a nation conveying its appreciation for people's contribution. LINDY KERIN: The Opposition's spokesman for veterans affairs, Alan Griffin, says he understands how the ex-soldiers feel. He says a Labor government would reassess the situation. ALAN GRIFFIN: To review the recommendations of the Clarke review that weren't implemented by this Government and there's quite a few of them. We've specifically mentioned two recommendations of which the situation of our nuclear vets is one. I actually met with a senior representative of the nuclear vets just the other day on the central coast and talk to him about the fact that we would examine what's occurred, look at some of the overseas studies that have taken place in the meantime and reconsider the matter when we get elected. MARK COLVIN: Labor's spokesman on veterans affairs, Alan Griffin, ending Lindy Kerin's report. © 2007 ABC | Privacy Policy ***************************************************************** 33 Bradenton.com: EPA assumes limited role in Tallevast 10/26/2007 | By DONNA WRIGHT dwright@bradenton.com TALLEVAST -- The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has agreed to send one of its top environmental justice officers to Tallevast but is declining to act as a mediator to resolve residents' concerns related to a plume of toxic waste beneath their homes. EPA cannot intervene because the state's Department of Environmental Protection - not the federal government - is in charge of cleaning up the 200-acre plume, EPA Regional Director J. I. Palmer Jr. wrote in a letter to Laura Ward and Wanda Washington, leaders of FOCUS, a residents advocacy group. Frustrated that more than seven years have passed with no resolution to their demands for relocation, Ward and Washington last August asked Cynthia Peurifoy of EPA's Office of Environmental Justice in Atlanta to intervene. "The community has been stonewalled so much and by so many, at various levels of government that are supposed to protect us, that we are now skeptical of all information that is placed before us," Ward and Washington wrote. Tallevast, a predominantly black neighborhood surrounded by a growing ring of industry and commercial growth, perfectly fits the profile of the minority community environmental justice reviews are designed to serve, the FOCUS leaders said. President Bill Clinton ordered the EPA to set up the Office of Environmental Justice in 1992, after the agency's studies revealed low-income communities, particularly those of color, are disproportionately affected by hazardous waste and contamination because industry in the past has been located close to those neighborhoods. The Office of Environmental Justice's role is to provide oversight and guidance to make sure affected communities get the help they need through mediated dispute resolutions. However, Tallevast falls outside of the EPA's jurisdiction, said Laura Niles, an agency spokeswoman. "Tallevast is not an EPA Superfund cleanup site, so, technically, EPA does not have oversight, but we still want to be involved and make sure residents' concerns are being addressed," Niles said. Although Ward is disappointed with EPA's refusal to intervene, she said she welcomes Peurifoy's visit. "It seems they are saying yes and no at the same time. That's good. We need an extra pair of eyes to watch what is going on here," she said. Washington wants EPA to do more than visit. "We need EPA to be the overseer of the cleanup," said Washington. "Early on, we're very skeptical of DEP because the state knew about the contamination for years but did not tell us." That mistrust, Washington says, continues to grow stronger as more data on the plume rolls in. "Seven years have passed since they discovered the contamination, and we are still here sitting on top of it," Washington said. No date has been set for Peurifoy's visit, but it would likely be coordinated through DEP, Niles said. Jeanne Zokovitch, an environmental attorney with WildLaw, a nonprofit advocacy group advising FOCUS, thinks the EPA has an important role to play in Tallevast. "There is a common understanding that if the state is not living up to EPA's stringent guidelines, then you can ask EPA to step in," said Zokovitch. "Florida does not have any environmental justice laws. There is no Florida agency set up to address environmental justice issues. So EPA is the likely agency for the request." But a DEP spokeswoman said EPA has neither an advisory nor oversight role in Tallevast cleanup. "EPA has independent federal statutory authority to pursue an enforcement action involving the contamination at the Tallevast site," Vazquez said. "EPA has exercised its discretion not to duplicate efforts at this time." The toxic waste under Tallevast has been traced back to the former Loral American Beryllium Co. at 1600 Tallevast Road. As the owner of the plant when the contamination was found in 2000, Lockheed Martin Corp. has the legal responsibility to investigate and clean the spill. Tallevast residents did not learn of the contamination until 2003. Many homes did not have county water and relied on private wells that were found to be contaminated. Lockheed paid to have those households switched to county water, and the contaminated wells have been capped. * About Bradenton.com | ***************************************************************** 34 RIA Novosti: Russia to develop new uranium deposit in East Siberia -1 11:27 | 26/ 10/ 2007 NERYUNGI (Yakutia), October 26 (RIA Novosti) - A large uranium field will be developed in Yakutia in East Siberia, a first deputy prime minister said on Friday. "A large uranium ore deposit will be developed here," Sergei Ivanov told journalists. According to Russia's Federal Agency for Nuclear Power (Rosatom), the country has 870,000 metric tons of natural uranium, the world's third-largest reserves behind Australia and Kazakhstan. Ivanov, who oversees defense-related industries in his role as first deputy premier, also said last week that 18 billion rubles ($722 million) in federal budget funds had been allocated this year for the development of the nuclear energy sector, and that 51 billion rubles ($2 billion) and 90 billion rubles ($3.6 billion) would be spent in 2008 and 2009, respectively. Russia is expected to double electricity generation at nuclear power plants by 2020 through the construction of 26 new reactors with total output of 1.2-1.5 gigawatts. "We will be able to supply all future nuclear reactors in Russia with uranium for the full working cycle," Sergei Kiriyenko, the head of Rosatom, said at an energy conference in Moscow on October 23. For more information in Russian  RIA Novosti ***************************************************************** 35 Canadian Press: Canada's nuclear industry should take more responsibility for waste: expert 9 hours ago MONTREAL - Canada's nuclear industry should take a more active role in dealing with the issues related to storing atomic waste underground, says a U.S. environmentalist. In recent years, the industry has promoted nuclear energy as an important source of carbon-free energy and an easy way to lower greenhouse gas emissions. But Canada, like other nuclear energy producing countries, has yet to develop long-term management plan for the waste, said Thomas Cochran, nuclear program director for the American Natural Resources Defense Council. "It's incumbent on the industry to have developed a solution to the waste before they produce a lot of it," Cochran said Friday at a climate on conference change. "This simply hasn't occurred in any country." Cochran was among 400 participants from around the world attending the Climate 2050 conference, a meeting of academics and decision-makers to discuss action on climate change. Ottawa announced last June that it was accepting an industry-led proposal that Canada develop the capacity to store spent fuel underground. Federal Natural Resources Minister Gary Lunn has said the government was "decades" away from drafting concrete details on how and, more contentiously, where to store it. Spent fuel from the country's reactors is currently stored on site, first in cooling pools before being moved to dry-cast containers. According to the Nuclear Waste Management Organization, the industry group behind the underground proposal, Canada's nuclear waste only fills about five hockey rinks. "It's not like you have piles of coal ash," said the organization's director of environment, Anda Kalvins, following a plenary on nuclear energy. "The amounts of used fuel that are created can be contained in the pools and dry-storage areas." While there is no urgent need to build long-term processing capabilities given the present output of nuclear energy, Cochran suggested it was time for the industry to stop passing the buck on the issue. "Canada... has failed to develop its repository early, and is sitting here 40 years later with no repository," he said. "The industry will make the argument 'Oh we can store this safely on site,' and push this issue off to future generations, but if you were to triple the global capacity of nuclear power, you would need a new geological repository for waste every few years." Many environmental groups including Greenpeace have already expressed opposition to underground storage, fearing radioactive leaks or accidents. That opposition could become more vocal should Canada choose to join the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership, a U.S-led initiative to group nuclear energy using countries and uranium exporting countries. The partnership, which counts such countries as Russia and China among its 16-member states, includes a proposal that could see Canada storing and refining used nuclear fuel from other countries. The idea would be to send the spent fuel back to the original uranium exporting country for disposal, and Canada is the world's largest uranium exporter. Copyright © 2007 The Canadian Press. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 36 Salt Lake Tribune: 'Legislators fought Goshutes' nuke waste dump - but now consider reactors What happened to 'over my dead body' policy? Article Last Updated: 10/26/2007 07:59:07 PM MDT When the Skull Valley Go- shute Indian tribe wanted to play host to a nuclear project in Utah, state leaders spent 10 years and millions of dollars to derail the idea. Fast forward to October 2007: Two state lawmakers are touting plans for Utah's first nuclear reactors and even the governor sounds open to the prospect. Some people can't help but wonder what's happened to the state's over-my-dead-body opposition. One is Skull Valley Go- shutes Chairman Lawrence Bear. He sees the state's new interest in nuclear reactors as a good sign for his tribe's project, a 100-acre parking lot for massive containers of spent fuel from the nation's nuclear plants. At the same time, he's puzzled that there's no hostility to the reactors being proposed by Republican state Reps. Aaron Tilton of Springville and Mike Noel of Kanab for a site near Green River. Lawmakers passed a bundle of laws to try to stop the Goshutes - and they rejected one that would have beefed up economic development on the Tooele County reservation. The tribe took the state to court and persuaded a federal judge to throw out the bills as unconstitutional. "My first thought was, 'Why they are doing it,' " Bear said of the reactor-hawking lawmakers, "since they have been opposed to what we have been doing for 10 years at least." Timing appears to be at least partly behind the state's new attitude. Gov. Jon Huntsman Jr. spent the first two years of his administration fighting the Goshute storage plan. This year he has made a top priority of cutting greenhouse gasses - such as carbon dioxide - that fuel global warming. "I think most of our citizens look with a jaundiced eye at nuclear energy" because of Utah residents' past exposure to radiation from weapons tests, Huntsman said in an interview Thursday. "The reason you don't take it off the table É is it's a carbon-free source of energy." He said the state should remain open to the prospect of nuclear energy - especially if such problems as the high cost (about $3 billion), safety, proliferation and waste disposal can be successfully addressed. "The problem a lot of us had with it before," he said, "is we were not benefiting from clean energy, but being dumped on by those who were." Among those who question the state's apparent change of heart on nuclear is Bob Miller, a professor at the Lewis and Clark Law School. During the years the Goshutes studied the storage-site idea and succeeded in securing a a U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission license for it, he observed the state's determined