[ RadSafe ] Duke mulls building nuclear plant

[Sandy Perle]

Index:

Duke mulls building nuclear plant
Nuclear power plants and Alaskan oil on Bush agenda
Faster X-Ray Film Cuts Radiation
U.S. installing nuclear detectors in Singapore port
Clinton nuclear power station proposed expansion
Tsunami pushes up nuclear reactor 
Hans Bethe, 98, father of nuclear astrophysics
Japan's Tohoku Elec Starts Test-Runs At New Nuclear Plant  
Utah nuclear fuel fight going to White House 
Fresh rumpus over Dounreay waste 
Japan rejects Europe's nuclear fusion deadline
Nevada loses ruling on funds to fight Yucca Mountain nuclear dump
Permit for cooling San Onofre plant faces challenge 
==========================

Duke mulls building nuclear plant

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff will meet with Duke Power 
Co. officials Monday to discuss Duke's possible application for a 
construction and operating license for a nuclear power plant. 
 
The process incorporates inspections and tests during construction to 
provide information necessary to demonstrate that the reactor could 
operate safely when built. 

Duke Power, a division of Charlotte-based Duke Energy Corp. 
(NYSE:DUK), operates three nuclear plants in the Carolinas. 

Three other nuclear plant operators have applied for combined 
licenses -- Virginia-based Dominion Resources Inc. (NYSE:D), New 
Orleans-based Entergy Corp. (NYSE:ETR) and Chicago-based Exelon Corp. 
(NYE:EXC), Reuters reports. 

The companies have not decided whether to build a nuclear plant. 

That depends on factors that include the cost of alternative fuels 
such as oil and natural gas, demand for more electricity and federal 
and state regulations among other things. 

The last nuclear plant built in the country started operations in 
1996. 

Duke owns and operates about 30,000 megawatts of generating capacity 
in North America, including 7,000 megawatts of nuclear power, Reuters 
says. One megawatt can power about 1,000 homes.
------------------

Nuclear power plants and Alaskan oil on Bush agenda

SYDNEY, Australia - President George Bush is to revive his 
administration's energy strategy, vowing to overcome the obstacles 
Democrats and environmental groups have mounted to drilling in an 
Alaskan wildlife refuge, and saying it is time to start building more 
nuclear power plants.

Mr Bush's renewed push, during a one-day visit to the Battelle 
Memorial Institute in Columbus to inspect new energy technology, was 
a rare departure from his almost daily lobbying for his No. 1 
domestic priority in his second term: remaking the social security 
system. But his energy and environmental initiatives have suffered 
setbacks in Congress, including the Senate committee defeat on 
Wednesday of his anti-pollution legislation, which critics argued did 
not go far enough.

Senate Republicans are also moving to manoeuvre a vote on drilling in 
the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, called ANWR, that would not be 
subject to a filibuster vote by Democrats.

"We could recover more than $US10 billion [$12.5 billion] of oil from 
a small corner of ANWR that was reserved specifically for energy 
development," Mr Bush said. "That's the same amount of new oil we 
could get from 41 states combined." Officials later admitted that 
many of those 41 states have no known oil reserves.

Mr Bush said the drilling operation would involve only 800 hectares 
of the wildlife refuge, or "the size of the Columbus airport", and 
that the the project would have "almost no impact on land or local 
wildlife", a statement that environmental groups sharply dispute.

Mr Bush rarely discussed nuclear power during last year's 
presidential election campaign, but on Wednesday he said the US 
hadn't "ordered a nuclear power plant since the 1970s, and it's time 
to start building again".

The Administration is considering a number of nuclear energy 
proposals and supporting an International Thermonuclear Experimental 
Reactor, a source of competition between France and Japan, both of 
which want to be the site of the multibillion-dollar project.

The driving force behind a national energy policy has been the Vice-
President, Dick Cheney, who headed the taskforce that set the 
Administration's course and became the source of arguments about Bush 

White House secrecy. Mystery still surrounds the role of industry in 
developing the Cheney group's proposals.
-------------------

Faster X-Ray Film Cuts Radiation
 
(AP) Eastman Kodak Co. is rolling out a higher-speed X-ray film that 
can halve a patient's exposure to radiation. 

