Video: Improving Nuclear Security

An informative video clip from CNN showing improvements in nuclear security, one reactor at a time.

http://edition.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/asiapcf/09/16/btsc.vietnam.nuclear/#cnnSTCVideo

A.Q. Khan Documentary

I will be giving a pretty skimmed down presentation on the A.Q. Khan network. You have to understand that more and more is being unraveled as we speak about the proliferation activities the network engaged in. Listed here is a BBC documentary on Youtube that you can view for a more visual look at the A.Q. Khan network. The last video in the series has not been posted, so you can only see 5/6 of the documentary. I may choose to incorporate a video or two on Thursday if it suits my purpose. However, as of now, I do not plan to.

A.Q. Khan BBC Documentary

Part I- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NW7JKm5F4QE

Part II- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pVDTDTckAXQ

Part III- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=98qRH7sbEFY

Part IV- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LK3on5AwYQY

Part V- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YQ4-Fg03SA8

First Nuclear Reactor to Become Museum?

A nuclear reactor’s next life: tourist attraction?

Stuart Eskenazi/The Seattle Times
Friday, October 26, 2007

RICHLAND, Wash. — Stuck in time and place, B Reactor at the Hanford nuclear reservation is a monument of world history few get to tour.

Built in secrecy during World War II but dormant since 1968, B Reactor ushered in the atomic age as the world’s first nuclear reactor, producing the plutonium for the first full-scale nuclear test explosion in New Mexico and the bomb the U.S. dropped on Nagasaki.

Some Tri-Cities residents want the Hanford nuclear reservation's B Reactor--the world's first nuclear reactor--to be preserved as a museum in Hanford, Wash.

For generations, Hanford has been the bread of life for the Tri-Cities, from when nine reactors produced plutonium to now, when billions of dollars are paying for the world’s largest environmental cleanup.

Proud of their nuclear heritage, Tri-Citians want the U.S. Department of Energy to give new life to B Reactor by turning it into a museum.

If that happens, several thousand more visitors a year will be able to stand face to face with the reactor core — and confront the issues of the soul that color the atomic age.

“Even if you disagree with the principle of this, even if you believe this reactor never should have been built, you have to admire the complexity of what they built here — the genius of it,” Hanford historian Michele Gerber said while leading a tour of B Reactor.

Without question, the reactor is a marvel of science, engineering and craft. B Reactor was constructed in a mere 11 months, a millionfold scale-up of an experimental reactor built on a Chicago sports court.

But the reactor’s place in the sociopolitical history of the U.S. and the world is more volatile and open to debate.

Dr. David Hall, of Seattle, a past national president of Physicians for Social Responsibility, said the story told at a B Reactor museum must include a fair accounting of the human and financial costs of developing nuclear capabilities. He isn’t sure that side of the story would get a full airing at a museum on the Hanford site.

“It depends on who’s writing the history,” Hall said. “I want to honor the good intent and patriotism of the people who worked at B Reactor. On the other hand, science needs to be honest about its consequences and understand the Pandora’s box that was opened.”

Historian Michele Gerber holds aluminum tubes the size of the uranium slugs that were used in the reactor's processing tubes. Some Tri-Cities residents want the Hanford nuclear reservation's B Reactor--the world's first nuclear reactor--to be preserved as a museum in Hanford, Wash.

Did the bomb on Nagasaki save tens of thousands of U.S. lives by forcing Japan’s surrender? Or did it needlessly sacrifice tens of thousands of civilian Japanese lives?

Are advances in nuclear energy and medicine outweighed by the environmental contamination from nuclear wastes?

“Those debates ought to start in this room,” Gerber said, while standing in front of the reactor core. “The mission of Hanford is never complete until the waste is managed and properly disposed of — and that requires the same amount of innovation that went into building this reactor.”

Lacking in aesthetic, B Reactor rises 120 feet from the Southeast Washington desert about a quarter-mile from the Columbia River, sharing the landscape with the sagebrush that grows on the 586-square-mile Hanford nuclear reservation.

In early 1943, more than 1,500 residents of two desert towns — Hanford and White Bluffs — were ordered to immediately vacate with no explanation. Native Americans who knew the land for generations no longer had access to it.

At the peak of construction, more than 50,000 workers converged upon Hanford to dutifully carry out their war effort. Told little about their mission, they completed a highly classified project under an extremely tight deadline.

Rumors spread as to what was being manufactured at Hanford. As legend has it, a child was sure he figured it out — toilet paper!

His father, who worked at the site, came home every night with a couple or three rolls, the boy unaware his dad was pilfering to provide his family more than its wartime ration.

Tri-Citians tell that tale and want to be the ones to tell B Reactor’s story for the museum, figuring who better than those who lived it.

“What happened at B Reactor is roughly equivalent to the discovery of fire and putting a man on the moon,” said Wally Greager, 80, who worked five decades at B Reactor and other Hanford facilities. He is among a group of Hanford retirees who 17 years ago launched an effort to preserve B Reactor. They see the museum as a tool to promote the nuclear industry.

