***************************************************************** 10/31/07 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 15.256 ***************************************************************** RADBULL IS PRODUCED BY THE ABALONE ALLIANCE CLEARINGHOUSE ***************************************************************** Send News Stories to news@energy-net.org with title on subject line and first line of body NUCLEAR POLICY NUCLEAR REACTORS 1 IPS-English INDIA/US: Risking Survival Govt to Honour Nuke Deal 2 US: NRC: NRC Assigns New Senior Resident Inspector to Beaver Valley 3 US: MiamiHerald.com: FPL's guards slept on job at nuclear plant, fed 4 US: Grist: The Achilles heel of nuclear power | 5 AU: Star News Group: Meeting raises nuclear concerns - 6 US: NRC: NRC to Discuss Proposed Aircraft Impact Assessment Rule Nov 7 US: Harrisburg Patriot-News: Berwick nuclear plant Unit 1 restarted 8 US: pnj.com: Florida leaders join in tri-state water wars 9 IAEA: Asia Leads Way In Nuclear Power Development 10 US: toledo blade: Ex-worker guilty, contractor cleared in Davis-Bess 11 US: NRC: NRC’s William Travers to Become Advisor at The Internationa 12 US: Brattleboro Reformer: Energy forum nixes nukes, boosts renewable 13 US: Salt Lake Tribune: Emotional critic 14 US: The Courier: Entergy receives $48M from spent fuel lawsuit - 15 US: NRC: Notice of Issuance of Decommissioning Amendment for Cabot 16 US: NRC: Notice of Availability of Environmental Assessment and Find 17 DW: Germany Faces Shortage of Nuclear Safety Experts 18 US: NRC: Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards (ACRS) 19 US: NRC: In the Matter of NRG South Texas LP, STP Nuclear Operating 20 IHT: Sweden's Vattenfall loses 200,000 clients after nuclear plant i 21 WNN: Floating a nuclear power plant in Yakutia 22 UPI: India-U.S. hiccup may hurt power targets 23 Japan Times: Tepco faces rare red ink after nuke plant's halt | 24 US: TheDay.com: Back To The Drawing Board For Millstone 25 US: TheDay.com: NRC Finds Worker Was Discriminated Against At Millst 26 IHT: Nuclear ambitions fan controversy in Bulgaria - 27 Financial Post: TransCanada assessing viability of nuclear 28 Malaysia News: Japan nuclear operator sees red after quake - 29 IAEA: UN General Assembly Reaffirms Support for IAEA NUCLEAR SECURITY NUCLEAR SAFETY 30 Daily Yomiuri: Study: Nuclear attack now could kill, injure 832,000 31 US: The Spectrum: Left in the dark 32 US: ENS: U.S. Army Accused of Hiding Chemical Weapons Information NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE 33 AU ABC: ADF, Immigration Dept breached waste disposal conditions - r 34 sacbee.com: Clinton, Obama oppose nuclear facility in Nevada - 35 YubaNet.com: Boxer Opening Statement on "The Licensing Process for t 36 US: Carlsbad Current-Argus: Punitive fine sends wrong message 37 UK: Thisisdorset: Angry Plant Workers Quiz Group On 300 Job Losses 38 JOGJCC: Dounreay escapes NDA funding cuts - 39 US: NRC: Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste And Materials 40 Las Vegas SUN: Presidential politics on display at Senate Yucca 41 US: Minnesota Indian Tribe Calls on Congress to Solve Nuclear Waste 42 Las Vegas Now: U.S. Senate Holds Contentious Hearing Regarding Yucca 43 JOGJCC: Strip-out begins inside Dounreay dome - 44 Las Vegas SUN: Clinton, others weigh in against proposed Nevada 45 ReviewJournal.com: Presidential hopefuls try to 'out-Yucca' one 46 US: Buffalo News: Process could be key to reducing use of fossil fue PEACE 47 AFP: US speeding up anti-missile plans - Moscow - 48 RIA Novosti: Russia expects U.S. missile defense proposal in 49 US: SF Chronicle: War industry regains command 50 Reuters: North Korea's nuclear capabilities | U.S. | 51 UPI: Walker's World: The Indo-Pakistan hyphen 52 US: The Weekly Standard: A Mushroom Cloud Of Nuclear Defense Delays, 53 US: AFP: US missile defense negotiations 'on course'- Pentagon - US DEPT. OF ENERGY 54 DOE: DOE's National Renewable Energy Lab to Dramatically Increase 55 DOE: U.S. Department Of Energy Commends Industry Consortia for 56 Tri-City Herald: 'Umbrella' going over Hanford tank farm 57 Hanford News: Tri-Party agencies mum on meetings ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** FULL NEWS STORIES ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** 1 IPS-English INDIA/US: Risking Survival Govt to Honour Nuke Deal Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2007 13:46:17 -0800 Analysis by Praful Bidwai NEW DELHI, Oct 31 (IPS) - Caving in to intense pressure from Washington and from domestic business and strategic lobbies, India's Congress party-led coalition government is planning to push through the civilian nuclear cooperation deal with the United States in the teeth of strong political opposition. After a great deal of vacillation, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh has decided to take the next step in completing the deal by approaching the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to negotiate a special inspections (safeguards) agreement, according to well-placed sources in his Congress party, who insisted on anonymity. In doing so, Singh risks the collapse of his Congress-led United Progress Alliance (UPA) government, which is critically dependent on the support of the Left for a parliamentary majority. India's Left parties, which hold 60 seats in the 543-strong Lower House of Parliament, oppose the nuclear agreement tooth and nail. (The Congress has 145 seats, and its UPA allies under 70.) Singh's decision comes amidst extraordinarily high-powered lobbying by U.S. officials, including Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, Undersecretary of State R Nicholas Burns, and Ambassador to India David Mulford. Equally significantly, former secretary of state Henry A. Kissinger, and two influential former U.S. ambassadors to India, Frank Wisner and Robert Blackwill, have been in India urging the UPA to expedite the deal's passage. ”Add to this the pressure exerted by the U.S.-India CEOs' Forum meeting in Mumbai and the ‘Fortune' Global Forum in New Delhi, and the picture is complete,” says Achin Vanaik, a political scientist specialising in international relations at Delhi University. ”India has perhaps never before witnessed such concentrated heavy-handed lobbying on any issue.” ”However,'' adds Vanaik, ”it's not as if Singh will be able to easily overcome the domestic hurdles the deal faces. To do that, he will need the help of the principal opposition group, the pro- Hindu, right-wing Bharatiya Janata Party. And that means entering a tricky political terrain, with all manner of bad compromises.” Going by available indications, Singh intends to approach the IAEA in early December, immediately after the end of a brief Parliament session being convened between Nov. 15 and Dec. 7. The UPA government hopes that the IAEA will negotiate a unique safeguards agreement with India in record time. Armed with this, India expects that the U.S. will get the deal approved by the 45-nation Nuclear Suppliers' Group, which must make a special exception for India to its strict rules regulating nuclear commerce. The deal could then be taken up for ratification by the U.S. Congress early next year, before the Republican and Democratic primaries for the presidential election are completed and President George W. Bush becomes a total lame-duck. The Bush administration is said to be desperate to have the deal signed and sealed quickly not merely because it has invested a great deal of political capital in it, but also because it could present it in the national elections as the Republicans' sole foreign policy achievement -- in contrast to the Iraq and Afghanistan disasters. ”Clearly, the timetable for the deal's negotiation is being dictated by U.S. domestic political expediency, and not by the democratic debate in India,” argues M.V. Ramana, a physicist and nuclear affairs analyst based at the Centre for Interdisciplinary Studies in the Environment and Development in Bangalore. This became evident last week when Burns, a key negotiator in the deal, said time was running out to complete the agreement: ”One message that the U.S. is articulating very clearly to India is that this is an opportunity that doesn't come around often. They ought to take this opportunityŕit is smart to get it back to the Congress ŕ when they will have the time to look at it and not get it too deep into our election year.” Burns bluntly added that India will need to honour the deal if it wants to play ”a global leadership role ŕand enter a new era of relations with the U.S.” Kissinger too reiterated the same message by telling the Indian media that the deal's failure could affect Washington's future dealings with India because the American leadership will not be able to trust India or calculate how India will respond to future strategic overtures. There is a big domestic hitch, though. The UPA cannot avoid a discussion on the deal in the coming Parliament session. In that debate, a large number of political parties, led by the Left and a new regional grouping called the United National Progressive Alliance, are certain to oppose the deal. So the Congress party's only chance lies in neutralising the BJP, which is against the deal largely for opportunistic reasons --simply because it heads the opposition. Unlike the Left parties, which criticise the deal for its strategic implications in promoting a close security relationship with the U.S., the BJP wants a strategic partnership with Washington. The BJP says it opposes the deal in ”its present form”, not in principle. The U.S. is now attempting to bring about a rapprochement between the Congress and the BJP ű a move that is seen here as similar to what it did in Pakistan between President Gen. Pervez Musharraf and opposition leader Benazir Bhutto. Ambassador Mulford recently met BJP leaders including leader of the opposition L.K. Advani, party president Rajnath Singh, and former National Security Advisor Brajesh Mishra. Kissinger too met Advani to canvass support for the deal. It is not clear if the BJP will come around to backing the deal after having opposed it for two years as a ”sell-out of India's sovereignty and strategic independence.” Rajnath Singh told Mulford that the deal should give India the freedom to conduct further nuclear tests -- something Washington cannot possibly accept overtly. However, it is not ruled out that the generally pro-Western and pro-U.S. BJP will agree to a compromise such as supporting a vague ”sense-of-the-House” resolution in the deal's favour. But it is likely to demand a high political price for this. ”That will severely damage the credibility of the Congress,” says Vanaik. ”Even that may not be enough to dispel the impression within the international community that the deal does not enjoy strong domestic support, leave alone consensual backing. This could further embolden critics of the deal in the IAEA and the NSG.” The domestic consequences could be especially grave if the Congress' allies in the UPA strengthen their opposition to pushing the deal through at the risk of the government's collapse and imminent mid-term elections. They have repeatedly warned against early elections. Manmohan Singh's insistence on ramming the deal through is unlikely to be overwhelmingly supported by his own Congress party. His strategy could thus cause disarray in the Congress as well as the UPA, without ensuring the consummation of the agreement. Equally importantly, it will set a bad political precedent in signing long-term agreements with huge foreign policy, security and energy security implications without a transparent domestic debate leading to a strong consensus. ***** + INDIA/US: Nuke Deal May Trigger Mid-Term Polls (http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=39366) + Nuclear Ambitions - IPS Special Coverage (http://www.ipsnews.net/new_focus/nuclear/index.asp) (END/IPS/AP/WD/IP/NU/IF/CO/PB/RDR/07) = 10311802 ORP009 NNNN ***************************************************************** 2 NRC: NRC Assigns New Senior Resident Inspector to Beaver Valley News Release - Region I - 2007-056 - U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs, Region I 475 Allendale Road, King of Prussia, Pa. 19406 www.nrc.gov CONTACT: Diane Screnci (610) 337-5330 Neil A. Sheehan (610) 337-5331 E-mail: opa1@nrc.gov Nuclear Regulatory Commission officials in King of Prussia, Pa., have promoted David Werkheiser to Senior Resident Inspector at the Beaver Valley nuclear power plant in Shippingport, Pa. The two-unit site is operated by FirstEnergy. Werkheiser first joined the NRC in April 2003 as a reactor inspector in the Region I Division of Reactor Safety in King of Prussia, Pa. He has been the Resident Inspector at Beaver Valley since May 2006. Resident inspectors can serve up to seven years at any one site. "Dave Werkheiser has the experience and commitment to safety that will help the NRC ensure that Beaver Valley conducts operations with the highest safety standards to protect public health and safety," said NRC Region I Administrator Samuel J. Collins. Prior to joining the NRC, Werkheiser was an NRC-licensed senior reactor operator at Penn State’s Breazeale Nuclear Reactor. He also served in the United States Navy for nearly nine years, including an assignment as a nuclear-qualified engineering supervisor aboard the USS Hawkbill at Pearl Harbor, Hi. Werkheiser earned bachelor’s and master’s degrees in nuclear engineering from Pennsylvania State University. He also completed a U.S. Department of Energy Graduate Fellowship. Each U.S. commercial nuclear plant has at least two NRC resident inspectors. They serve as the agency's eyes and ears at the facility, conducting inspections, monitoring major work projects and interacting with plant workers and the public. ====================================================================== 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. Privacy Policy | Site Disclaimer Wednesday, October 31, 2007 ***************************************************************** 3 MiamiHerald.com: FPL's guards slept on job at nuclear plant, feds say - 10/31/2007 - Guards from Wackenhut have been accused of dozing on duty at the Turkey Point nuclear plant, the third such national incident regulators have made public recently. BY CURTIS MORGAN cmorgan@MiamiHerald.com Security guards at Florida Power & Light's Turkey Point nuclear power plant slept on the job, or covered for snoozing colleagues, on a number of occasions from 2004 to 2006, federal regulators said Tuesday. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission, in letters sent to FPL and Wackenhut Nuclear Services, said its investigators had ``substantiated that security officers were willfully inattentive to duty or served as look-outs such that other security officers could be inattentive while on duty.'' The naps have been classified as ''apparent violations'' until FPL and Wackenhut, which provides security for FPL's nuclear plants at Turkey Point in Miami-Dade County and in St. Lucie County, can formally respond to the investigation. Roger Hannah, a spokesman for the NRC's regional office in Atlanta, said the agency takes security concerns ``very seriously.'' Dozing guards have become a hot-button issue for the industry in recent months. Turkey Point is the third case the NRC has made public since a whistle-blowing guard earlier this year caught fellow Wackenhut officers on videotape sleeping at a Pennsylvania nuclear plant. But, Hannah stressed, ``we don't have a problem with security now at Turkey Point. This is something that appears to have been addressed by the licensee.'' FPL, which last month announced it intends to add two new reactors to Turkey Point by 2025, defended security at the plant along Biscayne Bay near Homestead. All six Wackenhut guards involved have been denied access to the facility, said April Schilpp, FPL's senior manager for nuclear communications. The utility also stepped up company oversight there. ''FPL's position is that nothing is more important to our nuclear power plant operations than protecting the health and safety of the public,'' Schilpp said. ``We don't tolerate inappropriate behavior from security officers or anyone who has unescorted access to our plants.'' Wackenhut Nuclear Services, which guards nearly half the nation's nuclear plants, did not return a call to corporate offices in Palm Beach Gardens on Tuesday. `INATTENTIVE TO DUTY' The NRC, citing security concerns, did not provide details or a specific number of incidents, but said the problems involved multiple guards who were ''willfully inattentive to duty [sleeping] at times'' from 2004 to 2006. Investigators said five officers admitted to sleeping on separate occasions and one was observed by other guards sleeping several times. Two others admitted to playing look-out at least once for fellow guards. One officer in a ''vital area'' also was caught ''inattentive'' on duty in April 2006 by an NRC inspector. The NRC defines ''inattentive'' as sleeping, just closing one's eyes or simply not paying attention, Hannah said. The agency's letter said the incidents created the potential for security breaches, because officers were not able to maintain continuous communication in each manned station. Under NRC protocol, the companies have 30 days to contest findings, explain corrective steps or ask for outside mediation. Companies also can face fines if violations are upheld. The NRC and utilities have stepped up security at the nation's nuclear power plants since the terrorist attacks on Sept. 11, 2001. Sparked by rising oil prices and concern over global warming gases from fossil fuels, the nuclear industry is proposing to build 32 new reactors across the nation in coming decades. The anticipated expansion has heightened critics' concerns about reactor security and growing nuclear waste stockpiles. OTHER INCIDENTS It isn't the first time that the performance of Wackenhut employees, which work at 30 of the nation's 64 nuclear facilities, has been questioned. In March, tests on a Turkey Point reactor shut down for refueling revealed a small hole that had been mysteriously drilled in a cooling system. Despite a $100,000 reward and hundreds of interviews, the FBI has not identified a suspect. A former Wackenhut security guard was charged last year with stealing a semiautomatic rifle and a thermal sight from the St. Lucie plant. In April 2004, FPL also barred six guards from St. Lucie after an audit found they took shortcuts during fire inspections. Last month, The New York Times and other media reported that the Exelon Corp., which operates the Peach Bottom plant in Pennsylvania, where some dozen guards were videotaped sleeping, intends to fire Wackenhut. In August, an NRC inspector also caught a guard sleeping at the entrance of a nuclear power plant in Indian Point, N.Y. Schilpp said Turkey Point's elaborate security measures can't be compromised by a few negligent guards. But, she said, ''given recent issues'' FPL ``was looking closely at its relationship with the company.'' ''We have really high standards and expectations of performance for our security guards,'' Schilpp said. ``We expect world-class services from all of our contractors, and Wackenhut is no exception.'' * Copyright 1996-2007 The Miami Herald Media Company| ***************************************************************** 4 Grist: The Achilles heel of nuclear power | Gristmill: The environmental news blog | Nuclear plants require lots of water in an increasingly dry world Posted by Joseph Romm at 11:33 PM on 30 Oct 2007 No, I don't mean cost, safety, waste, or proliferation -- though those are all serious problems. I mean the Achilles heel of nuclear power in the context of climate change: water. Climate change means water shortages in many places and hotter water everywhere. Both are big problems for nukes: ... nuclear power is the most water-hungry of all energy sources, with a single reactor consuming 35-65 million litres of water each day. The Australians, stuck in a once-in-a-1000-years drought, understandably worry about this a lot: Operating a 2,400 Watt fan heater for one hour consumes 0.01 litres of water if wind is the energy source, 0.26 litres if solar is the energy source, 4.5 litres if coal is the energy source, or 5.5 litres if nuclear power is the energy source. Hotter water is another serious worry. Nuclear power "requires great amounts of cool water to keep reactors operating at safe temperatures. That is worrying if the rivers and reservoirs which many power plants rely on for water are hot or depleted because of steadily rising air temperatures," International Herald Tribune earlier this year. During the extreme heat of 2003 in France, 17 nuclear reactors operated at reduced capacity or were turned off. Patrice Lambert de Diesbach, an energy analyst at CM-CIC Securities in Paris, said hot summers were the problem. "We are up against the maximum amount of hot water that can be released into rivers," Diesbach said. "Unfortunately the situation is only going to get worse." Indeed, if we stay on our current emissions trajectory, more than half of European summers will be hotter than 2003 within the next four decades, according to a Nature by British scientists from Oxford University and the Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction and Research. By the end of the century, "2003 would be classed as an anomalously cold summer relative to the new climate," the study notes. I think that nuclear power could realistically provide no more than one "wedge" of the 10 or more wedge-sized climate solutions we need to avoid climate catastrophe. And if we don't avoid catastrophe, nuclear may find itself fizzling out as an energy strategy. This post was created for ClimateProgress.org, a project of the Center for American Progress Action Fund. ©2007. Grist Magazine, Inc. All rights reserved. Gloom and doom with ***************************************************************** 5 AU: Star News Group: Meeting raises nuclear concerns - 1st November 2007 09:53:18 AM Speakers raise issues about nuclear power at a public meeting last week. WESTERNPORT residents gathered last week over their concern about nuclear power coming to the bay. Organised by the Westernport Action Group (WAG), the public meeting in Mornington provided vital information on the potential for a nuclear power reactor in the area. Guest speaker Jim Green of Friends of the Earth said a nuclear reactor in the area would result in compulsory land acquisitions and the inability of residents to insure against nuclear incidents. He also gave examples of cases where the prices of properties near nuclear plants had fallen so low that the local councils had changed the names of suburbs. Greens candidate for Flinders Bob Brown and Labor candidate for Flinders Gary March also spoke, answered questions and listened to the concerns of community members. They, along with Greens candidate for Holt Lynette Keleher also acknowledged that nuclear power was not greenhouse friendly, and that nuclear power stations used massive amounts of water in the electricity generation process. The meeting highlighted the attitudes and policy differences regarding nuclear power and uranium mining of the political candidates. However, residents were disappointed that their federal members did not attend. Australian Conservation Foundation guest speaker Mr Dave Sweeney spoke about the urgency surrounding the issues of an expansion of uranium mining and export, saying that uranium mining resulted in radioactive waste. Copyright 2006 Star News Group ***************************************************************** 6 NRC: NRC to Discuss Proposed Aircraft Impact Assessment Rule November 15 in Rockville, Md News Release - 2007-143 - NRC NEWS 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 will hold a public meeting Nov. 15 in Rockville, Md., to discuss the need for designers of new reactors to assess the level of built-in protection a particular reactor design has to avoid or reduce the effects of a large commercial aircraft impact. The meeting on the proposed rule will run from 9:00 a.m. until noon in the Commissioners’ Conference Room, on the first floor of the NRC’s One White Flint North building, 11555 Rockville Pike. The public is invited to participate and ask questions throughout the meeting at designated points in the agenda, available on the NRC’s Public Meeting Schedule Web page: http://www.nrc.gov/public-involve/public-meetings/index.cfm. In order to ensure enough meeting materials are available, those interested in attending are asked to contact NRC staff members Stewart Schneider at 301-415-4123 or George Tartal at 301-415-0016 by Nov. 9. If special accommodations such as a sign language interpreter are required, please contact one of these staffers by Nov. 2. The public can also access the meeting via a toll-free teleconference; contact Schneider or Tartal after Nov. 12 for the telephone number and passcode. The meeting will be transcribed and posted on the NRC’s Web site through the agency’s electronic document database, ADAMS. The proposed rule may be viewed and downloaded via the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov. Participants may provide informal comments at the meeting, but the NRC will only respond to written comments submitted by Dec 17. Comments can be mailed to Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555–0001, ATTN: Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff. Comments can be e-mailed to SECY@nrc.gov. If you fail to receive a reply e-mail confirming receipt of your