The higher speed could mean less blurring and fewer retakes for 
people who get the shakes around the doctors. 

It is the first X-ray film in 20 years to offer a 50 percent or 
better drop in radiation dosage, the company said. 

The new product could help the world's biggest film manufacturer 
squeeze profits from its film-based business, which is shrinking as 
photography switches over to digital technology. 

Tested this winter at children's hospitals in Kentucky and South 
Carolina, the 800-speed, general-purpose medical film is being 
shipped this month to hospitals, clinics and doctors' offices around 
the United States and Canada. 

Phillip Bunch, a medical physicist at Kodak, said the film he 
invented with chemist Robert Dickerson might be especially beneficial 
for hospital technicians and long-term patients, particularly younger 
ones, in need of frequent X-rays. 
Bunch said hospitals will save money because their expensive X-ray 
tubes will last longer and they would need fewer retakes. 

Radiation dosages from X-rays have plummeted so much in the 110 years 
since German physicist Wilhelm Roentgen discovered the rays. 

The risk of developing cancer from a chest X-ray has been calculated 
at around 1 in 350,000, and would drop to 1 in 700,000 with this new 
film, said Dr. G. Donald Frey, professor of radiology at the Medical 
University of South Carolina in Charleston. 

But Frey said some contend there is no evidence that radiation is 
risky at the current low levels. That could affect how many hospitals 
switch to higher-speed film. 

Americans get an average of about 20 times more radiation from 
background sources — from the ground, space and even their own bodies 
than they get from an X-ray, Frey said.
-------------------

U.S. installing nuclear detectors in Singapore port

SINGAPORE (Reuters) - The U.S. government will install radiation 
detectors in Singapore's busy port to prevent the smuggling of 
ingredients for dirty nuclear bombs, U.S. officials said on Thursday.

Singapore, a close ally in the U.S.-led war on terrorism, is the 
first Southeast Asian nation to join Washington's "MegaPorts" 
security initiative which also covers the Bahamas, Belgium, Greece, 
the Netherlands, Sri Lanka and Spain. 

"The U.S. is going to supply the equipment free of cost as well as 
training, and maintenance of the equipment," David Huizenga, 
assistant deputy administrator of the U.S. National Nuclear Security 
Administration, told reporters. 

The devices, which resemble a gate that can sound an alarm when 
containers holding nuclear material pass through, should be ready by 
September, U.S. officials said. 

Singapore operates the world's second-busiest container port after 
Hong Kong and the world's biggest transshipment hub, where goods 
arriving by ship from one port are re-loaded onto a different ship 
destined for another port. 

Singapore has repeatedly warned of potential links between sea 
pirates and militant networks such as Jemaah Islamiah, blamed for the 
deadly 2002 bomb blasts on the Indonesian island of Bali and widely 
linked to Osama bin Laden's al Qaeda. 

Local authorities have warned repeatedly that terrorists could hijack 
a tanker ship laden with liquefied natural gas or lethal chemicals 
and use it as a "floating bomb" against its port, killing thousands. 

Huizenga said Washington was in talks with 30 other countries to join 
the programme and that negotiations with the Philippines, Thailand, 
Malaysia and Indonesia could be concluded in months. 

Speaking at a signing ceremony, U.S. ambassador to Singapore Frank 
Lavin said the plan was about "denying space to the enemy".
------------------

Clinton nuclear power station proposed expansion receives 
environmental OK from federal regulators 
 
CLINTON - The Nuclear Regulatory Commission will seek comment at an 
April 19 meeting on its preliminary conclusion that environmental 
impacts would not prevent issuing an early site permit for a second 
reactor at the Clinton nuclear power station.

The meeting will be at 7 p.m., Tuesday, April 19, at Vespasian Warner 
Public Library, 310 N. Quincy St., Clinton. NRC staff members will 
have an informal discussion period starting at 6 p.m. at which they 
will answer questions and explain the permit process.

Currently, the NRC is looking at having a final decision on the early 
site permit by August 2006, said Jan Strasma, a spokesman in the 
agency's Lisle regional office.

A final safety evaluation report also must be prepared on the 
proposed project, Strasma said. That report is expected by the end of 
this year, he said.