“People need to recognize what they get out of it,” Greager said. “If you’re not afraid of it, good can come from it.”

U.S. Rep. Doc Hastings, the Republican who represents the Tri-Cities, said B Reactor ought to be viewed in the context of when it was built — as part of the top-secret Manhattan Project to build the first nuclear bomb.

“We were in an all-out struggle at the time and thought Nazi Germany had the technology to build an atomic bomb,” he said. “From a historic standpoint, we won the war in a large part because of efforts at Hanford.”

Times-Record News

New Book on A.Q. Khan

The Deception: Pakistan, the United States, and the Secret Trade in Nuclear Weapons

On December 15, 1975, A. Q. Khan—a young Pakistani scientist working in Holland—stole top-secret blueprints for a revolutionary new process to arm a nuclear bomb. His original intention, and that of his government, was purely patriotic—to provide Pakistan a counter to India’s recently unveiled nuclear device. However, as Adrian Levy and Catherine Scott-Clark chillingly relate in their masterful investigation of Khan’s career over the past thirty years, over time that limited ambition mushroomed into the world’s largest clandestine network engaged in selling nuclear secrets—a mercenary and illicit program managed by the Pakistani military and made possible, in large part, by aid money from the United States, Saudi Arabia, and Libya, and by indiscriminate assistance from China.

http://search.barnesandnoble.com/booksearch/isbninquiry.asp?r=1&ISBN=0802715540&pdf=y&z=y

Nuclear Power: Current Status and Outlook

A recent Press Release by the IAEA explaining the growth of nuclear power by the year 2030 describes the low and high amount of nuclear power plants in the world. They predict and enormous growth over this period of time, and there will need to be many analysts with knowledge of key materials and security measures over this time period.

Here is some information :

Nuclear power´s share of worldwide electricity production rose from less than 1 percent in 1960 to 16 percent in 1986, and that percentage has held essentially constant in the 21 years since 1986. Nuclear electricity generation has grown steadily at the same pace as overall global electricity generation. At the close of 2006, nuclear provided about 15 percent of total electricity worldwide.

The IAEA´s other key findings as of the end of 2006 are elaborated below.There were 435 operating nuclear reactors around the world, and 29 more were under construction. The US had the most with 103 operating units. France was next with 59. Japan followed with 55, plus one more under construction, and Russia had 31 operating, and seven more under construction.

Of the 30 countries with nuclear power, the percentage of electricity supplied by nuclear ranged widely: from a high of 78 percent in France; to 54 percent in Belgium; 39 percent in Republic of Korea; 37 percent in Switzerland; 30 percent in Japan; 19 percent in the USA; 16 percent in Russia; 4 percent in South Africa; and 2 percent in China.

Present nuclear power plant expansion is centred in Asia: 15 of the 29 units under construction at the end of 2006 were in Asia. And 26 of the last 36 reactors to have been connected to the grid were in Asia. India currently gets less than 3% of its electricity from nuclear, but at the end of 2006 it had one-quarter of the nuclear construction - 7 of the world´s 29 reactors that were under construction. India´s plans are even more impressive: an 8-fold increase by 2022 to 10 percent of the electricity supply and a 75-fold increase by 2052 to reach 26 percent of the electricity supply. A 75-fold increase works out to an average of 9.4 percent/yr, about the same as average global nuclear growth from 1970 through 2004. So it´s hardly unprecedented.

China is experiencing huge energy growth and is trying to expand every source it can, including nuclear power. It has four reactors under construction and plans a nearly five-fold expansion by just 2020. Because China is growing so fast this would still amount to only 4 percent of total electricity.

Russia had 31 operating reactors, five under construction and significant expansion plans. There´s a lot of discussion in Russia of becoming a full fuel-service provider, including services like leasing fuel, reprocessing spent fuel for countries that are interested, and even leasing reactors.

Japan had 55 reactors in operation, one under construction, and plans to increase nuclear power´s share of electricity from 30 percent in 2006 to more than 40 percent within the next decade.

South Korea connected its 20th reactor just last year, has another under construction and has broken ground to start building two more. Nuclear power already supplies 39 percent of its electricity.Europe is a good example of "one size does not fit all."

Altogether it had 166 reactors in operation and six under construction. But there are several nuclear prohibition countries like Austria, Italy, Denmark and Ireland. And there are nuclear phase-out countries like Germany and Belgium.There are also nuclear expansion programmes in Finland, France, Bulgaria and Ukraine. Finland started construction in 2005 on Olkiluoto-3, which is the first new Western European construction since 1991. France plans to start its next plant in 2007.

Several countries with nuclear power are still pondering future plans. The UK, with 19 operating plants, many of which are relatively old, had been the most uncertain until recently. Although a final policy decision on nuclear power will await the results of a public consultation now underway, a White Paper on energy published in May 20071/ concluded that "...having reviewed the evidence and information available we believe that the advantages [of new nuclear power] outweigh the disadvantages and that the disadvantages can be effectively managed. On this basis, the Government´s preliminary view is that it is in the public´s interest to give the private sector the option of investing in new nuclear power stations.