attacks on the tiny tribe's efforts to secure its own economic destiny. "It's ironic and sad that when a project is proposed by the tribe, non-Indians fight it to the death," said Miller. "But now that it's proposed by non-Indians and the mainstream, it seems to be moving forward." Indeed, several prominent Utahns, including former GOP state party Chairman Joe Cannon and EnergySolutions President and CEO Steve Creamer plotted an effort five years ago to hijack the Goshutes' nuclear storage proposal. The so-called "Plan B" idea would have had the state build and operate a storage site within an hour's drive of the location Tilton and Noel are now suggesting, near Canyonlands National Park. Former Utah Gov. Mike Leavitt nixed the idea. He had been the one to declare a national nuclear waste storage site would come to Utah "over my dead body." And, ultimately, with the help of people like Creamer and Utah's delegation in Congress, the state was able to block the project. Their pressure prompted the Interior Department to deny two key permits that the Goshutes and their business partners, the utilities that made up Private Fuel Storage LLC, needed to complete their project only months after the NRC granted a license for the storage site last year. Forrest Cuch, director of Native American Affairs for the state, called support for the reactors "hypocritical" in light of the reaction to the Skull Valley project. "People need to remember how they treated the Goshutes when they raised that issue," he said. But PFS Chairman John Parkyn, like the Goshutes tribal chairman, sees the state's new look at nuclear as a positive development. Nuclear, he said, "would be a great choice for Utah." The Goshutes filed suit against the Interior Department earlier this year over the rejected permits. fahys@sltrib.com --- * ROBERT GEHRKE contributed to this story. Nuclear energy * The plan: Building two side-by-side nuclear power plants in Utah. * The site: A key contract indicates the plants' massive water needs would be filled from a diversion of Green River water in Emery County. The company manager, though, insists no locale has been picked. * The reaction: A local elected official welcomes any project that would bring his community more jobs. ***************************************************************** 37 TBJ: Cars on train carrying nuclear waste derail at Shearon Harris - Raleigh/Durham > News > Industries > Energy - Electric Utilities Friday, October 26, 2007 - 2:52 PM EDT Triangle Business Journal - by Chris Coletta Rail cars on a train carrying spent nuclear fuel derailed at the Shearon Harris nuclear power plant in western Wake County, Progress Energy said Friday. The incident occurred on the plant's property, the Raleigh utility said. Progress can't offer details about the specific time or place of the derailing because of federal regulations, a spokesperson said. The cars that came off the tracks were a caboose and a flatbed that didn't contain any nuclear waste and serves as a buffer between cars, Progress said. The entire train remained upright. The rail car that carried the waste never left the tracks. When transported by rail, spent waste is placed in concrete-reinforced containers that weigh between 75 and 125 tons, according to the Nuclear Energy Institute trade group. A spokeswoman said regulations prohibit Progress from saying where the train was coming from or going to. But Shearon Harris gets overflow nuclear waste from only one facility, the Brunswick nuclear plant about 30 miles south of Wilmington. "Plant officials report that the rail cars came off the tracks when individuals inaccurately communicated about whether the tracks were prepared for the train's movement," the company said in a news release. Contact the Editor Need Assistance? More Latest News © 2007 American City Business Journals, Inc. and its licensors. ***************************************************************** 38 PEACOCK REPORT: DOE Step Closer To Building New Uranium Processing Plant (TPR) October 25, 2007 The construction of a new uranium processing plant in the U.S. came one step closer to reality this week as the Dept. of Energy (DoE) began soliciting bids for facility architectural-design services. According to a procurement document that The Peacock Report (TPR) located via a routine search of the FedBizOpps database, the non-reactor nuclear project at the Y-12 National Security Complex in Oak Ridge, Tennessee has an estimated overall value of $1.4-$2.4 billion. Additional details of the endeavor are available at the Y-12 website. BWX Technologies, Inc. (BWXT), a subsidiary of McDermott International, Inc., is the prime contractor operating the Y-12 facility. BWXT likewise has separate contracts to operate various nuclear energy and weapons-production sites around the nation, including the Los Alamos National Laboratory, the Rocky Flats nuclear cleanup site, and the Savannah River Site. Separately, TPR also discovered that DoE intends to put up for sale 250 metric tons of surplus, off-spec low-enriched uranium (LEU) on the global market. According to a DoE/National Nuclear Safety Administration document dated Oct. 17, potential buyers include "commercial nuclear power companies, nuclear fuel cycle suppliers, or teams consisting of several interested firms. The LEU being offered will be derived from processing and down-blending of highly enriched uranium (HEU) metals, oxides and reactor fuel elements at the Savannah River Site (SRS) H Canyon and associated facilities near Aiken, South Carolina. This material will produce LEU that does not meet applicable ASTM specifications for commercial nuclear power reactor fuel." Liquid Nuclear Waste Plant Slated for New Mexico Nearly 10 million liters of radioactive liquid will be processed annually at a new waste-treatment facility that the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) intends to build in Los Alamos County, New Mexico, according to a planning document that The Peacock Report located via a routine search of the FedBizOpps database. Construction of the new facility, which is slated to begin in the spring of 2009 and be completed by December 2010, has an estimated cost of $40-$65 million, the Sources Sought notice says. This subcontracting action is connected to a larger endeavor involving the creation of a new nuclear facility for the Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL). The goal at this stage is to assess the "availability and adequacy of potential business sources" capable of constructing facilities that handle liquid nuclear waste. The document, dated Oct. 10, describes the projected new treatment plant as containing: [A] basement, main floor, and mezzanine with an overall footprint of 120-ft by 90ft. The basement level is 90-ft by 90-ft and is partially below grade. The basement level includes reaction tanks, waste packaging, influent storage tanks, chemical receipt and storage, and exterior drum storage. [emphasis added] The main level includes the change rooms (showers, lockers, storage), access control, equipment room, control room, briefing room, and process equipment. The building ventilation system exhaust includes high-efficiency particulate air filter assemblies and the facility design incorporates safety significant structures, systems and components. NNSA anticipates releasing a more detailed Request for Proposals in the fall of 2008, with the subsequent awarding of contracts in the winter of 2009. Contact: Steve Peacock, stevepeacock@yahoo.com WHO: Steve Peacock worked as one of the late Leona Helmsley’s house security officers at her flagship Helmsley Palace hotel from 1987-1992 – the tumultuous years before, during, and after her federal tax-fraud conviction. Peacock is the author of Hotel Dick: Harlots, Starlets, Thieves & Sleaze (iUniverse, available via Barnes & Noble.com), a memoir about his encounters with the often bizarre guests of the 55-story, 1,000 room Helmsley Palace. WHAT: Brief statement from Steve Peacock: " The short story is this: Leona was a walking contradiction. Sometimes she quietly passed through the lobby en route to her executive office. And yet other times she was as mean and out of control as her reputation now accurately reflects. "During that time I had personally witnessed Leona’s increasingly erratic behavior, which included face-to-face encounters with the self-appointed Queen. One day, for instance, she simply halted the march of her entourage walking through the Palace lobby, with the express purpose of gently urging me to "get a haircut," while another time -- in a drunken rage -- she screamed in my face, arms flailing, because a visitor moments earlier was smoking in the lobby; something that was permitted at the time. She was utterly unpredictable." ABOUT "HOTEL DICK" (excerpt from back-cover info): "Steve Peacock had taken a unique five-year peek into the lives of the wealthy, the powerful and the 'lower' classes that serviced their every desire. This experience was a rare chance to immerse him in the subculture of the privileged… He served as a buffer between the so-called elite and the hookers, thieves, and street people who were drawn to this glass-and-steel luxury tower… Hotel Dick reveals what went on behind the former playground of the rich and famous. The story of the rise and fall of Harry and Leona Helmsley has already been told; however, Hotel Dick is the first book to provide a secret window into the lives of the other bizarre and lust-filled personalities who roamed this notorious Manhattan landmark." RELATED READING: Hookers, Hoopla & Handshakes: Pigsylvania Society 2006 (TPR, 12/14/06). ***************************************************************** 39 NRC: Fuel Cycle Safety: One Commissioner’s Perspectives Speech - s-07-047 - OFFICE OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS Office of Public Affairs Telephone: 301/415-8200 Washington, DC 20555-0001 E-mail: opa@nrc.gov Web Site: Public Affairs Web Site Fuel Cycle Safety: One Commissioner’s Perspectives Dr. Peter B. Lyons, Commissioner U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission at the OECD Nuclear Energy Agency Fuel Cycle Safety Workshop Wilmington, NC October 17, 2007 It is an honor to speak to the Fuel Cycle Safety Workshop. I am pleased to share my perspectives today on the role of this Workshop in the renewed global interest in nuclear energy and to discuss some of the U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission's (NRC) future challenges in this area. Many meetings focus on the reactor aspects of any nuclear renaissance. But potential new reactors, as well as the existing reactor fleets, function only when all the elements of the fuel cycle operate safely. This Workshop is not only important to assuring safety of existing facilities, but it is also taking place at a time of significant change in the global outlook of the industry. It is, thus, an excellent opportunity for industry and regulators to explore perspectives on fuel cycle safety that may influence new facilities. Global cooperation on nuclear safety is important, since nuclear energy can no longer be regarded as a strictly domestic matter for any single country. Nuclear power is now truly international, from the mining of the uranium ore, through nearly all the steps of the fuel cycle. Answers to, or expertise in, all the technical challenges in that complete cycle do not reside totally within any country. We in the United States have a great deal to learn from the international community in areas ranging from construction techniques, to UF6 deconversion, reprocessing and recycling technologies, and operations involving MOX. I don't mean to imply that the United States does not have much to contribute to the global community in these areas; however, the inescapable truth is that we have much to gain from interactions with the international community in terms of improving the safety of our nation's fuel cycle facilities. Through our global interactions, we exchange regulatory practices and technical information that enable safe operations both here and in other countries. There are changes on the horizon involving the entire fuel cycle. For example, when the price of uranium fell in the early 1980s, conventional uranium-mining production in the United States dropped precipitously. Many conventional mills ceased operations or closed permanently and began decommissioning and reclamation. But today, although conventional mills will continue to contribute to the supply of uranium, in-situ leach facilities are the predominant source of uranium production in the United States for reasons of both economy and reduced environmental impacts. Based on