"The NRC will review both the environmental impact study and the 
safety evaluation report before making its final decision on issuing 
the early site permit," Strasma said. "A public hearing will be held 
in 2006 to receive public comments prior to the decision being made."

If the early site permit is granted, Exelon Generation Co., the 
Clinton plant's owner, could decide to move toward construction of a 
second reactor. Or the company could take up to 20 years to make that 
decision.
 
"We want to take advantage of this new regulatory decision making 
process," said Ann Mary Carley, Exelon manager of nuclear 
communications. "If the permit is approved, it doesn't mean we will 
go immediately to step two."

Step two would be choosing a nuclear plant design and submitting it 
to the NRC for approval, she said.

The NRC is looking at several nuclear power plant designs, Carley 
said.

"They haven't got to the point of saying if you pick this one, it is 
already approved," she said.
------------------

Tsunami pushes up nuclear reactor 

Chennai, March 9: The waves rose, so will the nuclear reactor.
The 500-mw prototype fast breeder reactor coming up at Kalpakkam, 
about 60 km from here, will be slightly taller than planned — a 
modification prompted by the tsunami. 

Water had surged into the reactor’s foundation pit when the December 
26 tsunami devastated coastal stretches of Tamil Nadu.

The huge foundation pit, close to the Madras Atomic Power Station, 
was filled with over six metres of seawater and chunks of silt and 
sludge, prompting the Atomic Energy Regulatory Board to take a fresh 
look at the entire plinth area and suggest modifications.

Baldev Raj, director of the Indira Gandhi Centre for Atomic Research 
that has designed the nuclear power plant to be built at a cost of Rs 
3,492 crore, told a news conference today the salt water had partly 
“infected” the concrete basement. So they would go in for an extra 
concrete tier at the bottom which would eventually raise the core 
height of the reactor by 1.2 meters over its initial design of 10 
meters.

Prabhat Kumar, project director of Bhavaini, the company formed to 
execute the project, explained that 10 mm of the “top layer” of the 
“concreting work” at the bottom has been chipped off. The basement 
that had already come up to a height of 1.2 metres will now be used 
as a buffer and the overall height would correspondingly go up, 
increasing the reactor’s height, Kumar said.

The scientists said the safety measures could raise the overall 
project cost to Rs 5 crore. Though work on the reactor has resumed 
after a delay of about two months, they said “we hope to still 
complete the project in time by 2010”.

Raj said a high-level panel, including experts from the Structural 
Engineering Research Centre, Chennai, Indian Meteorological 
Department, Delhi, Central Water and Power Research Station, Pune, 
and the National Institute of Oceanography, Goa, deliberated on ways 
to protect the installation against all possible natural disasters.

The new height proposed for the reactor will give it a maximum level 
of 9.4 metres from the mean sea level at Kalpakkam, which the 
committee, he said, found to be a “safe margin”. The maximum water 
level rise in Kalpakkam during the December 26 tsunami was 4.7 
metres, the scientist added.

The panel also suggested “additional features” for the atomic power 
station which will be carried out, Raj said, adding that another 3.5-
metre-high concrete wall was being built near the reactor site to 
check future seawater intrusion into the foundation pit.

Among the long-term measures being taken up to protect the nuclear 
facilities and the Kalpakkam Township is the construction of a 
reinforced concrete peripheral security-cum-boundary wall. Work on 
the 4-km-long wall has already started, Raj said. Installation of a 
local area warning system in the coastal stretch and a new wireless 
communication system powered by solar energy are among the other 
safety measures being initiated, he added.

Raj said a memorial for tsunami victims would also be put up at 
Kalpakkam, which lost 37 people, including four employees of the 
atomic energy department.
--------------------

Hans Bethe, 98, father of nuclear astrophysics

Nobel laureate Hans Bethe, who discovered the violent force behind 
sunlight, helped devise the atom bomb and eventually cried out 
against the military excesses of the Cold War, died Sundayat his home 
in Ithaca, N.Y. He was 98, the last of the giants who inaugurated the 
nuclear age.

His death was announced by Cornell University, where he worked and 
taught for 70 years. 
 