"The US had 103 reactors providing 19 percent of the country´s electricity. For the last few decades the main developments have been improved capacity factors, power increases at existing plants and license renewals. Currently 48 reactors have already received 20-year renewals, so their licensed lifetimes are 60 years. Altogether three-quarters of the US reactors either already have license renewals, have applied for them, or have stated their intention to apply. There have been a lot of announced intentions (about 30 new reactors´ worth) and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission is now reviewing four Early Site Permit applications.

URS Corporation - Major Player in Countering WMD - Seeks Analysts

Posting for defense analyst job in Fort Belvoir, Virginia
with URS Corp of San Francisco

Interest Category: Security/ Homeland Security

Job Description: Responsibilities:

Provide the Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA) with process support and independent assessments of Joint Capabilities Integration and Development System (JCIDS) analyses

Position will focus on the preparation of JCIDS documentation and coordination with various stakeholders in the combating WMD community

Applicant will support DTRA's role of assisting the USSTRATCOM Center for Combating weapons of mass destruction (CWMD) and other organizations in identifying future warfighting and CWMD capabilities and technologies needed to defeat or mitigate WMD threats

Job Requirements

Minimum Requirements: - BA/BS with a minimum of 10 years experience in conducting research, analysis and preparing independent assessments of DoD programs

A thorough knowledge of DoD's Joint Capabilities Integration and Development System (JCIDS)

Experience in defense planning, analysis and research operations

Chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear (CBRN) technical experience

Joint Staff, Service Staff or Office of Secretary of Defense acquisition, planning or programming experience

Successfully work with a team and be capable of presenting recommendations/proposals in a diplomatic manner

Excellent written and oral presentation skills. Proficient in the Microsoft Office applications (MS Word, MS Power Point, MS Excel and MS Access)

Active DoD Secret and be eligible for a Top Secret clearance

http://www.jobs.net/Job.asp?jid=J3G48B78K6Z3HKCBKCZ

Recent press release discussing URS Corp's business goals

URS TO ACQUIRE WASHINGTON GROUP INTERNATIONAL
Combines Leaders in Engineering, Construction and Management
Services to Create Diversified “Single Source” E&C Company

SAN FRANCISCO, CA; BOISE, ID — May 31, 2007 — SAN FRANCISCO, CA and BOISE, ID – May 31, 2007 – URS Corporation (NYSE: URS) and Washington Group International, Inc. (NYSE: WNG) have signed a definitive agreement for the acquisition of Washington Group by URS in a cash and stock transaction valued at approximately $2.6 billion.

The transaction will combine two world-class engineering and construction companies, expand the capabilities of both firms and capitalize on their positions in important high growth sectors, including power, infrastructure and environmental management. The combined company would have projects in over 50 countries and more than 54,000 employees.

The combined company will offer a full range of engineering, construction, and operations and maintenance services for both fossil fuel and nuclear power plants globally. The combined company also will have one of the largest teams of nuclear scientists and engineers in the industry, as well as a leading nuclear decommissioning and remediation business, enabling it to meet the anticipated resurgence in the nuclear energy market. In the infrastructure market, the combined entity will be positioned to meet growing demand for comprehensive services on large, complex transportation and water/wastewater projects around the world. In addition, the combined company is expected to be a major contractor to the federal government, including a top five provider of technical services to the U.S. Department of Defense and a top provider of engineering, management and environmental services to the U.S. Department of Energy.

The combined company will be called URS Corporation. Martin M. Koffel, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of URS, said, “URS has a history of anticipating change in the industry, and this transaction is the next logical step in building for future growth. Through this combination, both companies will be better positioned to capture growth from favorable trends across the engineering and construction sectors, including the increased investment in infrastructure projects, the focus on emissions reduction and energy independence in the power market, and the increased use of outsourcing by federal agencies, such as the U.S. Departments of Defense and Energy. Together, we will have the resources to meet increasing client demand for a single firm that can provide the full range of engineering and construction services required for large, complex projects in these high growth markets, both in the United States and abroad. In addition, our clients will benefit from the combined firm’s expanded capabilities in the oil and gas, industrial process, facilities design and management, mining and homeland security sectors.”

Stephen G. Hanks, Chief Executive Officer of Washington Group, said, “This transaction will create a new leader in the engineering and construction industry that will deliver superior value to our stockholders, customers and employees over the long term. The increased scale and resources of the combined company, including URS’ significant design resources, will further support our ability to compete for new opportunities in high growth markets. The combined company also will have a significant presence in the anticipated resurgence of the nuclear industry, including fuel sourcing, enrichment, power generation and spent fuel reprocessing and disposition.”

The transaction is subject to the approval of the merger agreement by Washington Group stockholders, the approval of URS’ issuance of shares in the transaction by URS stockholders, regulatory approvals and customary closing conditions. Martin M. Koffel will remain CEO of the combined company. Upon completion of the transaction, one current member of the Washington Group Board of Directors will join an expanded URS Board of Directors.