discussion with the industry, the NRC is preparing to review as many as 12 new applications for uranium recovery facilities in the foreseeable future, which represent a considerable increase in licensing activity. In addition, the international press reports many new mining and milling operations under development. On October 3, 2007, the NRC received an application from Oklahoma-based Energy Metals Corporation to construct and operate an in-situ uranium recovery facility at Moore Ranch in Campbell County, Wyo. It is the first application for a new uranium recovery facility submitted to the NRC since 1988. The NRC staff is currently reviewing the application to determine whether it contains sufficient information to begin detailed environmental and safety reviews. If the application is deemed acceptable, the Agency will formally docket it and publish a notice of opportunity to request an adjudicatory hearing. Other examples of changes on the horizon include advanced enrichment technologies at USEC and General Electric (GE). USEC was issued a construction and operating license in April 2007 for its American Centrifuge Plant. GE is evaluating the SILEX or Global Laser Enrichment technology for uranium enrichment and may submit a license application for an enrichment facility in early 2008. For my presentation today, I plan to offer some perspectives on the safety, future challenges, public transparency, and human capital as related to fuel cycle facilities. I will start with NRC’s top priority: SAFETY. Safety One aspect of this focus on safety involves the concept of safety culture. The NRC is currently seeking to improve its oversight of this attribute at licensed fuel cycle facilities. We recognize that there may be lessons to be learned from the recent safety culture initiative in our reactor oversight process that apply to other areas of regulatory oversight. While the regulatory framework for fuel cycle facilities is different from that for reactors, an approach to increase NRC oversight of safety culture at certain fuel-cycle-facility licensees will be evaluated through a pilot effort. This pilot will assess the applicability of the reactor safety culture components to certain fuel cycle facilities and examine how to incorporate them into our inspection program. We are evaluating the role of Agreement States in regulation of fuel cycle facilities. As you may know, the NRC allows the Agreement States to regulate the use of source material and byproduct material. Currently, 34 states have the status of an Agreement State. Because of the potential increase in the number of fuel cycle facilities, the Commission expressed concern regarding the significant resources required to license and inspect a large fuel facility and its potential impact on an Agreement State program and asked the NRC staff to make a recommendation on the feasibility of the Agency’s licensing all large fuel cycle facilities. A Commission decision will be available shortly. Natural hazards are another area in which knowledge continues to evolve, and we continue to learn from each significant event worldwide. By way of examples, construction of a first-of-its-kind, waste-vitrification plant at Hanford experienced a delay caused by the need to reevaluate seismic and other concerns. The December 2005 tsunami has led to rapid development in the state-of-the-art of prediction, propagation, and early warning systems. The implementation of performance-based, seismic criteria in a recent Early Site Permit also reflected a substantial change from the deterministic perspective of earlier years. In addition, the recent Niigata earthquake in Japan may provide new, important insights for the entire nuclear community. Future Challenges In recognition of the increased interest in nuclear power around the world, new approaches to management of the fuel cycle are being proposed that may significantly challenge the NRC. The Department of Energy’s (DOE) Global Nuclear Energy Partnership (GNEP) is intended to develop the systems, technologies, and policy regimes to allow recycling of used fuel from light water reactors and, to a large extent, eliminate the actinides in fast-burner reactors in a way that enhances proliferation resistance. The resulting waste streams are envisioned to have characteristics that would lessen the volume and thermal challenges for a geologic repository. The GNEP initiative could involve several interconnected (and possibly co-located) facilities: (1) a Consolidated Fuel Treatment Center; (2) an Advanced Burner Reactor; and (3) an Advanced Fuel Cycle Facility. As currently envisioned, NRC would probably be the regulator for the Consolidated Fuel Treatment Center and the Advanced Burner Reactor, as these would be commercial enterprises. In addition, the NRC would need to be involved in development and operations of DOE's research facilities, such as the Advanced Fuel Cycle Facility, to understand issues that may affect its future licensing process. However, as DOE is formulating this program, it is not yet clear at what stage in its evolution the NRC will be participating. I believe that NRC's regulatory role will depend largely on DOE's and industry's participation and on legislation. The interdependence of the facilities, that is, defining how each facility affects the safety, safeguards, quality, effectiveness, and efficiency of the others, will require involvement of multiple NRC program offices. We must ensure that a stable and reliable regulatory infrastructure is in place well before an application is submitted. Our challenges will be to: (1) develop a regulatory framework for commercial GNEP facilities; (2) provide guidance to applicants; (3) develop qualified NRC staff to support a timely NRC licensing review; and (4) maintain an effective inspection program. NRC staff has already begun to consider a path forward, including modification of existing guidance and regulations and possible new rulemakings to address the safety and security requirements for these new technologies. Also under consideration is development of specific GNEP regulations applicable to both fuel reprocessing and fast burner reactors. Under a new agreement, DOE will provide technical information on GNEP to the Agency to enable our staff to develop the technological basis for GNEP--while making it clear that NRC will not license the planned DOE fuel-cycle research facility. Under the agreement, DOE will keep the NRC abreast of its work in de­velopment of new, proliferation-resistant, reprocessing systems for spent nuclear fuel and new burner reactors. Whether we modify existing regulations or develop new ones, experience gained in past operations must guide our efforts. We cannot afford to relearn past lessons as we build the next generation of fuel cycle facilities. One such area of experience involves control systems. Just as digital instrumentation and control systems offer advantages in reactor safety, they also offer advantages for the entire fuel cycle. But introduction of digital systems is neither simple nor guaranteed to prevent problems. For example, last summer a scram at Browns Ferry Unit 3 occurred when a digital network controlling the reactor recirculation pumps experienced a “data storm” of excessive traffic due to malfunction of one of the components on the network. It seems there was no 'limiter' designed into the network to ensure that the data flow remained within the capability of the network. In another example, earlier this summer, the power supply of the digital control system failed at the Honeywell UF6 conversion plant and placed plant components into a start-up configuration while the plant was operating. Operators were able to bypass the failed power supply and restore power to the work stations and communications network. However, when communications were re-established with the plant’s controllers, the controllers reinitialized as designed. Unfortunately, that design reconfigured the production equipment for a Acold start,@ which shut a number of valves. However, because the plant was operating and “hot,” the valve closure caused pressure increases in some of the process tanks. The operators noted the increasing pressures and shut the plant down safely. Another challenge for both industry and the NRC involves management of both high- and low-level wastes (LLW). We face a monumental task to review a license application for a potential Yucca Mountain waste repository whenever DOE submits its license application. LLW issues may also present challenges in the future. Without adequate LLW disposal sites, as highlighted by the recent plans to close Barnwell in 2008 to out-of-compact states, the NRC will be faced, in all probability, with assuring that the absence of disposal capacity for such wastes does not translate into unsafe and insecure storage of the waste by generating organizations. Another challenge involves a legislative mandate giving the NRC new responsibilities with respect to DOE’s military waste management activities for certain material resulting from the reprocessing of spent nuclear fuel. NRC's responsibilities include consulting with DOE in its determination of whether such waste is high-level waste (HLW), as well as monitoring its disposal. The concept behind this so-called "incidental" waste is that some material, resulting from the reprocessing of spent nuclear fuel, does not need to be disposed as HLW in a geologic repository. Such reduced disposal requirements are appropriate only if the residual radioactivity of the material, if properly controlled, is sufficiently low that it does not represent a hazard to public health and safety. Consequently, incidental waste is considered to be LLW, instead of HLW. DOE’s technical analyses are documented in a "waste determination" to evaluate whether waste is incidental or, alternatively, is HLW. Through a consultation process, NRC is mandated to provide to DOE its independent review of these waste determinations. While this waste determination process currently is only applicable to certain DOE military wastes, depending on details of a future possible implementation of GNEP, similar waste determinations may become appropriate for civilian waste as well. Public Transparency In addition to the challenges I’ve mentioned, we are continuously attempting to seek the appropriate balance to ensure that our regulatory processes are open to the public while maintaining the secure use and management of radioactive materials. But since NRC’s Mike Weber discussed this topic in more detail yesterday, my comments on it will be minimal. As Mike already noted, such policies represent a very delicate balance. As one example, in 2004, in an attempt to maintain the secure use and management of radioactive materials, we limited public access to all information at two of our licensed nuclear fuel cycle facilities. That policy, at the request of the DOE, was initiated in response to post-9/11 concerns that certain publicly available documents might contain security-sensitive information. Recently, the Commission recognized that too much information was being withheld, thus affecting our sharing of information on the recent spill at Nuclear Fuel Services (NFS). As a result, the Commission directed our staff to make many documents publicly available, relating to the Agency’s oversight of NFS in Tennessee and BWX Technologies in Virginia, that were previously withheld pursuant to that 2004 policy. Human Capital Let me now switch to the subject of human capital. Both the NRC and the industry are facing critical shortages of experienced staff. No nuclear power or fuel cycle facility can operate without trained and dedicated people who have made safety a priority. Of course, regulatory bodies must also have trained and knowledgeable staff. The global growth in nuclear power compels all of us to focus on training the next generation of construction workers, electricians, welders, engineers, operators, managers, and regulators. While NRC has experts in many of the core technical areas needed for licensing reviews of facilities for a spent fuel recycling program, we need additional expertise in several specialty fields to review the advanced technologies used in such a facility. Specifically, the NRC needs additional chemical engineers (with a detailed knowledge of reprocessing), actinide chemists, plutonium chemists, and radio-chemists. In addition, nuclear engineers with expertise in transmutation are needed to review fuel recycling facilities. You may be aware that the NRC is engaged in strenuous efforts to increase its staff by a net of 600 people, over 3 years, to handle the increased workload of new plant applications