For almost eight decades, Dr. Bethe pioneered some of the most 
esoteric realms of physics and astrophysics, politics and armaments, 
advising the federal government and emerging as the science 
community's conscience.

During World War II, he led the theoreticians who devised the atom 
bomb and for decades afterward fought against many new arms 
proposals. Dr. Bethe fled Europe for the United States in the 1930s. 
As a physicist, he made discoveries in the world of tiny particles 
described by quantum mechanics and the whorls of time and space 
envisioned by relativity theory. He did so into his mid-90s, 
astonishing colleagues with his continuing vigor and insight.

In a 1938 paper, Dr. Bethe explained how stars like the sun fuse 
hydrogen into helium, releasing energy and, ultimately, light. That 
work helped establish his reputation as the father of nuclear 
astrophysics, and in 1967 earned him the Nobel Prize in physics. 
Politically, Dr. Bethe was the liberal counterpoint to Edward Teller, 

the physicist and conservative who played a dominant role in 
developing the hydrogen bomb. That weapon brought to Earth a more 
furious kind of solar fusion, and Dr. Bethe opposed its development 
as immoral.

For more than half a century, he championed many forms of arms 
control and nuclear disarmament, becoming a hero of the liberals.

In 1967, Dr. Bethe was awarded the Nobel Prize for his explanation of 
how the stars shine.

Hans Albrecht Bethe was born on July 2, 1906, in Strasbourg, Alsace-
Lorraine, to a family of modest means. His father, a physiologist at 
the University of Strasbourg, was a Protestant, and his mother was 
Jewish.

At the University of Munich, he received his doctorate, having 
already made contributions to the fledgling science of quantum 
mechanics. He came into conflict with the new Nazi race laws and fled 
Germany in 1933. He went to Cornell University, in Ithaca, where he 
remained the rest of his academic life.

Dr. Bethe wrote a series of brilliant papers that culminated in the 
1938 treatise "Energy Production in Stars." It set forth the first 
explanation of stellar energy that explained all the known facts -- 
essentially, why stars like the sun burn for billions of years.

In 1943, he was named the first director of the theoretical division 
at Los Alamos, the secret laboratory in New Mexico where thousands of 
scientists, technicians and military personnel were gathering to 
learn whether a nuclear bomb was indeed possible.

The bomb's horrors became a turning point for Dr. Bethe. After the 
destruction of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, he devoted himself to trying 
to stop the weapon's "own impulse," as he put it.

In the late 1960s and early 1970s, Dr. Bethe lent his growing 
prestige to fight the government's plans to deploy anti-missile 
weapons. In the 1980s, he fought President Reagan's proposed shield 
against enemy missiles, known popularly as "Star Wars." 
-------------------

Japan's Tohoku Elec Starts Test-Runs At New Nuclear Plant  
 
TOKYO -(Dow Jones)- Japan's Tohoku Electric Power Co. Wednesday 
started test-runs at its newly-built nuclear power plant in 
Higashidori village, Aomori prefecture, northern Japan.

The power utility started generating electricity from the 1.1 million-
kilowatt nuclear power plant at 11:50 a.m. local time (0250 GMT) for 
testing purposes, a company spokesman said.

Tohoku Electric will gradually raise operations to full capacity 
before it begins commercial operations in October this year.

The Higashidori nuclear power plant will be one of Tohoku Electric's 
main sources of electricity production, together with its existing 
Onagawa Nuclear Power Station in Miyagi prefecture, which houses 
three nuclear reactors with a a maximum capacity of 2.17 million 
kilowatts, the spokesman said.

Many of Japanese power utilities produce base-load electricity from 
nuclear power plants, and supplement their power supplies using oil- 
and gas-fired thermal power plants, particularly in the summer 
season, when the nation's electricity demand reaches its yearly-peak 
due to air conditioning needs.