About URS
URS Corporation offers a comprehensive range of professional planning and design, systems engineering and technical assistance, program and construction management, and operations and maintenance services for transportation, facilities, environmental, water/wastewater, industrial infrastructure and process, homeland security, installations and logistics, and defense systems. Headquartered in San Francisco, the Company operates in more than 20 countries with approximately 29,500 employees providing engineering and technical services to federal, state and local governmental agencies as well as private clients in the chemical, pharmaceutical, oil and gas, power, manufacturing, mining and forest products industries.

About Washington Group International
Washington Group International provides the talent, innovation, and proven performance to deliver integrated engineering, construction, and management solutions for businesses and governments worldwide. Headquartered in Boise, Idaho, with more than $3 billion in annual revenue, the Company has approximately 25,000 people at work around the world providing solutions in power, environmental management, defense, oil and gas processing, mining, industrial facilities, transportation, and water resources. For more information, visit (www.wgint.com).

http://www.urscorp.com/Press_Releases/pressRelsTradeDet.php?recordID=435&listYear=2007

DDBC Barstow

DESCRIPTION OF PRODUCT/SERVICE PROVIDED:
EG&G provides a wide range of logistical and support services for the Defense Distribution Depot, Barstow, California (DDBC). These services include:

Receipt of materials: EG&G personnel are solely responsible for the accurate and timely processing of materials received at both the Nebo and Yermo DDBC sites. These services include (but are not restricted to):

Storage: EG&G's warehousing personnel are primarily responsible for the care and maintenance of over 49,000 NSNs and major commodities housed at DDBC including electronic parts and components, radioactive material, electrostatic discharge items, industrial/general supplies, clothing and textiles, replacement parts for military equipment, engines and transmissions, shafts, reduction gears, wire cable furniture, boats, anchors, radar units, and propellers.

Issue: EG&G's commitment is to "issue the correct materiel in the correct quantity and condition code at the correct time, every time". Depot personnel make themselves available on a 24/7/365 basis to serve the needs of the war fighter, guaranteeing response to non-duty hours emergency requests within two hours of receipt. EG&G provided services include:

Nuclear, biological, and chemical (NBC) testing: Licensed, highly trained EG&G personnel are responsible for the periodic and item manager driven inspection and testing of NBC gear.

Mobile crane and rigging support includes the loading and offloading of large equipment and military vehicles at both the Yermo and Nebo sites by fully certified and licensed EG&G employees. The company also provides blocking and bracing services as well as container handler (RTCH) support on an on-call basis at the National Training Center, Ft. Irwin.

Packaging and marking: In accordance with customer requirements, military standards, and the special requirements of shipping goods to sometimes less than ideal locales for off-loading, EG&G's staff of experienced packers provide upgraded protection for more than 5,000 mission critical items shipped annually from DDBC.

Container manufacturing: In its 29 months of operations through 1/31/03, EG&G's container manufacturing operations have designed, planned, and constructed over 2,500 shipping and storage containers in accordance with customer requirements and/or ASTM standards. Adept in designing containers capable of handling special load bearing requirements and material configurations, EG&G's experienced box shop staff has met and exceeded all contractually specified standards for timeliness and production of containers to customer specifications and applicable regulations.

Kit assembly/disassembly: Having acquired ex-Government employees with strong knowledge of specialized kitting processes as part of its initial hiring phase, the depot has become a preferred source for the assembly, modification, and disassembly of a variety of specialized kits. Periscopes, repair kits, and many other item sets have been broken apart or reconfigured by EG&G's versatile workforce. The depot has developed a specific competency in the modification of GP-Medium and GP-Large tents, renovating over 2,000 of these units during the course of the contract for active use by the war fighter worldwide.

Special Awards/Citations
EG&G and its employees have received numerous citations and letters of commendation for their efforts to provide a high level of service to the war fighter. These commendations include:

• A letter of recognition from the Marine Corps' Multi-Commodity Maintenance Center which notes that "time and time again, you [EG&G's Environmental Support staff] have been asked to go the extra-step for us to meet a date or urgent situation, and you have never wavered in meeting those needs"
• A certificate of achievement awarded to EG&G's Mobile Crane & Rigging Crew for "outstanding logistical support" by the 4th Infantry Division (Mechanized), Ft. Hood TX. According to the award, "the men of the Mobile Crane and Rigging crew reflect great credit upon themselves, EG&G Logistics, and the Yermo Annex"
• A letter of appreciation from the Naval Inventory Control Point, Mechanicsburg, PA, commending the "expeditious and professional manner" of EG&G's Document Control personnel. The staff "has helped me out of numerous problem CASREP and high priority requirements at a moment's notice."

Finally, EG&G was awarded one of four coveted Shippers Performance Awards by the Military Traffic Management Command for 2002. Chosen from a field of 1,100 shippers, the award symbolizes EG&G's commitment to the timely and cost-efficient delivery of requisitioned mission stock to its end customer base.

http://www.urscorp.com/EGG_Division/ddbcBarstow.php

PSU Reactor Leak Continues at 16 GPM

19 October 2007

Search on for radioactive leak

by Adam Smeltz, The Centre Daily Times

- asmeltz@centredaily.com

The radioactive water leak may still be flowing.