comments, please call (301) 415-1966. Comments can also be submitted online at the Federal eRulemaking Portal. Comments can be hand-delivered to 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Md., between 7:30 a.m. and 4:15 p.m. on federal workdays, or faxed to Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission at (301) 415-1101. Please includeRIN 3150-AI19 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. Wednesday, October 31, 2007 ***************************************************************** 7 Harrisburg Patriot-News: Berwick nuclear plant Unit 1 restarted - PennLive.com The Associated Press, 10/31/07 3:15 PM EDT BERWICK — Things are back to normal at PPL’s Susquehanna Nuclear Power Plant near Berwick following a shutdown of one unit for planned maintenance. Unit 1 was shut down for more than two weeks. It’s generating power again after being restarted Tuesday. PPL says it chose this time for maintenance because it’s the time of year when the least electricity is used. Unit 2 operated normally during the shutdown. PennLive.com | Site Index | Home | News | Forums | Blogs | Sports | The Patriot News | The Express-Times © 2007 PennLive LLC. All Rights Reserved. Use of this site ***************************************************************** 8 pnj.com: Florida leaders join in tri-state water wars Lawmakers Florida U.S. representatives who have signed on to a letter urging House and Senate leaders to block Georgia's effort to limit water flow into Florida's Apalachicola River include: Rep. Corrine Brown, D-Jacksonville Rep. Kathy Castor, D-Tampa Rep. Ander Crenshaw, R-Jacksonville Rep. Alcee Hastings, D-Fort Lauderdale Rep. Kendrick Meek, D-Miami Rep. Jeff Miller, R-Chumuckla Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, D-Pembroke Pines Rep. Robert Wexler, D-Boca Raton More are expected to sign on. Published - October, 31, 2007 Representatives urge Congress not to limit water flow to Apalachicola Eun Kyung Kim News Journal Washington bureau WASHINGTON — Florida's congressional delegation urged House and Senate leaders Tuesday to block an effort by drought-stricken Georgia to limit water flow into Florida's Apalachicola River. Squeezing water flow would severely harm the river and Apalachicola Bay, both of which support Florida's environment and economy, lawmakers wrote in a letter to Democratic and Republican leaders. Empowering Georgia to "suspend environmental laws unilaterally at the expense of a downstream state's ecology and economy cannot be justified in any circumstance," they wrote in a letter signed by Florida's two senators, Democrat Bill Nelson and Republican Mel Martinez, as well as more than a half dozen U.S. representatives. Earlier this month, Georgia's governor asked the White House and a federal judge to reduce the minimum flow into the Apalachicola by 60 percent or more. The water flows from the Chattahoochee River, which supplies drinking water for much of Atlanta's suburbs. The water also is used to cool off a nuclear reactor in Alabama, a coal plant in Florida and helps supports a multimillion-dollar commercial fishing industry in the Panhandle. Nelson, Martinez and their Senate counterparts from Georgia and Alabama are expected to meet Thursday on Capitol Hill with the governors from their states to discuss the water fight, a battle that has lasted nearly two decades. Republican Gov. Charlie Crist was expected to be there, although his press secretary would not confirm his schedule. Last week, Crist wrote President Bush to urge him against granting Georgia's request. He said reduced inflows already have jeopardized the commercial markets. "Further reductions would only hasten the decline of this important component of Florida's economy," he wrote in the letter. Florida's delegation also voiced opposition to a pair of bills introduced by Georgia lawmakers that would suspend protections under the Endangered Species Act to curb freshwater flow into the Apalachicola. "I don't think you can have a federal policy that favors any one state in the sharing of vital resources," Nelson said in a statement. "We must take into account the need for drinking water, energy supply and agriculture." Rep. Allen Boyd, D-Monticello, called the Georgia effort "knee-jerk legislation." "The water supply problems in Georgia did not happen overnight, and they certainly are not exclusive to Georgia," he said. "We must work together toward a measured, adaptive, and reasonable solution to address our water-sharing challenges." Copyright © 2007 The Pensacola News Journal. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 9 IAEA: Asia Leads Way In Nuclear Power Development Japan, South Korea, China and India Driving Present Global Nuclear Power Expansion Staff report 30 October 2007 Growing energy demand is one of the factors driving nuclear power development in Asia. (Photo: Hong Kong Tourism Board) With 18 of the 31 reactors now being built located in Asia and more in the planning, Asian nations are at the forefront of the renewed interest in nuclear power generation according to the findings of a newly-released IAEA report. The "Energy, Electricity and Nuclear Power for the period up to 2030" report identifies countries such as Japan, South Korea, China and India as the center of the present global nuclear power expansion. Commenting on the report´s findings, IAEA Nuclear Energy Analyst Alan McDonald said that factors such as growing energy demand, energy security and environmental concerns are driving the Asian nuclear power expansion. "China and India have booming economies, booming populations, growing energy demand. They basically need to develop all the energy sources they can. Right now, nuclear electricity is only a small percentage, 2% in China, 3% of electricity in India. But China plans a five-fold increase by 2020 and India plans an eight-fold increase by 2022," he said. "In Japan and South Korea the problem is not so much booming populations as a lack of indigenous oil and gas resources, and so for them nuclear is attractive for energy security reasons and also, in particular in Japan, for reducing greenhouse gas emissions." Several other Asian countries either have plans to expand their nuclear power capacity, enter the nuclear arena for the first time, or have expressed the intention of doing so. Pakistan plans to build new reactors adding to its existing fleet of two units, while Vietnam intends to begin construction of its first nuclear power plant in 2015. Indonesia plans to build two 1000MW reactors in central Java while Thailand´s Energy Generating Authority has recently announced plans to build two large nuclear plants, with construction to begin in 2015. In Malaysia, a comprehensive energy policy study, including consideration of nuclear power, is to be completed by 2010. Background: The IAEA´s latest projections estimate global nuclear-generated electricity growth to 2030 to be between 25 and 93 per cent. At the high end, this amounts to an average growth rate of about 2.5% per year. "We certainly don´t today have a renaissance in construction but we very much do have a renaissance in interest," commented Mr. McDonald. At the close of 2006, the 435 operating nuclear reactors located in 30 countries provided about 15% of total electricity worldwide. See Story Resources for more information. Copyright ©, International Atomic Energy Agency, P.O. Box 100, Wagramer Strasse 5, A-1400 Vienna, Austria Telephone (+431) 2600-0; Facsimilie (+431) 2600-7; E-mail: ***************************************************************** 10 toledo blade: Ex-worker guilty, contractor cleared in Davis-Besse case Article published Tuesday, October 30, 2007 BLADE STAFF One former Davis-Besse worker was found guilty this afternoon and another was acquitted of lying to the government about the nuclear plant’s dangerous condition in the fall of 2001. Engineer David Geisen, a former FirstEnergy employee, was found guilty of three of five charges against him while Rodney Cook, a contractor, was acquitted of the four charges he faced. The two men were prosecuted together in U.S. District in downtown Toledo. Andrew Siemaszko, also an engineer, is expected to stand trial at a later date. The three men had each faced up to five years in prison and separate $250,000 fines. They were accused of having a role in assembling paperwork that FirstEnergy Corp. lawyers and executives used over a three-month period in late 2001 to make the utility’s case for keeping the plant operating. Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff members had suspected something was amiss with the plant, which is 30 miles east of Toledo and along the Lake Erie shoreline. They wanted it shut down for inspection no later than Dec. 31, 2001. Three weeks after the plant was finally shut down on Feb. 16, 2002, officials learned they may have dodged a huge radioactive accident — if not a catastrophe — by a mere two-tenths of an inch, the width of a pencil eraser. That’s all that was left of the nuclear reactor’s massive steel lid in one footprint-shaped area when the real threat was discovered on March 6, 2002. Officials learned that uncontrolled acid had burned through everything but the stainless steel liner. And that liner was starting to crack and bulge. Follow-up lab tests showed it was weeks away from bursting, if that long. © 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 ***************************************************************** 11 NRC: NRC’s William Travers to Become Advisor at The International Atomic Energy Agency News Release - 2007-144 - 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 William D. Travers, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s Regional Administrator for Region II in Atlanta, has been selected to serve at the International Atomic Energy Agency's (IAEA) headquarters in Vienna. He will provide valuable regulatory expertise to assist in the IAEA's nuclear safety and security mission. Travers will be the Senior Technical Advisor to the IAEA’s Deputy Director General, Tomihiro Taniguchi, in the areas of safety and security policy as well as a variety of technical issues. In particular, he will advise on the planning and implementation of the Integrated Regulatory Review Service (IRRS) program, provide guidance to countries starting or expanding nuclear power programs, and work to advance a strong safety/security interface in IAEA activities. This position is part of the IAEA's cost-free expert program, which enables highly qualified personnel to serve in temporary appointments for the mutual benefit of the IAEA and its member states. From 1998-2004, Travers served as the NRC’s Executive Director for Operations. During this time, he also served as the agency's representative member on the IAEA's Commission on Safety Standards. Travers joined the NRC in 1976 as a radiological physicist and has held positions of increasing responsibility in a variety of offices, including Chief of the Emergency Preparedness Branch, Deputy Associate Director for Advanced Reactors and License Renewal, and Director of the Special Projects Office in the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation; Director of the Spent Fuel Project Office in the Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards; and Deputy Executive Director for Regulatory Effectiveness in Office of the Executive Director for Operations. Travers received his bachelor’s degree from Purdue University in 1972. He completed his graduate studies in Radiation Health Physics and Nuclear Engineering as an Atomic Energy Commission and David Ross Fellow, and received his doctorate from Purdue in 1976. In 2005, he was awarded the rank of Distinguished Executive by President George W. Bush. 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. Wednesday, October 31, 2007 ***************************************************************** 12 Brattleboro Reformer: Energy forum nixes nukes, boosts renewables BRATTLEBORO, VT By PAUL H. HEINTZ, Reformer Staff Wednesday, October 31 SPRINGFIELD -- Vermont's energy future should be powered by a variety of renewable and environmentally sound sources -- and not by Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant. Such was the consensus of the 175 Windham and Windsor county residents who took part Monday night in the fourth of five forums held throughout the state this month by the Department of Public Service. The "Vermont's Energy Future" forums, according to its organizers, are meant to gauge public opinion as DPS, the Legislature and state utility companies plot a path forward as contracts providing for two- thirds of Vermont's electricity supply expire between 2012 and 2016. "There are no perfect solutions, and this is the sort of thing we ponder every day at the department," DPS commissioner David O'Brien said at the start of a four-hour session, which included interactive polling, discussion groups and a question and answer session with a panel of experts. With wireless keypads reminiscent of those used by audience members in "Who Wants to be a Millionaire," forum participants voted on a series of questions relating to electricity sources and were shown the answers on a projection screen immediately after they voted. The crowd at Springfield's Howard Dean Technical Center, which included many politically involved Windham County residents, voted overwhelmingly in favor of increasing the percentage of renewable and in-state power sources. Seventy-one percent of participants felt either strongly or very strongly that the state should not continue purchasing power from Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant if it remains open after 2012. At the same time, 76 percent felt strongly or very strongly that the state should continue purchasing power from Hydro-Quebec, which currently provides 27 percent of Vermont's electricity. Sixty-five percent felt Vermont's electricity should be produced either mostly or entirely in-state, 87 percent felt the state should increase funding for energy efficiency measures, and 56 percent felt strongly or very strongly that electricity should be produced by a greater number of decentralized facilities. While participants in the Springfield forum seemed to be mostly in agreement with one another, DPS officials cautioned that attendees were likely not representative of state residents at large. "If you look at these regional workshops, they tend to be people who are self-selecting," said DPS spokesman Stephen Wark. To counter that, he said, the department is conducting deliberative polling this weekend, during which it will quiz a "random sample" of 200 Vermonters at a Burlington hotel over the course of two days. "Our hope is to take the two processes and combine them so we know what activist Vermonters want and what mainstream Vermonters want," Wark said. According to demographic data collected at the start of the program, many of the participants said they held graduate degrees, 67 percent were between 50 and 70 years old, and 48 percent identified themselves as Democrats. While 28 percent said they root for the New England Patriots, 53 percent said they do not care about football. "In terms of thinking about some of the decisions we're going to make, my responsibility as public service commissioner is what is in the overall best interest of the state," O'Brien said. "So I need to look at what sort of representative sample we're getting at the workshops and just take that as a consideration." Participants spent an hour in small groups led by a facilitator brainstorming questions to ask a panel of four industry experts. The conversation within one such group, Table 15, appeared typical of the discussions. "Price and reliability -- those are the two things that will determine whether business will be competitive," said Dave Winslow of Springfield. Brattleboro resident Janice Baldwin told the group she was attending the forum because she found Vermont Yankee "scary" and was most interested in increasing energy efficiency. Many in the group expressed alarm about how little time remains before the Vermont Yankee and Hydro-Quebec contracts begin to expire, and they wondered who exactly would choose the direction in which the state will move. "I'm concerned we're going to be backed into a corner because we have no other options," said Melissa Post of Chester. Bellows Falls resident John Fuchs said that while all available options come with their costs, investing in renewables now might be the wisest approach. "The stuff that makes the most sense long-term is expensive now. The stuff that makes the most sense short-term will be the most expensive in the future," he said. When the groups reconvened, each was allowed to ask one question of a panel including DPS planner Dave Lamont, former DPS commissioner Richard Sedano, Central Vermont Public Service resource planner Bruce Bentley and Vermont Public Power Supply Authority planner Patricia Richards. Many of the questions focused on similar elements, ranging from concerns about climate change and other externalities to support for subsidizing renewable energy sources and promoting net-metering and distributed generation. While some on the panel said the point of the forum was to gauge what sort of power supplies Vermonters favored, they also cautioned that the most appealing sources may not provide adequate electricity -- and that even if they did, the cost could be high. Many participants came away from the forum feeling optimistic about their contribution to the discussion, though cautiously so. "I hope our feedback has an impact on the decision made. I tend to be a little cynical, but I hope I did," said Jane Michaud of Brattleboro. "I've been to some Entergy forums and they do seem like dog and pony shows when the (Nuclear Regulatory Commission) shows up. But I'm hopeful our input makes a difference." "I think they made a good effort to include the public in this decision-making process. It's not perfect, but I hope they take the results seriously and incorporate them into their plans," said Paul Cameron, director of Brattleboro Climate Protection. "I think they're making a good faith effort to listen to the public, but the public needs to hold them to it." Paul Heintz can be reached at pheintz@reformer.com or 802-254-2311, ext. 275. ***************************************************************** 13 Salt Lake Tribune: Emotional critic Public Forum Letter Article Last Updated: 10/30/2007 06:49:06 PM MDT I find it ironic that Republican state Reps. Aaron Tilton and Mike Noel claim their critics are emotional and unknowledgeable about the nuclear power-generating industry. Too bad that all they see is using public tax dollars for their personal gains and benefits, such that they can deliberately deceive the public about not having a conflict of interest. Two questions this emotional critic has: Where is the water for reactor cooling going to come from since we live in desert? Why am I getting all the responsibility as a Utah taxpayer to pay for and store the waste, but none of the power? Is it because Utah generates more power than we actually use? Cindy King Salt Lake City ***************************************************************** 14 The Courier: Entergy receives $48M from spent fuel lawsuit - Russellville, Ark. 201 East Second St P.O. Box 887 Russellville, AR 72811-0887 Thursday, November 1, 2007 THE COURIER / Joshua Mashon This metal pellet is the same size as the uranium pellets used to fuel ANO. Each fuel assembly contains 84,960 pellets. These are 177 fuel assemblies in each reactor. Department of Energy’s saga in failing to open Yucca Mountain continues; more delays could cost taxpayers in more suit settlements By Scott Perkins/ Editor Entergy Corp., a New Orleans-based company and the owner/operator of Arkansas Nuclear One (ANO) near Russellville, was awarded $48.7 million because the Department of Energy (DOE) failed to open Yucca Mountain, a nuclear waste storage facility located in Nevada, by the contract deadline. The U.S. Court of Federal Claims released its decision last week. ANO has been storing its own spent fuel since December 1996 for Unit 1 and April 1997 for Unit 2. Entergy filed suit against the department for breaking a contractual agreement to pick up spent fuel from its Russellville plant by 1998. “We’re pleased with the outcome and continue to access the details,” said Yolanda Pollard, director of corporate media relations for Entergy Corp. “Any decision is subject to appeal from the Department of Energy. We can’t speculate to any future impact at this time.” The department has 60 days to file an appeal with the U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C. “The court determined the cost when figuring the $48 million and that figure is based on the cost of improvements on site necessary to store spent fuel, including dry-fuel storage pads and casts through mid-2006, as well as other plant modifications in order to store spent fuel,” said Pollard, who has worked for Entergy for about 13 years. “ANO will continue to load dry fuel storage casts on site until the DOE picks it up.” About 60 lawsuits have been filed against the DOE by various companies and a handful of cases have already been decided, according to Pollard. “Entergy filed on behalf of all of its nuclear plants, with the exception of Palisades in Michigan, which Entergy acquired this year,” Pollard said. Pollard said Entergy received a $10.1 million ruling for Grand Gulf in Mississippi, which is also subject to appeal. ANO began operation 33 years ago and was originally designed to accomodate spent-fuel storage in temporary pools. According to the Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management’s (CRWM) Web site, spent fuel removed from nuclear reactors is placed in a special pool of water contained in a steel-lined concrete basin, where the water cools the spent fuel. Some commercial power plants and government facilities move the fuel after it has cooled to dry-storage containers made of steel and/or concrete to shield radiation, according to the Web site. The containers are either placed upright on concrete pads, or stored horizontally in metal canisters in concrete bunkers. This type of long-term storage is also called dry-cask storage. “Current storage methods shield any harmful radiation and are presently safe,” according to the Web site. “However, modern aboveground storage structures are designed for temporary storage only, and will not withstand rain, wind, and other environmental factors for the tens of thousands of years during which the waste will be hazardous.” The Yucca Moutain project is a geologic repository that will store nuclear waste for a period of about 10,000 years, according to the Web site. The waste, in solid form, will be buried deep underground, and the surrounding rock and dirt will shield people and the environment from the radition, according to the Web site. Current plans call for submitting an application to obtain a license for the facility from the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission no later than June 30, 2008, according to the Web site. CRWM Director Edward Sproat III told the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Energy and Water in March 2007 that the projected opening date of the facility is March 2017. This projected opening date is assuming all regulatory bodies grant approval for the project and there is no further legal action pursued by opponents of the project. Uranium fuel overview Fuel used at ANO consists of ceramic uranium fuel pellets installed inside airtight fuel rods. Fuel rods numbering 236 are bundled together to form a fuel assembly. About 360 slate-colored uranium pellets about the size of the last joint of an adult’s little finger are installed inside 15-foot long, silver-looking, zirconium-alloy fuel rods. The core of each ANO reactor is loaded with 177 fuel assemblies. Each fuel assembly is 15 feet long, about 8 inches in diameter and contains 84,960 fuel pellets. In all, the 177 fuel assemblies contain about 15.9 million fuel pellets. Each fuel pellet possesses energy equal to149 gallons of oil or nearly a ton of coal. Fuel assemblies are used for about four and a half years before they are placed in temporary, onsite storage facilities designed specifically for safe storage of spent nuclear fuel. Entergy Corp. is the second-largest U.S. operator of nuclear reactors and operates 12 reactors in eight states. How much fuel? According to Phil Fisher, senior communications specialist at ANO, the plant has 53 dry cask spent fuel storage containers in use. Additional figures include: n Spent fuel assemblies stored in dry cask storage containers — 1,368 n Spent fuel storage capacity in Unit 1 spent fuel pool — 907 n Spent fuel storage capacity in Unit 2 spent fuel pool — 915 n Spent fuel assemblies currently stored in Arkansas Nuclear One’s Unit 1 pool — 643 n Spent fuel assemblies currently stored in Arkansas Nuclear One’s Unit 2 pool — 581. Copyright 2007 Russellville Newspapers, Inc. ***************************************************************** 15 NRC: Notice of Issuance of Decommissioning Amendment for Cabot Corporation FR Doc E7-21428 [Federal Register: October 31, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 210)] [Notices] [Page 61692-61693] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr31oc07-133] NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket No. 40-9027] The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has approved the Cabot Corporation (Cabot) decommissioning plan (DP) for the Reading site by amendment to their Source Material License, SMC-1562. The Reading site is located in Reading, PA, near the Buttonwood Street bridge. The site operated intermittently between April 1967 and May 1969 for the production of niobium by extraction from tin slag feedstock. The main processing building was removed from the license in August 1995 by license amendment. The licensee first submitted a DP for the Reading site on August 28, 1998 (Accession No. 9809140068). The submittal was revised in March 2000 to reflect revised dose modeling scenarios and in June 2005 (ML051330369, ML051330364) to incorporate a rip-rap erosion barrier. Revision 3 to the DP was submitted later in June 2005, to reflect changes to the rip-rap design after licensee consultation with the City of Reading Redevelopment Authority (ML053560277). The licensee submitted revision 4 of the Reading site DP and related documents to the NRC for review and approval in August 2006, (Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) accession numbers ML062360159, ML062360164, and ML062210261) as supplemented on September 21, 2006 (ADAMS accession number ML062640081). This amendment revised the rip-rap cover design and include cover design analysis. An environmental assessment was completed on October 16, 2007 (ML072390296). The NRC approved the DP by Amendment No. 9 to the Source Material License SMC-1562 on October 24, 2007. A ``Notice of Consideration of Amendment Request for Decommissioning the Cabot Performance Materials, Reading, Pennsylvania, Site, and Opportunity for a Hearing'' was published in the Federal Register on October 28, 1998 (63 FR 57715). Two parties requested hearings; Jobert Trucking and the City of Reading Redevelopment Authority. Jobert Trucking was denied standing by the court on May 16, 2000 (ADAMS ML003715331) and the Redevelopment Authority request to withdraw hearing [[Page 61693]] petition was granted on October 31, 2000 (ML003765068). Copies of the license amendments approving Cabot's proposed decommissioning plan are available for public inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room (PDR), located at One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland 20855- 2738. The NRC maintains ADAMS, which provides text and image files of NRC's public documents. The amendment may be accessed electronically from the ADAMS Public Electronic Reading Room on the Internet at the NRC Web site, http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html under ADAMS accession number ML072420136. Persons who do not have access to ADAMS, or have problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS, may contact the NRC PDR Reference staff by phone at 1-800-397-4209, 301- 415-4737, or by e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 24th day of October, 2007. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission Andrew Persinko, Branch Chief, Reactor Decommissioning Branch, Division of Waste Management and Environmental Protection, Office of Federal and State Materials and Environmental Management Programs. [FR Doc. E7-21428 Filed 10-30-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P ***************************************************************** 16 NRC: Notice of Availability of Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact for License Amendment for Crow Butte Resources, Inc., Crawford, NE FR Doc E7-21429 [Federal Register: October 31, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 210)] [Notices] [Page 61693-61694] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr31oc07-134] NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket No. 40-8943] AGENCY: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. ACTION: Notice of availability. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stephen J. Cohen, Project Manager, Uranium Recovery Licensing Branch, Division of Waste Management and Environmental Protection, Office of Federal and State Materials and Environmental Management Programs, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001. Telephone: (301) 415-7182; fax number: (301) 415-5369; e-mail: sjc7@nrc.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Introduction The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is issuing a license amendment to Material License No. SUA-1534, issued to Crow Butte Resources, Inc. (the licensee), to authorize an upgrade to the central processing plant (CPP) and an increase in the CPP flow rate at its main in situ leach (ISL) facility near Crawford, Nebraska. NRC has prepared an Environmental Assessment (EA) in support of this amendment in accordance with the requirements of 10 CFR Part 51. Based on the EA, the NRC has concluded that a Finding of No Significant Impact is appropriate. The amendment will be issued following the publication of this Notice. II. EA Summary The purpose of the proposed amendment is to authorize an upgrade to the CPP and increase the plant flow rate at the licensee's Crawford, Nebraska, facility. Specifically, the licensee is authorized to install a maximum of six ion exchange columns and four ancillary tanks that would support a plant flow rate increase of 4,000 gallons per minute (gpm). The total allowable plant flow rate will increase to 9,000 gpm. On October 17, 2006, the licensee requested that NRC approve the proposed amendment. The staff has prepared the EA in support of the proposed license amendment. The staff considered impacts to water resources, public and occupational exposures, socio-economic conditions, endangered and threatened fauna and flora, historic and cultural resources, geology, soils, transportation, and air quality. This licensing action involves installing new equipment within the existing footprint of the CPP. Consequently, no building construction or surface disturbance is required to implement this action. Furthermore, the licensee will not open any new wellfields as a result of this licensing action, beyond those currently addressed by its license. The staff, therefore, does not expect the proposed action to impact geology, surface water, endangered and threatened fauna and flora, transportation, and historic and cultural resources. NRC staff also does not expect significant environmental impacts to groundwater, socio-economic conditions, soil, air quality, and public and occupational exposures. The use of pressurized downflow columns minimizes the releases of radon, thus, no significant impacts to air quality or public and occupational exposures are expected. Also, the licensee maintains procedures for cataloging and addressing system leaks, which minimizes the impacts of such occurrences; therefore, no significant impacts to groundwater and soils are expected. No significant impacts to socio-economic conditions are expected because implementing this action would not result in significant staff increases. III. Finding of No Significant Impact On the basis of the EA, NRC has concluded that there are no significant environmental impacts from the proposed amendment and has determined not to prepare an environmental impact statement. IV. Further Information Documents related to this action, including the application for amendment and supporting documentation, are available electronically at the NRC's Electronic Reading Room at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. From this site, you can access the NRC's Agencywide Document Access and Management System (ADAMS), which provides text and image files of NRC(s public documents. The ADAMS accession numbers for the documents related to this notice are: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Document title Date Accession number ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Request for License Amendment for Plant October 17, 2006.......................... ML063390348 Upgrade. License Amendment for Plant Upgrade, April 27, 2007............................ ML071290026 Response to Request for Additional Information. NRC Inspection Report...................... September 8, 2006......................... ML062540084 NRC Environmental Assessment for Renewal of February 1998............................. ML071520242 Source Materials License No. SUA-1534. Environmental Assessment for the Plant October 23, 2007.......................... ML072360287 Upgrade. NRC Request for Additional Information..... September 8, 2006......................... ML070540341 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- If you do not have access to ADAMS or if there are problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS, contact the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR) Reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov. [[Page 61694]] These documents may also be viewed electronically on the public computers located at the NRC's PDR, O 1 F21, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852. The PDR reproduction contractor will copy documents for a fee. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 24th day of October, 2007. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Stephen J. Cohen, Project Manager, Uranium Recovery Licensing Branch, Decommissioning and Uranium Recovery Licensing Directorate, Division of Waste Management and Environmental Protection, Office of Federal and State Materials and Environmental Management Programs. [FR Doc. E7-21429 Filed 10-30-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P ***************************************************************** 17 DW: Germany Faces Shortage of Nuclear Safety Experts Deutsche Welle | 31.10.2007 The Atomic Egg was the shining face of Germany's nuclear future Fifty years ago, Germany's first nuclear reactor was built near Munich. DW-WORLD.DE spoke to an safety expert about standards in today's German atomic plants and the possible problems for the future. The Atomic Egg research facility near Munich was the site of groundbreaking research in the fields of physics, biology, chemistry and medicine. Experiments carried out there also helped, in part, pave the way towards the setting up of Germany's nuclear industry. It was an age when there was an almost naive belief in nuclear power. Fifty years on, the country is poised to phase-out atomic energy in 2020. DW-WORLD.DE spoke to physicist Christian KĂĽppers, of the Darmstadt Ă–ko-Institut and a member of the government's advisory Radiation Protection Committee, about safety standards in German nuclear plants and potential problems ahead. DW-WORLD.DE: How safe are the German nuclear power plants and research reactors in international comparison? Christian KĂĽppers: You can't really generalize. There are old and new ones, and those in the middle. The old ones are not only dated in the sense they've been operational for many years and subject to wear and tear. Safety requirements are now a lot higher. That means that long before Germany agreed to phase out nuclear power, people realized the old reactors do not meet current standards for new plants. For example, if you think about the debate after September 11, 2001 and the danger of air attacks, the new plants in Germany are designed to withstand an air crash, whereas the old ones are not. These are things that you can't change by making alterations. Is this the case in other countries? Most other countries have not considered this kind of construction to protect against the danger of air crashes. That also goes for countries like the United States and France that have a lot of reactors. Bildunterschrift: Some of Germany's power plants are now firmly in middle age Are the reactors here in Germany older than in other countries? German plants are relatively old in comparison with other countries. If you look at France, for example, the oldest reactors in France are the two blocks in Fessenheim on the German border. They were built more recently than Biblis B and BrunsbĂĽttel. My theory is that if you don't have problems with people opposing atomic energy and you don't face any problems building new plants then it's easier to close the old reactors and build new ones that are more economical to run. It's a rather different story, if you know that everyone will be happy if an older reactor gets closed down, but you will not be allowed to build a new one. I do not say that you have to be in favor of atomic energy for that reason. So although there were once greater numbers of old reactors in France, they have now been closed down. There were technical problems this summer in nuclear power plants in BrunsbĂĽttel and KrĂĽmmel in the northern German state of Schleswig-Holstein. Do these also indicate a problem with the structure of the safety supervisory systems in Germany? It is primarily the job of the German states to supervise safety. The government can step in if it realizes that the state is not carrying out this job properly. It varies from state to state. If you identify deficits in Schleswig-Holstein you can't say this reveals a general deficit in supervision in Germany. I think enough rules exist to allow proper supervision. The authorities have considerable powers. They can appoint experts to step in for example and carry out checks. The fact that they don't always do this is another matter. What could be a problem, particularly in the future, is that there are practically no young scientists who are very well qualified in the area of reactor safety. That means that both the operators and the authorities are competing for qualified staff. At the same time a lot of people are retiring. Why is that the case? Is it linked to Germany's decision to phase out nuclear power? It is not directly linked. It has become apparent over the last 10 to 15 years. The fact has been clear for some time that no new plants will be built in the foreseeable future so the industry didn't offer such good prospects for the future. Is that linked to the Green movement? Yes. But I have to say that the last plants were actually commissioned in 1980 or thereabouts. After that the electricity operators didn't order any new atomic power plants in Germany. Bildunterschrift: German opposition to nuclear power has had unexpected effects How can the problem of finding new blood be addressed? I know via the Radiation Protection Commission that chairs in the universities were no longer filled when professors retired. You have to ensure the money is there to retain such posts. On the other hand, you also have to publicize what is on offer. At first glance, it might look as if there will be no jobs after 2020, but after that there will be the phases when you have to dismantle plants. That will last at least a decade or two. To that extent, there are long-term prospects. Research reactors in Germany are not included in the general nuclear phase-out. Don't they pose a potential danger? A large research reactor also has a radioactive stock. It is much smaller than that of a normal nuclear power plant, but it is still big enough that it could have a catastrophic effect on the surrounding countryside. It would be a relatively restricted area, but if you look at Garching, then if the wind is blowing in an unfavorable direction and in the event of the worst possible accident, then it could mean that Munich would have to be evacuated. There has been some criticism of the successor to the "Atomic Egg" in Garching. Is it justified? The reactor was built using a type of uranium that can be directly used to build atomic weapons after enrichment. That occurred at a time when it was internationally agreed that we should be moving away from its usage and when Germany was also switching to less enriched uranium. We very much regretted the fact that it became operation using this type of uranium. What do you see as one of the most important tasks facing the nuclear sector in Germany? A permanent storage facility is needed for highly radioactive waste from reprocessing. Up to now, we have only explored the suitability of Gorleben. It would be good if swift progress were made. At least one other location should be explored and then a decision should be made about which is the most suitable and work should then be started. This is a problem that politicians like to postpone because it's not an issue that is likely to win them any friends. But it is a problem that has to be solved. I think that it is technically possible. But it has to be done. To keep on storing the waste above ground -- and it will remain there for at least another two decades in any case because the storage facility won't be ready -- is the most dangerous option. Interview: Julie Gregson DW-WORLD * Some EU Officials Want to Resist Nuclear Power Renaissance High-ranking European government officials, representing seven anti-nuclear states called Monday for alternatives to nuclear energy, which is experiencing a renaissance as attention turns to lowering greenhouse gases. (01.10.2007) * Concerns Mount Over Nuclear Energy After Series of Scares Irregularities at nuclear reactors in Germany and Japan in recent weeks have rekindled safety fears and raised tough questions about nuclear energy amid increasing environmental concerns. (27.07.2007) * German Energy Giant Reopens Debate on Nuclear Phase-out Plan One of Germany's leading energy companies wants to extend the lifetime of one of its nuclear plants in a move that anti-nuclear campaigners describe as an attack on plans to phase out nuclear energy in Germany. (26.12.2006) WWW-Links © 2007 Deutsche Welle ***************************************************************** 18 NRC: Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards (ACRS) ; Subcommittee Meeting on Thermal-Hydraulic Phenomena; Notice of Meeting FR Doc E7-21432 [Federal Register: October 31, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 210)] [Notices] [Page 61694] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr31oc07-136] NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION The ACRS Subcommittee on Thermal-Hydraulic Phenomena will hold a meeting on November 14, 2007, at 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland, Room T-2B1. The entire meeting will be open to public attendance, with the exception of portions that may be closed to discuss AREVA proprietary information pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(4). The agenda for the subject meeting shall be as follows: Wednesday, November 14, 2007--8:30 a.m. Until 12 Noon The Subcommittee will review and comment on the proposed AREVA instability detect and suppress solution codes and methodology specified in the topical reports: (1) ANP-10262(P), Revision 0, ``Enhanced Option III Long Term Stability Solution;'' and (2) BAW- 10255(P), Revision 2, ``Cycle-specific DIVOM Methodology Using the RAMONA5-FA Code.'' The Subcommittee will hear presentations by and hold discussions with representatives of the NRC staff, AREVA, 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, Ms. Zena Abdullahi (Telephone: 301-415-8716) 5 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 8:45 a.m. and 5:30 p.m. (ET). Persons planning to attend this meeting are urged to contact the above named individual at least 2 working days prior to the meeting to be advised of any potential changes to the agenda. Dated: October 25, 2007. Cayetano Santos, Chief, Reactor Safety Branch, ACRS. [FR Doc. E7-21432 Filed 10-30-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P ***************************************************************** 19 NRC: In the Matter of NRG South Texas LP, STP Nuclear Operating Company, (South Texas Project, Units 1 and 2); Order Approving Indirect Transfer of Facility Operating Licenses FR Doc E7-21433 [Federal Register: October 31, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 210)] [Notices] [Page 61691-61692] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr31oc07-132] NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket Nos. 50-498 and 50-499; License Nos. NPF-76 and NPF-80] I NRG South Texas LP (NRG South Texas) is a co-holder of the Facility Operating Licenses numbered NPF-76 and NPF-80, which authorize the possession, use, and operation of South Texas Project (STP), Units 1 and 2, respectively. The facilities are located in southwest Matagorda County, Texas, which is approximately 12 miles south-southwest of Bay City and 10 miles north of Matagorda Bay. STP is jointly owned by three entities: NRG South Texas, 44 percent; City of Public Service Board of San Antonio, 40 percent; and City of Austin, Texas, 16 percent. In addition, these entities each hold a corresponding percentage interest in STP Nuclear Operating Company (STPNOC), which operates STP. II By application dated May 3, 2007, as supplemented by electronic mail dated June 28, 2007, and letters dated July 23 and October 3, 2007, STPNOC, on behalf of NRG Energy, Inc. (NRG Energy), and NRG South Texas LP, requested that the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC, [[Page 61692]] Commission), pursuant to Section 50.80 of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), consent to the proposed indirect transfer of control of the STP licenses to the extent held by NRG South Texas with respect to its ownership interest in STP. Currently, NRG Energy is the indirect owner of 100 percent of NRG South Texas. Under a proposed corporate restructuring, a new holding company, NRG Holdings, Inc., will be created. NRG Energy will become a direct wholly-owned subsidiary of NRG Holdings, Inc. Accordingly, NRG Holdings, Inc. will acquire indirect control of the licenses for STP to the extent currently held by NRG South Texas. In addition, NRG Holdings, Inc. will become an indirect co-owner of STPNOC, with respect to the interest in STPNOC currently held by NRG South Texas. To the extent the proposed corporate restructuring would thus result in the indirect transfer of control of the STP licenses as held by STPNOC, prior NRC consent was also requested. Notice of the requests for approval and an opportunity for a hearing was published in the Federal Register on July 10, 2007 (72 FR 37546). No comments or hearing requests were received. Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.80(a), no license, or any right thereunder, shall be transferred, directly or indirectly, through transfer of control of the license, unless the Commission shall give its consent in writing. Upon review of the information in the application as supplemented and other information before the Commission, and relying upon the representations and agreements in the application as supplemented, the NRC staff concludes that the proposed indirect transfer of control of NRG South Texas to NRG Holdings, Inc. as described herein will not affect the qualifications of NRG South Texas as holder of the STP licenses to the extent now held by it, and that the indirect transfer of control of the licenses, to the extent effected by the proposed transaction described in the application, is otherwise consistent with applicable provisions of law, regulations, and orders issued by the NRC pursuant thereto. The NRC staff further concludes that, to the extent the proposed indirect transfer of control of NRG South Texas would result in an indirect transfer of control of the STP licenses as held by STPNOC, such proposed indirect transfer of control of NRG South Texas will not affect the qualifications of STPNOC to hold the STP licenses, and such indirect transfer of control of the licenses as held by STPNOC is otherwise consistent with applicable provisions of law, regulations, and orders issued by the Commission pursuant thereto. The findings set forth above are supported by a safety evaluation dated October 22, 2007. III Accordingly, pursuant to Sections 161b, 161i, and 184 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 2201(b), 2201(i), and 2234; and 10 CFR 50.80, it is hereby ordered that the application regarding the indirect license transfers related to the proposed establishment of NRG Holdings, Inc. is approved, subject to the following condition: Should the indirect transfer of control of NRG South Texas to NRG Holdings, Inc. not be completed within one year from the date of this Order, this Order shall become null and void, provided, however, upon written application and good cause shown, such date may be extended by order. This Order is effective upon issuance. For further details with respect to this Order, see the application dated May 3, 2007, and supplemental electronic mail dated June 28, 2007, and letters dated July 23 and October 3, 2007, and the safety evaluation dated October 22, 2007, which are available for public inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room (PDR), located at One White Flint North, Public File Area 01 F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland and accessible electronically from the Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) Public Electronic Reading Room on the Internet at the NRC Web site, 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 PDR Reference staff by telephone at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by e- mail to pdr@nrc.gov. Dated at Rockville, Maryland this 22nd day of October, 2007. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Catherine Haney, Director, Division of Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. [FR Doc. E7-21433 Filed 10-30-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P ***************************************************************** 20 IHT: Sweden's Vattenfall loses 200,000 clients after nuclear plant incidents - International Herald Tribune The Associated Press Published: October 31, 2007 STOCKHOLM, Sweden: Swedish utility Vattenfall AB has lost almost 200,000 customers in Germany because of a "crisis in confidence" after failing to properly inform the public about a fire in a nuclear power plant and the shutdown of another, company officials said Wednesday. The loss was experienced "mainly in the wake" of the fire at the Kruemmel plant and the temporary shutdown of the Brunsbuettel nuclear power plant in Germany, both in Germany on June 28, Vattenfall president and chief executive Lars G. Josefsson said. "In recent months, Vattenfall has lost nearly 200,000 retail customers in Germany," Josefsson said. "This is a result of the crisis in confidence that Vattenfall experienced mainly in the wake of the events at the Krummel and Brunsbuttel nuclear power plants." At least two Vattenfall executives, including Vattenfall Europe AG CEO Klaus Rauscher and the head of its German branch, Bruno Thomauske, left the company amid criticism of how the incidents were handled. The Swedish state-owned company, which also reported its third-quarter earnings Wednesday, said it had seen "significant reductions" of retail customers in Germany's two largest cities, Hamburg and Berlin. In a move to restore the confidence, it said it had launched an improved product offer with competitive prices and by trying to attract new customers through intensified marketing in areas outside of Hamburg and Berlin. Despite the customer loss in Germany, the company said net sales in Germany rose 18 percent in the quarter compared with the same period last year. This was mainly because of a higher feed of wind power to its transmission network of which certain, higher, costs were passed on to customers, driving up the revenue numbers in the unit. Net sales for the Vattenfall group came to 31.59 billion kronor (€3.43 billion; US$4.94 billion) in the three-month period, compared with 27.99 billion kronor a year ago. Copyright © 2007 the International Herald Tribune All rights reserved ***************************************************************** 21 WNN: Floating a nuclear power plant in Yakutia 31 October 2007 A site selection process has been agreed for another floating nuclear power plant in Russia. A 26 October meeting between the Republic of Sakha and Russia's Federal Atomic Energy Agency (Rosatom) saw the Yakutia region proposed. Sakha is the largest republic in the Russian Federation. In the Yakutia region it spans three time zones, but has less than one million inhabitants. Rosatom said the agreement, signed by Sergei Kiriyenko and Sakha President Vyacheslav Shtyrov, was aimed towards developing an investment project for the construction of a floating nuclear power plant in order to support later infrastructure projects in the Arctic north of Sakha. Currently the cost to generate electricity from imported fossil fuels in towns like Tiksi, Ust-Kuiga and Yurung-Khaya is 12 roubles per kWh ($0.49/kWh). By comparison, the hydroelectric dams that supply the south of Sakha generate power for 1.1 roubles per kWh ($0.04/kWh). Cross-subsidies largely level out the cost to consumers, but officials believe the high price of power to be a major limiting factor for development in the north where there are large mineral deposits and potential for a greater fishing industry. The proposed solution is a barge-mounted nuclear power unit which would provide electricity and heat to settlements not currently connected to the grid. Rosatom said the unit could employ ABV-6M reactors with a capacity of around 18 MWe to provide both electricity and heat. These were developed by OKBM and would be built at Zvezdochka Engineering Plant in Severodvinsk, near to the Sevmash facility where the first floating nuclear power plant is under construction. That unit is based on two KLT-40S reactors, as used in icebreaking ships, and will help to power the shipyard itself with 70 MWe. The Sakha government and Rosatom both agreed to seek out investors to take part in a public-private partnership to complete the project and to begin feasibility studies and site investigations. Support has been secured from the Russian Investment Fund. Officials expect to commission the power plant around 2013-5. Further information Federal Atomic Energy Agency (Rosatom) WNA's Nuclear Power in Russia information paper WNN: Russian floating reactor construction starts WNN: Two floating nuclear plants for Chukotka ***************************************************************** 22 UPI: India-U.S. hiccup may hurt power targets International Security - Energy - Briefing - UPI.com Published: Oct. 31, 2007 at 12:18 PM NEW DELHI, Oct. 31 (UPI) -- India says it will have to cut 6,000 megawatts of power from its target of 20,000 MW if the civilian nuclear deal with the United States is not implemented. "If the India-U.S. civilian nuclear deal does not go through, India will have to slash at least 6,000 MW from its projected 20,000 MW by 2020 in the absence of international civilian nuclear cooperation," said Anil Kakodkar, chairman of Atomic Energy Commission. He was responding to a question on whether the Department of Atomic Energy's projected nuclear power capacity of 20,000 MW will be scaled down if the deal does not pass because of political opposition. "It is possible to realize the projected 20,000 MW by 2020 only if there is an international civil nuclear cooperation," Kakodkar told reporters on the sidelines of a nuclear meeting. According to government figures, the DAE in the 1990s projected an ambitious program of 20,000 MW of nuclear power generation, keeping in mind 10,000 MW from its pressurized heavy water reactor program, 2,500 MW from fast-breeder reactors and 8,000 MW from imported light-water reactors. At the time, Kakodkar said 8,000 MW was planned from Russian nuclear cooperation. "But although Russians are still interested in giving that much, unless the current international politics is set right, it may not be possible," he said. © 2007 United Press International. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 23 Japan Times: Tepco faces rare red ink after nuke plant's halt | japantimes.co.jp Web Thursday, Nov. 1, 2007 Kyodo News Tokyo Electric Power Co. said Wednesday it will post a group net loss of Ą95 billion in the current business year, falling into the red for the first time in 28 years because of the indefinite shutdown of its key nuclear plant after July's devastating earthquake in Niigata Prefecture. Japan's biggest utility also said its group net profit fell 88 percent in the first half of fiscal 2007 from the same period last year to Ą21.22 billion, affected by the shutdown and rising costs due to higher oil prices. "The company will concentrate on cost-cutting measures, and at the moment, we don't have a plan to ask for a drastic fee hike," Tepco President Tunehisa Katsumata told a news conference. In the April-September period, Tokyo Electric posted Ą213.99 billion in consolidated pretax profit, down 25.5 percent from a year before. Operating profit fell 21.3 percent to Ą268.29 billion on sales of Ą2.68 trillion, up 2.8 percent. Tepco has been struggling to secure sufficient supply sources since the closure of the Kashiwazaki-Kariwa plant, the world's biggest in terms of output capacity, due to damage caused by the powerful earthquake that hit Niigata Prefecture on July 16. The Japan Times ***************************************************************** 24 TheDay.com: Back To The Drawing Board For Millstone [ Welcome to theday.com ] Federal appeals court ruling prompts DEP to revise draft permit By Patricia Daddona Published on 10/31/2007 The state Department of Environmental Protection said Tuesday it must revise a proposed permit for Millstone Power Station in light of a new court ruling that governs how to prevent the destruction of fish in the cooling systems of power plants. The DEP staff, which filed its report with the DEP's Office of Adjudications, said it would “terminate” the year-old process needed to approve a recent draft permit, revise the draft sometime around Nov. 29, and then seek public comment and hold a public hearing on the matter. Revising the draft permit will allow the DEP to adjust its standards in light of the court's new mandates, DEP spokesman Dennis Schain said. “A lot of the work we've done is applicable,” Schain said, “but as a result of this court case, we believe there are some additional requirements we need to cover and we're committed to delivering that in the next month.” A year ago, the DEP issued a tentative water discharge permit that had included more stringent approaches to protecting winter flounder and other aquatic life at the power plant. z The two Millstone reactors take in water from the Long Island Sound and use a grate to trap sea life and return it to the water. But the winter flounder larvae are too small and are destroyed as they pass through the plants' cooling systems. The permit was supposed to have been renewed 10 years ago, but a previous DEP commissioner granted Millstone emergency authorization to keep using the old permit. This spring, before the DEP could hold a public hearing on its proposed permit, a federal appeals court ruled that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and state regulators need to take into account the “best technology available” when issuing permits. Such equipment could include costly cooling towers that would re-circulate water and kill fewer fish and fish larvae. In the federal court case, Riverkeeper II v. EPA, the 2nd Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals also determined that using a cost/benefit analysis to determine what constitutes the best technology available is not in keeping with the tenets of the Clean Water Act. A number of environmental groups and states, including Connecticut, were parties to the Riverkeeper case. Schain said it's likely the revised permit will require Millstone owner Dominion to look at all available technologies in addressing the nuclear reactor operations' impact on aquatic life. The old Millstone permit is still in effect while the new process moves forward, he said. Privacy Policy | Contact Us at 1 (860) 442-2200 | New London, CT | © 1998-2007 The Day Publishing Co. 104 ***************************************************************** 25 TheDay.com: NRC Finds Worker Was Discriminated Against At Millstone [ Welcome to theday.com By Patricia Daddona Published on 10/31/2007 A supervisor at Millstone Power Station discriminated against a maintenance mechanic by verbally warning him for questioning whether proper procedure was followed in changing equipment used with emergency generators, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission has found. The NRC made the finding, which concerns matters of nuclear safety and security, on Oct. 18 and released it publicly Tuesday. There was in fact no safety or any other type of violation, said NRC spokesman Neil Sheehan, but the worker had a right to raise the issue with management, a right known in the nuclear industry as a “protected activity.” According to a report from the NRC's Office of Enforcement, the employee questioned his supervisor at the Unit 3 reactor about whether a design change notice was required for altering support equipment for the emergency generators. The supervisor is not identified. Asked exactly what equipment changes the worker was concerned about, when this occurred and other details, Sheehan refused comment, saying the matter involves security and allegations from a worker who might have been identified as a whistleblower, had the investigation turned out differently. He did say investigators determined that a notice alerting the NRC of the design change was not necessary. The mechanic, whom the NRC would not identify, also alleged in an earlier, internal complaint to Millstone owner Dominion's “employee concerns program” that unqualified workers were performing maintenance work at Unit 3, Sheehan said. NRC investigators said they did not substantiate that allegation. Dominion corrected the situation by removing the documentation of the employee's verbal warning from his personnel record; counseling the supervisor; briefing managers on how to detect and prevent retaliation; and emphasizing a need to check policy regularly to maintain a safety-conscious work environment, the report states. Investigators also found that while the supervisor failed to respect the employee's right to raise a safety issue, the action was not done deliberately to violate federal rules. Also, Sheehan said the fact that the worker contacted Dominion's employee concerns program with his concern was a “positive sign” that employees feel comfortable bringing up safety or disciplinary issues within the company. The NRC decided to “exercise discretion” and not issue any formal violations or fines against Dominion because the company handled the matter properly and took “comprehensive” action to correct the situation. The report warns that any similar violations in the future “may result in significant action.” More than a year ago, Sham Mehta had alleged Dominion retaliated against him by eliminating his job after he raised security concerns. The company maintained that restructuring of Mehta's department, which resulted in his job being eliminated, had no connection with him raising the security concerns. Mehta reached a settlement with Dominion but ultimately left the company. On Tuesday, Dominion declined to comment on the report's findings. Waterford Privacy Policy | Contact Us at 1 (860) 442-2200 | New London, CT | © 1998-2007 The Day Publishing Co. 102 ***************************************************************** 26 IHT: Nuclear ambitions fan controversy in Bulgaria - International Herald Tribune By Matthew Brunwasser Published: October 30, 2007 SOFIA: As governments around the world struggle to secure energy supplies, cut carbon emissions and adapt to rising oil prices, Bulgaria has adopted an ambitious solution: Construct a new nuclear power plant, the country's second, near the northern town of Belene, across the Danube from Romania. Critics say the project is economically flawed, open to corruption and mismanagement, and will cement Russian dominance of Bulgaria's energy sector while putting Bulgarian taxpayers at risk of footing the bill. The government says global energy pressures make the project necessary. At a cost that is likely to exceed the contracted €4 billion, or $5.8 billion - already 16 percent of Bulgaria's gross domestic product last year - the nuclear plant at Belene is the most expensive public works project in the country's post-Communist history. Construction was actually started in the Communist era, in 1981, but the project was cancelled in 1990, before reactors were installed but after some $1 billion had been spent, as Bulgaria struggled with an economic crisis. In 2003, the government of the then prime minister and former exiled king, Simeon Saxe-Coburg-Gotha, announced the resurrection of the Belene project. Construction restarted this year with a €250 million loan from BNP Paribas. The project is awaiting a technical report by the European Commission before applying for an additional €350 million loan from Euratom to finance the second stage of construction. If the loan is approved, it would be the first time that Euratom financed the construction of new nuclear capacity rather than expanding existing facilities. The government is pushing Belene to offset the loss of production that followed last year's closure of two reactors at the country's Kozloduy nuclear plant, in the northwest of the country. Bulgaria agreed to shut down the reactors for safety reasons as part of its entry into the European Union in 1999. After the reactor closures, electricity exports were expected to end completely. But NEK announced this month that Bulgaria still planned to export 3.6 million megawatt-hours this year, down from 7.7 million in 2006. In the past, Bulgaria covered 70 percent of the power import requirements of Greece, Romania, Serbia and Macedonia. Belene is seen as a carbon-free means to win back these markets. z The Bulgarian Prime Minister, Sergei Stanishev, told Parliament in January that Bulgaria's energy policy was "totally consistent with the priorities of the EU energy policy, to build competitive national, regional and European-wide markets while protecting the environment and ensuring safe energy supplies." "Not having its own resources of natural gas, oil and high calorie coal, Bulgaria's choice of building the Belene nuclear power plant is first and foremost a choice in favor of energy independence from fossil fuel supplies, which come precisely from Russia," he said. Independence from Russia energy supplies, however, is not self-evident at Belene. Bulgaria has awarded a contract to Atomstroyexport, in which the Russian gas giant Gazprom owns an 84 percent stake, to build the plant and install two 1,000 megawatt water-pressurized reactors. As a result, Belene will be the first Russian nuclear plant built in the European Union. Russia already provides 100 percent of Bulgaria's natural gas, 89 percent of its imported crude oil - which is processed at the only Bulgarian oil refinery, owned by the Russian company Lukoil - and 36 percent of its hard coal imports. Russia also provides all the nuclear fuel for the Kozloduy power plant, and recycles all its spent fuel. "All the economists have attacked Belene on the basis of price, state guarantees and independence," said Georgy Ganev, an economist at the Center for Liberal Strategies in Sofia. "You can't completely lock yourself into Russian technology and Russian-supplied fuel at a moment when you are capable of diversifying." z Critics say that money spent on Belene would be better used on less glamorous improvements of energy efficiency like insulating buildings. Bulgaria, according to 2004 figures from Eurostat, the European statistics office, is by far the most energy-inefficient state in Europe, using eight times more energy than the average amount used in the 27 EU member states to produce every €1 of gross domestic product. One vocal critic, Krassen Stanchev of the Institute for Market Economics in Sofia, has estimated the cost to the state at 2.1 percent of Bulgaria's annual GDP. "Belene has no clear economic or technical rationale," said Ivan Ivanov, a member of Parliament from the opposition party, Democrats for a Strong Bulgaria, who sits on the parliamentary energy commission. "Electricity exports are not profitable when the state invests ?4 billion in the construction of Belene. If it was profitable, the private sector would do it." One possibility could be for NEK to offer a 15-year fixed-price electricity purchasing guarantee, said Djurica Tankosic, a senior vice-president at WorleyParsons, the architect and engineering contractor on the project. "We are looking at the optimal structure of the securitization of this project," Tankosic said. Financial guarantees are currently the subject of negotiation with potential investors, but Tankosic said the state would not cover 100 percent of the investment risks. One major unknown for the project is what the price of electricity will be in 2014, when Belene is expected to begin producing for the national electricity grid. Other countries are also building new capacity to feed the growing economies and energy needs of the region. In neighboring Romania, for example, the Cernavoda nuclear power plant started commercial operation of its second 700 megawatt reactor this month. According to Standard and Poor's, the credit rating agency, "NEK's intention to participate as a majority owner in the Belene nuclear project could significantly increase the company's exposure to operating, regulatory, market, and environmental risk." Some critics say that rather than meeting Bulgaria's economic needs, the project is a response to lobbying pressures from the country's several thousand nuclear professionals whose livelihood has been threatened by the progressive closure of Kozloduy. They also say that corruption has long been rampant in the arcane world of public procurement in energy, dominated by a handful of companies close to those in power. Ognyan Minchev, director of the Institute for Regional and International Studies, in Sofia, charged that Russian interests had used direct cash payments to individuals to influence procurement decisions in similar projects. "Russian companies and Russian authorities have absolute freedom of what we might call 'informal personal influencing' of public officials in countries like Bulgaria," Minchev said, without citing specific examples. Ganev, the economist, said that as much as one-third of the cost of Belene could be channeled into questionable payments. One allegation of corruption surfaced this year when the city council of Svishtov, a town located 10 kilometers, or six miles, from Belene that opposes the project on environmental grounds, brought to the attention of prosecutors a $7.8 million contract for an environmental impact statement and feasibility study signed by NEK with Parsons E&C Europe, which has since been renamed WorleyParsons Europe. Some Bulgarian nuclear engineers said that nearly the same work had already been carried out at the site by the state firm Energoproekt, for about $150,000. Justifying the contract and its cost, Tankosic, who signed on behalf of Parsons, said the work involved was a "very in-depth review" by a large group of licensed companies. "The process was absolutely transparent and it was absolutely by the books when it comes to Bulgarian regulations," he said. Officials at NEK declined to comment. Three months after receiving the complaint, the prosecutor's office has yet to determine in which jurisdiction it should be investigated. Bulgaria has long been criticized by the EU for a dilatory approach to corruption issues. Deutsche Bank and UniCredit backed out of financing Belene in July, after Deutsche Bank cited environmental risks as well as the bank's commitment to social responsibility. German environmentalists say there is a danger of seismic activity in the region, and that the Russian reactor should not be licensed because it lacks a safety appraisal. "According to our laws and solid political orientation, we are in the European Union and NATO," said Ivanov, the opposition member of Parliament. "But in the most important economic sector of the 21st century - energy - we are still in the sphere of Russia." Copyright © 2007 the International Herald Tribune All rights reserved ***************************************************************** 27 Financial Post: TransCanada assessing viability of nuclear Jon Harding, Financial Post Published: Wednesday, October 31, 2007 CALGARY - TransCanada Corp. has cautiously joined the list of firms interested in satisfying Alberta's soaring power needs with nuclear energy. The Calgary-based company is doing "detailed homework" assessing the viability of nuclear as a power source in Alberta, where rivals in the nuclear-energy business have also been gauging public and government support. "We think Alberta is an interesting situation [for nuclear] with the long-term supply and demand fundamentals for electricity being so good," Hal Kvisle, TransCanada chief executive, said yesterday. "There is certainly demand for power." Canada's largest pipeline company also owns and operates a fleet of gas-fired power-generation facilities in Canada and the United States, as well as a majority stake in Ontario's Bruce nuclear-power facility. Mr. Kvisle, who a little more than a year ago dismissed the likelihood of nuclear power being used any time soon as an energy source to develop Alberta's vast oilsands resource, said TransCanada could leverage its expertise at Bruce, in which a multi-billion-dollar refurbishment is underway, if it were to build a greenfield plant in Alberta. "We've got an exceptionally competent nuclear development team at Bruce that has done very good job of guiding the refurbishment of the Bruce A plant, which in many ways is similar to a complete new build," he said. "We have confidence that team would do a very good job of pursuing nuclear projects in Alberta if they make sense." Barriers remain, however, including a well-documented shortage of transmission capacity within the province and the absence of transmission lines from Alberta connecting to major North American markets -- a condition that would lower the risk of pouring billions into any Alberta-based nuclear facility. "We don't yet know is if nuclear would be competitive with exotic forms of coal generation," Mr. Kvisle said. "We don't think simple coal-fired generation makes sense in Alberta going forward for CO2 reasons, but there are coal-gasification and other projects that might make sense and that is what nuclear has to compete with. We're doing our detailed homework as always." Alberta today consumes about 9,000 megawatts of electricity and expectations are growth, especially from within the surging oilsands sector, should drive demand to about 14,000 megawatts by 2016. Energy Alberta Corp., a private Calgary-based firm, is planning a $6.2-billion nuclear plant in the province's northwest Peace Country, and in August it filed an application with the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission for a licence to prepare a site. The 2,200-megawatt, twin-reactor facility would be built by 2017 by Energy Alberta's partner, Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd. (AECL), using its CANDU technology. The company has an exclusivity contract with AECL for any CANDU plant built in Alberta. Since August, Areva Canada, the Canadian arm of France's state-owned nuclear energy conglomerate, has