Tohoku Electric will supply half of the power output from the 
Higashidori nuclear plant to Tokyo Electric Power Co. (9501.TO), the 
largest power utility in Japan.
-------------------

Utah nuclear fuel fight going to White House 

WASHINGTON — With options running out for Utah to block nuclear 
waste storage on Goshute tribal lands in Tooele County, Utah's two 
Republican senators, Orrin Hatch and Bob Bennett, are taking their 
appeal directly to the White House.
      Hatch and Bennett will meet today with White House Deputy Chief 

of Staff Karl Rove, himself a former Utahn, to enlist the 
administration's support in blocking the PFS consortium of nuclear 
power utilities from storing up to 40,000 tons of spent nuclear fuel 
rods in Utah.
      "It is a fair statement to say we are running out of time," 
said an admittedly nervous Rep. Jim Matheson, D-Utah.
      The appeal to the White House is the latest move by the Utah 
delegation, which has been meeting "continuously" to discuss how to 
stop PFS now that the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board, in a split 
decision, ruled PFS should be granted a license. That decision is 
expected to be ratified by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
      There is growing skepticism the delegation has the political 
muscle to thwart the project and that its legislative options are 
limited, at best.
      "Oh mercy," said Rep. Rob Bishop, the Republican who represents 
the 1st Congressional District where the PFS storage site is located. 
"I still believe a legislative option is the best option, and it may 
be the only one."
      Bishop, who admits to a certain level of legislative 
creativity, insists the fight in Congress is not over, nor has he 
given up.
      He will again introduce legislation declaring federal lands 
around the site as wilderness, something that would block PFS from 
constructing a rail line to the site. But a similar measure, which 
passed the House last year, was thwarted by the Senate. And there is 
little reason, Bishop admitted, to believe it would sail through this 

year.
      But it might stand a better chance if the Utah delegation could 
enlist the support of Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid of Nevada, 
who has been sharply critical of the Utah senators for supporting 
permanent nuclear waste storage at Yucca Mountain, Nev., in exchange 
for a letter from then-Secretary of Energy Spencer Abraham that no 
federal money would be used to support PFS.
      That promise is seen by some as somewhat empty, since PFS is 
privately funded, anyway.
      "I strongly oppose any decision that would allow storage of 
nuclear waste in Skull Valley," Bennett said. "I continue to believe 
our best course is to store the waste at its current locations until 
Yucca Mountain is ready. It doesn't make sense to move it twice."
      But Utah's House members are not unified with the senators that 
supporting Yucca Mountain is the only way to keep the waste out of 
Utah.
      Rep. Chris Cannon, R-Utah, says it is time to "close ranks" 
with the Nevada delegation, calling Yucca Mountain "a far worse 
solution, but better than a temporary solution in Utah."
      "We should have had a united front (with Nevada) against the 
East Coast dumping its waste on the West," added Matheson, who 
opposed the Yucca Mountain project from the beginning. "We should 
reach out to Nevada and try to build the relationship."
      Bishop also opposes Yucca Mountain and questions the wisdom of 
the senators' deal.
      "Hindsight is always wonderful," he said. "At the time, the 
senators were doing what they thought was appropriate. And it may 
still turn out to be the right thing to do. But it has not been 
helpful yet."
      Cannon said there really wasn't much the senators could do, 
that "we did see a better solution."
      Bishop is frustrated by Reid and the Nevada delegation, which 
he believes worked behind the scenes last year to kill his wilderness 
bill to block PFS — even though the industry openly admits PFS is a 
precursor to Yucca Mountain.
      "If that's the way he (Reid) is going to be, we need to be more 
creative and work around him," Bishop said. "He does not have 
dictatorial power, not yet. But it makes it harder if the Nevada 
delegation wants to play games like that."
      Utah House members believe the fate of Yucca Mountain and PFS 
are tied together. The industry wants the PFS site as "temporary" 
storage — the lease with the Goshutes is up to 40 years — until it 
can be moved to permanent storage at Yucca Mountain. But everything 
points to the industry using both facilities.
      Scores of regulatory and legal setbacks on the Yucca Mountain 
project have delayed the opening of that facility to 2012 at the 
earliest, and there is growing sentiment it might not open at all. 
The delays have made the need for temporary storage even more acute.
      Matheson points out Yucca Mountain has a capacity of about 
70,000 tons of nuclear waste. But the nation already has more waste 
than that at sites around the country. And with a renewed national 
emphasis on nuclear power, the waste problem is going to get 
progressively worse.
      Matheson, Cannon and Bishop are all supporters of a change in 
national policy to allow the recycling of spent fuel rods (banned by 
presidential order in the 1970s) as Japan and Europe now do. They 
believe the remaining waste should be left where it is.
      "We ought to be talking reprocessing in America," Cannon said. 
"That is the real solution to the transportation and storage 
problems."
      Cannon expects there will be considerable congressional 
discussion over the issue of reprocessing, but he doubts it will 
happen in time to thwart PFS.
      The reality is there is little support at this time in Congress 
for recycling, and there is no groundswell of opposition to the PFS 
proposal. The states with PFS member utilities are large and 
powerfully represented in Congress, and any attempt to block PFS 
legislatively faces an uphill battle.
      Bishop's wilderness bill, with a few tweaks to mollify 
opponents, is probably the best chance, although the delegation 
hinted it has other ideas under wraps.
      There is also an outside chance the Bureau of Indian Affairs 
and the Bureau of Land Management could weigh in against PFS, but the 
delegation is not optimistic about that.
      "We think we have some arrows in our quiver we can play around 
with," Bishop said. "We're not giving up on it."
-----------------