Or the hole — wherever it is — could be as dry as the Sahara.

On Thursday, workers at Penn State’s Breazeale Nuclear Reactor had yet to find out.

“We’re still stressing that there is no risk to the public,” said Neil Weaver, a spokesman with the state Department of Environmental Protection in Harrisburg.

Just about 11 days have passed since university workers determined that a leak had sprung in the 71,000- gallon pool that holds the small reactor near University Drive and Hastings Road.

They quickly shut down the research device. This week, they set about draining half the pool into an on-site holding tank.

That process was finished Wednesday, said William Dreibelbis, a manager of health and environmental programs on campus.

He said Thursday that the drawdown had not been in place long enough for workers to determine if the leak is in the empty half — the south end — or in north end.

“One of our greatest risks right now is the safety of the people working in an over-20-foot pit,” Dreibelbis said Thursday, referring to workers in the pool basin.

He said about a dozen Penn State employees are contributing to the work. The drawdown is intended to help them locate the source of the leak, he said.

Meanwhile, it also provides an opportunity for an outside contractor to re-line and resurface the pool basin.

Dreibelbis said it’s too soon to tell how much money the ordeal will cost Penn State or when the reactor may resume operation.

The university, in official statements, has described the water leak as slightly radioactive and said the situation poses no public health threat. Representatives from the DEP and the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, which licenses the small research reactor, have supported those statements.

A’ndrea Messer, a Penn State public information officer, said the leak rate is estimated at fewer than 16 gallons an hour.

Water is thought to be draining into the ground beneath the reactor facility.

The fluid itself carries about 28,000 picocuries of tritium, a radioactive isotope, in each liter, Dreibelbis said.

That’s about 8,000 picocuries per liter more than the safe drinking-water limit established by the federal Environmental Protection Agency.

But because the reactor water is probably mixing with less-radioactive water already in the ground, Dreibelbis said, “I think it would be really hard even to find this elevated tritium in any water table.”

“It doesn’t represent exposure to the populace,” he said. No water wells are within the immediate vicinity of the reactor, though some public water supplies for College Township and the University Park campus do sit some miles downstream.

Calls to representatives of those public water systems were not immediately returned Thursday.

Neil Sheehan, a spokesman for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, has said Penn State will want to check groundwater around the reactor facility and monitor for any seepage. If radiation levels creep above EPA-accepted limits, the university could face the specter of government enforcement action.

Sheehan said Thursday that it’s too soon to tell whether the university may be in violation of any rules. Dreibelbis said the university already has taken samples from four monitoring wells that were established earlier near the reactor.

Results from those samples were not ready on Thursday, he said.

About 50 research and test reactors are in the U.S., according to the NRC. Leaks like the one at University Park are relatively rare at the facilities, said Scott Burnell, an NRC spokesman just outside Washington, D.C.

The most recent similar leak he could recall was logged about two years ago in Denver, he said.

“It is reasonable — and it is required — that licensees for reactors maintain their facilities and procedures and policies for spotting any sort of instance such the one they see right now” at Penn State, Burnell said.

The NRC has no information to suggest that the leak at Penn State has anything to do with poor maintenance, he said.

The Centre Daily Times

And Now To the Videotape

U.N. Eyes Pics Of Possible Syria Nuke Site

Analyzing Satellite Images Of Facility Struck Last Month By Israeli Warplanes

VIENNA, Austria, Oct. 19, 2007

---

(AP) U.N. experts have begun analyzing satellite imagery of the Syrian site struck last month by Israeli warplanes, diplomats said Friday, disclosing what amounts to the first independent look at reports that Damascus was hiding a nuclear facility.

It was unclear where the material was obtained or what exactly it showed. One of the diplomats who is linked to the International Atomic Energy Agency - the U.N. nuclear watchdog examining the photos - said IAEA experts were looking at commercial images, discounting suggestions from other quarters that they had come from U.S. intelligence.

Separately, a senior diplomat familiar with the issue indicated that agency experts were looking at several possible locations for the Israeli strike. Two other diplomats said initial perusal of the material had found no evidence that the target hit Sept. 6 was a nuclear installation. They emphasized, however, that it was too early to draw definite conclusions.

All of those speaking to The Associated Press were briefed on the agency's receipt of the images but demanded anonymity because their information was confidential.

Since the bombing, news media have quoted unidentified U.S. officials as saying that the airstrike hit some sort of nuclear facility linked to North Korea, which is now in the process of dismantling its nuclear weapons program. On Friday, The Washington Post cited American officials as saying the site in Syria's eastern desert near the Euphrates River had characteristics of a small but substantial nuclear reactor similar to North Korea's facility.

Officials of the Vienna-based nuclear watchdog and the U.S. diplomatic mission to the IAEA had no comment Friday. But IAEA spokeswoman Melissa Fleming indirectly rebuked Washington earlier this week, saying the agency “expects any country having information about nuclear-related activities in another country to provide that information to the IAEA.”