and other nuclear regulatory business. Obviously, we cannot simply hire people off the street and send them out to be regulators the next day. Even when hiring people with substantial experience in the industry, we have found that it takes from 6 months to a year of training before they are ready to assume regulatory responsibilities. For recent university graduates, it takes 1-2 years. We have also employed creative approaches to build our staff capabilities. One example is the implementation of NRC’s Graduate Fellowship Program for critical skills like corrosion chemistry and human factors. This Program is designed to attract and/or retain highly qualified individuals who aspire to work in areas requiring highly specialized technical knowledge and skills. This developmental program combines an initial period of work at the NRC with subsequent graduate education and a return to an NRC position that utilizes their increased knowledge. We also want to expand our staff’s knowledge base by drawing on the regulatory experiences in similar facilities around the world, such as La Hague, MELOX, and Atalante in France and Rokkasho in Japan. These and other countries have significant operational experience with facilities similar to those proposed now in the United States or which may be proposed in response to the GNEP. The discussions and presentations at this Workshop will be an important addition to the knowledge of our staff. The NRC considers participation of our staff in these types of workshops to be vital for many reasons. I have already noted that we learn from the experience of others. In addition, it is important that we share information related to our research and regulatory initiatives, get feedback on them, and receive new perspectives from research conducted around the world. By working together, we can provide invaluable guidance on safety issues to these operating and new facilities and help ensure that safety is always the top priority. ====================================================================== NRC speeches are available through a free list serve subscription at the following Web address: http://www.nrc.gov/public-involve/listserver.html. The NRC homepage at www.nrc.gov also offers a SUBSCRIBE link. E-mail notifications are sent to subscribers when speeches are posted to NRC's Web site. Privacy Policy | Site Disclaimer Friday, October 26, 2007 ***************************************************************** 40 Gallup Independent: Navajo gets commitment on uranium contamination October 25, 2007: By Kathy Helms Diné Bureau WINDOW ROCK ? Representatives of the Navajo Nation received a bipartisan commitment Tuesday from members of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform to address ?a modern American tragedy? resulting from decades of uranium mining activities foisted on an uninformed Navajo public by the U.S. government. In response to a request by Resources Committee Chairman George Arthur that the committee approach the issue from a ?human concept,? rather than political, Chairman Henry A. Waxman, D-Calif., assured him that ?both Democrats and Republicans on this committee are very clear that we want to work together, that we?re all outraged by what we?ve seen happening.? The Navajo Nation panel was questioned extensively by the committee before representatives from several federal agencies involved in oversight of the Nation and uranium cleanup activities were put on the hot seat. Before moving on to that panel, Waxman had some comments regarding a demonstration involving radioactive soil from U.S. Highway 160 in Tuba City by Stephen B. Etsitty, executive director of Navajo Environmental Protection Agency; and testimony from Navajo Nation Council Delegate Phil Harrison regarding Indian Health Service?s blending of uranium-contaminated water so that it could be used as drinking water for residents of Cove and Red Valley. ?Mr. Etsitty brought in some dirt that he showed was very radioactive, and as I understand, Mr. Etsitty, that is not the most radioactive part of the dirt that is on your property. Is that correct?? ?That is correct,? Etsitty said. ?There are many other samples and places from where this sample came from that are much higher. But for the demonstration that we did here this morning, we had to abide by shipping constraints and also safety overall. ?What I demonstrated was exposure, and what we had here was very limited exposure and the levels that we picked up on the particular sample were high, but not putting us here in this room immediately at risk. But if members were to consider the level that people are being exposed to over decades, it does amass to a grave public health concern,? he said. Exposure to yellowcake Waxman said the committee had to go through ?extraordinary efforts? to allow Etsitty to bring the sample into the hearing. ?The Capitol police were very concerned about it. We had a lot of people that were very concerned that we should even bring that small little sample into the room. And yet, we should realize that this is the kind of radioactive dirt that the Navajo people are being exposed to every day,? he said. ?The second point I want to make, Mr. Harrison, is that the idea that we would have blended water ? water contaminated with uranium, that is radioactive, and then blended with noncontaminated water ? I don?t think anybody in this Capitol would drink it. And yet we?re asking people in the Navajo Nation to drink this water. The federal government is giving its OK to this.? Harrison, who grew up in Cove and lives east of Red Valley, earlier told the committee. ?We have two water wells that produce over 115 gallons a minute. Both of those wells had exceeded the EPA standards. We tried to resolve that by working with General Electric and we tried to pursue a grant through USDA. ?Because of the bureaucratic system that they had, we ran out of time to address the water well in a 24-month period. So the Indian Health Service went to another course of action to blend that water well with another source of water well to cut down the EPA readings,? Harrison said. Unbelievable Waxman told him, ?I just find that unbelievable. Their solution is to take contaminated water and to mix it with less contaminated water and have people drink it. This, to me, is just amazing that that would be the solution that the Indian Health Service would come up with. After not being able to figure out what to do, they would come up with a solution that, to me, can?t be a solution to protect people?s health. ?If we?re not willing in this Congress to be exposed to the dirt and the water that you?re exposed to every single day, then I don?t think we ought to ask you to be exposed to it either. And I think that?s a telling point for how people here in Washington think it?s maybe different for you. Why they should think it?s different for you and they wouldn?t want it for themselves, underscores the neglect that we have given to this very serious problem,? he said. ?Let me say to all of you ... you?ve given us very powerful testimony and all of us here feel empathy with you and your families and people we haven?t even met that we know have suffered. I have to say that I feel enormous shame that the federal government has treated the Navajo Nation as poorly as it has.? Waxman asked whether United Nuclear Corp. cleaned up the Northeast Churchrock Mine when it left, and was told by Larry King of Churchrock, ?They never cleaned it up. Everything is still there.? He asked Edith Hood of Churchrock about the 50- to 60-feet-high waste piles that stand about 1,000 feet from her door and near the homes of eight other families in the vicinity. ?Do children sometimes play in that pile?? he asked. She responded, ?Yes, they do.? ?Have you seen any impact on any of the livestock, the lambs, or any of the other animals?? he asked. ?Yes. We have lambs that did not have wool ? hair ? but they died within days. We have butchered sheep, and in one case, the fat was yellow, which is not normal,? she said. Darrell E. Issa, R-Calif., told the committee, ?We have an obligation to make sure that either the companies that mined those facilities, or the United States government, if necessary, clarify what the responsibilities are and get it fixed in a timely fashion. And on a bipartisan basis, you have assurance from this committee ... that it is something that once started I believe we will continue to work on until we get you a resolution.? Shocking Rep. John A. Yarmuth, D-Ky., told the Navajo delegation, ?I must say that in my 10 months on this committee, I have sat through a lot of hearings that made me sad and angry. But I?m not sure that any hearing has shocked me as much as this one. This is truly a stunning example of failure on the part of our government. I commend the chairman and members of both parties for wanting to get to the bottom of this and to make sure that our government responds in the way it should. Rep. Betty McCollum, D-Minn., remarked, ?You have all suffered greatly, and in my opinion, needlessly, for corporate greed and for our nation?s weapons program, and I am personally embarrassed at the lack of concern for all of the Navajo people who lived, and continue to live. Those who are passed, I offer my condolences to your families for your loss. As you have pointed out, the Navajo have stood valiantly by the United States at their time of need, and as an American, I thank you for that. ?I can?t go back and change the past. I?m here today to do what I can to make a better future for our children and for our planet. So I?m going to ask you, and I would like for you to be specific as possible ... what you think the federal government needs to be doing. Flying overhead in helicopters and taking photographs and doing very cursory studies of where there may or may not be uranium waste is not my idea of doing a full-scale cleanup,? she said. Rep. Peter Welch, D-Vt., said he agreed with Yarmuth?s comments. ?Certainly on this committee we?ve heard some pretty bad things ? but nothing quite so bad, quite so arrogant, quite so thoughtless, quite so consequential as what has happened on your land,? he said. He questioned Etsitty about the status of abandoned mine cleanup. ?The EPA admits to 520 mines and the Navajo Nation, depending on how, I guess, we define a mine, says it could be up to 1,200,? Welch said. ?My understanding about your study is that 90 percent of these mines have been capped or filled by the Navajo Nation itself. But those caps don?t do anything about the groundwater, and they don?t eliminate the radiation threat from the mines that you are exposed to, your children will be exposed to, and in all likelihood, your grandchildren will be exposed to. Cleanup ?The first step in cleaning up the mines is doing an environmental site assessment. Mr. Etsitty, the U.S. EPA has done a site assessment at one mine ? the Northeast Churchrock Mine, is that right?? Welch asked. ?That is correct,? Etsitty said. ?So they?ve got one done and 519 more to go,? Welch remarked. ?What I understand from our briefing is that the EPA flew over the mines and took aerial radiation levels, but they aren?t detailed enough to create a cleanup plan. So they just gave you a list of the mines with information about nearby settlements and the water sources and asked you to prioritize them. The EPA said it would then begin site assessments on the highest priority. Is that your understanding of what?s going on?? ?Yes, we?ve had a project going back several years to go back and inventory and identify as many of these sites as possible,? Etsitty said. ?That began with aerial surveys. Now we are at a point where we have prioritized the top 32 sites, with Northeast Churchrock being the priority site on that short list.? ?How long has the EPA had your list of priorities?? Welch asked. ?Well, we?ve been on this project, which we call the Abandoned Uranium Mine Collaborative, and we?ve been working with EPA pretty close to 10 years. The list was developed early on. It was just a matter of compiling all of the site characteristic data into a database. We did have ambitious goals at the beginning. We ran into cost difficulties with the final product, but we do have a completed product. I would say the information has been available for about eight years,? Etsitty said. ?So, has the EPA got any site assessments of the mines you?ve identified?? Welch asked. ?Directly, just the Northeast Churchrock Mine site,? Etsitty said. ?Just one?? Welch asked. ?So, we haven?t even begun the assessments, let alone the cleanup. ... There?s a long way to go, obviously,? he said. Thursday October 25, 2007 Selected Stories: All contents property of the