made overtures and talked of building nuclear plants at Whitecourt, about 150 km northwest of Edmonton. Mr. Kvisle cited declining gas production in Western Canada and the likelihood of higher natural gas prices in the future as a deterrent in the way of feeding Alberta's power demand with gas-fired power generation. Meanwhile, as TransCanada said third-quarter profit rose 11% to $324-million from $293-million last year, it revealed costs have nearly doubled for its massive Keystone oil pipeline project connecting oilsands crude from Alberta to the United States. © National Post 2007 © 2007 CanWest Interactive, a division of CanWest MediaWorks ***************************************************************** 28 Malaysia News: Japan nuclear operator sees red after quake - AFP - Wednesday, October 31 TOKYO (AFP) - - TEPCO, the world's biggest private electricity supplier, said Wednesday it expected to go into the red this year for the first time in nearly three decades after an earthquake shut down a nuclear plant. Tokyo Electric Power Co. said net profit plunged 88 percent year-on-year in the first six months to 21.1 billion yen (185.21 million dollars). The world's largest nuclear plant, operated by TEPCO northwest of Tokyo, has been shut since a July 16 earthquake that caused dozens of problems at the facility, including a fire and a radioactive leak. UN nuclear inspectors found no safety risks at the plant, but the company has said it will be shut at least for the rest of the year. TEPCO said it spent 175.1 billion yen on repairs and inspections in the first half and expected the figure to rise as high as 603.5 billion yen during the financial year. In the first half, operating profit fell 21.3 percent to 268.3 billion yen. But sales rose 2.8 percent year-on-year to 2.68 trillion yen as a hot summer drove up use of air conditioning and as industries stepped up activity. The company said it expected to go into the red for the first time since the year to March 1980. It revised its annual forecast to a net loss of 95 billion yen, compared with an earlier projection of a net profit of 65 billion yen. Higher fuel oil prices are also expected to hit the company's financial figures, TEPCO said. The company revised its operating profit forceast to 200 billion yen, down 20 percent from an earlier expectation of 250 billion yen. The sales forecast was raised to 5.47 trillion yen from 5.445 trillion yen. ***************************************************************** 29 IAEA: UN General Assembly Reaffirms Support for IAEA IAEA Chief Addresses 62nd UN General Session in New York Staff report 30 October 2007 A view of the General Assembly meeting in New York. (Photo: UN Photo/Eskinder Debebe) The United Nations General Assembly has reaffirmed strong support for the IAEA´s work, following Director General Mohamed ElBaradei´s annual address delivered in New York on 29 October. The General Assembly also adopted a resolution appealing to Member States to continue to support the IAEA´s indispensable role in "encouraging and assisting the development and practical application of atomic energy for peaceful uses." In his address to the to the 62nd Regular Session of the UN General Assembly, Dr. ElBaradei reported on the IAEA´s work in the areas of nuclear power technology, nuclear verification and nuclear applications. Dr. ElBaradei said that in the face of the resurgence in interest in nuclear power, "technological and institutional innovation is a key factor in ensuring the long term sustainability of nuclear power." In particular he called for the development of a new multinational framework for the fuel cycle, both the front and the back end, to assure supply and curb proliferation risk. "Fifty years after the Atoms for Peace initiative, I believe the time has come to think of a new framework for the use of nuclear energy – a framework that accounts both for the lessons we have learned and the current reality," he said. On the issue of nuclear verification, Dr. ElBaradei said that Iran´s "active cooperation and transparency" are key factors in resolving outstanding issues over the country´s nuclear ambitions. He added that he intends to report on the implementation of the work plan agreed in August between the IAEA and Iran to the Agency´s Board of Governors meeting in November. In nuclear applications, Dr. ElBaradei hailed the so-called South-South cooperation, stimulated by the development of nuclear capacities and infrastructure in some regions. "Opportunities for cooperative ventures - such as shared multinational management of common underground water aquifers, transborder programmes for the elimination of insect pests and other causes of disease, and jointly owned and managed nuclear power plants - are coming to the drawing board, adding new significance to technical cooperation," he stated. On budgetary matters, Dr. ElBaradei spoke of the "urgent need" for adequate resources to ensure effective delivery of the IAEA programme as mandated by the Statute and as requested by its Member States. "The IAEA remains under-funded in many critical areas, a situation which, if it remains unaddressed, will lead to a steady erosion of our ability to perform key functions," he said. Concluding his speech, Dr. ElBaradei said that the Agency´s role as the international body entrusted with the mission of ensuring that nuclear power would not become a cause for destruction of humanity, but rather an engine for peace and prosperity, remains as crucial today as it was fifty years ago when the IAEA was founded. "Our mission is critical in both good times and bad. Our professionalism, impartiality and independence are vital, both publicly and behind the scenes," he stated. See Story Resources for more information. Copyright ©, International Atomic Energy Agency, P.O. Box 100, Wagramer Strasse 5, A-1400 Vienna, Austria Telephone (+431) 2600-0; Facsimilie (+431) 2600-7; E-mail: Disclaimer ***************************************************************** 30 Daily Yomiuri: Study: Nuclear attack now could kill, injure 832,000 in Hiroshima HIROSHIMA--A nuclear attack against Hiroshima would kill or injure up to 832,000 people, a study group of the Hiroshima municipal government said Wednesday. The working group, headed by Hiromi Hasai, professor emirates of Hiroshima University, revealed the findings in the draft of the final report on its estimates of victims in a nuclear attack. It is the first prediction of damages resulting from a nuclear attack drawn up by a local government based on the law to protect the people. The estimate will be reflected in the Hiroshima government's plan to protect citizens of the city, which has a population of 1.1 million, in case of a military contingency. The study group, however, concluded that the abolition of nuclear weapons would be the sole measure that would fully protect the citizens from nuclear attacks. The draft of the report estimates four scenarios of a nuclear attack on a summer weekday during the daytime under fair weather conditions--an environment identical to Aug. 6, 1945, when the city was A-bombed. The four scenarios examined the likely effect of different types of nuclear attacks on the city. A one-megaton bomb--about 60 times as powerful as the one dropped onto the city 62 years ago--exploded in the air about 2.4 kilometers above the city would result in the largest number of victims--832,000--on the day of the bombing and during a three-to four-month period after that. ) The Daily Yomiuri, The Yomiuri Shimbun © The Yomiuri Shimbun. ***************************************************************** 31 The Spectrum: Left in the dark www.thespectrum.com -Spectrum, St. George, UT Wednesday, October 31, 2007 Being left in the dark about potential health hazards seems to be a reoccurring problem that Utah cannot escape. Once again, being downwind from radioactive emissions could be the culprit. Sierra Pacific Resources, Sithe Global Power and LS Power Associates are in discussions with the Nevada state environmental regulators over greenhouse gas emission levels that will be allowed for three new coal-fired power plants. One of these proposed plants is 14 miles north of Mesquite. The Associated Press reported that a memorandum of understanding setting out those standards is already under way. However, public input has not even occurred. A coalition of environmental groups - Sierra Club, Citizen Alert, the Nevada Conservation League, among others - has asked the Nevada Department of Environmental Protection to open to the public these power plant plans, which have all been done discreetly and under the radar, the AP reported. The Bureau of Land Management is hosting a public meeting in St. George on Election Day to gather public comment, but it all seems a little too late and on a day that is least likely to draw a crowd. Even so, residents need to turn out in droves because while the power plants will be located in Utah's neighboring state, inadequate emission control systems can potentially victimize Southern Utahns with air pollution. Emissions from coal-fired plants are life threatening, particularly for people with chronic health conditions like asthma. Coal has impurities ranging from trace quantities of many metals, including uranium and thorium, to much larger quantities of aluminum and iron to still larger quantities of impurities such as sulfur, Oakridge National Laboratory reported. Because of that, coal combustion emits large amounts of carbon dioxide. Other chemical by-products are nitrogen, mercury, carcinogenic and mutagenic substances and sulfur dioxide that leads to haze and acid rain, Furthermore, environmental scientists have linked emissions from coal-fired power plants to forest degradation, waterway damage and reservoir contamination. These unsavory consequences from emissions are not favorable for a growing Southern Utah and its wilderness and reservoirs in close vicinity. Besides, Utah has its own battles to fight with global emissions. In 2002, the last year data was made available, Utah pumped out 37 million tons of carbon dioxide. That is sure to increase with the construction of a new plant less than 50 miles away from the Nevada-Utah border. Consider the following: Pollution from power plants cuts short the lives of nearly 24,000 Americans nationwide every year. Those 24,000 Americans die an average of 14 years early because of exposure to power plant pollution. (2,800 of those deaths are from lung cancer). Power plant pollution is responsible for 38,200 non-fatal heart attacks per year. Enforcing the current Clean Air Act will result in 4,000 fewer deaths each year than the Bush administration's air pollution plan. The Clean Power Act, a leading proposal to clean up power plants once and for all, would save 8,000 more lives every year than the Bush administration plan. This is 100,000 more lives by 2020. We recognize that 52 percent of the capacity for generating electricity in the United States is fueled by coal, compared with 14.8 percent for nuclear energy, but that does not mean that it must be done at the expense of American lives. Regulation of radiation emissions from coal plants may translate into increased capital and operating costs, making coal-fired power less economically competitive, but if that is what it takes to save lives, it must be done. Even better, would be the investment in alternative energy sources. Until then, Utahns need to be aware of what is happening around them. To turn a blind eye would be invitation for potential disaster for our quality of living and overall health. Copyright ©2007 The Spectrum. ***************************************************************** 32 ENS: U.S. Army Accused of Hiding Chemical Weapons Information Environment News Service (ENS) Citizen groups trying to stop the U.S. Army from shipping waste from deadly VX nerve agent from Indiana across eight states to Port Arthur, Texas say sources who wish to remain anonymous told the groups that the Army had withheld crucial information from the public and a federal judge during a hearing on the shipments last July. Based on this information, the groups have taken legal action again to challenge the process, which they claim is illegal and poses serious safety and health hazards. In the motion for summary judgment filed today, groups state that the Army "intentionally withheld critical evidence" from the public and the federal judge in Indiana who heard their arguments last July. The Army ships the VX nerve agent hydrolysate from Newport, Indiana to Port Arthur, Texas to be incinerated as part of the destruction of all U.S. chemical weapons under an international treaty. On April 5, 2007, the Army signed a $49 million contract with Veolia Environmental Services of Lombard, Illinois to provide final treatment of the caustic wastewater at its plant in Port Arthur, Texas. After U.S. District Judge Larry McKinney denied the groups' request for a preliminary injunction to stop the VX hydrolysate, VXH, shipments, the groups were given an "inside tip" that extensive efforts had been made to identify viable on-site alternatives to the transportation option and that the Army had kept secret the data resulting from those efforts. "Withholding information about these activities undermines the very cornerstone of the National Environmental Policy Act, a federal law requiring open review of alternatives for actions undertaken by the federal government that could have environmental consequences," said Craig Williams, director of the Chemical Weapons Working Group based in Berea. According to today's filing, not only were three alternatives identified as viable, one was actually chosen as the contingency plan should VXH shipment to a DuPont facility in New Jersey be unsuccessful, which it turned out to be. Opposition due to public health and environmental impact concerns blocked the DuPont proposal. The groups' motion states, "After the DuPont option failed, the federal defendants abandoned, in secret, the on-site VXH treatment contingency option that had been selected in secret and for which preparations had been made in secret (and paid for by the federal defendants)." The motion claims that the undisclosed steps taken by the Army to implement a viable on-site treatment option went so far as to even include preparing environmental permit applications and drafting a NEPA analysis - yet none of this information was made public nor provided to the court. "It's obvious to us that the Army and their contractors did not want the public or the court to be aware of how far their on-site treatment selection had progressed in order to make their clandestine signing of a contract with an incinerator company almost a thousand miles away appear to be the only workable option," said Williams. zz The motion also claims that there was no public notice, review or comment on the decision to ship the waste to Texas. The groups also claim that the shipments violate U.S. law prohibiting interstate transportation of chemical weapons. They allege that there are higher VX concentrations in the waste than expected due to valve failures, piping configurations and holding tank design flaws at the Newport, Indiana treatment facility. The Army failed to consider matters of environmental justice in its decision, the groups claim, saying that the Army failed to provide adequate monitoring or response capability for VX agent releases. Mick Harrison, attorney for plaintiffs, said, "The new evidence presented in this motion shows, disturbingly, that the Army made a conscious choice to disregard the clear Congressional mandate that the public be meaningfully involved in the analysis federal agencies are required to conduct under NEPA of alternative courses of action and their environmental consequences. The Army, however, is not above the law." Although some of these points were raised during the preliminary injunction hearing in July in which the judge ruled in favor of the Army, the plaintiffs believe that the new information including on-site treatment capabilities, along with additional arguments on the merits of the claims, will result in a favorable finding during this procedure. Meanwhile, plaintiffs have been insisting the EPA review the methods used by the Army to determine the toxicity of the VXH waste being sent to Port Arthur for incineration, claiming that the current methods are not in compliance with EPA requirements. If the EPA does not do an investigation thorough enough to satisfy them, plaintiffs in this case say they will consider bringing suit to force that issue as well. Copyright Environment News Service (ENS) 2007. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 33 AU ABC: ADF, Immigration Dept breached waste disposal conditions - report - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation) Posted October 31, 2007 21:28:00 The annual report of Australia's nuclear safety regulator shows that the Defence Force and Immigration Department did not properly dispose of controlled substances. In the annual report of the Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency (ARPANSA) there are 12 instances of licence holders breaching their conditions. Licences are given to organisations which use radioactive or nuclear material. The Department of Transport, the Australian National University (ANU), the Department of Immigration, and Defence Department and Defence Force were all found to have breached the conditions of their licences by either disposing of controlled material or transferring it to another person or organisation without approval. But ARPANSA says in each case, CEO John Loy considered whether or not to take enforcement action and decided that it was not necessary. ***************************************************************** 34 sacbee.com: Clinton, Obama oppose nuclear facility in Nevada - By David Whitney - dwhitney@mcclatchydc.com Published 12:26 pm PDT Wednesday, October 31, 2007 WASHINGTON -New York Sen. Hillary Clinton and Illinois Sen. Barack Obama declared themselves flatly opposed to building a nuclear waste repository in Nevada Wednesday, a clear indication that the 2008 president elections could end a 25-year effort to build the controversial dump. Clinton delivered her opposition in person and Obama by letter as the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee held its first hearing on Yucca Mountain since Democrats took over Congress in January and Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., assumed the panel's helm. Boxer said she had scheduled the hearing at the request of Clinton, the front-runner in the contest for the Democratic presidential nomination who has been campaigning in Nevada on the issue. The state caucuses are Jan. 19. Congress has been planning for an underground repository to hold spent fuel from commercial power plants and waste from defense plants since 1982. Yucca Mountain was selected as the site and Congress has voted to reaffirm that over the objections of Nevada as recently as 2002. Critics charge that moving spent fuel from over 100 commercial nuclear plants to Yucca Mountain 100 miles from Las Vegas would be a huge health and safety risk. They charge that the site leaks, is in an active earthquake zone and is being proposed for licensing by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission next year when its design is only 35 percent complete. "You can't go ahead and build a house when its design is only 35 percent complete," Boxer charged at the hearing. But witnesses for the Energy Department, Environmental Protection Agency and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission said that submission of an application for a construction license doesn't require that every detail be mapped out. Michael Weber, head of the NRC's nuclear material safety unit, said the process being followed for Yucca Mountain is about the same the agency followed in licensing nuclear power plants. "This looks like a little cozy trio," Boxer said of the three federal witnesses. "I just don't feel good about it." Copyright © The Sacramento Bee ***************************************************************** 35 YubaNet.com: Boxer Opening Statement on "The Licensing Process for the Yucca Mountain Repository" By: Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works Published: Oct 31, 2007 at 08:08 Email this article Today's hearing is part of the oversight responsibility of the Environment and Public Works Committee over nuclear power and nuclear waste issues. My serious concerns about Yucca Mountain as a nuclear waste repository date back many years because my state of California will be severely impacted if it is built and put into operation. If the Yucca project is constructed, there will be thousands of shipments of high level nuclear waste transported through California, subjecting our citizens to potential exposure to the most dangerous contaminants known to humankind. Many scientists predict that Yucca Mountain will leak radiation into the groundwater, which poses a real threat to drinking water in California. This leaking nuclear waste even has the potential to contaminate surface waters, creating uncontrolled exposure in my state. My concerns extend beyond California to the whole nation and obviously to the people of Nevada. Billions of taxpayer dollars could be wasted on a proposal that is fatally flawed because it will put millions of people at risk. If Yucca Mountain becomes operational, radioactive waste will be transported there from across the Nation. The people of an estimated 44 states, including California, will have to guard against a serious terrorist threat as nuclear waste travels through our communities. Nuclear waste will be traveling past schools, homes, hospitals and businesses. This oversight hearing is critically important as we seek information about this controversial proposal, and is part of what will be a continuing process. I look forward to hearing from the bipartisan Nevada delegation, and all our other witnesses, during today's hearing. Copyright © 2007 YubaNet.com, all rights reserved. Email your ***************************************************************** 36 Carlsbad Current-Argus: Punitive fine sends wrong message The Current-Argus Article Launched: 10/30/2007 08:51:59 PM MDT As the state senator who represents Senate District 34, within which the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant is located, I recognize the importance of maintaining a perfect compliance record for WIPP operations for the safety of our citizens. WIPP has consistently maintained the integrity of the permit that the New Mexico Environment Department and the Department of Energy have long worked so hard to make work. Unfortunately, DOE in Idaho made a mistake and shipped a non-compliant drum to WIPP last summer. NMED Secretary Ron Curry announced last week that he is developing a notice of violation and will assess a six-figure fine on DOE for that mistake. While NMED does have the authority to impose a substantial fine (it could be more than $1 million dollars $27,500 per day for 55 days), I believe there are a lot of mitigating circumstances that NMED should consider when calculating the fine amount: The site in Idaho where the drum was packaged made a timely notification to DOE when it found that an incorrect drum was shipped to and emplaced at WIPP. Likewise, DOE made a timely notification to NMED the following day. The Idaho generator site immediately suspended all overpacking operations, and DOE suspended all shipments from that site the next day. DOE provided oversight on the Idaho operation's actions to recover from the event. DOE initially planned to immediately start retrieving the over-pack container, but was encouraged by NMED to make a case for leaving the drum in place. DOE made a strong safety case that the drum contents (1.25 ounces of prohibited liquid) posed no risk to the workforce or the environment and should not be retrieved. NMED then reversed itself two weeks later and ordered that the container be removed from WIPP and returned to Idaho. When ordered to retrieve the drum, DOE suspended all shipments to WIPP from all sites. WIPP retrieved the container within two weeks of NMED's order without worker injury or waste handling incident and shipped it back to Idaho. DOE continuously communicated with NMED and apprised them of the event and retrieval progress daily. These actions, which were extremely responsive on DOE's part, should have some effect on the calculation of the fine. The potential harm to public health or the environment that could have arisen from this violation is nonexistent, and consequently, the gravity of the violation is very low, and quite possibly, nonexistent. NMED's enforcement of the permit clearly protects the credibility of the permit itself, and NMED has maintained the permit integrity by ordering the drum removed. DOE paid dearly in lost operations and project image for making a minor mistake that caused absolutely no harm or even risk. A large fine will not make DOE any more compliant, or committed to compliance. I believe that a large fine imposed by NMED and sanctioned by the governor will be clearly seen as politically motivated. A large fine will send the wrong message to an uninformed general public. WIPP is accomplishing something almost unbelievable. It is safely operating a deep geologic repository for radioactive waste and proving that a nuclear energy future is possible, even when regulated by multiple state and federal agencies, with every activity under a high-powered microscope. The disposal of waste