The investigation by the IAEA is important because it is the first instance of an independent and respected organization looking at the evidence and trying to reach a conclusion as to what was hit.

Daryl Kimball, executive director of the Arms Control Association, cautioned that - without full U.S. cooperation - the IAEA's probe might be hampered because commercial satellite imagery “may not be of sufficient quality to figure out difficult questions.” Still, he welcomed IAEA involvement, saying it gave the chance for a neutral organization to “provide an assessment and give the international community some guidance about what has or has not happened.”

Syria denies that it has an undeclared nuclear program and North Korea has said it was not involved in any nuclear program in the Mideast nation. Damascus has said the Israelis targeted an empty building, and the agency has said it has no evidence to the contrary.

The diplomats said that Vienna-based Syrian diplomats have met with senior IAEA representatives since the bombing, but have provided no substantive information that would indicate their country had nuclear secrets.

Syria has signed the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and has allowed agency experts to inspect its only known nuclear facility - a small, 27-kilowatt reactor, according to diplomats linked to the IAEA.

CBS News

Reactor in Nearby Erie County, Ohio to be Decommissioned

Nuclear reactor to be discarded

By RICHARD PAYERCHIN, Sandusky Bureau Chief

10/18/2007

PERKINS TOWNSHIP -- The end is nearing for NASA Plum Brook Station's nuclear reactor.

For years NASA and subcontractors have worked to take apart, clean and dispose of the nuclear reactor that was built to test potential spacecraft parts by exposing them to radiation. Although the reactor has not operated since 1973, the site is considered contaminated for purposes of cleanup.

The decommissioning has passed several milestones in recent months, according to a report by Project Manager Keith Peecook.

On Aug. 20, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission published its intention to approve NASA's Final Status Survey Plan, which explains how the space agency will meet the project goals and terminate NASA's license to operate the reactor, Peecook said.

The NRC approval was ''the keystone in our efforts to complete a safe and successful decommissioning,'' Peecook said.

At the end of August, NASA also issued a draft request for proposals for the decontamination and waste disposal contract.

That request seeks a contractor to handle ''all the major, remaining project tasks,'' Peecook said. A contract will be awarded this winter and work will begin in the spring.

Part of the final cleanup is completing decontamination throughout the entire facility, shipping and disposing of all packaged low-level radioactive waste on the site and excavating, testing and disposing of soil around the facility.

That contract also will include cleanup of the Pentolite Ditch, the drainage ditch that empties into Plum Brook and that carried trace amounts of Cesium-137 and Cobalt-60. Those elements in 2005 were discovered in Plum Brook, the first instance of finding detectable levels of radiation outside Plum Brook Station's 6,400-acre site.

NASA officials have repeatedly reported that the elements are not harmful to humans and this winter the space agency also will publish a fact sheet on additional sampling to find the radioactive elements in Plum Brook. As of June, consultant Bob Haag recommended leaving in place the cesium that had drifted into the East Sandusky Bay because they are away from frequent human access.

More information is available at www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/pbrf.

Cleveland Morning Journal

©The Morning Journal 2007

Meeting Video Posts

Here is the video links from the previous meeting. Overall, I thought it was a good lesson. If you have any other video links or ideas about future classes or anything in particular you would like to discuss, the please feel free to ask them.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fnY_Ug0DabM&mode=related&search=Plutonium%20Uranium%20Bomb%20Nuclear%20Iraq%20Calutron%20Teflon – Part 1

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ln_qr75jwdU&mode=related&search=Plutonium%20Uranium%20Bomb%20Nuclear%20Iraq%20Calutron%20Teflon - Part 2

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LxFFGbL4rKk&mode=related&search=Plutonium%20Uranium%20Bomb%20Nuclear%20Iraq%20Calutron%20Teflon – Part 3

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mQQ-rtoR_nI&mode=related&search=Plutonium%20Uranium%20Bomb%20Nuclear%20Iraq%20Calutron%20Teflon – Part 4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r0vKnjFrDOs&mode=related&search=Plutonium%20Uranium%20Bomb%20Nuclear%20Iraq%20Calutron%20Teflon – Part 5

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=myIHJu_5d74&mode=related&search=Plutonium%20Uranium%20Bomb%20Nuclear%20Iraq%20Calutron%20Teflon – Part 6

Research Reactor News - Penn State Reactor Issue Getting Handled in the Press

Penn State University still searching for minor leak at nuclear reactor

(AP)

Penn State workers searching for what the university called a minor leak of "slightly radioactive water" from a pool at the school's nuclear research reactor plan to drain part of the pool to try to find the problem.

Nuclear Regulatory Commission spokesman Neil Sheehan said Friday that the university has 15 people working on the leak discovered Tuesday and is looking to bring in outside help.

University officials have said that the leak in the 71,000-gallon pool that shields the core's radiation and cools the reactor poses no risk to students, employees, the community or the environment.

Someone drinking the contaminated water for a year would be exposed to only half the amount of radiation deemed safe by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and less than half the amount received from a conventional X-ray, the university said in a statement.