Gallup Independent. Any duplication or republication requires consent of the Gallup Independent. Please send the Gallup Independent feedback on this website and the paper in general. Send questions or comments to gallpind@cia-g.com ***************************************************************** 41 Bismarck Tribune: Don't ever nuance a nuke event North Dakota News Oct 26, 2007 - 04:05:43 CDT We need to be reassured by the U.S. Air Force as plainly and reliably as possible that there shouldn't be a repeat of a chain of events in August involving nuclear weapons, events that began in North Dakota and ended in Louisiana. The military has a longstanding institutional custom of giving nuance to the information about itself it communicates to the civilian world. Hardly anything lately has been more nuanced than information made known about the response of the Department of Defense and the Air Force to the flight of a B-52 bomber from Minot Air Force Base to a base in Louisiana. Through what the Air Force has called lack of attention to detail and failure to conduct a required examination, nuclear-armed missiles made the trip on the B-52. It's not that the incident was able to be hushed up. The response of the DOD all the way up to Defense Secretary Robert Gates was a public one: Five Minot AFB officers were relieved of their duty, and more than 60 personnel were "decertified." That's military-speak for being taken off the job, the job of transferring munitions. Reportedly they had other duties to keep them busy, but located nowhere close to the advanced cruise missile. More is needed, even, than the assignment of replacement officers to the Air Force base, where there are new commanders of the bomb wing and the maintenance group. Secretary of the Air Force Michael Wynne must follow up on an assurance that changes are being made so that there's only a remote chance of a repeat involving nuclear arms. There was talk when the secretary was in Minot recently of a blue-ribbon review panel to look into Air Force guidelines and procedures on weapons handling. Fair enough, but the civilian citizenry needs to have a front row seat in the audience. If a panel finds the regs need to be replaced, rather than merely beefed up, we need to know. It "was a rare mistake," said Col. Paul Bell, who now commands the bomb wing. Americans aren't inclined to hear the word, mistake, in connection with nuclear weapons. Rare? Make it much more rare than rare. Reassigning some officers might have been necessary to uphold military discipline. It's hard to penetrate the opaqueness of the investigation to know if there was scapegoating, whether careers, in effect, are ended. That's a personnel issue. The public interest is safety. The Air Force may have high regard for its procedures. There probably are duties in the Air Force in which an informal approach toward following procedures is not the end of the world. We don't want sloppiness when nukes are involved. Copyright © 2007 Bismarck Tribune, a division of Lee Enterprises. ***************************************************************** 42 RIA Novosti: Russia set to launch 5 ballistic missiles by yearend 13:55 | 26/ 10/ 2007 VLASIKHA (Moscow Region), October 26 (RIA Novosti) - Russia's Strategic Missile Forces will conduct five launches of intercontinental ballistic missiles by the end of 2007, the SMF commander said Friday. "By the end of this year, we will test launch another five missiles, including a RS-18 (SS-19 Stiletto), a RS-12M (SS-25 Sickle), a missile interceptor and a heavy RS-20 (SS-18 Satan)," Colonel General Nikolai Solovtsov told a news conference. He said that seven ICBM launches had been conducted so far in 2007 to test the performance of a new RS-24 missile with multiple warheads, extend the service life of RS-18 and RS-25 missiles and lift payloads into orbit. He also said five regiments of an SMF division in the Saratov Region have been equipped with silo-based Topol-M (SS-27) systems and put on combat duty. A complete regiment of silo-based Topol-M comprises ten missiles. The advanced Topol-M missile is considered by many experts as the best ICBM in the world at present. "Therefore, Russia already possesses weapons that can penetrate any modern missile defenses," Solovtsov said. The deployment of silo-based Topol-M systems in the Saratov Region and road-mobile systems in the Ivanovo Region (central Russia) would be completed in 2010. RIA Novosti ***************************************************************** 43 AFP: Putin warns Europe ahead of Portugal summit - by Dario Thuburn Fri Oct 26, 6:46 AM ET MAFRA, Portugal (AFP) - Russia's President Vladimir Putin issued a new warning to Europe over the Iran nuclear standoff and Kosovo's push for independence ahead of a summit with EU leaders in Portugal on Friday. The European Union had been hoping to patch up relations with Putin. But the Russian leader outlined sharp differences as he arrived, likening supporters of tough policies on Iran to "mad people wielding razor blades" and calling for "patience" on Kosovo's future. Western powers suspect that Iran is trying to build up a secret nuclear weapons capability. Iran insists that its nuclear programme is aimed only at producing energy. Russia is helping to build a reactor in Iran and has gone against most Western powers by opposing tighter UN sanctions against Iran and blocking moves towards independence for Kosovo, a southern Serbian province. The EU-Russia summit, which marks 10 years since Brussels and Moscow signed a partnership agreement, was held in the former Portuguese royal residence of Mafra, some 40 kilometres (25 miles) outside Lisbon. The last summit near the Russian city of Samara earlier this year was marred by bitter disputes between Putin and EU leaders over the state of democracy in Russia and EU officials had been hoping to improve relations. Portuguese Prime Minister Jose Socrates, whose country holds the EU presidency, hosted Friday's talks alongside EU foreign policy chief Javier Solana and European Commission president Jose Manuel Barroso. Economic relations between Brussels and Moscow have boomed despite frequent rows, with trade turnover going up 3.5 times to an annual 300 billion dollars (209 billion euros) since Putin became president in 2000, officials said. But political negotiations to formulate a new EU-Russia partnership agreement remain stalled because of a Polish veto imposed after Russia banned the import of meat from Poland in 2005 over food safety concerns. A new partnership accord is seen as particularly important for the European Union because it is intended to regulate also energy ties as Europe increases its reliance on Russian oil and gas imports. Hopes of a breakthrough in the dispute were raised by the victory on Sunday in Poland's parliamentary elections of a pro-European party that has also vowed to improve relations with Moscow. But the EU's External Relations Commissioner Benita Ferrero-Waldner said partnership talks were more likely to start at the next summit in 2008, which will also come after parliamentary and presidential elections in Russia. "We want this summit to be business-like," Ferrero-Waldner said on Friday. Ferrero-Waldner said she expected Russia to commit to partial financing for regional cooperation projects with the European Union and said the EU would raise the quota for Russian steel imports. Referring to energy, Ferrero-Waldner said: "We're going to tell them that it's very, very important to liberalise the markets in that sector. We want more reciprocity, more transparency, more openness." The European Union has called on Russia to free up its gas market for EU companies, while Russia has in turn accused Europe of blocking access to EU markets for state-controlled gas giant Gazprom. Officials on Friday were also due to confirm an earlier agreement on a new system to warn European countries ahead of time about possible cuts in energy supply from Russia. At a conference in Lisbon on the eve of the summit, EU and Russian industry leaders pointed to "spectacular" growth in EU-Russia trade ties and urged politicians to improve relations for the sake of business. Copyright © 2007 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The ***************************************************************** 44 Reuters: Putin scraps with EU over energy Fri Oct 26, 2007 8:04pm BST By Axel Bugge and Jeff Mason MAFRA, Portugal (Reuters) - Russian President Vladimir Putin scrapped with European Union leaders on Friday over Brussels' plans to limit foreign investment in energy markets at a summit that achieved little on key sticking points. Putin, in his final EU summit as president, took a swipe at proposals from Brussels that could prevent gas monopoly Gazprom from buying up power grids and pipelines while the 27-nation bloc revamps its gas and electricity markets. He also drew a parallel between U.S. plans for a missile shield in eastern Europe and the Cuban missile crisis in 1962, widely regarded as the closest the world came to nuclear war. "I would remind you how relations were developing in an analogous situation in the middle of the 1960s," he said. "Analogous actions by the Soviet Union when it deployed rockets on Cuba provoked the Cuban missile crisis." European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso voiced confidence that the EU could endorse Moscow's bid for membership of the World Trade Organization, a long standing bone of contention in EU-Russia relations. "I am confident that those issues are solvable and both sides need to make rapid efforts to solve them," Barroso told reporters, referring to the two last issues preventing Brussels from signing of on Russian WTO membership. Putin said "talks are not easy but constructive" on WTO. EU officials had played down expectations for the one-day summit, saying no major breakthroughs were expected on key issues such as a new partnership and cooperation agreement between Moscow and Brussels. The Russian leader urged Europe not to be concerned by Russian companies investing in Europe, saying that European investment in his country far outstripped investment in Europe. 'HORRIBLE MONEY' "When we hear from some European capitals that 'the Russians are coming with their horrible money to buy everything', that makes me laugh," Putin told EU officials, including Barroso and Portuguese Prime Minister Jose Socrates, at the one-day meeting. "A total sum of European investment in Russia is 30 billion euros (21 billion pounds). I don't know whether it is big or not, but Russian investment in the European Union is 10-fold lower, just 3 billion euros." Barroso denied the energy draft laws would discriminate against Moscow and said Russian companies must play by the same rules as anyone else. Socrates, whose country holds the EU's rotating presidency, said there were "important" advances at the summit. Russia and the EU signed deals on cooperation in drug trafficking and boosting steel trade. Russia is the bloc's third biggest trading partner after the United States and China. Business leaders urged the politicians to improve relations. "There are two trends: economic ties go up, while political ties go down," Anatoly Chubais, head of Russian electricity grid RAO UES, told reporters after EU and Russian business leaders met Putin and the top European officials. He said Russian investment in the EU was comparable or near European investment in Russia, contradicting Putin's assessment. A dispute over Russia's ban on Polish meat imports has stopped the EU and Russia starting talks on a new partnership and cooperation agreement (PCA) to replace one which expires in December. "The new PCA is one of the acute problems... I expect talks on the new treaty will start in the near future," Putin said. Russian officials say they hope a new government in Poland, following an election, could become friendlier to Moscow. Brussels and Moscow have haggled over Russia's export duties on timber, which the EU wants resolved before blessing Moscow's entry into the WTO. (Additional reporting by Oleg Shchedrov) ***************************************************************** 45 DW: EU, Russia Remain Divided Over Key Issues at Summit | Europe | Deutsche Welle | 26.10.2007 Lots of smiles but little substance -- Putin with Socrates Russia and the European Union discussed cooperating on human rights, drug enforcement and cultural exchanges at a summit that however acheived little on key sticking points. Vladimir Putin, in his final EU summit as president, sparred with the EU over energy and trade in a one-day meeting that will likely be remembered for the Russian president's comments drawing a parallel between US