Fresh rumpus over Dounreay waste  
 
Objections have been raised over plans to move nuclear waste 
Councillors from England who are fighting a switch of nuclear waste 
from Dounreay to Cumbria are visiting the Caithness plant. 
Members of Cumbria County Council have objected to the move, which is 
backed by the reprocessing plant's regulators. 

Low level radioactive waste is being caused by the operation to 
decommission the site, where waste dumps are full. 

The objectors from Cumbria are arguing that rubbish generated at the 
complex should stay where it is. 

Regulators have said there is no alternative to exporting the low 
grade material - estimated at a lorry-load per week - to the national 
waste depository at Drigg, near Sellafield. 

The move has been supported by green watchdogs, the Scottish 
Environmental Protection Agency (Sepa). 

New dumps at Dounreay are not expected to be complete for another six 
years. 

But bosses have insisted they are confident they will eventually be 
able to deal with the 100,000 cubic metres of new radioactive rubbish 
caused by decommissioning the nuclear power plant. 
 
It is feared that moving waste may cause environmental problems 
Boss Norman Harrison said: "By using the right processes here, we're 
actually minimising the amount of low level waste that's produced. 

"It's part of how we want to engage with the county councillors to 
get their sign-on for this interim period when - to keep our 
processes flowing - it would be appropriate to export some low level 
waste down to Drigg." 

But delegation member, councillor Tim Knowles, replied: "We're not 
very happy about it to be honest. There is clearly a problem. 

"We feel that low level nuclear waste should stay where it is until 
policy issues have been resolved. The government's reviewing the low 
level waste issue, with a report coming out next year." 

He added: "We really can't see the urgency and we don't want to be in 
a position where the ultimate destination of this material is pre-
judged. 

"I think we tend to be seen as the central location to deal with all 
these problems. We've got 60% of the UK's waste, therefore we've got 
the problems associated with that. We don't want to be taken for 
granted." 

Councillor Knowles added: "It's all right for Sepa to say that they 
support it, but they don't have to deal with political issues arising 
from transport - either at this end, in the areas that are going to 
be affected and at the destination site at Drigg. 

"I think there's a lot more water to flow under the bridge." 

He was supported by anti-nuclear campaigner Peter Roach, who added: 
"It might be setting a precedent for other types of waste which are 
currently on the site at Dounreay. 

"It's also going to fill up the facility at Dounreay much more 
quickly than is necessary." 

He went on: "That's going to mean that other low level waste later on 
will have to find a home, which might be far more difficult than 
finding a home for the low level waste at Dounreay."
----------------

Japan rejects Europe's nuclear fusion deadline

The European Union and Japan are still deadlocked over where to build 
the world's largest nuclear fusion facility, after Japan brushed off 
a new EU "deadline" to reach a decision by the end of June.

Both are vying to host ITER (International Thermonuclear Experimental 
Reactor), a $5 billion to $10 billion project that aims to lay the 
groundwork for using nuclear fusion as an inexhaustible and clean 
source of energy. 