The reactor is used for research by nuclear engineering undergraduate and graduate students and by 20 to 30 other departments on campus but does not produce electricity, according to the reactor facility's Web site.

Research reactors use fuel that is less radioactive than that used in commercial power reactors, and also less fuel overall than power reactors.

For instance, Penn State's fuel can generate about 1 megawatt of heat, while the amount of heat generated by a typical commercial power reactor would be about 3,000 megawatts, according to the NRC.

While oversight is required at research facilities, the guidelines aren't as stringent as for power reactors, Sheehan said.

___

On the Net:

Breazeale Nuclear Reactor: http://www.rsec.psu.edu/index.html

Wilkes-Barre Times-Leader

Research Reactor News - IAEA Asks Syria About Rumored Nuke Site

UN watchdog asks Syria about "undeclared" atom plant

Mon Oct 15, 2007 11:41am EDT
By Mark Heinrich

VIENNA, Oct 15 (Reuters) - The U.N. nuclear watchdog did not know about any undeclared atomic plant in Syria and has asked Damascus about information that such a site was targeted by an Israeli air strike, a spokeswoman said on Monday.

Citing unidentified U.S. and foreign officials with access to intelligence reports, the New York Times said on Sunday the nuclear reactor was partially built and apparently modelled on one in North Korea used for stockpiling atomic bomb fuel.

Israel confirmed earlier this month that it had carried out a Sept. 6 air strike on Syria, a major foe, but has not described the target. Syrian President Bashar al-Assad said the target was an unused military building.

"The International Atomic Energy Agency has no information about any undeclared nuclear facility in Syria and no information about recent reports," spokeswoman Melissa Fleming said in a statement issued from the IAEA's Vienna headquarters.

"The IAEA is in contact with the Syrian authorities to verify the authenticity of these reports," she said.

"We would obviously investigate any relevant information coming our way. The IAEA Secretariat expects any country having information about nuclear-related activities in another country to provide that information to the IAEA."

A Vienna diplomat close to the IAEA said it had initiated contacts with Damascus shortly after the air raid but the Syrians had provided no clarification yet.

U.S. officials have linked the raid to apparent Israeli suspicions of covert nuclear cooperation between North Korea and Syria. They said the site in question was identified earlier this year in satellite photographs.

SYRIAN DENIES ILLICIT PROGRAMME

Syria has belonged to the 144-nation IAEA since 1963 and has one declared, small research reactor subject to U.N. inspections, which aim to prevent illicit diversions of civilian nuclear energy technology into atomic bombmaking.

Syria has denied hiding any nuclear activity from the IAEA or having anything other than energy goals with nuclear work.

The Vienna diplomat said that if Syria was indeed building a new reactor, it would have been required to inform the agency, and provide design data, as soon as it decided to construct one.

No country had provided satellite or other intelligence about the alleged plant to the IAEA although such help would be crucial to detecting such a site, added the diplomat, who asked not to be named due to the topic's political sensitivity.

"With the (low) level of IAEA funding, inspectors can't go around a country checking every building. The IAEA is not a go-it-alone investigative agency," said the diplomat.

The IAEA has been investigating past nuclear secrecy in Iran, a member state and ally of Syria, since 2003.

Iran has pledged to clarify the scope of its programme by the end of 2007 in an effort to avoid being hit with harsh U.N. sanctions over its refusal to stop enriching uranium, a process Western powers suspect Iran is channelling into bombmaking. Iran says it only wants an alternative source of electricity.

The New York Times said the targeted Syrian facility appeared to have been much further from completion than an Iraqi reactor the Israeli air force flattened in 1981.

"A very real question is whether Syria is technically and financially able to build such a reactor. It would be hard to justify an air strike on a facility so early on in construction and, if supplied by North Korea, unlikely ever to be finished," U.S. analyst David Albright, alluding to North Korea's nuclear disarmament agreement earlier this year, told Reuters.

"Israel may have wanted to send a signal to Iran. The U.S. wants to scare Iran (off nuclear work) and this air strike might have been a way to do it, and explain some of Israel's secrecy."

http://www.reuters.com/article/latestCrisis/idUSL15457955

China Syndrome

The China Syndrome

By Roger Ebert / January 1, 1979

"The China Syndrome" is a terrific thriller that incidentally raises the most unsettling questions about how safe nuclear power plants really are. It was received in some quarters as a political film, and the people connected with it make no secret of their doubts about nuclear power. But the movie is, above all, entertainment: well-acted, well-crafted, scary as hell.

The events leading up to the "accident" in "The China Syndrome" are indeed based on actual occurrences at nuclear plants. Even the most unlikely mishap (a stuck needle on a graph causing engineers to misread a crucial water level) really happened at the Dresden plant outside Chicago. And yet the movie works so well not because of its factual basis, but because of its human content. The performances are so good, so consistently, that "The China Syndrome" becomes a thriller dealing in personal values. The suspense is generated not only by our fears about what might happen, but by our curiosity about how, in the final showdown, the characters will react.