plans for a missile shield in eastern Europe and the Cuban missile crisis in 1962, widely regarded as the closest the world came to nuclear war. "This was a constructive summit, a positive event. It has led to several significant steps toward building a deeper relationship between the EU and Russia," said Portuguese Prime Minister Jose Socrates, who hosted the meeting in the town of Mafra near Lisbon. "The development of our trade is clear for all to see. That is the keynote of our relationship," he added. The atmosphere on Friday was relaxed and jovial. Besides Socrates, Russian President Vladimir Putin, EU foreign-policy chief Javier Solana and the head of the European Commission, Jose Manuel Barroso, were in attendance. "We are satisfied with the results of this meeting, which was held in a friendly atmosphere and a constructive manner," Putin said. Human rights institute Bildunterschrift: Men in black -- Putin, center, with Barosso and Socrates Putin suggested that the EU and Russia should set up a joint institute to discuss issues of human rights across the continent. "I am happy to put forward a joint initiative from the two houses of the Russian parliament to establish an EU-Russian center for human rights and democracy. This could bring together politicians, businessmen and civil society," Putin told journalists. "Given Russia's growing financial and economic potential, we should be able to make some contributions to financing discussions on human rights and democracy," he added. EU leaders welcomed the move, saying that it could "move forward" the relationship between the two sides. Previous EU-Russia meetings have often been clouded by mutual accusations of human rights abuses. Human rights experts said Putin's support for human rights was pure political rhetoric. "We already have two European organizations that look at human rights," said Nils Muiznieks, a former Integration Minister and expert on EU-Russia relations at the Latvian University. "Russia is trying to destroy both of them. Why do we need a third?" Few agreements reached at summit Bildunterschrift: Another Cuban Missile Crisis? On Friday, the EU and Russia signed agreements on raising quotas of Russian steel imports and cooperating in the fight against drugs. They also established a body to promote cultural exchanges. Putin confirmed that Russia would invite OSCE observers to its forthcoming parliamentary and presidential elections. But the key issues which experts had highlighted before the summit remained unsolved. Neither of the two most contentious issues which experts raised before the meeting -- a Polish veto on a future EU-Russia strategic agreement in retaliation for a Russian ban on Polish meat imports, and the fee that Russia charges EU airlines to fly over its territory - was directly mentioned in the press conference. The strategic deal is blocked by an "internal EU issue" which Russia hopes will be "solved as soon as possible," Putin said in the only reference to the Polish dispute. The issue of Siberian overflights was not mentioned at all. The EU's plans to ban any company from its energy markets which both produces and distributes energy had also drawn Russian fire before the meeting. Russian officials say that the measure is aimed at keeping Russian gas monopolist Gazprom out of Europe. Putin likens tensions to Cuban Missile Crisis Bildunterschrift: Summit a step towards normalizing relations While the Portuguese summit seemed to restore normalcy to the EU-Russia relationship, the same cannot be said for the ongoing tension between Russia and the United States. The issue of plans to install a missile-defense system in EU members Poland and the Czech Republic surfaced Friday when Putin compared the situation to the 1962 Cuban missile crisis. At the same time, Putin suggested the tension was much lower than during the Cuban missile crisis because he feels the US is listening to Moscow's concerns about the missile plans. "On a positive note, I note that concerns about threats to our security are being heard by the Americans," Putin said. "Our American partners are thinking about how to neutralize these threats that are being created. Our work continues." European leaders did not comment on Putin's missile shield comments. DPA news agency (th) DW-WORLD © 2007 Deutsche Welle ***************************************************************** 46 UPI: Outside View: Russia's missile options United Press International - International Security - Industry - Published: 26, 2007 at 8:39 AM By ALEXANDER KHRAMCHIKHLIN UPI Outside View Commentator MOSCOW, Oct. 26 (UPI) -- The situation around the proposed deployment of a missile defense system in Europe and the threat of a Russian moratorium on the Conventional Forces in Europe Treaty can be traced to the ambitions and a reluctance of the sides to understand each other. This is true both of the West and Russia. The result may be an unwarranted and unwanted aggravation of relations. There are many rational grounds for Russia to be displeased with the deployment of the American missile defense elements in Europe and the situation over the CFE. Practically all the Russian military experts are aware that the American national missile defense in its present shape, given its technical capabilities, poses no threat to the Russian strategic nuclear forces. However, Russian observers are still puzzled by the choice of Poland and the Czech Republic as the sites for the NMD facilities. Surely, the American military cannot seriously believe, first, that Iran is capable of building intercontinental ballistic missiles and second, of delivering them to the U.S. territory. Both projections belong in the realm of psychiatry rather than military or political forecasting. This naturally suggests to the Russians that the NMD is aimed against Russia, and not against Iran. And there is a growing sense that the missiles to be installed in silos in Poland will be not the ground-based interceptors, but medium-range missiles within a very short striking distance of targets in the European part of Russia. Furthermore, the 1987 Treaty on Medium and Shorter Range Missiles bans missiles with a range of between 300 and 3,300 miles only for Russia and the United States. This doesn’t worry the United States too much because it has no enemies in the Western Hemisphere. The situation is not so simple for Russia. Many countries on the perimeter of the Russian borders already have, or are creating medium and shorter-range missiles. They include Israel, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, India, China and North Korea. Among these countries, only India and North Korea are unlikely potential enemies of Russia. This gives Russia a great temptation to renounce the Medium and Shorter-Range Missile Treaty. The medium-range missiles deployed in the Urals and Siberia can reach any point in Europe and Asia to compensate for the American missile defense system in Eastern Europe and the missile arsenals of the above-mentioned Asian countries, without bringing in more valuable and expensive ICBMs. As regards the CFE Treaty, it was signed in a totally different geopolitical situation and is largely irrelevant. There are several reasons why Moscow is displeased with the current situation. Above all, it is the presence of the “gray zone†in the Baltics -- Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia are not CFE members and theoretically can have their own armed forces of any strength and foreign troops of any size on their territories. In addition, there are flank limitations when Russia, first, cannot freely deploy forces on its own territory, and second, the Bulgarian and Romanian Armed Forces are still considered to be “Warsaw Treaty†forces although the two countries have long joined NATO. Nor can one tolerate the failure of NATO countries to ratify the “adapted CFE Treatyâ€, although Russia has withdrawn all its troops from Georgia and has a very small force in Moldova that has no heavy equipment and whose duty is to guard the huge ammunition dumps left over from the Soviet Army. In this case, the Russian troops are in fact protecting Europe from an uncontrolled spread of huge quantities of weaponry and explosives from these dumps. Russia’s grievances about CFE are well justified, but they are largely theoretical. In reality, neither Russia, nor any NATO countries are using up their quotas for any of the five classes of equipment, be it under the “old CFE†of 1990 or the “adapted CFEâ€. The armies of the Baltic countries and Slovenia, which are not CFE members, are purely symbolic in size and there are no foreign contingents on their territories -- except the four fighter planes at a Lithuanian airfield which rotate on a six-month basis. On none of the five classes of weapons limited under the CFE Treaty does NATO have as much as a 3:1 superiority over Russia, whereas NATO’s economic superiority over Russia in terms of absolute gross domestic product is 30-fold. So, it is absolutely not in Russia’s interests to break off the treaty because it would give NATO a theoretical chance to parlay its economic superiority into military superiority. The question is whether the European NATO countries want to be drawn into a new arms race. Besides, if such a race is resumed, after all, Russia would definitely pull out of the Medium and Shorter-Range Missile Treaty to make up for its lag in conventional arms. It should be noted the resumption of the Pioneer medium-range missiles production would not be a fundamental problem for Russia because they are essentially analogous to the currently produced Russian Topol ICBMs, except that they have two instead of three stages. -- (Alexander Khramchikhin, is the chief analyst with the Institute of Political and Military Analysis in Moscow. This article is reprinted by permission of the RIA Novosti news agency.) -- (United Press International's "Outside View" commentaries are written by outside contributors who specialize in a variety of important issues. The views expressed do not necessarily reflect those of United Press International. In the interests of creating an open forum, original submissions are invited.) © 2007 United Press International. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 47 Guardian Unlimited: Nuclear Submarine Commander Removed Friday October 26, 2007 3:16 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. 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'' on his own, Navy Lt. Alli Myrick, a public affairs officer, told The Associated Press. Portland's commanders identified the problems during a routine review, she said. 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. The Hampton, a Los Angeles Class submarine assigned to Submarine Squadron Eleven, is the most advanced nuclear attack submarine in the world, carrying a torpedo, cruise missile, and mine-laying arsenal, according to information on the Navy's Web site. The submarine is docked in San Diego. Portland's dismissal as commander is effective immediately. Myrick said Portland will be temporarily assigned to squadron duty and the Hampton will not conduct operations until the Navy can confirm the operational standards have been met. Myrick said at no time was the submarine conducting unsafe operations. ``He has not been charged with any offense nor has he received non-judicial punishment,'' Myrick said. There was no phone listing for Portland in San Diego, and the Navy did not immediately respond to an AP interview request. Portland's removal comes after officials also discovered that logs on the Hampton had been filled out to make it appear the daily checks of the reactor water had actually been done. Other members of the squadron discovered the lapse during a routine examination required as part of the redundancy built into the system so problems are caught. The examination was done as the submarine was nearing the end of a West Pacific deployment that concluded Sept. 17. The investigation was first reported in Monday's edition of Navy Times newspaper, which quoted an unidentified source as saying that failing to measure and maintain the correct water chemistry in the reactor over the long-term could cause corrosion in the propulsion system. The reported problems with procedures and record keeping in the Navy squadron follows an incident in August when a B-52 bomber was mistakenly armed with six nuclear-tipped cruise missiles and flown to a Louisiana base. The mission from Minot Air Force Base in North Dakota was to ferry cruise missiles that had been slated for decommissioning but the warheads were supposed to have been removed beforehand. The Air Force disciplined some 70 airmen. Portland is the fourth