The project has been stalled since December 2003 because its six 
member parties cannot agree on where to locate the premier facility. 
The EU, China and Russia have lobbied for Cadarache in France, while 
the US, South Korea and Japan have supported the Japanese town of 
Rokkashomura. 

On Monday, EU research minister Francois Biltgen of Luxembourg said 
that current plans call for construction to begin on ITER by the end 
of 2005. To meet that target, he suggested the EU would go forward 
with the project - alone if necessary - if no agreement is reached by 
the end of June 2005. That is when Luxembourg hands over the rotating 
EU presidency.

But that date is "very artificial", says Dale Meade, a physicist at 
Princeton University in New Jersey, US. "Every year there's a new 
deadline, every year there's a missed deadline." He believes the only 
"agreement" the EU hopes to reach by June is one to build the project 
in France.

But Japan continues to oppose this. "There is no change in our 
position," said Takahiro Hayashi, deputy director of Japan's Office 
of Fusion Energy. He told the AFP news agency: "We believe the 
Japanese proposal is superior to the EU proposal."

"Something has got to change," Meade told New Scientist. Neither 
country has shown interest in trade-offs such as hosting a smaller, 
related facility or another large project. 

Meade advocates breaking ITER into smaller, $1 billion projects that 
each explore an aspect of ITER's main scientific and technological 
goals. "We may have to split this mega-project into more pieces," he 
says.

The US continues to support the Japanese site and a six-party 
coalition but is basically staying out of the fray, says Jeff 
Sherwood, a spokesman at the US Department of Energy. "It is now 
between the Europeans and the Japanese," he told New Scientist. 

The DoE has requested $55.5 million for ITER in the 2006 federal 
budget and estimates it will spend $1.12 billion on the project 
between now and 2013 to fulfill its promise to pay for 10% of 
construction costs.

Meade cautions that if Japan and the EU "are unable to make a 
decision, the US has to decide what we're going to do". Alternate 
projects in the US are currently "on hold".

ITER would work by heating isotopes of hydrogen to hundreds of 
millions of degrees, creating a plasma of charged particles. Confined 
by magnetic fields in a doughnut-shaped machine called a tokamak, the 
particles would collide and fuse, producing high-energy helium nuclei 
and neutrons.

The uncharged neutrons would escape the tokamak, generating heat that 
could be siphoned off for generating electricity. But the positively 
charged helium nuclei would be trapped by the magnetic fields and 
would help sustain fusion reactions.
-------------------

Nevada loses ruling on funds to fight Yucca Mountain nuclear dump

LAS VEGAS - Nevada lost a bid Tuesday to get more money from the 
federal government to fight the proposed Yucca Mountain nuclear waste 
dump.

A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of 
Columbia rejected the state's argument that the Energy Department 
shortchanged it by $4 million last year.

The judges ruled that the $1 million Nevada got in 2004 was what 
Congress intended, and the Energy Department had no authority to 
provide more.

"The court clearly ruled that when Congress makes a specific 
appropriation, that's all the state should get," said Joe Egan, a 
Vienna, Va.-based lawyer representing Nevada. He said no decision had 
been made about an appeal.

Energy Department spokesman Joe Davis declined comment until 
department lawyers reviewed the ruling.

The state had contended the federal Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1983 
provided for it to get money from a nuclear waste fund paid for by 
companies that use nuclear power.

The state told the court the funding would pay for its scientific 
studies and help it oversee the Energy Department's application for a 
repository operating license from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

"We're disappointed. We felt like it was something we needed," said 
Bob Loux, Nevada nuclear projects director and the top state official 
working to oppose the Yucca project. He said the state would continue 
oversight on a limited budget while challenging transportation routes 
and federal water use at the Yucca site.

The lawsuit, filed a year ago, is one of a series of state challenges 
to elements of the federal plan to bury 77,000 tons of the nation's 
most radioactive waste beneath Yucca Mountain, 90 miles northwest of 
Las Vegas.

Congress and President Bush approved the project in 2002, despite 
opposition from Nevada's governor and its congressional delegation.

The Energy Department wanted to submit a license application by 
December 2004 and open the dump in 2010. But the schedule was pushed 
back following a ruling from the federal appeals court in a separate 
case last July.