issue that has hampered nuclear power development for decades in America is being erased by successful WIPP operations. NMED's assessment of a large fine somehow minimizes WIPP's enormous contribution, and even trivializes the outstanding efforts of the WIPP workforce. A large punitive fine, in my opinion, is simply inappropriate. Vernon D. Asbill, of Carlsbad, is a Republican state senator and retired educator. ***************************************************************** 37 UK: Thisisdorset: Angry Plant Workers Quiz Group On 300 Job Losses Part of the This Is Dorset Network By Laura Kitching WORRIED FOR OUR FUTURES: Prospect trade union rep Austin Kinnane (far back) and other UKAEA workers protest about the looming job losses CONCERNED and angry workers packed Winfrith Village Hall to ask why their hard work in decommissioning a former nuclear site had resulted in redundancy. Some 300 jobs are expected to be lost as a result of funding cuts at the Winfrith site - and staff of the United Kingdom Atomic Energy Authority (UKAEA) said this was the first time they could speak to those responsible. A public meeting by the Winfrith Site Stakeholder group saw 100 people turn out to hear why the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA) is cutting the budget and causing skilled staff redundancies and mothballing' their work when it could be finished in one go. Head of the Winfrith site for UKAEA, Andy Staples, said their decommissioning work would have been completed by 2017 with an expected budget of up to Ł50 million but now the plan had been put back 20 years. He said now Winfrith and the Harwell nuclear site in Oxfordshire had been flat-funded - meaning the money has not gone up to match expenses - to Ł60 million between them. The meeting heard that as part of an NDA review funding was being prioritised at the Sellafield nuclear site in Cumbria, which was considered more hazardous. Mr Staples said it would mean a significant reduction of both UKAEA staff and contractors at Winfrith by 300-350 people - out of a previous workforce of 400-450. He added: "It will mean keeping Winfrith in a state of safe care and maintenance rather than active decommissioning. "There will be a series of changes over the next six months." NDA site program manager Malcolm Barents said they needed to concentrate on those sites with the highest hazard and had to manage within the current resources. He added: "It's a bit premature to say there will be a 20-year delay in decommissioning - we don't know when funding might change in the future." Prospect trade union representative Austin Kinnane and other UKAEA staff arrived at the meeting with protest banners about the loss of up to 70 per cent of the workforce. He said: "This has been the first opportunity to directly ask the NDA questions because they haven't come to us personally. "This is important to the local community as well, because the decommissioning will be stopped. At the moment we're getting rid of all the nuclear facilities and one objective is to hand all the land back to the community. "Now the redundant nuclear radioactive facilities will remain at Winfrith far longer than they need to." He added: "You do a good job of decommissioning the site and get to a certain point and your reward is being made redundant. "Are the NDA ever going to finish any site? The answer is no." Wool parish councillor Alex Ward received a round of applause when he said: "With a 20-year delay, even if staff are willing to hold on until decommissioning starts again many will be at retirement age. "The problem will be training up new staff with the same sort of expertise. "I can't see how you're readily going to replace these people when decommissioning becomes an option again. "All the expertise and training seems to be lost." Conservative parliamentary candidate for South Dorset Richard Drax said: "It is totally illogical to make all these highly-qualified people redundant if they've got to come back in 20 years' time. "They've done so well they've worked themselves out of a job, that's the irony. "Normally those who do well get rewarded - in this business they've got sacked." 10:34am Wednesday 31st October 2007Print  Email this Comment Add your comment Please note: to publish your comment you must be registered on this site. If you are already registered, please enter your details below. Not registered? Newsquest Media Group ***************************************************************** 38 JOGJCC: Dounreay escapes NDA funding cuts - John O'Groat Journal and Caithness Courier 1 November, 2007 By Iain Grant Published: 31 October, 2007 UK ATOMIC Energy Authority workers at Dounreay are celebrating a treble financial boost. Their current month's salary is increased by a newly-negotiated pay rise while next month they will receive a newly approved Ł420 "top-up" bonus. And it was announced yesterday that the site's funding from its public paymasters has escaped the major cuts facing a number of defunct reactor sites in the south of England. The Nuclear Decommissioning Authority's confirmation of annual funding of around Ł150 million for clean-up work at Dounreay for the next three years was welcomed by site managers. The mood amongst workers this time last year was one of despondency, with fears of major budget cuts and job losses. These failed to materialise though they have been realised for their counterparts at a number of English sites. The UKAEA's payroll of just under 1000 workers last month called off threatened strike action after accepting a pay offer. This involves a basic rise of two per cent, with a performance and incentive-related deal offering an extra lift of another two per cent. The rise, backdated to April, was included in their pay cheques for October. There was further good news when they learned that the Ł1000 bonus they were given in July is being augmented by a further Ł420. A UKAEA spokesman said both payments relate to the fee earned by the company from the NDA. The UKAEA has drawn flak from employees of other site-based contractors who do not enjoy similar bonuses. One, who did not wish to be named, said yesterday: "It seems really unfair that we are the ones getting our hands dirty in the clean-up of the site but it's only the guys in suits that are getting the bonuses." According to the UKAEA spokesman, the bonuses are paid from the extra money earned by the company in performance-related fees from the NDA. He said: "The UKAEA has used the profit it has earned to pay bonuses to its staff. It's entirely a matter for other contractors on the site how they reward their staff." Meanwhile, the NDA yesterday revealed that Dounreay can expect funding of Ł152 million in 2008/09 and 2009/10 and about Ł150 million in 2010/11. This compares to the Ł150 million in the current financial year, which was considerably more than initial estimates. Randall Bargelt, NDA programme director for Dounreay, said yesterday: "Good progress has been made so far on the clean-up work needed at Dounreay but we know that there is still much to be done. "The NDA is prioritising its funding for those sites with the highest hazards.We will continue to assess the impact of work priorities against the available funding and issue further guidance as necessary." Dounreay's managers are privately happy with the settlement but are loath to appear too smug given the major ructions the NDA's latest settlement has caused in other parts of the industry. With resources targeted at Sellafield and Dounreay, major cutbacks are envisaged in the planned dismantling of the Magnox reactors at Sizewell A in Suffolk; Dungeness A in Kent; Hinkley Point A in Somerset; Bradwell in Essex; and Berkeley in Gloucestershire. Unions and politicians are also mobilising to protest about projected job losses through swingeing budget cuts at the UKAEA plant at Winfrith in Dorset. An NDA spokesman confirmed it is prioritising spending towards "higher hazard" plants. iain-grant@ukf.net All content copyright 2007 Scottish Provincial Press Ltd. ***************************************************************** 39 NRC: Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste And Materials Meeting on Planning and Procedures; Notice of Meeting FR Doc E7-21430 [Federal Register: October 31, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 210)] [Notices] [Page 61694] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr31oc07-135] NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION The Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste and Materials (ACNW&M) will hold a Planning and Procedures meeting on November 13, 2007, Room T- 2B1, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland. The entire meeting will be open to public attendance, with the exception of a portion that may be closed pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552b (c) (2) and (6) to discuss organizational and personnel matters that relate solely to internal personnel rules and practices of ACNW&M, and information the release of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy. The agenda for the subject meeting shall be as follows: Tuesday, November 13, 2007--8:30 a.m. until 9:30 a.m. The Committee will discuss proposed ACNW&M activities and related matters. The purpose of this meeting is to 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, Dr. Antonio F. Dias (Telephone: 301/415-6805) between 8:15 a.m. and 5 p.m. (ET) 5 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 ACNW&M meetings were published in the Federal Register on September 26, 2007 (72 FR 54693). Further information regarding this meeting can be obtained by contacting the Designated Federal Officer between 8:15 a.m. and 5 p.m. (ET). Persons planning to attend this meeting are urged to contact the above named individual at least 2 working days prior to the meeting to be advised of any potential changes in the agenda. Dated: October 24, 2007. Antonio F. Dias, Chief, Nuclear Waste & Materials Branch. [FR Doc. E7-21430 Filed 10-30-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P ***************************************************************** 40 Las Vegas SUN: Presidential politics on display at Senate Yucca Mountain hearing October 31, 2007 WASHINGTON (AP) - Democratic presidential hopeful Sen. Hillary Clinton joined Nevada officials in lashing out at the proposed Yucca Mountain nuclear waste dump at a Senate hearing Wednesday. An Energy Department official insisted the project is safe and on-track. Nevada Senators Harry Reid and John Ensign contended that it's based on flawed science and will never get built. Clinton requested the Senate environment committee hearing after promising Nevada voters she'd do so. The New York Democrat is courting voters before Nevada's Jan. 19 presidential caucus. Democratic Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois, another presidential candidate, also submitted a statement opposing the dump. But Obama's not on the committee. All contents © 1996 - 2007 Las Vegas Sun, Inc. ***************************************************************** 41 Minnesota Indian Tribe Calls on Congress to Solve Nuclear Waste Crisis Before Embracing New Era of Nuclear Power Thousands of vulnerable communities located near temporary nuclear waste sites at risk WASHINGTON, Oct. 31 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- A Minnesota Indian tribe today urged a Senate panel to deliver on a promise to move the nation's nuclear waste to a safe, secure facility before allowing the United States to revisit nuclear power as a preferred energy source. The Prairie Island Indian Community offered its comments during the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee's hearing on the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository project. The tribe is among the closest communities in the country to a temporary nuclear waste site, located just 600 yards from more than 20 large containment units of highly radioactive spent nuclear fuel. Prairie Island is just one of thousands of communities in 39 different states located in close proximity to a temporary nuclear waste facility. There are presently 121 temporary nuclear waste storage sites scattered across the United States. "The federal government must fulfill its obligation under the National Nuclear Waste Storage Act and subsequent acts of Congress to solve the waste disposal problem and move the nation's nuclear waste to a safe and secure facility," the tribe stated in its testimony. "Developing a safe, permanent storage facility for spent nuclear fuel is critical to the health and welfare of the millions of Americans who currently live near temporary nuclear waste storage sites." Twenty-five years after Congress passed the National Nuclear Waste Storage Act and mandated the establishment of an underground repository, the future of the nation's nuclear waste disposal program remains in doubt. In 2002, Congress approved Yucca Mountain in Nevada as the site for the nation's first permanent repository for high-level nuclear waste but some Congressional leaders are now calling for the project to be abandoned. Meanwhile, despite the uncertainty surrounding the nation's waste disposal program, new nuclear power plants are being proposed throughout the country. "Lost in the debate over Yucca Mountain are the communities that bear the burden of the federal government's inaction and failure to solve the nation's nuclear waste problem," the tribe commented. "The indefinite storage of high-level nuclear waste at 121 different locations in 39 states poses a serious threat to national security and puts at risk more than 169 million Americans currently living within 75 miles of these temporary storage facilities." Prairie Island told the committee that storage at Yucca Mountain, a remote, militarily-secure site designed to permanently store the nation's high-level nuclear waste is a safer alternative to leaving nuclear waste under varying levels of security at multiple locations, near communities, rivers, and other natural resources. "Until or unless the federal government solves its nuclear waste problem, it is simply irresponsible to allow the construction of new nuclear power plants anywhere in the United States," the tribe stated in its testimony. To date, American ratepayers have contributed more than $28 billion to the national Nuclear Waste Fund to pay for a national storage site. This includes $470 million from Minnesotans. Prairie Island is located in southeastern Minnesota along the banks of the Mississippi River, approximately 50 miles from the Twin Cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul. Prairie Island is among the closest communities in the nation to a nuclear power plant and an above-ground nuclear waste storage site. Twin nuclear reactors and nearly two dozen large cement nuclear waste storage casks sit just 600 yards from our homes. As many as 35 additional casks will be added in the coming years. The only evacuation route off the Prairie Island is frequently blocked by passing trains. The tribe has been fighting to have the nuclear waste removed since 1994 when the state of Minnesota first allowed Xcel Energy to store the waste near its reservation. SOURCE Prairie Island Indian Community Copyright © 1996- PR Newswire Association LLC. All Rights Reserved. A United Business Media company. ***************************************************************** 42 Las Vegas Now: U.S. Senate Holds Contentious Hearing Regarding Yucca Mountain Jonathan Humbert, Reporter Nevada Senators like Harry Reid face an uphill battle against a Bush administration war chest. Nevada Senator John Ensign broke from the party line. -- this time from the United States Senate. Wednesday, the environmental committee held a contentious hearing aimed squarely at shutting down the proposed nuclear dump. Reporter Jonathan Humbert was the only local television reporter at that hearing in Washington. Nevada senators Harry Reid, John Ensign, Barbara Boxer and even Hillary Clinton fresh from the campaign trail. It wasn't about slowing down Yucca Mountain -- it was about ending the project forever. After three decades of controversy and stalling, democratic leaders say Yucca Mountain could be closed within a year. Wednesday's hearing offered no binding commitments, but it did renew the call to cut off funding and squeeze the project dry. Nevada's senators face an uphill battle against a Bush administration war chest of $400 million. They also face opposition from many states with nuclear power who want to see the multi-billion dollar dump house their waste. Idaho Senator Larry Craig, already considered a senate outsider, took the lead for nuclear power. He says the government must finish Yucca Mountain. "And if we don't, we either become a less productive nation or we're dirtier nation based on current technology." Senator Hillary Clinton was one of the harshest voices. She grilled nuclear experts over what she sees as a shoddy process. Nevada Senator John Ensign broke from the party line though to blast the Bush administration, the Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of Energy. "What we should not do is push an incomplete application for a flawed site through a rushed site and an incoherent process," said Sen. Clinton. "I think that we are really pouring money down a large rat hole in the state of Nevada," said Sen. Ensign. From here, the Department of Energy will submit another application by June of 2008. That could be the end to the mountain of waste in Nevada's backyard. Email your comments to Reporter Jonathan Humbert. All content © Copyright 2000 - 2007 WorldNow and KLAS. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 43 JOGJCC: Strip-out begins inside Dounreay dome - John O'Groat Journal and Caithness Courier Published: 31 October, 2007 RIPPING out the innards of Dounreay's famous dome has begun, with the stripping out of the integral reactor ducting and associated equipment that once helped power the UK's first fast breeder reactor. The reactor-well ventilation ducting and some electromagnetic pump duct-work is being removed from the sphere in order to minimise hazards for future decommissioning work and to open up access routes for the removal of the DFR breeder. Essential safety checks are being carried out prior to the ducts being cut into manageable sections using a special technique for contaminated components. A total of 85 metres of redundant ducting will then be wrapped and placed in storage to await packaging and disposal as waste. An incentive scheme has been put in place which will reward the project team for carrying out the work to cost and on schedule, whilst maintaining an exemplary safety record. The removal of the ductwork is estimated for completion by the end of March 2008. Another component to be removed is a redundant glovebox which was once installed within the sphere for the removal of equipment associated with the reactor primary coolant circuits. Removal will not only free up space but allow the unit to be utilised elsewhere on site, which will save time and a substantial amount of money. Once the glovebox has been isolated and checked for safe removal, it will be lifted from the plant using the newly-refurbished Goliath crane. It will then be prepared for transportation to the Prototype Fast Reactor facility where it will be used as part of its decommissioning programme. Mike Brown, DFR decommissioning manager, said: "Removing old equipment that has been in situ for over 50 years brings with it many challenges. Lateral thinking and expert planning is essential and safety must remain the utmost priority at all times. "The project team are delivering an optimised programme of work which is not only essential for the decommissioning of DFR, but brings with it benefits to the overall site decommissioning programme and other plants and facilities." UKAEA is carrying out this work on behalf of the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority with the support of its contractors, Doosan Babcock, Nukem and Johnson Controls. The decommissioning of DFR is expected to be completed by 2030. All content copyright 2007 Scottish Provincial Press Ltd. ***************************************************************** 44 Las Vegas SUN: Clinton, others weigh in against proposed Nevada nuclear dump October 31, 2007 By ERICA WERNER Associated Press Writer WASHINGTON (AP) - Democratic presidential front-runner Hillary Rodham Clinton indirectly courted Nevada voters during a Senate hearing Wednesday by bashing a radioactive waste dump planned for their state. "Yucca Mountain is not the answer," Clinton told a packed hearing of the Environment and Public Works Committee held at her request. "I believe we need to start over," she said. With Nevada hosting a new early caucus Jan. 19, Democratic presidential candidates have been competing to prove who's most opposed to the Yucca Mountain nuclear dump that the Energy Department is trying to build in the desert 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas. Most of Nevada's residents and elected officials, including Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., are vehemently against the dump, which is supposed to hold at least 77,000 tons of highly radioactive waste now stored at site around the country. Clinton capitalized on her seat on the Senate environment committee with a detailed condemnation of the dump and carefully prepared questions for government witnesses. Afterward, she held a conference call with Nevada reporters to reiterate her opposition. Not to be outdone, Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois, another Democratic hopeful, submitted a written statement for the record opposing the dump, even though he's not on the committee. Former Sen. John Edwards, meanwhile, pre-emptively issued a public statement Tuesday criticizing Yucca Mountain and attacking Clinton, who's called herself "agnostic" on the issue of nuclear energy. "Sen. Clinton again is trying to have it both ways by asking for a hearing to delay the Yucca Mountain project while declaring herself agnostic on nuclear energy," Edwards said. Wednesday was the first chance for Democrats since they took control of Congress to hold an oversight hearing on the long-delayed nuclear dump project, which has been hamstrung by scientific controversies, lawsuits and money shortages. Committee Chairwoman Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., lambasted government witnesses over their handling of the project and said she'd do what she could to stop it. Because of long-standing opposition from Reid and the other members of Nevada's congressional delegation - including Republican Sen. John Ensign - Yucca Mountain's project managers are accustomed to antagonistic questioning from lawmakers. They offered no new insights on the project, which was supposed to open in 1998. The opening date keeps slipping and is now expected no earlier than 2020. Energy Department officials said they still are preparing a total cost estimate for the project, and an Environmental Protection Agency official refused to be pinned down on when EPA will issue long-overdue radiation safety standards for the dump. That led to a caustic exchange with Clinton who asked Robert J. Meyers of EPA's Office of Air and Radiation to explain what he meant by saying the radiation standards would be ready "soon." Meyers replied that soon meant soon. "That's very enlightening Mr. Meyers, I must confess," Clinton said. All contents © 1996 - 2007 Las Vegas Sun, Inc. ***************************************************************** 45 ReviewJournal.com: Presidential hopefuls try to 'out-Yucca' one another Oct. 31, 2007 By STEVE TETREAULT STEPHENS WASHINGTON BUREAU WASHINGTON -- Top Democrats running for president scrambled over one another to advertise their distaste for nuclear waste burial at Yucca Mountain as Congress prepared to shine a light on the project at a hearing today. John Edwards challenged Sen. Hillary Clinton's opposition to Yucca Mountain, on the eve of a Senate hearing where Clinton is expected to take a lead in scrutinizing and criticizing the planned waste repository. Clinton's campaign in turn questioned Edwards' credentials, reminding that he voted for Yucca Mountain five years ago when he was a senator from North Carolina. Sen. Barack Obama avoided the fray, but was preparing a statement that stresses his own dislike for the idea of burying 70,000 metric tons of highly radioactive waste within the mountain ridge 100 miles northwest of Las Vegas. "The selection of Yucca Mountain has failed, the time for debate on this site is over and it is time to start exploring new alternatives for safe, long-term solutions based on sound science," Obama said in the letter. The candidate clamber underscores how they perceive Yucca Mountain as a major litmus test as Nevada Democrats prepare to hold their early presidential nominating caucuses next January, said Eric Herzik, a political scientist at the University of Nevada, Reno. "Everybody is opposed to Yucca Mountain when they talk in Nevada, and talk to Nevadans," Herzik said. "In the Democratic primary, you have to be opposed." But Herzik said the efforts by candidates to "out-Yucca" one another could lessen the impact of today's hearing, where Democrats want to showcase tough questions to the Department of Energy and other federal agencies. "This is symbolic politics, and it is addressed to Democratic voters," Herzik said. "It is being perceived as a political show." Clinton has worked to position herself to Nevadans as the candidate most likely to kill the Yucca project if elected president. All Democrats seeking votes in the state's early nominating caucus next January say they oppose the repository. But Edwards moved to slow the Clinton charge, saying Nevadans should take a closer look at her. Although Clinton opposes Yucca Mountain, Edwards referenced remarks she made at an August debate where she said she was "agnostic" on the larger issue of nuclear power. "Americans need a committed leader who will challenge the system and bring change, not someone who is still making up her mind," Edwards said in a statement released by his campaign on Tuesday. "Senator Clinton again is trying to have it both ways by asking for a hearing to delay the Yucca Mountain project while declaring herself agnostic on nuclear energy," Edwards said. More nuclear power plants mean more nuclear waste, and growing needs to dispose of it, said Edwards, who says he opposes building any new reactors "until we find another way to permanently and safely store nuclear waste." In the meantime, Edwards said, "we can meet our energy needs through renewable energies, improved energy efficiency and the use of coal with permanent storage of its carbon emissions." Responding to the charge, Clinton brought up Edwards' own baggage on Yucca Mountain. As a North Carolina senator in 2002, he voted in favor of President Bush's decision to designate the Nevada nuclear waste site. "Rather than attack Senator Clinton, a consistent opponent of Yucca Mountain, perhaps he should spend his time explaining to Nevadans why he voted for it," said Hilarie Grey, a Clinton campaign spokeswoman. "Rather than merely talking about Yucca Mountain, Senator Clinton is taking action," Grey said, adding that Edwards is going on the offensive because his campaign is struggling. Edwards has explained his shift on Yucca since 2002. He said it became clear to him that the science supporting nuclear waste burial is Nevada "is unreliable," and that he also grew concerned about transporting waste across the country and the threat from terrorists. Obama was preparing a statement to be submitted to Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., and to Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., chairwoman of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee that is sponsoring the hearing. A copy was made available on Tuesday. In it, Obama said the likelihood that Yucca Mountain will continue to be challenged on scientific and legal grounds, and may not open for decades if ever, means the government should look for alternatives. "The time has come for the federal government to refocus its resources on finding more viable alternatives for the storage of spent nuclear fuel," he said, including looking for another state willing to host a repository. "The federal government should also redirect resources toward improving the safety and security of spent fuel at plant sites around the country until a safe, long-term solution can be implemented," he said. Contact Stephens Washington Bureau Chief Steve Tetreault at stetreault@stephensmedia.com or (202) 783-1760. Links powered by inform.com Leave Your Comment 2 Reader Comments Terms & Conditions The following comments are provided by readers and are the sole responsiblity of the authors. The reviewjournal.com does not review comments before publication nor guarantee their accuracy. By publishing a comment here you agree to abide by the comment policy. If you see a comment that violates the policy, please notify the web editor. Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal, 1997 - 2007 ***************************************************************** 46 Buffalo News: Process could be key to reducing use of fossil fuels Opinion: Another voice / Nuclear recycling Updated: 10/31/07 6:47 AM While the use of nuclear energy is likely to grow in coming years, its ultimate role in meeting energy needs in a carbon-constrained world is still up for debate. And increasingly, that debate swirls around a controversial process once used at West Valley, the former nuclear reprocessing facility, to squeeze more energy out of spent fuel. Instead of disposing of spent fuel, the United States allowed its valuable components to be recycled so that plutonium and uranium could be extracted to make new fuel for the production of electricity. Recycling has been prohibited in the United States since 1977 because of nuclear proliferation fears. It was also considered too costly. Now, after three decades, President Bush is proposing to revive the process as part of his Global Nuclear Energy Partnership. If approved by Congress, the partnership would encourage the worldwide use of nuclear energy and allow the U.S. nuclear industry to function a lot more efficiently and economically. As part of this plan, research would be undertaken on developing new recycling technologies that limit, if not prevent, nuclear proliferation. The Department of Energy is considering 11 sites for a recycling facility, with most of the focus on the Savannah River Site in South Carolina and the Idaho National Laboratory. The West Valley facility, which is being dismantled and cleaned up, is not being considered. The case for nuclear recycling is strong. If the spent fuel now being stored in water pools and dry casks at nuclear power plants around the United States — some 50,000 tons — were recycled, it would help conserve uranium resources, which are not unlimited. It would also significantly reduce the volume, heat and toxicity of the remaining high-level radioactive waste that isn’t recycled, in effect more than doubling the capacity of the Yucca Mountain waste repository in Nevada. Opponents insist that recycling would be too costly, but not if the expanded use of nuclear energy helped prevent catastrophic consequences from climate change. For one thing, there is up to 100 times more energy potential in fuel that’s been recycled and used with conventional nuclear plants and advanced reactors. France and Great Britain continued to recycle spent fuel after the United States stopped, and they have done it safely and efficiently. Largely as a result of recycling, France today exports nuclear- generated electricity to other European countries, at considerable profit. France also has the lowest per-capita emission of greenhouse gases of any industrial country. It’s now in our national interest to proceed with research and development of nonproliferating technologies for recycling. Given the specter of climate change, we cannot afford to limit the ability of nuclear power to provide the emission-free energy that the world needs. Theodore G. Adams is a health physicist who worked at the West Valley facility for more than 10 years. © 2007 The Buffalo News ***************************************************************** 47 AFP: US speeding up anti-missile plans - Moscow - Thursday November 1, 12:52 AM MOSCOW (AFP) - Russia accused the United States on Wednesday of accelerating attempts to deploy anti-missile defences in central Europe, despite Moscow's request for a freeze on the project. Washington's negotiations with Poland and the Czech Republic over installing the defences "have not only not been suspended, but additional measures are being taken to speed them up," said Foreign Ministry spokesman Mikhail Kamynin. "There is the impression that the United States is trying to make the realisation of its plans irreversible," Kamynin said in a statement. Kamynin also reiterated Moscow's dismissal of US accusations that Iran presents a military threat. Russia does not support "a holy alliance against this country," he said. The ministry spokesman accused Washington of failing to make good on a promise to put US proposals for resolving the dispute into concrete terms, while also failing to take seriously Russia's own proposals. "Unfortunately the American side prefers not to pay attention that Russia's offer is an alternative -- not a support" for US plans, he said. Washington and Moscow are at loggerheads over US plans for deploying 10 missile interceptors in Poland and a radar in the Czech Republic. The United States says the shield would guard against potential threats from Iran. Russia sees the US missile defense plans as a military encroachment in its former sphere of influence that could be turned against Russia's own nuclear deterrence. The United States, which is still negotiating with Poland and the Czech Republic for access to their territory, insists that the planned missile defences are no match for Russia's nuclear arsenal. Copyright © 2007 Yahoo! All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 48 RIA Novosti: Russia expects U.S. missile defense proposal in writing soon 15:20 | 31/ 10/ 2007 MOSCOW, October 31 (RIA Novosti) - Russia expects the United States to present its missile defense proposals in writing in the near future, a Russian Foreign Ministry spokesman said on Wednesday. "We expect the U.S. side to prepare and submit to us its concrete proposals for cooperation in the missile defense realm in documentary form," Mikhail Kamynin said. He said Russia's foreign and defense ministers had held talks on October 12 with their U.S. counterparts in Moscow, at which the U.S. side made 'counter proposals' in a bid to allay Russia's concerns over Washington's missile shield plans in Europe, including inviting Russian experts to inspect mooted missile defense sites. "At the time, we asked the U.S. side to present those ideas in the form of concrete proposals so that they could be analyzed and developed by experts. However, to date, that has not been done," Kamynin said. He said Moscow regrets the fact that Washington has effectively chosen to ignore alternatives proposed by Russia to U.S. missile defense plans for central Europe. Russia has offered the U.S. use of radar stations at Gabala in Azerbaijan, and Armavir in south Russia, as alternatives. "Far from suspending negotiations with the Czech Republic and Poland, [the U.S.] is taking additional steps to accelerate them. The impression is that the United States is attempting to make the implementation of its plans irreversible," he said. Russian President Vladimir Putin earlier warned that if Washington ignores Russia's concerns and deploys interceptor missiles in Poland and a radar in the Czech Republic, Moscow could be forced to adopt countermeasures. First Deputy Prime Minister Sergei Ivanov raised the possibility earlier in the year of deploying missiles in Kaliningrad, the country's Baltic exclave, which borders on Poland. However, Putin said that recent talks with the U.S. had showed that Washington is trying to reach a compromise on the issue. "Our recent contacts with American colleagues indicate that they are genuinely considering Russian proposals and looking for ways to resolve the issue," he said. The U.S. announced its central European missile defense plans earlier this year, claiming the facilities were needed to counter possible threats from so-called rogue states such as Iran and North Korea. Moscow considers the plans a threat to national security. Speaking at a news conference following the October 26 Russia-EU summit in Portugal, President Putin said the plans were reminiscent of the political crisis caused by the Soviet Union's nuclear missile bases in Cuba in 1962. The chief of the Russian Armed Forces General Staff dismissed the latest U.S. proposals as nothing new. General Yury Baluyevsky said that on the whole, the recent talks in Moscow had failed to produce any substantial results with the potential to break the current deadlock. RIA Novosti ***************************************************************** 49 SF Chronicle: War industry regains command Article:War industry regains command:/c/a/2007/10/30/EDQGT3L8R.DTL Robert Scheer, Creators Syndicate, Inc. Wednesday, October 31, 2007 Not to stoke any of the inane conspiracy theories running wild on the Internet, but if Osama bin Laden weren't on the payroll of Lockheed-Martin or some other large defense contractor, then he deserves to have been. What a boondoggle 9/11 has been for the merchants of war, who this week announced yet another quarter of whopping profits made possible by George W. Bush's pretending to fight terrorism by throwing money at outdated Cold War-style weapons systems. Lockheed-Martin, the nation's top weapons manufacturer, reaped a 22 percent increase in profits, while rivals for the defense buck, Northrop Grumman and General Dynamics, increased profits by 62 percent and 22 percent respectively. Boeing's profits jumped 61 percent, spiked this quarter by its commercial division, but Boeing's military division, like the others, has been doing very well indeed since the terrorist attacks. As Newsweek International put it in August: "Since 9/11 and the U.S.-led wars that followed, shares in American defense companies have outperformed both the Nasdaq and Standard & Poor's stock indices by some 40 percent. Prior to the recent cascade of stock prices worldwide, Boeing's share prices had tripled over the past five years while Raytheon's had doubled." Not bad for an industry in serious difficulty with the sudden collapse of the Cold War at the beginning of the 1990s, when the first President Bush and his Defense Secretary Dick Cheney were severely cutting the military budget for high ticket planes and ships designed to fight the no-longer existent Soviet military. Sure they had Iraq to kick around, but the elder Bush never thought to turn the then very real aggression of Saddam Hussein into an enormously expensive quagmire. He both defeated Hussein and cut the military budget. Not so Bush the younger, who exploited the trauma of 9/11 as an occasion to depose the defanged dictator of Iraq and thus provide a "shock and awe" showcase for the arms industry, which continues to benefit obscenely from the failed occupation. The second Iraq war, irrationally conflated with the 9/11 attack that had nothing to do with Hussein, provided the perfect threat package to justify the most outrageous military boondoggle in the nation's history. The bin Laden boys only had an arsenal of $3 box knives, but Bush claimed Hussein had WMD. Sadly for the military-industrial complex, Hussein's army collapsed all too suddenly. But the insurgency, much of it fueled by the Shiites, who were ostensibly on our side, provided the occasion for pretending that we are in a war against a conventionally armed and imposing military enemy. Of course, we are in nothing of the sort with this so called "war on terror," a propaganda farce that draws resources away from serious efforts to counter terrorism to reward the corporations that profit from hi-tech weaponry that has little if anything to do with the problem at hand. As Columbia University professor Richard K. Betts points out in Foreign Affairs magazine: "With rare exceptions, the war against terrorists cannot be fought with army tank battalions, air force wings, or naval fleets - the large conventional forces that drive the defense budget. The main challenge is not killing the terrorists but finding them, and the capabilities most applicable to this task are intelligence and special operations forces ... It does not require half-a-trillion dollars worth of conventional and nuclear forces." That half a trillion only covers the Pentagon budget for expenses beyond the cost of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars or the Department of Homeland Security. Those last three items total more than $240 billion in Bush's 2008 budget requests. Add to that the $50 billion spent on intelligence agencies and an equal amount of State Department-directed efforts and you can understand how we manage to spend more fighting a gang of Mujahedeen terrorists, once our "freedom fighters" in that earlier Afghanistan war against the Soviets, than we did at the height of the Cold War. "The Pentagon currently absorbs more than half of the federal government's discretionary budget," writes Lawrence J. Korb, "surpassing the heights reached when I was President Reagan's assistant secretary of defense .... And much like the 1980s, we are spending billions of dollars on weapons systems designed to fight the Soviet superpower." Thanks to bin Laden and Bush's exploitation of "war on terror" hysteria, the taxpayers have been hoodwinked into paying for a sophisticated military arsenal to fight a Soviet enemy that no longer exists. The Institute for Policy Studies calculated last year that the top 34 CEOs of the defense industry have earned a combined billion dollars since 9/11; they should give bin Laden his cut. E-mail Robert Scheer at RSCHEER@truthdig.com This article appeared on page B - 11 of the San Francisco Chronicle ***************************************************************** 50 Reuters: North Korea's nuclear capabilities | U.S. | Wed Oct 31, 2007 5:17am EDT (Reuters) - Here are some facts about North Korea's nuclear program. The North agreed to disable key facilities under a disarmament-for-aid deal it reached with regional powers. THE FACILITY - North Korea's nuclear program dates back to at least the 1980s, and is centered at Yongbyon, about 100 km (60 miles) north of Pyongyang. - It consists of a five-megawatt reactor, a fuel fabrication facility and a plutonium reprocessing plant, where weapons-grade material would be extracted from spent fuel rods. - In October 1994, the United States and North Korea struck a deal to freeze the Yongbyon complex in exchange for more proliferation-resistant reactors to be built by an international consortium. That project has been cancelled. ESCALATION - The U.S. confronted North Korea in October 2002 and charged it with having a clandestine plan to enrich uranium for weapons. - In February 2005, North Korea declared for the first time it had nuclear weapons. - It said it conducted its first nuclear test in October 2006. THE TALLY - U.S. officials said the North has produced about 50 kg (110 lb) of plutonium, which proliferation experts said conservatively would be enough for six to eight nuclear weapons -- depending on the quality of the plutonium and weapon design. DELIVERING A WEAPON - No one is sure if the North can make a nuclear weapon small enough to mount on a warhead. - The North test-fired seven missiles on July 2006, including its Taepodong-2 with a range some experts said could one day reach U.S. territory. It fizzled soon after launch. - The backbone of North Korea's air force is an ageing fleet of 780 fighters and 80 bombers built with Soviet technology, the South's Defence Ministry said. Sources: Reuters, Center for Nonproliferation Studies, intelligence reports, Congressional Research Service ***************************************************************** 51 UPI: Walker's World: The Indo-Pakistan hyphen International Security - Emerging Threats - Analysis - UPI.com Published: Oct. 31, 2007 at 10:04 AM By MARTIN WALKER UPI Editor Emeritus MUMBAI, Oct. 31 (UPI) -- For decades, the world has thought of India and Pakistan in terms of the dangerous hyphen that so often connects them. There is the Indo-Pakistan problem of Kashmir, and another of two nuclear-armed states with an anguished and competitive history of three hot wars and a long cold one that still continues. But India’s stunning economic growth over the past five years had begun to delete that stubborn hyphen as the world woke up to the likelihood that the world’s largest democracy was becoming a major economic power. Statesmen and investors alike are already factoring into their plans the prospect that India seems on track to join the United States, China, Japan and Europe as one of the superpowers of the future. And this week, with German Chancellor Angela Merkel and U.S. Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson each visiting India and hailing its economic prowess, that tendency to see India largely in terms of its glittering future is even more apparent. There are three reasons why this may not be entirely right. The first is that Pakistan is also clambering up the prosperity ladder after three successive years of 7 percent growth in gross domestic product and a new success in attracting foreign investment that is -- in proportion to the size of the two economies -- even greater than that of India. The second reason is that the two countries are not just neighbors who in living memory were parts of the single British Raj, but that they also share traditionally single provinces like Punjab and Kashmir. Despite the massive relocation of populations that took place at the time of independence in 1947, the two populations are still connected by tribal, linguistic, cultural and family ties. They share water and other resources, and they face the common looming problem of climate change and the increasingly worrying vagaries of the monsoon rains. The third reason is that each country, despite the hopes and economic promise, is deeply fragile. In Pakistan this week, as the mourning for the 139 who died two weeks ago when suicide bombers attacked the homecoming cavalcade of former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto, another bomb exploded near the army headquarters of President Pervez Musharraf in Rawalpindi. The vast province of Baluchistan rumbles with separatist discontent, and the military is taking heavy casualties in its spasmodic attempts to take control of the Taliban sanctuaries of the North-West Frontier districts. The country faces threats of jihadism and terrorism, of an army that is low in morale and whose intelligence arm seems not entirely under control, while undergoing a political and constitutional crisis that Bhutto’s return has clearly not resolved. In India this week even as the booming stock market soared dizzily above 20,000 points, doubling in the last six months, a march of 25,000 poor and landless arrived in the capital, New Delhi, to demand land reform. They sought (and won a promise of) tough new laws to protect other landholdings, deeds and tenancy rights from the corruption and abuses that have seen their ownership subverted by the rich and powerful, by private developers and by government-backed special economic zones. "Many people here have been displaced many times over -- first because of mining, then because of dams. They have nowhere to go," march organizer Puthan Vithal Rajgopal told reporters in New Delhi. The world hears more these days of India’s aspiring middle class of some 300 million people and rather less of the 400 million who continue to live in dire poverty. Often, as in the slums of Mumbai that cluster around the modern airport, they live cheek by jowl with India’s newly prosperous residential and commercial developments. The world hears more of India’s new missiles, warplanes and submarines and its geopolitical ambitions than it does of the 150 million Muslims, many of whom see themselves as second-class citizens at best and as potential victims of Hindu nationalism at worst. Last week the scandal-probing investigative team of Tehelka, who made their name filming a sting operation to expose an arms-trade corruption scandal, broadcast a film of another sting. A reporter spent six months posing as a sympathizer to record men boasting of their atrocities in the killings of hundreds of Muslims in the Gujarat riots of 2002, and the film presented powerful evidence that the killers had been backed and some later protected by the chief minister of Gujarat, Narendra Modi. A bold and gifted administrator with a reputation for running a reformed and corruption-free system that has produced admirable economic progress, Modi is one of the symbols of the new, business-friendly India and is seen by his supporters as a prime minister of the future. But at the same time, he has become a symbol of aggressive Hindu nationalism and of sectarian violence, as someone who defines India’s vulnerability to Hindu-Muslim antagonism and communal division. As a democracy under the rule of law, India has safety valves and procedures against this kind of social division that Pakistan, which has spent most of the 60 years since independence under military rule, still lacks. But the fragility remains. The promise of South Asia, of an India and Pakistan living peacefully and trading profitably as neighbors, remains glittering and tantalizingly close. But the abyss of sectarian violence and religious extremism, of massive poverty challenging the new rich, looms darkly alongside. In that sense, the hyphen that defines a common challenge for Indo-Pakistan remains stubbornly, tragically in place. © 2007 United Press International. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 52 The Weekly Standard: A Mushroom Cloud Of Nuclear Defense Delays, Awaiting Further Deliberations Only Facilitates Iran?s Missile Development - CBS News Oct. 31, 2007 Bush On Iranian Threat "CBS News RAW": President Bush reiterated his administration's stance on Iran, saying its nuclear capabilities remain a serious threat to world peace and Mideast stability. | Share * Bush On Iranian Threat (0:58) * Tighter U.S. Sanctions On Iran (1:56) * Will Iran Sanctions Work? (9:31) (Weekly Standard) This column was written by Charlie Szrom. Imagine a tool exists that would weaken potential Iranian nukes without waiting for resolution of the debate over sanctions, force, and diplomacy. If we found such a device, shouldn't we fund it immediately rather than waiting for Iran's nuclear program to come online? One would think so. But last Tuesday, Defense Secretary Robert Gates stepped on the brakes in Prague: he suggested in a proposal to the Russians that "activation" of Central European missile defense should wait until the Iranians test missiles. And, in September, Congress cut funding for the program, which would install a radar system in the Czech Republic and ten interceptors in Poland. Claiming a desire to stall construction, legislators allotted $85 million less in the Senate and $139 less in the House than the $206 million requested by the Missile Defense Agency (MDA) for FY2008. Waiting for the mushroom cloud of a missile test or further Congressional deliberation will strengthen Iranian nuclear power. Postponement would let Tehran intimidate the region with a weapon system whose counter would remain years away from completion. Next year, the 2008 presidential campaign will push budget requests into a new administration, which would then solicit missile defense funding in late 2009 at the earliest. The MDA estimates that it could complete the Central European anti-missile "shield" in five years, but inevitable bureaucratic logjams and negotiations with NATO partners will surely slow the pace. Construction begun in 2010, therefore, would likely not finish until after 2015. That happens to be the year by which the Defense Intelligence Agency predicts Iran could have intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs). The Central European program would protect U.S. allies that have sacrificed on our behalf. While preliminary ground-based missile defense safeguards the American homeland, Britain and Poland have no such protection. Some critics claim the program will not work -- even though the military has successfully used interceptors to shoot down offensive missiles in 28 of 36 tests since 2001 and has conducted 18 successful flight tests out of 19 tries since September 2005. According to Lieutenant General Henry Obering, head of the Missile Defense Agency, unsuccessful tests occurred because of faulty components, not design flaws in the missile defense concept. This means that the success rate -- highly respectable for a program that began in experimental stages -- will likely improve as the military irons out auxiliary errors. Rep. Ellen Tauscher believes we should consider employing technologies such as the Theater High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) system or the ship-based Aegis system instead of a ground-based program. The armed forces built these systems for use in military theaters, not entire regions. They could not protect an area as wide as Europe nor could they, in their current versions, intercept ICBMs. Such technologies could, however, supplement ground-based defenses by extending coverage to southeastern Europe, which lies too close to Iran to enjoy protection from interceptors in Poland. Russian President Vladimir Putin proposes that America use a radar station in Qabala, Azerbaijan, complemented by interceptors instead based at sea, in Iraq, or in Turkey. But the Soviets built the Qabala radar more than 20 years ago. The facility needs drastic updating or outright replacement: the deputy Azeri foreign minister stated in 2006 that the facility was so antiquated it would cease functioning within five years. The radar's location goes further in making it a useless replacement. A missile defense system requires an early warning radar. In the case of the proposed Central European system, a satellite would detect a missile launch and activate the Czech-based radar, which would then guide interceptors to target the offensive missiles. The time delay between missile detection and interceptor initiation demonstrates the need for significant distance between a defense system and the territory from which a missile might originate. Interceptors based in Azerbaijan, which lies on Iran's northern border, would launch well after Iranian missiles were already headed to Europe. Iraq, Turkey, and sea-based interceptors would make poor substitutes. Not enough space exists between those two countries and Iran, while sea-based interceptors like AEGIS cannot climb high enough to meet ICBMs, which travel in suborbital spaceflight. Also, Qabala represents the last remnant of the Russian military in Azerbaijan. On August 6, Russian planes threateningly dropped a missile in Georgia, Azerbaijan's western neighbor and a close U.S. ally. If we agreed to share the radar, we would expand Moscow's influence in an anti-Russian region at little military benefit to ourselves. While locals in the Caucasus may dislike missile defense, some in Central Europe feel differently. A mid-August poll conducted by the Missile Defense Advocacy Alliance and the Opinion Research Corporation showed that a majority of Poles -- 58 percent -- want missile defense in their country. We can expect continued Polish backing after the October 21 election, as 67 percent of respondents belonging to the victorious Civic Platform supported the program. In the Czech Republic, only 38 percent support the program. However, nearly half -- 49 percent -- of those Czechs either extremely or very familiar with missile defense plans favor them. The U.S. must help educate Czechs further, explaining that the radar will not adversely affect residents near Misov, the proposed site in the south of the country. Contrary to one critique, this program will not start a new arms race. Russian missiles intended to strike the United States would cross the North Pole, not Europe, and thus would not face interdiction from a Polish site. Russia's thousands of ICBMs would also easily overwhelm the planned interceptors, which number just ten. Some critics have argued that NATO should participate more in the program, while others have said the construction should wait until a more favorable diplomatic climate emerges with a new U.S. president. Both points contain some validity. We should coordinate more with NATO. Missile defense would involve new NATO members in the active defense of Europe. But we should not let greater participation cancel or delay the program's progress. By Charlie Szrom © Copyright 2007, News Corporations, Weekly Standard, All Rights Reserved. © MMVII, CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 53 AFP: US missile defense negotiations 'on course'- Pentagon - Wed Oct 31, 3:08 PM ET WASHINGTON (AFP) - The Pentagon said Wednesday its negotiations to install US missile defenses in eastern Europe are on track but denied a Russian charge that they were being accelerated. "We are very much on course and wish to come to agreements with the Czech Republic and Poland as soon as possible, so we can begin building and installing this system," said Pentagon press secretary Geoff Morrell. "But I have no sense that this is in any way being expedited." Gates hopes to wrap up the negotiations by the end of the year, although the Czechs have said they may not conclude until early next year. The US plan calls for installing a powerful targeting radar in the Czech Republic and 10 interceptor missiles in Poland by 2012. Morrell's comments followed accusations by Russian foreign ministry spokesman Mikhail Kamynin that Washington was not taking seriously a Russian counterproposal on missile defense. Kamynin said Washington not only had not acceded to a Russian demand that the negotiations with Poland and the Czech Republic be frozen, "but additional measures are being taken to speed them up." "There is the impression that the United States is trying to make the realization of its plans irreversible," Kamynin said in a statement. US Defense Secretary Robert Gates told reporters last week that the US side has gone as far as it could to allay Russian concerns about the missile defense system, and the ball was now in the Russians' court. Morrell reaffirmed that position Wednesday, telling reporters: "You will not be seeing additional proposals coming from the secretary until there is movement from the Russian side." During a visit to Moscow earlier this month, Gates and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice presented Russian President Vladimir Putin with ideas for integrating Russia into a broad European missile defense system. Russian Defense Minister Viktor Serdyukov said last week that the US proposals were not enough to satisfy Russian concerns. Russia sees the US missile defense plans as a military encroachment in its former sphere of influence that could be turned against Russia's own nuclear deterrence. The US side insists it poses no threat to the Russians, only to a looming missile threat from Iran. Copyright © 2007 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The ***************************************************************** 54 DOE: DOE's National Renewable Energy Lab to Dramatically Increase Use of Clean, Renewable Energy October 30, 2007 Department of Energy’s National Renewable Energy Lab to Dramatically Increase Use of Clean, Renewable Energy New “Green Building,” Biomass and Solar Facilities to Transform how NREL Uses Power GOLDEN, CO– U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Secretary Samuel W. Bodman today participated in a groundbreaking ceremony for a highly efficient and “green” Research Support Facility, and announced two major renewable power projects at the Department’s National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL). These projects further President Bush’s to increase the use of clean, renewable energy and maximize energy efficiency across the federal government. NREL’s new Research Support Facility promises to be one of the most “green” buildings ever constructed; the new Renewable Fuel Heating Plant will use biomass to cut NREL’s future natural gas use by 75 percent; and the Mesa Top PV Project – a new five-acre photovoltaic array, and one of the largest solar power systems in Colorado – will help power the lab’s main campus. These projects underscore NREL’s role in advancing DOE’s Transformational Energy Action Management (TEAM) Initiative, a Department-wide effort to maximize energy efficiency and renewable energy generation across the DOE complex. TEAM Initiative puts DOE on an aggressive footing toward meeting and possibly exceeding President Bush’s executive over to reduce energy use across the federal government. DOE Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Alexander Karsner and NREL Director Dan Arvizu joined Secretary Bodman for today’s groundbreaking ceremony and announcements. “It is fitting that the Nation’s leading research center on renewable energy and energy efficiency is also a leader in putting these vital technologies to use,” Secretary Bodman said. “These projects truly set a new precedent for how we use energy and I hope they will serve as models for future federal clean energy projects. Through TEAM Initiative, and exemplary projects like these at NREL, DOE is on track to meet and exceed its commitment to reduce energy intensity (energy consumption per square foot) at its facilities by 30 percent nationwide, saving taxpayers roughly $90 million a year.” NREL’s 210,000 square-foot Research Support Facility is designed to be a model for sustainable, high-performance design, and will provide DOE-owned work space for administrative staff who currently occupy leased space. It will make substantial use of daylighting, dramatically reducing energy use and providing a pleasant and productive working environment. The RSF has been designed to achieve a LEED® (Leadership in Environmental and Energy Design) Platinum designation – the highest benchmark awarded by the U.S. Green Building Council. NREL’s Renewable Fuel Heating Plant will provide heat to the RSF and other research buildings on the Laboratory’s South Table Mountain campus by using biomass such as wood chips from forest thinning along Colorado’s Front Range. This Plant will be constructed adjacent to the existing Field Test Laboratory Building, and operate in conjunction with an existing natural gas-fueled boiler system. It is expected to be completed in May 2008. The Renewable Fuels Heating Plant will use an Energy Savings Performance Contract (ESPC) with a third party provider, Ameresco Energy Services Co. Under the ESPC, Ameresco will pay for construction of the project and be repaid with NREL’s energy cost savings. The Mesa Top PV Project will be located near the NREL Solar Radiation Research Laboratory, and will produce an estimated 750kW of clean, renewable electric power from solar energy that will be used on site. This five-acre span of solar panels is expected to be completed in May 2008; the installation could provide up to seven percent of the electricity NREL uses. This project uses several agreements involving DOE’s Western Area Power Administration (WAPA) and Golden Field Office, SunEdison, and Xcel Energy. Under these agreements, SunEdison will develop the solar energy system, and in turn, receive federal tax credits, along with revenues from both the sale of electricity to DOE and Xcel Energy's purchase of the Renewable Energy Credits associated with the generation. DOE will purchase that power on behalf of NREL at a price equal to what it currently pays for electricity from Xcel Energy. “By combining sound policy and tax incentives with DOE’s commitment to smart business practices, we are clearing a path for other agencies to follow,” Assistant Secretary Karsner noted. “This is a big win for clean energy, for our environment, for our nation’s energy security, and for taxpayers. I congratulate the Department, our Lab, WAPA, Ameresco, SunEdison, and Xcel Energy for thinking creatively and implementing such transformational projects.” The Renewable Fuel Heating Plant and the Mesa Top PV Project are the latest in a long line of measures DOE has undertaken to lessen overall energy use, increase use of renewably energy, and confront climate change by reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Both projects are notable for their use of innovative and increasingly popular private financing and contracting mechanisms that can provide more clean energy, more quickly, while minimizing federal capital expenditures, and delivering long-term financial savings for the government and taxpayers. “At NREL, we are proud that these major new facilities will enhance our capabilities, and provide reliable, renewable energy to power our growing research campus,” Director Arvizu said. “This is more evidence that DOE and NREL will continue to walk the talk when it comes to clean energy technology.” NREL, situated on more than 625 acres across multiple sites near Golden, CO, is the Nation’s primary laboratory for renewable energy and energy efficiency research and development (R&D). Its mission and strategy focus on advancing our Nation’s energy goals. Its scientists and researchers support critical market objectives to accelerate research from scientific innovations to market-viable alternative energy solutions. At the core of this strategic direction are NREL’s research and technology development areas; which span from understanding renewable resources for energy, to the conversion of these resources to renewable electricity and fuels, and ultimately to the use of renewable electricity and fuels in homes, commercial buildings, and vehicles. NREL directly contributes to our Nation’s goal for finding new renewable ways to power our homes, businesses, and cars. Media contact(s): Jonathan Shradar, (202) 586-4940 Kerry Masson, (303) 275-4090 U.S. Department of Energy | 1000 Independence Ave., SW | Washington, DC 20585 1-800-dial-DOE | f/202-586-4403 ***************************************************************** 55 DOE: U.S. Department Of Energy Commends Industry Consortia for Making Headway to Build Much-Needed, New Nuclear Reactors in U.S. October 30, 2007 WASHINGTON, DC – The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Deputy Secretary Clay Sell today commended the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) and the NuStart Energy Development consortium (NuStart) for submission of its combined Construction and Operating License (COL) application to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). This application marks the second to the NRC in nearly 30 years to build a new nuclear reactor. Specifically, TVA’s application seeks approval to build and operate two Westinghouse AP1000 advanced commercial nuclear reactors at its Bellefonte site near Hollywood, Alabama, and will serve as the reference application for future utilities applying for an AP1000 COL. “The submission of this license application is a necessary and monumental step toward the rebirth of nuclear power in the United States, and I commend TVA and NuStart for working with the Department of Energy, and for making headway to build much-needed, new nuclear reactors,” Deputy Secretary Sell said. “Through public-private sector collaboration, loan guarantees and tax incentives, this Administration is providing sound and stable policy that will propel the nuclear industry to continue with the type of momentum this Nation hasn’t seen in over 30 years.” This application, catalyzed by DOE’s Nuclear Power 2010 program (NP2010), will set the regulatory groundwork for dozens of AP1000 reactors to be built. Through its work with NP2010, NuStart Energy, LLC - a consortium of energy companies and nuclear vendors – promotes a unified industry approach toward identifying and addressing regulatory and licensing issues early and, through collaboration with industry peers, works to achieve standardization in the design and licensing of new reactors. In 2005, DOE selected NuStart to demonstrate the NRC’s untested process for licensing new reactors in the United States, and for obtaining regulatory approval of new reactor designs. The shared focus, use of industry experience, commitment to quality, and cooperation – coupled with early engagement with the NRC – are designed to provide a thorough and quality product for NRC review. NuStart’s members share costs and risks, and companies throughout the industry are benefiting from the consortium’s work as they pursue their own efforts. Current NuStart utility members include: Constellation Energy, Baltimore, Maryland; Duke Energy, Charlotte, North Carolina; EDF International North America, Washington, DC, the U.S. subsidiary of the French electric utility; Entergy Nuclear, Jackson, Mississippi; Exelon Generation, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; Florida Power & Light Company, Juno Beach, Florida; Progress Energy, Raleigh, North Carolina; South Carolina Electric & Gas, Columbia, South Carolina; Southern Company, Atlanta, Georgia; and Tennessee Valley Authority, Knoxville, Tennessee. Four other NuStart member utilities have announced they expect to submit COL applications to the NRC by the end of 2008 that will reference TVA’s Bellefonte application for the AP1000 reactor design, ensuring standardization of the design and saving review time and resources. In addition, using the success of NuStart as a foundation for developing applications, three other NuStart members have announced plans to submit license applications for different technologies. Announced in 2002, NP2010 is a joint government/industry cost-shared effort that can help provide solutions to meet future base load energy demand and address climate change. Specifically, NP2010 seeks to: demonstrate new, untested processes for licensing reactors in the United States; identify sites for new nuclear power plants, complete first-of-a-kind engineering of new reactor designs; develop and bring to market advanced nuclear plant technologies, and evaluate the business case for building new nuclear power plants. The Nuclear Energy Office has additional information on NP2010 and other DOE nuclear energy programs. Media contact(s): Angela Hill, (202) 586-4940 U.S. Department of Energy | 1000 Independence Ave., SW | Washington, DC 20585 1-800-dial-DOE | f/202-586-4403 ***************************************************************** 56 Tri-City Herald: 'Umbrella' going over Hanford tank farm Published Wednesday, October 31st, 2007 ANNETTE CARY HERALD STAFF WRITER Hanford workers are building a $2 million cap about the size of a football field over part of the nuclear reservation's oldest tank farm. T Farm, which includes 16 underground tanks, is home to the tank that is believed to have had the largest leak of radioactive waste among Hanford's 149 leak-prone single shell tanks. "I like to make the analogy of an umbrella," said John Kristofzski, project director for CH2M Hill Hanford Group. The cap is planned to keep rain and other water from soaking into the waste plume, which has spread about 75 yards around Tank T-106 and 90 feet below it. "It will reduce infiltration, and liquid is what drives contaminants to the ground water," said Joe Caggiano, a hydrogeologist for the Washington state Department of Ecology, the regulator on the project. The water table is about 200 feet below the tank. Washington Group International, a subcontractor to CH2M Hill, is now building a layer of soil up to 2 feet deep in the shape of a stop sign 60,000 square feet large. Soil is placed on a conveyor belt to carry it from an uncontaminated area over a wire fence and inside the tank farm boundary. The dirt layer will be covered with synthetic fabric, then sprayed with polyurea plastic. It's similar to the substance used to line pickup beds, but the quarter-inch layer of plastic will be more chemically resistant and longer wearing. In fact, the barrier is designed to allow trucks to drive across it without damaging it as work continues to empty single-shell tanks. Making the project more complicated, the barrier is being built around numerous monitoring stations for checking moisture movement and around risers that stick up above the ground to provide access to the underground tanks. The cap will cover not only Tank T-106 but also all or part of nine others with capacities of up to 530,000 gallons. The cap is being built with a slight slope to channel water to a lined trench that will carry it to an uncontaminated area outside T Farm. "It's not the final solution," said Rob Yasek, facility representative for the Department of Energy. "The idea is to see if it works." The cap at T Farm is the first of its type and scale at Hanford and is designed to last 25 years. Its goal is to limit movement of the waste deeper into the soil until a long-term cleanup decision is made on how to close tanks and clean up contamination around them. If the cap works well, more could be installed at other tank farms where radioactive waste has leaked into the ground. About 67 of Hanford's underground tanks are believed to have leaked, although none are known to be leaking now. Tank T-106 was a natural choice for the demonstration, Yasek said. It was built during World War II to hold waste from T Plant, which chemically separated plutonium from irradiated fuel rods for the nation's nuclear weapons program. In 1973 it leaked about 115,000 gallons of waste that includes chromium nitrate and radioactive uranium and technetium. The cap could be completed in late November or early December. w Annette Cary: 582-1533; acary@tricityherald.com © 2007 Tri-City Herald, Associated Press & Other Wire Services ***************************************************************** 57 Hanford News: Tri-Party agencies mum on meetings This story was published Wednesday, October 31st, 2007 Annette Cary, Herald staff writer The Tri-Party agencies are saying little about a top-level negotiating session last week in the Tri-Cities on Hanford's Tri-Party Agreement. At the table were James Rispoli, Department of Energy assistant secretary of environmental management; Jay Manning, director of the Washington State Department of Ecology, and Elin Miller, Region 10 administrator for the Environmental Protection Agency. The meeting had been scheduled to follow discussions with the public and interested parties, such as the tribes and the Hanford Advisory Board, about major changes in the legally binding Tri-Party Agreement. The parties received good input and "listened carefully" to public comment, according to a brief joint statement by DOE, EPA and the state given to the Herald on Monday. "There has been a good exchange of ideas among the three parties," the statement said, referring to last week's meeting. "The parties are considering alternatives and next steps." The top-level negotiating sessions began in May after it became clear that some work had fallen so far behind schedule that deadlines could not be recovered. That includes an estimated eight-year delay in startup of operations for the $12.3 billion vitrification plant to treat radioactive waste. At the September Hanford Advisory Board meeting, the three agencies made public some major changes that were being considered in legally binding deadlines for Hanford cleanup. They include extending the deadline for emptying radioactive waste from the leak-prone single-shell tanks from 2018 until 2040. The waste from the tanks then would have to be treated by 2047. Although the vitrification plant would not begin operating until 2019, 35 new interim deadlines for finishing parts of the plant are being considered to make sure construction and testing remains on track. In exchange for delays in deadlines for retrieving and treating tank waste, EPA and the state would require DOE to do more work to protect ground water and the Columbia River. They also want an annual report covering the total cost of remaining cleanup and a schedule for getting it done. © 2007 Tri-City Herald. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 this material is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. For more information go to: *****************************************************************