commanding officer of a submarine to be relieved of duty this year. The other three, who were relieved for various unrelated actions, were: Cmdr. Edwin Ruff of the USS Minneapolis St. Paul, Cmdr. Matthew Weingart of the USS Newport News and Cmdr. William Schwalm of the USS Helena. Portland will be replaced by Cmdr. William J. Houston, who previously was assigned as a special assistant to the Director of the Naval Reactors. Guardian Unlimited © Guardian News and Media Limited 2007 ***************************************************************** 48 Guardian Unlimited: Putin: US Plan Evokes '62 Cuban Crisis Friday October 26, 2007 8:46 PM By MIKE ECKEL Associated Press Writer MAFRA, Portugal (AP) - President Vladimir Putin on Friday evoked one of the most dangerous confrontations of the Cold War to highlight Russian opposition to a proposed U.S. missile defense system in Europe, comparing it to the Cuban missile crisis of 45 years ago. The comments - made at the end of a summit between Russia and European Union that failed to resolve several festering disputes - were the latest in a series of belligerent statements from the assertive Putin. Emboldened by oil- and gas-fueled economic clout, Russia is increasingly at odds with Washington and much of Europe on issues ranging from Iran and Kosovo to energy supplies and human rights. Putin used a news conference at the summit's conclusion to reiterate Russia's stalwart opposition to U.S. plans to put elements of a missile defense system in the former Soviet bloc countries of Poland and the Czech Republic - both of which are now NATO members. ``Analogous actions by the Soviet Union, when it deployed missiles in Cuba, prompted the 'Caribbean crisis,''' Putin said, using the Russian term for the Cuban missile crisis. ``For us the situation is technologically very similar. We have withdrawn the remains of our bases from Vietnam, from Cuba, and have liquidated everything there, while at our borders, such threats against our country are being created,'' he said. The October 1962 crisis erupted when President John F. Kennedy demanded that Soviet leader Nikita S. Khrushchev remove his country's nuclear missiles from Cuba because they could have been used to launch a close-range attack on the United States. The Americans imposed a naval blockade on Cuba and the world teetered on the edge of war before the Soviets backed down. Putin also suggested that the tension was much lower than in 1962 because the United States and Russia are now ``partners,'' not Cold War enemies. His relationship with President Bush, Putin said, helps solve problems, calling him a ``personal friend.'' The Russian leader said there has been no concrete U.S. response to his counterproposals for cooperation on missile defense, but added that the United States is now listening to Russia's concerns about its plans and seeking to address them. In Washington, White House press secretary Dana Perino underscored those remarks rather than the Cuban missile crisis analogy, saying ``there's no way you could walk away without thinking that he thinks that we can work together.'' The U.S. plan is part of a wider missile shield involving defenses in California and Alaska which the United States says are to defend against any long-range missile attack from countries such as North Korea or Iran. Russia strongly opposes the idea, saying Iran is decades away from developing missile technology that could threaten Europe or North America, and it says the U.S. bases are aimed at spying on Russian facilities and undermining Russia's missile deterrent force. State Department spokesman Sean McCormack told reporters there were ``clear historical differences between our plans to deploy a defensive missile system designed to protect against launch of missiles from rogue states, such as Iran, and the offensive nuclear-tipped capability of the missiles that were being installed in Cuba back in the 1960s.'' ``I don't think that they are historically analogous in any way, shape or form,'' he said. Turning to his future, Putin said he would not assume presidential powers if he became prime minister after finishing his term next May. Putin is barred from seeking a third consecutive term in the March 2008 presidential election. But he suggested this month that he could become prime minister, leading to speculation that the substantial powers now invested in the presidency might be transferred to the prime minister. ``If someone thinks that I intend to move, let's say, into the government of the Russian Federation and transfer the fundamental powers there, that's not the case,'' Putin said. ``There will be no infringement on the powers of the president of the Russian Federation, at least while it depends on me.'' After repeating his insistence that he does not intend to change the constitution in order to run for a third term, Putin said he had not yet decided where and in what capacity he would work as former president. He is expected to remain an influential figure in Russia. Putin will lead the ticket of the dominant United Russia party in December parliamentary elections. An overwhelming victory for the party could turn the legislature into a new power base for Putin and give him a claim to continued authority based on his popularity. Putin traveled to Portugal, which holds the EU's rotating presidency, for talks with leaders of the 27-nation bloc. But despite a positive spin put on the meeting by Putin and EU President Jose Manuel Barroso - who called it ``open, frank and productive'' - the summit yielded no major breakthroughs. The EU and Russia have been without a new cooperation agreement for more than a year, during which time doubts have grown in many European capitals about the reliability of Russia's energy supplies and trade policies toward EU member nations, such as Poland. Topping the list of concerns is Russia's energy policy - the reliability of supplies and the intentions of state-run oil and gas companies. Russia already provides 30 percent of EU energy imports, including 44 percent of natural gas imports. The state-controlled gas giant OAO Gazprom has recently moved to acquire assets in Europe and strike bilateral deals with some EU countries. That has led the EU to consider new restrictions on non-EU companies owning majority stakes in gas pipelines or electricity power grids without additional agreements - much to the Russians' consternation. Earlier, Putin tried to assure European leaders that Russian investment was not to be feared. ``When we hear in some countries phrases like, 'The Russians are coming with their scary money,' it sounds a bit funny,'' he said. --- Associated Press Writer Barry Hatton in Mafra contributed to this report. Guardian Unlimited © Guardian News and Media Limited 2007 ***************************************************************** 49 Bellingham Herald: New PNNL contract would restrict private work YAKIMA, Wash. -- A provision that allows the contractor managing Pacific Northwest National Laboratory to conduct research for private companies will be removed from the next contract, under a draft request for proposals released by the federal government Thursday. Battelle Memorial Institute, a nonprofit group based in Columbus, Ohio, has managed and operated the national science laboratory in south-central Washington since its inception in 1965. The laboratory had a business volume of $765 million in 2007. An estimated 10 percent of that work was for private companies under a "special-use permit" approved by the U.S. Department of Energy under each contract since 1965. The permit allows Battelle to use government-owned facilities to conduct outside work. In a statement announcing the draft request for proposals Thursday, the department said it would eliminate the special-use permit to foster competition through a "level playing field" and to better align the new laboratory contract with other contracts in the Energy Department's complex. The draft will be open for comments through Dec. 10. Members of Washington's congressional delegation immediately criticized the proposal, arguing it could result in layoffs and cripple the laboratory. "The use permit is responsible for 300-400 jobs at PNNL alone, and has led to job and business creation in the Tri-Cities and across our state. It should not be summarily ended as this draft proposes," read a joint statement by Sen. Patty Murray and Rep. Norm Dicks, both Democrats, and Republican Rep. Doc Hastings, whose district includes the laboratory. Battelle has operated the laboratory under a series of extended contracts since 1965. Its current contract, which expired Sept. 30, has been extended while the government seeks new bids. z The laboratory's research areas include science and environment, energy, defense and national security. Battelle officials were disappointed about the Energy Department's decision to eliminate the special-use permit, spokeswoman Katy Delaney said in a telephone interview. "Historically, we believe it's been a good means of connecting the lab to industry," she said. However, she said Battelle was excited about the opportunity to bid and was putting together its "A Team" to do so. "We consider this our flagship lab in the national laboratory system, and we intent to put together a winning proposal," Delaney said. Battelle also is a partner in operating Brookhaven National Laboratory in New York, Oak Ridge National Laboratory in Tennessee, Idaho National Laboratory, the National Renewable Energy Laboratory in Colorado and Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California. PNNL, located in Richland, conducts nearly 60 percent of its research for the Energy Department, and about 25 percent for the departments of Homeland Security and Defense. Private work accounts for about 10 percent of the laboratory's business. In 2005, 11 percent of the work conducted at the laboratory for the Energy Department, or an estimated $76.5 million, was related to the Hanford nuclear reservation, a nuclear weapons facility created during World War II as part of the top-secret Manhattan Project to build an atomic bomb. Copyright ©2007 The Bellingham Herald The Bellingham Herald. 1155 N. State. St., Bellingham, WA 98225, Phone (360) 676-2600. ***************************************************************** 50 Tri-City Herald: DOE contract to operate PNNL will disallow private work (about) Friday, October 26th, 2007 03:50 PDT JOHN TRUMBO, HERALD STAFF WRITER The Department of Energy announced Thursday that it intends to award a new contract for operating the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory within 12 months, but it no longer will allow private work to be done at the government facility. The decision to exclude so-called "use permit" work in a future contract for the national lab in Richland could mean the loss of up to 400 jobs and about $75 million in private contracts annually. The exclusion of private work from the future PNNL contract would end a unique 42-year special arrangement between the government and Battelle Memorial Institute of Ohio, which has managed the lab since 1965. DOE said removing the use permit from the draft request for proposals would level the playing field for all companies interested in bidding on the PNNL contract. Washington's federal legislators and officials at the Tri-City Development Council (TRIDEC) say deleting the use permit from PNNL's contract also could hurt development of other science and businesses in the Tri-Cities. "DOE's omission of the 'use permit' is completely unacceptable," said a joint statement issued Thursday from Washington's congressional delegation of U.S. Sen. Maria Cantwell and Patty Murray and U.S. Reps. Norm Dicks and Doc Hastings. Battelle's current contract was extended to Sept. 30, 2008, so DOE could complete the bidding process and select a contractor for the lab. The new contract would be for five years, with a 15-year extension if the contractor's performance is good enough. DOE's announcement Thursday said that the draft request for proposals would be open for public comment for 45 days. "This is very important to our community. It's important for the community to comment," said Gary Petersen, vice president of TRIDEC. Petersen said getting community members and contractors to submit comments before the Dec. 10 deadline would be important to getting the use permit put back into the bidding process. Currently, Battelle's contract to operate PNNL for DOE has two parts. The maintenance and operations contract covers work done for the government, while the use permit contract allows Battelle to take on private, or outside, work using government lab facilities and equipment as well