The court said a 10,000-year Environmental Protection Agency 
radiation protection standard for the Yucca site did not extend far 
enough into the future to meet a National Academy of Sciences 
recommendation. The EPA is rewriting the standard and is expected to 
release a draft in late spring or early summer.

Energy Department officials now say they hope to submit a license 
application by the end of this year, but the repository might not 
open until 2012 or later.
--------------------

Permit for cooling San Onofre plant faces challenge 

Environmentalists objected yesterday to the proposed renewal of a 
state permit that allows Southern California Edison to use 2.4 
billion gallons of seawater each day to cool the San Onofre nuclear 
power plant. 

Members of the San Diego Bay Council, a coalition of local 
environmental groups, told a public hearing that the permit written 
by regulators lacks sufficient detail to properly assess the plant's 
effect on marine life. 
 
"From reading this permit, you wouldn't know that a single fish is 
killed," said Laura Hunter of the Environmental Health Coalition. 

The coalition asked the San Diego Regional Water Quality Control 
Board to postpone its decision for three months so environmentalists 
can hire experts to analyze the permit and recommend changes. 

Unwilling to delay the issue that long, the board voted to extend the 
public comment period, which was scheduled to expire yesterday, until 
March 23. Only written comments will be accepted. 

John Robertus, the board's executive director, said his staff needs 
at least two months to get the draft permit ready for final approval. 

The renewed permit would allow the plant to continue discharging warm 
water for an additional five years. The plant is not allowed to 
discharge water that is more than 25 degrees warmer than the ocean. 

Under the new permit, Edison also would be required to complete 
another comprehensive study of how the warm-water discharges affect 
fish and other marine organisms. Changes to the Clean Water Act 
require power plants to reduce the amount of fish, shellfish, larvae 
and eggs killed by being pumped through the cooling systems. 

Additionally, Edison's monitoring for chlorine would be increased 
from monthly to weekly. 

Chlorine is used to prevent marine algae from building up inside the 
condenser pipes, which act like a car's radiator to cool the nuclear 
reactor. 

Regulators have proposed dropping a current requirement for Edison to 
test the shoreline near the plant for bacteria – monitoring that 
already is done by the county health department. 

San Onofre has two nuclear generating plants, each of which has a 
separate cooling system intake and outfall pipe. The two plants 
together can generate 2,250 megawatts, or enough to power about 2 
million households. 

The Unit 2 plant began operation in 1992, followed by Unit 3 in 1983. 

The original nuclear reactor, Unit 1, was decommissioned in 1992. 

Edison officials say the plant's ocean water intake system annually 
kills 20 tons to 40 tons of adult fish in addition to millions of 
plankton, fish larvae and eggs. The warm-water discharge also retards 
the growth of nearby kelp beds. 

In 1997, the state Coastal Commission ordered Edison to offset those 
impacts. As a result, Edison is paying $140 million for a habitat 
enhancement project at San Dieguito Lagoon and the construction of a 
150-acre artificial reef that will, in theory, replace the kelp beds 
harmed by the plant's discharge. The company also paid $3.6 million 
to build a sea bass hatchery in Carlsbad. 

At yesterday's hearing, environmentalists said they want to make sure 
there aren't more effects from the warm-water discharge that haven't 
been fully examined. 

"We need to know a heck of a lot more than what's been presented in 
the permit," said Ed Kimura of the Sierra Club. 

David Kay, Edison's manager of environmental projects, said the 
plant's discharge permit has been renewed twice in the past and that 
all the impacts of the discharge have been thoroughly analyzed. 

"San Onofre is the most intensely monitored plant certainly anywhere 
on this coast," Kay said. 

-------------------------------------
Sandy Perle
Senior Vice President, Technical Operations
Global Dosimetry Solutions, Inc.
2652 McGaw Avenue
Irvine, CA 92614 

Tel: (949) 296-2306 / (888) 437-1714  Extension 2306
Fax:(949) 296-1902 

E-Mail: sperle at dosimetry.com
E-Mail: sandyfl at earthlink.net 

Global Dosimetry Website: http://www.dosimetry.com/ 
Personal Website: http://sandy-travels.com/