The key character is Godell (Jack Lemmon), a shift supervisor at a big nuclear power plant in Southern California. He lives alone, quietly, and can say without any self-consciousness that the plant is his life. He believes in nuclear power. But when an earthquake shakes his plant, he becomes convinced that he felt an aftershock --caused not by an earthquake but by rumblings deep within the plant.

The quake itself leads to the first "accident." Because a two-bit needle gets stuck on a roll of graph paper, the engineers think they need to lower the level of the water shield over the nuclear pile. Actually, the level is already dangerously low. And if the pile were ever uncovered, the result could be the "China syndrome," so named because the superheated nuclear materials would melt directly through the floor of the plant and, theoretically, keep on going until they hit China. In practice, there'd be an explosion and a release of radioactive materials sufficient to poison an enormous area.

The accident takes place while a TV news team is filming a routine feature about the plant. The cameraman (Michael Douglas) secretly films events in the panicked control room. And the reporter (Jane Fonda) tries to get the story on the air. Her superiors refuse, influenced by the power industry's smoothly efficient public relations people. But the more Fonda and Douglas dig into the accident, the less they like it.

Meanwhile, obsessed by that second tremor, Lemmon has been conducting his own investigation. He discovers that the X-rays used to check key welds at the plant have been falsified. And then the movie takes off in classic thriller style: The director, James Bridges, uses an exquisite sense of timing and character development to bring us to the cliffhanger conclusion.

The performances are crucial to the movie's success, and they're all the more interesting because the characters aren't painted as anti-nuclear crusaders, but as people who get trapped in a situation while just trying to do their jobs. Fonda is simply superb as the TV reporter; the range and excellence of her performance are a wonder. Douglas is exactly right as the bearded, casually anti-establishment cameraman. And Jack Lemmon, reluctant to rock the boat, compelled to follow his conscience, creates a character as complex as his Oscar-winning businessman in "Save the Tiger."

rogerebert.com

Research Reactor News - Penn State Reactor

Penn State Reports Minor Reactor Leak

By GENARO C. ARMAS – 12 October 2007

STATE COLLEGE, Pa. (AP) — Penn State University reported a minor leak of "slightly radioactive water" at its nuclear research reactor but said Thursday that the leak poses no risk to workers, the community or the environment.

Workers discovered water leaking Tuesday from the pool in which the reactor sits into the ground beneath the Penn State campus. State and federal officials were notified, and the reactor was shut down and will remain out of service until the source of the leak is found, the university said.

"There's no impact on the community. It's just something that, now that we know what's going on, we are telling the community and continuing to look for the leak," A'ndrea Elyse Messer, the university's senior science and research spokeswoman, said Thursday night.

The state Department of Environmental Protection and federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission were notified after the problem arose Tuesday. Public safety was not threatened, but the situation is being monitored, officials said.

"They've clearly erred on the side of caution," said Eliot Brenner, an NRC spokesman who said the commission sent workers to the site Tuesday night. "It is not a danger. There is no safety issue here."

Staff at the Breazeale nuclear research reactor noticed "a small reduction of several hundred gallons over the past several days" from the 71,000-gallon pool, which shields the core's radiation and cools the reactor, the university said. The level had not dropped enough to trigger an alarm from monitoring devices, Messer said.

Classes, meetings and other research not connected to the reactor were still taking place at the facility, Messer said. There was no threat to the water supply and the public "should not be worried" by the leak, she said.

Someone drinking the contaminated water for a year would be exposed to only half the amount of radiation deemed safe by the Environmental Protection Agency and less than half the amount received from a conventional X-ray, the university said in a news release.

"Residents of central Pennsylvania routinely receive much larger exposure from natural sources in their environment," Penn State said.

The reactor is used for research by nuclear engineering students and by 20 to 30 other departments on campus but does not produce electricity, according to the reactor center's Web site. Since it was built in 1955, there have been "no accidents or evacuations involving a degradation or problem with the reactor," the site said.
On the Net:

* Breazeale Nuclear Reactor: http://www.rsec.psu.edu/index.html

Meeting Monday October 15 @ 4:30 in Wayne 114

Just a Reminder for everyone. We will go over the basics equipment and science involved in nuclear power and weapons. Anyone is welcome to come.

North Korea To Denuclearize

Diplomatic success... we hope. If you read "The Challenge of a Nuclear North Korea" I sent to you via email, then read this story, it is very interesting makes the situation easier to understand. It is a great opportunity for us to see how the intelligence gathered through the years helped to resolve the North Korean issue.

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/world/stories/100407dnintnkorea.3560bb6.html

Air Force Investigates Mistaken Transport of Nuclear Warheads

Six nuclear warheads on cruise missiles were mistakenly carried on a flight from North Dakota to Louisiana last week which prompted a major investigation. Military officials told CNN that the incident was a major breach of security rules and could not recall anything similar happening. Does this mean there may be incidents that have been forgotten? At least the consequences of this incident seem to have some benefit. When was the last time a review of procedures was done? Anyway, still puzzling.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/09/05/loose.nukes/index.html