as some of the same employees. About 10 percent of PNNL's contract work representing $750 million annually is from research done under the use permit. Battelle has about 4,200 employees at the lab. The congressional delegation's joint statement expressed disappointment and suggested a political fight. "The use permit is responsible for 300 to 400 jobs at PNNL alone, and has led to job and business creation in the Tri-Cities and across our state. It should not be summarily ended as this draft proposes," the statement said. The senators and representatives said they appreciate DOE answering "the call to complete this contract competition by the end of next year, ensuring a change in presidential administrations does not disrupt PNNL's important work." The statement continued: "PNNL has served our country and community well for over 40 years and the process of competing the contract must not result in layoffs and a crippled lab. "The future of PNNL and a vital part of the Tri-Cities community is at stake. We will work together as a delegation to ensure DOE does the right thing and restores the use permit." Carl Adrian, president and CEO of TRIDEC, said TRIDEC will continue to support legislators' efforts to preserve the use permit in a future PNNL contract. The use permit also has made it possible for collaborations between PNNL and Washington State University Tri-Cities, where the lab and university are jointly building and equipping a Bioproducts, Science and Energy Laboratory on the Richland campus. Petersen said Battelle also has made available staff and lab resources to help many private startup ventures such as IsoRay, a local public company that produces a new type of radiation treatments for prostate cancer. "If this goes away, what will north Richland look like? The research park (at Hanford) will take a big hit," Adrian said. DOE announced 21 months ago that it planned to put the PNNL contract out for competitive bids. But the draft request for proposals was slow in coming. Battelle's two-part contract that included the use permit made it difficult to call for new bids from companies because they would not be in a position to assume the private work. PNNL is the only national lab to have an arrangement allowing private work to occur at a government facility. Petersen said DOE's decision to delete the use permit was expected. "But we were hopeful DOE would see the advantage to the government in having the use permit. Unfortunately they apparently don't see it," he said. "This has been a very successful public-private partnership. It could be a model for other labs, but (DOE isn't) listening to us," Adrian said. Battelle officials have said they will compete for the new contract. Other companies that have expressed interest in being a prime contractor for the lab include AECOM Government Solutions in Los Angeles and BWXT Services of Lynchburg, Va. © 2007 Tri-City Herald, Associated Press & Other Wire Services ***************************************************************** 51 Tri-City Herald: New demolition plan less risky for K East Basin workers (about) Friday, October 26th, 2007 03:51 PDT ANNETTE CARY, HERALD STAFF WRITER Hanford workers finished pouring a 14-inch layer of grout Thursday over the floor of the leak-prone K East Basin. After verification is completed, workers can hang up their long-handled tools for good. They have been used to reach to the bottom of the 20-foot pool to remove debris and sludge and perform other work. From now on, much of the work can be done with heavy equipment under a new plan developed this summer for demolishing the radioactively contaminated basin with less risk of exposure to radiation for workers. The grout pour was the first step in the plan. "It's worker friendly," said Paul Pak, the Department of Energy project director. "It has reduced a lot of the project risks. It makes it more predictable." It uses traditional industrial methods with no unfamiliar technologies as the last demolition plan required, said Chris Lucas, director of K East closure for Fluor Hanford. Once workers got the radioactive sludge out of the basin and much of the contaminated equipment, Fluor and the Department of Energy found better conditions than expected, allowing a new plan for demolishing the basin. "Generally the dose rates in the basin were less than what was previously anticipated," Lucas said. The start to demolition of the basin has been seven years in the making. That's how long it took to remove irradiated fuel and radioactive sludge from the basin. At the end of the '80s, 2,300 tons of irradiated fuel was stranded in the K East and K West basins when processing stopped at Hanford to remove plutonium for the production of plutonium for the nation's weapons program. This spring the last of the sludge, formed from corroded fuel, was removed from the K East Basin and transferred to underwater containers in the K West Basin to await treatment. But the K East Basin remains filled with water to shield workers from radioactive contamination. The grout that was poured for three days this week supports the third major plan by Fluor and the Department of Energy to reduce the basin to rubble. Originally, Fluor had planned to fill the basin with grout, covering fuel racks and debris that littered the basin, then cut the grout into pieces to remove with the walls and floors of the pool. But most of the equipment and debris was removed to get at the sludge, eliminating the need for it to be grouted in place. Fluor next proposed using divers and workers with long-handled tools standing on grating above the pool to clean the walls and floors of the basin and remove debris. That would prepare the walls for hydrolasing, a high-pressure water scrub not previously tried at Hanford, to remove more than 140,000 pounds of concrete with embedded radiation. That plan got to the stage at which divers were at Hanford training and performing a hazard analysis. But "as we cleaned it out, as a general rule we found it a little more benign than anticipated," Lucas said. Under the latest plan, the most radioactively contaminated equipment still in the basin has been lifted into open-topped debris boxes placed on pallets just off the floor of the pool. Small pieces of debris, such as wire ties and hand tools dropped to the floor of the basin, were left in place to be covered with the layer of grout capping the floor. Next, the water will be removed from the basin the same way it was during operations of the K East Reactor -- by pumper truck. A remote operating system will be used to drain the water, filling 200 tanker trucks with almost 5,000 gallons of water each. The water will be taken to the Effluent Treatment Facility in central Hanford. As the water is lowered, spray nozzles installed in the basin will be operated remotely to apply fixative to radioactively contaminated walls. That will prepare the basin to be back filled with sand mixed with just enough grout to allow it to flow into the basin. "It hardens in a couple of days to a stiff sand," Lucas said. The sand will be used as a radiation shield and also as a platform for heavy equipment when demolition starts. Work then will shift to tearing down the above-ground portion of the building with heavy equipment. Fluor expects to have the building down in fiscal year 2008 and to return to removing the below-ground structure the next year. Shears mounted on heavy equipment will be used to cut into the sides of the pool, with sand and rubble removed until the debris boxes are exposed. They'll be hoisted out and put in larger boxes with more grout added. Fluor expects to have the basins removed by the end of fiscal year 2009. Most of the debris can be sent to the Environmental Disposal Restoration Facility in central Hanford, Pak said. The basin was to be removed six months ago under legal deadlines that were not revised after removal of sludge from the K East Basin fell behind schedule. But Hanford workers are proceeding now with demolition of the basin at "a reasonable rate," said Larry Gadbois, environmental scientist for the regulator on the project, the Environmental Protection Agency. © 2007 Tri-City Herald, Associated Press & Other Wire Services ***************************************************************** 52 Tri-City Herald: Battelle to replace contaminated cars, other items (about) Friday, October 26th, 2007 03:50 PDT JOHN TRUMBO, HERALD STAFF WRITER A minor radiation leak at Hanford's building 326 in June posed no threat to workers or their families, but Battelle spent about $28,000 to replace three employee cars and other items to get rid of any residual contamination. A small amount of plutonium 238 leaked from a sealed disc that was used in a series of experiments. Workers in the building who were contaminated moved to another building and drove their vehicles before the problem was discovered. A 2001 Volkswagen Passat, a 2002 Mazda Protege and a 1989 Mazda 323 sedan were found to have traces of radiation. Personal items including textbooks, music CDs, fishing gear, clothing, a wallet and cell phone also were contaminated. Battelle, which operates the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory for the Department of Energy, replaced the vehicles and personal items as a precaution even though the exposure was minimal, said Greg Koller, spokesman for the lab. Tests of the staff exposed to the contamination showed one individual received about 6 percent of the annual regulatory limit established by DOE, while other individuals had "considerably less" exposure, Koller said. "There were no health impacts. (Replacing the vehicles) was very precautionary," Koller said. "We didn't want the government or taxpayers to pay for any of this," he added. © 2007 Tri-City Herald, Associated Press & Other Wire Services ***************************************************************** 53 Knoxville News Sentinel: No plans for Tennessee River to quench Ga. By Andrew Eder (Contact) Friday, October 26, 2007 Atlanta’s mayor may covet Tennessee River water, but don’t expect Georgia to ask Tennessee for a straw anytime soon. The persistent drought in the Southeast has sapped federal reservoirs in northern Georgia, including Lake Lanier, which supplies Atlanta with water. The state estimates that the 38,000-acre reservoir is less than three months from being depleted. Atlanta Mayor Shirley Franklin has suggested piping in water from the Tennessee or Savannah rivers, but the state says that idea is not on the table. “The state of Georgia has no plans to pursue such an idea,†said Carol Couch, director of Georgia’s Environmental Protection Division. “If an idea like that were to be pursued, it would have to be done in the context of cooperative discussions between the two states.†Any transfer of Tennessee River water to another river basin would require approval from TVA, which manages the Tennessee River system. TVA spokesman John Moulton said any large transfers of water would initially affect the large tributary lakes that feed the main stem of the Tennessee River. “So, in an extremely dry year, water levels in those reservoirs would be even lower than they are now,†Moulton said. The tributary reservoirs are an average of 24 feet below normal levels for this time of year, according to TVA. Moulton said large water transfers could impact TVA’s ability to maintain the flows needed for water supplies, aquatic habitats, navigation, and cooling water for TVA’s coal and nuclear plants along the river. David Reece, a Knoxville-based senior vice president and regional manager for engineering firm Jordan, Jones & Goulding, said he thought it would be difficult for Atlanta to get relief from the Tennessee River without federal action. Georgia, Alabama and Florida, along with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, have been locked in a long-running dispute over a river basin shared by the three states. Ultimately, Reece said, there may need to be a federal water plan that looks at water supply issues on a countrywide basis to avoid those kinds of regional battles. Reece said the growing population in the Southeast has been driving the conflicts, and water supply issues could lead to more regionalized water systems. Either way, the drought has hammered home the fact that water will be a key issue for the region in years to come. “I believe this is a sign of a shift for the Southeast,†Reece said. Business writer Andrew Eder may be reached at 865-342-6318. © 2007, Knoxville News Sentinel Co. ***************************************************************** 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: *****************************************************************